Search

In 1823, Fresnel published an original (physical) interpretation of complex numbers in his investigations of refraction and reflection of polarized light. This is arguably the first time that complex numbers were given a physical interpretation, which led to a better understanding of elliptical and circular polarizations. This rather unknown episode of the history of physics is described in this work, and some of the pedagogical lessons that can be extracted from it are discussed.

In order to provide insight into current physics teaching practices and recommended reforms, we outline the history of physics education in the United States—and the accompanying pedagogical issues and debates—over the period 1860–2014. We identify key events, personalities, and issues for each of ten separate time periods, comparing and contrasting the outlooks and viewpoints of the different eras. This discussion should help physics educators to (1) become aware of previous research in physics education and of the major efforts to transform physics instruction that have taken place in the U.S., (2) place the national reform movements of today, as well as current physics education research, in the context of past efforts, and (3) evaluate the effectiveness of various education transformation efforts of the past, so as better to determine what reform methods might have the greatest chances of success in the future.

We describe a history of physics course, cotaught by a physicist and a historian of physics, on the quantum and relativity revolutions in the early part of the 20th century. The course has been taught both in Europe as part of a study abroad program and as a regular on-campus course, which could serve as a model for implementation elsewhere. We present some evidence that this course format can favorably influence students’ epistemological beliefs and expectations about physics.

The zeroth theorem of the history of science (enunciated by E. P. Fischer) and widely known in the mathematics community as Arnol'd's Principle (decreed by M. V. Berry), states that a discovery (rule, regularity, insight) named after someone (often) did not originate with that person. I present five examples from physics: the Lorentz condition defining the Lorentz gauge of the electromagnetic potentials; the Dirac delta function (x); the Schumann resonances of the earth-ionosphere cavity; the Weizsacker-Williams method of virtual quanta; the BMT equation of spin dynamics. I give illustrated thumbnail sketches of both the true and reputed discoverers and quote from their "discovery" publications.

In textbooks and popular writings physicists repeat familiar stories about the history of physics that historians have long identified as myths. Examples of remarks about Galileo and Aristotle are used to illustrate this practice. These examples lead to a discussion of several reasons why these myths might play a positive role for physicists and whether physicists can dispense with myths about the history of their field.

Emil Wiechert was well known during his lifetime as Professor of Geophysics at the Georg-August-Universitat in Gottingen and Director of the Geophysical Institute there. He made many significant contributions to geophysics and seismology, and is highly respected by present-day geophysicists for his research and organizational contributions to the development of geophysics and seismology as major scientific disciplines. On the other hand, his contributions to fundamental physics—cathode rays, the discovery of the electron, the Lienard–Wiechert potentials, his electron theory—are unknown to many physicists today. This article presents Wiechert’s life, achievements in physics, and relationship to well-known physicists like Arnold Sommerfeld, Hendrik Lorentz, and Woldemar Voigt, to enable contemporary physicists to know better Wiechert’s important contributions to pure physics, and to appreciate more fully his role in the history of physics.

In the tradition of LONGITUDE, BOLTZMANN'S ATOM is the dramatic true story of the fascinating characters behind the greatest turning point in modern science. In 1900 the existence of the atom was a matter of great scientific debate, but by 1905, the atom was an accepted fact and the work of Albert Einstein, Max Planck and Marie Curie launched the atomic century. At the centre of this dramatic story, told against the backdrop of turn-of-the-century Vienna, is Ludwig Boltzmann, the forgotten genius who set the atomic revolution in motion. Boltzmann, an Austrian physicist, was an unabashed believer in the atomic hypothesis. The most visionary physicist of his age, he explained how the properties of matter arise from the movement of their smallest parts. But during his lifetime, Boltzmann's enthusiasm and progress were constantly thwarted by his nemesis, Ernst Mach. Mach, a respected scientist, didn't see the point of explaining what could not be seen. He developed a philosophy to bolster his conviction that science ought to stick to what it can measure directly and ensnared Boltzmann in an all-consuming philosophical debate on the subject. Though he had almost single-handedly invented twentieth-century theoretical physics, Boltzmann died a broken man, unaware that his vision would eventually lead to the greatest chain of scientific dscoveries ever made. In BOLTZMANN'S ATOM David Lindley combines expert storytelling with his deep understanding of the subject to shed light on an enthalling period of ferment and discovery.

Student laboratories became an integral part of the study of physics around 1870, some forty years later than those in chemistry. The motivation was both cultural and utilitarian, and the situation that produced the innovation was the growth of manufacturing industry in the mid‐19th century. The first published and most influential laboratory manual was that prepared by E. C. Pickering for use at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Unpublished letters of late 1925 between Einstein and Schrodinger and the doctoral thesis of de Broglie reveal sources of Schrodinger’s inspiration to invent wave mechanics. Schrodinger saw a congenial similarity of de Broglie’s work on the stability of the atom with his own earlier speculation in relativity, which he noted to Einstein. But the last chapter of de Broglie’s thesis, on quantum statistics of gases, which is unfamiliar to many modern readers, provided Schrodinger with the method of treatment of a gas of material particles considered as a system of modes of vibration, of ’’matter waves.’’ This method especially, and other successes of de Broglie’s ’’ingenious thesis,’’ convinced Schrodinger to take seriously the first part, on the conditions of stability of the atom in a wave picture. Thus he sought and found an equation to describe the states of the electron from the matter‐wave viewpoint.

More than 50 books and 14 periodicals published in 1973 have been analyzed for contributions to the history of physics. The subjects most frequently discussed were optics, ether, relativity, mechanics, and atomic or nuclear physics. A survey of this literature is presented in the form of a chronological review of relevant aspects of the history of physics, from Chinese optics in the 5th century B.C. to the discovery of parity nonconservation in the 20th century A.D. Brief comments are made on current controversies among historians of science, such as the significance of ’’anticipation’’ of modern ideas in the writings of earlier scientists, and the role of experiment in the work of Galileo and Einstein. The most important new publication by a single author is James Bell’s The Experimental Foundations of Solid Mechanics, a treatise which seems to have been ignored by most historians of physics.

Pierre Gassendi asserted, and for the first time successfully defended, the notion of an independently real space and time, thus providing seventeenth century physics with its needed philosophical foundation. His philosophical position allowed Gassendi to make advances in physics, especially with respect to gravity and the principle of inertia. Gassendi’s work was influential upon a number of persons, notably Boyle and Newton. This paper introduces the reader to Gassendi’s work in physics and philosophy and shows some of his relation to Galileo and his influence upon Newton.

In a course entitled ’’Revolutions in Physics’’ a number of episodes in the history of physics are examined, in order to test the theories of Kuhn, Popper, Lakatos, and others, with regard to any common structure exhibited by the various revolutions that physics has undergone. The conflict between Lorentz’s Electron Theory and Einstein’s Special Relativity becomes a major focal point in the second half of the course for the models of scientific revolutions that are studied.

About a dozen scientists who have made important contributions in the history of physics are identified as physicians or as having a scientific education that included medical school. Their relationship to the medical profession and their contributions to physics are briefly summarized. Both the strengths and weaknesses of a background in medicine are considered in relation to research and discovery in physics.

This Resource Letter provides an introduction to the literature on the history of physics. Because of the overwhelming quantity of publications, the emphasis is on works covering broad topics and historical periods rather than on monographs dealing with special subjects or individual physicists, and on recent reference works that facilitate retrieval of more specialized information. The letter E after an item indicates elementary level or material of general interest to persons becoming informed in the field. The letter I, for intermediate level, indicates material of somewhat more specialized nature; and the letter A indicates rather specialized or advanced material. An asterisk (*) indicates those articles to be included in an accompanying Reprint Book.

Roemer’s work on the velocity of light has been incorrectly described in many physics texts and books dealing with the history of science. The evolution of the misinformation is discussed and documented in this paper, which uses this example to call attention to how negligently many authors of physics texts deal with the history of physics.

One of the most astonishing features of the history of physics is the confusion which surrounds the definition of the key term in dynamics—mass, a confusion which has existed almost from the day that Newton defined it. Originally defined as a measure, i.e., a number, it became something which a body had, which could be measured. Mach considered the definition “unfortunate, ” Einstein “illusory,” and Sommerfeld called it a “mock definition.” Yet without it Newton could not have laid the foundations of dynamics, succeeding where Galileo failed. A careful examination of the problem shows, with very little doubt, that when Newton used the word density he meant what we now call relative density. His definition of mass is then unexceptionable. What is unfortunate is that he allowed himself to speak of mass with the common meaning as well as with the special meaning he had given it. Recently the terms gravitational and inertial mass have been coming into greater use, but the confusion has increased rather than diminished. The author's theory of inertia, which is in quantitative agreement with experiment, helps to lessen the confusion, both old and new.

After reviewing trends in general courses in college physics, the author discusses potential objectives in teaching the history of physics, viz., cultural, pedagogical, research. He emphasizes the necessity for a cultural bridge that will include history, philosophy, and science (the basic course preferably given by a scientist, if an understanding of science is a primary goal). With respect to pedgagogy, he stresses the need for an approach that is immediately functional, but directed toward ultimate understanding. The author's particular concern here is the unique contribution of the history of physics to comprehensive understanding and research training (preferably in the senior year). In addition to the correlating review, a course along this line affords insights into important lessons of the past, the ensnaring involvment of the present and guiding directions for the future, as well as hereditary physics and its social matrix.

A review and discussion of George Sarton's new books Ancient Science through the Golden Age of Greece and A Guide to the History of Science with added reflections on the teaching of the history of physics.

By the sixteenth century mechanical clocks and watches were making frequent appearances in works of art. A number of examples are here reproduced.

The first application of the method of constructing the image of a point object by means of an unrefracted central ray and a ray which is parallel to the axis and is refracted through the focus was made by Robert Smith. A section of his A Compleat System of Opticks is here reproduced.

There is an increasing current interest in the philosophy and history of physics. This paper discusses an interesting and important (but relatively little known among physicists) controversy in the history of theories of space and time, the Leibniz-Clarke correspondence. Leibniz represents the relativist view of space and time. Clarke, a disciple of Newton, upholds the absolute space and time of Newtonian mechanics.

In addition to the Christmas Lectures at the Royal Institution, two other courses are regularly offered, the Afternoon Lectures and the Friday Evening Discourses. The latter, which are justly famous, are given at 9 o'clock each Friday evening from November until June. At that time a discourse "is delivered by some recognized authority, either upon some novel discovery, some recent development of scientific speculation, or some fresh aspect of a social, literary, artistic or scientific problem. These lectures are illustrated, so far as the subject permits, by experiments, diagrams and lantern slides. Interesting and sometimes unique exhibits, illustrative of some subject of current discussion, are arranged in the library, which is at the disposal of Members and their guests for social and conversational purposes both before and after the lectures."

Egyptian pictorial records dating from before 1100 B.C. exist which show siphons and drinking-tubes in use. Two of these are here reproduced, together with the explanation of the operation of siphons given by Heron of Alexandria in the first century A.D.

This report outlines preliminary teaching experiences in the early working phases of a laboratory designed to permit students to re-perform crucial experiments in physics—using, insofar as possible, replicas of original apparatus and copies or translations of original texts. Teaching has so far been limited to nonphysics majors at Barnard and Columbia Colleges, but the laboratory is intended for physics majors as well. Early results are encouraging.

The invention of spectacles can be dated very approximately by their appearance in early paintings. The history of this invention is here briefly sketched and some of the early paintings in which spectacles appear are reproduced.

The Tower of Winds in Athens, built about 100 B.C. by the Greek astronomer, Andronicus of Cyrrhus, is probably the oldest meteorological observatory and town clock still standing. A careful study of this structure was made at the middle of the eighteenth century by James Stuart and Nicholas Revett, a portion of which is here reproduced.

There are five major reasons why the physicist should know and be interested in the history of physics: (1) the great physicists have left us in their writings a treasure containing valuable suggestions for future laws, principles, theories, and experiments; (2) it is necessary to know why theories are now, or have been, discarded and are in disrepute: frequently a hostile scientific atmosphere may have been the sole reason why an important theory was rejected in the past; (3) in physics, many historical theories have been revived and applied anew; (4) the original historical arguments given in support of a theory may be invalid; and (5) physicists can often obtain inspiration by studying the lives of great men.

Small portable clocks were in use at the end of the fifteenth century. Three interesting paintings now hanging in European galleries are here reproduced and the possibility that they portray such clocks is discussed.

Probably no one had a greater influence upon English thought and literature during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries than Robert Grosseteste. It is proposed to celebrate the seven-hundredth anniversary of his death by reproducing a curious woodcut, portraying the reflection and refraction of light, which forms the title page of his Libellus de Phisicis Lineis Angulis et Figuris (Nuremberg, 1503).