Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 9
  • Cited by
    This (lowercase (translateProductType product.productType)) has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Niaz, Mansoor 2016. Chemistry Education and Contributions from History and Philosophy of Science. p. 159.

    Mbugua, Karori 2015. Explaining Same-Sex Sexual Behavior: The Stagnation of the Genetic and Evolutionary Research Programs. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, Vol. 46, Issue. 1, p. 23.

    Castro, Eduardo 2013. Defending the Indispensability Argument: Atoms, Infinity and the Continuum. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, Vol. 44, Issue. 1, p. 41.

    van Fraassen, Bas C. 2009. The perils of Perrin, in the hands of philosophers. Philosophical Studies, Vol. 143, Issue. 1, p. 5.

    Carrier, Martin 1988. On novel facts. Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie, Vol. 19, Issue. 2, p. 205.

    Andrus, David Butler, Daylin and Norvell, Wayne 1987. The comparative test in marketing research and theory development. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 15, Issue. 4, p. 9.

    Cushing, James T. 1985. Is there just one possible world? Contingency vs the bootstrap. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, Vol. 16, Issue. 1, p. 31.

    Zandvoort, Henk 1984. Lakatos and Nagel: A fruitful confrontation. Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie, Vol. 15, Issue. 2, p. 299.

    Smith, Crosbie 1978. A New Chart for British Natural Philosophy: The Development of Energy Physics in the Nineteenth Century. History of Science, Vol. 16, Issue. 4, p. 231.

    ×
  • Print publication year: 1976
  • Online publication date: August 2010

Atomism versus thermodynamics

Summary

Introduction

Throughout the nineteenth century there were two quite separate approaches to the problems posed by thermal and thermochemical phenomena. The first, the mechanical theory of heat, which developed into a fully-fledged phenomenological thermodynamics, was based upon two very general empirical laws, independent of any hypothesis as to the ultimate nature of matter. The second, the kinetic theory, on the contrary began with specific assumptions as to the constitution of matter, viz. that it was discrete, molecular, ultimately atomic, and that heat was a ‘concealed’ form of motion associated with the molecules of a substance.

The kinetic theory is now regarded (rightly) as one of the greatest achievements of nineteenth century physics. However, in the last decade of that century it was subject to severe attacks from some of the leading scientists of the day. Planck, for example, regarded the theory as faced with ‘insurmountable obstacles’ such that ‘every attempt at elaborating the theory has not only not led to new physical results but has run into overwhelming difficulties’. Similarly Ostwald saw in the theory ‘a superficial habit to cover up rather than promote actual scientific tasks by arbitrary assumptions about atomic positions, motions and vibrations’, which in his opinion did ‘great harm to science’.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Method and Appraisal in the Physical Sciences
  • Online ISBN: 9780511760013
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511760013
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×