To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Weinberg collaborates with Ed Witten. He becomes the youngest member of the Saturday Club of Boston. Weinberg signs up to write The Discovery of Subatomic Particles. After their continued separation due to teaching, Weinberg grows to like Austin more and more, with its social scene that crossed from academia into the public sphere. He negotiates with the Universioty of Texas for a position in Austin as the Josey Regental Chair in Science beginning in 1982. He joins the Headliners Club in Austin. Weinberg helps found the Jerusalem Winter School in Theoretical Physics. He begins exploring physical theories in higher dimensions. He attends the Shelter Island Conference in 1983. He is elected to the Philosophical Society of Texas and joined the Town and Gown Club in Austin, but quits the latter over its male-only stance, to help form a rival, the Tuesday Club (of Austin). In mid-1980s, he becomes seriously interested in string theory.
For physicists who study elementary particles and quantum field theory, the 1970s was a golden age. It saw the experimental confirmation of the electroweak theory, and the extension of that thinking would lead us to a successful theory of strong interactions as well. All the fundamental forces of nature, except for gravity, would be unified in what became known as the “Standard Model.” By the end of 1973, there was some experimental verification of the electroweak theory. Weinberg agrees to write The First Three Minutes, which was published in 1977. Louise visits Stanford Law School, accompanied by Weinberg, who finds his host department cold. In 1977, he collaborates with Ben Lee of Fermilab, who tragically died in a car accident later that year. Louise is invited to teach at University of Texas Law School, in the summer of 1979, after which she was offered a full professorship. The Weinbergs taught in their respective universities and met in Cambridge in the holidays. Weinberg’s Nobel Prize, shared with Salam and Glashow, is announced in October 1979, ahead of the ceremony that December.
Weinberg takes up a National Science Foundation predoctoral fellowship to study at the Niels Bohr Institute in Copenhagen. He is encouraged to take up research on nuclear alpha decay. His advisor, Gunnar Källén, tasks him with studying the Lee model. He plans to obtain his PhD from Princeton.
Charles Darwin's theory of evolution was one of the most significant revolutions in the history of science. Widely debated after the publication of the Origin of Species in 1859, it continues to be controversial. In this volume, Michael Ruse offers the definitive history of the theory of evolution through natural selection. Tracing Darwin's intellectual journey and experiences that lead him to his novel insights, Ruse explores his scientific contributions as well as their relationship to philosophical issues and religious implications, as well as being both inspiration and challenge to novelists and poets. He also shows how the Darwin's ideas continue to have contemporary relevance, as they shed light on social issues and problems, such as race, sexual orientation and the connections between Darwin's thinking to that of Sigmund Freud, and the status of women, including the possibility and desirability of social change. Written in an engaging, non-technical style, Ruse's volume serves as an ideal introduction to the ideas of one of the key figures in the history of modern science.
The inaugural lecture, or oration, delivered by Regiomontanus at the University of Padua in 1464 is deemed a document of remarkable significance in the history of science. Although it has attracted much scholarly attention, few efforts have been directed towards identifying the traces of Byzantine influence it might carry; that is to say, the extent to which Regiomontanus might have been influenced by the views of his patron, Bessarion. This paper responds to the need for such a study, arriving at the following conclusions. First, Regiomontanus's praise of astrology is in line with Bessarion's reaction to the official decisions taken against astrology in Constantinople at the Council of 1351 – decisions which were ultimately rooted in the hesychast controversy and in the confessional struggles between the Churches of Constantinople and Rome. Second, the legitimation of the Graeco-Arabic roots of astronomy in an institutional context, as undertaken by Regiomontanus, is in accordance with the intellectual influences Bessarion had absorbed in his youth in Constantinople. Third, contrary to some claims, it is likely that Regiomontanus does not adhere to a humanist anti-Arab agenda; rather, his views on the history of mathematics are a consequence of the Graeco-Arabic heritage of his patron, and of his lack of access to Arabic translations.
During the transition from the early to the modern era, the marginalization of astrology from the learned world marked a significant shift. The causes of this phenomenon are complex and still partially obscure. For instance, some sociological interpretations have linked it to a broader shift in mentality among the gentry and bourgeoisie, while other scholars attributed the decline to the emergence of the ‘new science’. Focusing on the case of Jean-Baptiste Morin (1583–1656), this paper examines the changing dynamics of patronage for what has been termed ‘the last official astrologer’. It demonstrates that Morin's appointment as professor of mathematics at the Collège royal and his prominence within the French court were expressions of a cultural politics in which his patrons were deeply invested. Conversely, Morin's efforts to restore astrology lent validation to the belief systems of his patrons. The paper further analyses Morin's fall from grace during his polemics with Gassendi and his circle, highlighting the political context of the Fronde and a growing public weariness regarding the relationship between politics and astrology. Ultimately, this case study reveals that in the French context, the marginalization of astrology was not solely determined within the ‘learned jurisdiction’. Instead, the shifting cultural and political investments of the ruling classes played a significant role.
Arguing about the stars has rarely been more controversial and dangerous than in the early modern period in Europe, especially in Catholic countries, in a time when old and novel conceptions of the heavens, planetary models and theories of celestial motions and influences were intensely debated, revised and scrutinized for philosophical soundness and religious conformity.1 In the hundred years or so that witnessed the birth and censorship of the Copernican theory; the execution in Rome of the most passionate defender of post-Copernican cosmology, Giordano Bruno (1548–1600), and the rise and fall of Galileo Galilei's (1564–1642) fame linked to his novel interpretation of the book of nature, the Catholic Church created some of the most powerful instruments of cultural control and educational conformity ever seen: the Inquisition, the Index of Forbidden Books and the vast network of Jesuit schools that spread from Rome and the Iberian peninsula across the globe.2
The concept of ‘science’ occupies a distinctive place within our rhetorical inheritance. Tangential to science's actual practices and institutions, this rhetoric holds that science comprises an arsenal of techniques, or a pervasive mentality, that have broadly shaped and even defined modern society. Such notions have been the subject of more or less constant discussion for two or three centuries, with early critics of scientific thought targeting its links to the religious and political radicalism of the Enlightenment and the troubles of industrialization.
Selenography was both a practice and a tool which developed through optical instrumentation in the seventeenth century. As a practice, it was the process of creating composite graphical depictions of the Moon through skill and sustained telescopic study. As a paper-based tool, the focus of this article, a selenography was a stabilized visualization and codified template for making, organizing and communicating lunar-based astronomical observations. The template's key observation and notation device was its system of named Moon spots, or lunar nomenclatures. Such systems varied significantly in different sites of knowledge making. Through the close study of two naming schemes produced and exchanged in Counter-Reformation contexts by Michael van Langren (1645) and Giovanni Battista Riccioli in collaboration with Maria Francesco Grimaldi (1651), this essay argues that selenographies were conceived with an eye to ideals of universal standardization for collective and even global observation. In practice, however, different forms of universality, revealing distinct local agendas tied to political and religious priorities, were materialized in each competing scheme.
The Architectural Image and Early Modern Science: Wendel Dietterlin and the Rise of Empirical Investigation explores how architectural media came to propel scientific discourse between the eras of Dürer and of Rubens. It is also the first English-language book to feature the polymathic, eccentric, and long-misunderstood artist Wendel Dietterlin (c. 1550–1599). Here, Elizabeth J. Petcu reveals how architectural paintings, drawings, sculptures, and prints became hotbeds of early modern empiricism, the idea that knowledge derives from sensory experience. She demonstrates how Dietterlin's empirical imagery of architecture came into dialogue with the image-making practices of early modern scientists, a rapport that foreshadowed the intimate relationships between architecture and science today. Petcu's astute insights offer historians of art, science, and architecture a new framework for understanding the role of architectural images in the foundations of modern science. She also provides a coherent narrative regarding the interplay between early modern art, architecture, and science as a catalyst for modern empirical philosophy.
This work is a history of ideas, not a history of science. It uses the past to answer the questions of whether the Darwinian Revolution comes from ideas already prevalent in Victoria society – or is it a work of rebellion? – and whether the Darwinian Revolution was truly revolutionary – or is this a mistaken judgment made by historians and others?