Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Browse subjects
  3. History
  4. History of science and technology
  5. Content listing

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

13575 results in History of science and technology

Page 548 of 679

  • BJH volume 10 issue 2 Cover and Back matter

  • Journal:
    The British Journal for the History of Science / Volume 10 / Issue 2 / July 1977
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    05 January 2009, pp. b1-b4
    Print publication:
    July 1977
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

  • Richard Owen, William Whewell, and the Vestiges

  • John Hedley Brooke
  • Journal:
    The British Journal for the History of Science / Volume 10 / Issue 2 / July 1977
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    05 January 2009, pp. 132-145
    Print publication:
    July 1977

  • In The life of Richard Owen by his grandson there is an inference to the effect that Owen had objected to his name being used to authorize various statements that Whewell was drafting in opposition to the Vestiges. The inference is drawn from letters that Whewell wrote to Owen on 13 and 15 February 1845. Corroboration of this would corne from a letter of Owen to Whewell, dated 14 February 1845, if extant. Among the Whewell papers at Trinity College, Cambridge, there are several letters from Owen to Whewell, none of which bears that date. There is one, however, dated 14 February 1844 which, on doser inspection, turns out to be the missing link in their correspondance. The evidence for the misdating is not merely that the letter falls naturally into a later sequence. The conclusion is inescapable because Owen refers to an ‘opinion which I have always entertained, and still do strongly, on the subject of a refutation of “Vestiges”’. Since the first edition of Chambers's book did not appear until October 1844, the letter must belong to the following year. My object in this paper is to examine the implications of this letter for a reconstruction of Owen's attitude to that book which Adam Sedgwick could so detest for, among many things, its ‘gross (and I dare to say, filthy) views of physiology’.

  • Rumford's Theory of Heat: A Reassessment

  • Stephen J. Goldfarb
  • Journal:
    The British Journal for the History of Science / Volume 10 / Issue 1 / March 1977
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    05 January 2009, pp. 25-36
    Print publication:
    March 1977

  • As a natural philosopher, Count Rumford is best known for his vehement advocacy of a motion or mechanical hypothesis of heat and for the dramatic experiments that he performed to support this hypothesis. Although a motion hypothesis which held that heat was merely the motion of the ultimate particles of a body had a distinguished history, with advocates that included Bacon, Boyle, Hooke, and Newton, most British natural philosophers by the beginning of the nineteenth century believed that the phenomena associated with heat were caused by an imponderable fluid. William Henry reflected contemporary opinion in 1803, when he wrote:

    The former of these opinions [i.e. the existence of caloric], though far from being universally admitted, is now generally received; and the peculiar body, to which the phenomena of heat are referred, has been denominated by M. Lavoisier [as] caloric.

Page 548 of 679