著者

今野 宏之

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.252, pp.204-213, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

---

In 1916 Einstein considered a thermal equilibrium between blackbody radiation and gas molecules in a cavity. On this occasion he introduced probability coefficients A and B of spontaneous and induced transitions, respectively. Then, he derived the ratio A/B (Eq. (4) in the text). With respect to this, Planck, in the fourth edition of his book (1921), Lectures on the Heat Radiation, derived the individual equation of A (Eq. (13)). Furthermore, it is quite interesting that in the course of derivation Planck introduced the substitution of a difference quotient (Eq. (11)) for a differential one (Eq. (9)). Thus, it should be noted that Planck employed this mathematical manipulation earlier than Kramers. This paper also argues that Planck's idea of difference quotient stems from the energy fluctuation based on the Fokker equation (7).

著者

石田 純郎

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.252, pp.224-227, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

著者

野澤 聡

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.252, pp.193-203, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

---

Daniel Bernoulli (1700-1772) is known for his masterpiece Hydrodynamica (1738), which presented the original formalism of "Bernoulli's Theorem," a fundamental law of fluid mechanics. Previous historical analyses have assumed that Daniel solely used the controversial principle of "conservation of vis viva" to introduce his theorem in this work. The "vis viva controversy" began in the 1680s between Cartesians, who defended the importance of momentum, and Leibnizians, who defended vis viva, as the basis of mechanics. In the 1720s, various Newtonians entered the dispute and sided with the crucial role of momentum. Since then, historians believed that 18th century natural philosophers regarded "vis viva" as incompatible with and opposed to Newtonian mechanics. This article argues that to introduce his theorem, Bernoulli not only used the principle of the conservation of vis viva but also the acceleration law, which originated in Newton's second law of motion. By looking at how eighteenth century scholars actually solved the challenging problems of their period instead of looking only at their philosophical claims, this paper shows the practice of mechanics at that time was far more pragmatic and dynamic than previously realized.

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.251, pp.187-189, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

著者

坂本 邦暢

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.252, pp.214-223, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

---

This paper examines the theological dimension of Francis Bacon's atomistic theory of matter. This analysis shows that he was among those early modern atomists who modified the classical atomism from a theological perspective. To achieve this goal, the discussion first focuses on Bacon's criticism of Bernardino Telesio. Bacon criticized Telesio's natural philosophy for being theologically false. Trying to avoid this falsity, Bacon developed his atomism in the framework of Biblical Creation story. According to him, God first made the chaotic mass of atoms from nothing and then brought order to the world by giving divine power to each atom. Consequently, atoms came to be led by divine wisdom. This theory aimed at modifying the purely materialistic aspect of the ancient atomism, according to which God never intervenes in the world. The wording employed by Bacon for this modification has strongly suggested that he relied on the work of the Danish Paracelsian Petrus Severinus in developing this atomistic reading of the Bible. Utilizing Severinus's theory to harmonize atomism with the Christian doctrine was common among early modern atomists such as Nicholas Hill, Daniel Sennert and Pierre Gassendi. Therefore, it is on the basis of his reliance on Severinus that we can locate Bacon's matter theory in the history of atomism in the early modern era.

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.251, pp.181-186, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

著者

坂野 徹 菊地 暁 泉水 英計 アルノ ナンタ 木名瀬 高嗣 鶴見 太郎 愼 蒼健

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.252, pp.228-253, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

著者

中根 美知代

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.251, pp.142-151, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

---

This paper clarifies Cauchy's and Weierstrass's contributions to the construction of differential calculus represented in terms of epsilonics. In the eighteenth century the limit concept had a geometrical image that is typically represented in >indefinitely approaching to a fixed value>. In 1820s Cauchy described this concept in terms of inequalities and defined the limit. Since his new calculus theory was based on this concept, he could transform previous results from calculus to his new theory developed only by algebraic techniques. He also defined his original concept of infinitesimals based on the limit concept. The relations between the infinitesimals and infinitely large numbers or infinitesimally small changes can be represented in term of epsilon-delta inequalities. Although Cauchy occasionally used the term of infinitesimals in the usual sense, he substantially developed his calculus theory in epsilonics using his infinitesimals. Weierstrass noted the differential calculus needs to apply neither Cauchy's limit nor infinitesimals, but the relations that involve them. Neither isolated limits nor infinitesimals can be written in terms of epsilon-delta inequalities, but their relations can. Weierstrass began his 1861 lectures on the differential calculus by defining the fundamental concepts in terms of epsilon-delta inequalities. His original limit concept was also defined in terms of these, without any geometrical image. In contrast to Cauchy, Weierstrass's theory was pure algebraic and had no geometrical background. Although both mathematicians basically developed their differential calculus in epsilonics, the essential difference between their approaches lies in this point.

著者

都築 正信

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.251, pp.152-155, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

著者

中村 士

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.251, pp.156-161, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.251, pp.179-180, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

著者

矢島 道子 瀬戸口 明久 松永 俊男 下坂 英 小川 眞里子 鵜浦 裕 藤岡 毅 溝口 元

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.251, pp.162-178, 2009 (Released:2021-08-03)

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.250, pp.124-125, 2009 (Released:2021-08-04)

著者

有賀 暢迪

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.250, pp.77-86, 2009 (Released:2021-08-04)

---

The principle of least action owes its modern formulation to Lagrange (1736-1813), who also related its "pre-modern" history in his Mechanique analitique (1788): Maupertuis (1698-1759) treated it in an ambiguous manner, while Euler (1707-1783) formulated it more precisely. Recent historical studies have shown, however, the difficulty of maintaining this narrative, for these two scholars departed from different problems and reached at different formulations of the principle. In general agreement with these views, this paper emphasizes a further, crucial distinction between Maupertuis and Euler-their usage of the term "quantity of action." When Maupertuis spoke of "quantity of action," he referred to a product of mass, velocity and distance, and his main concern was with the instanteneous change of two bodies colliding. Euler, on the other hand, investigated various "mechanical curves" under the continuous action of forces, searching for a quantity which was minimum to these curves. He realized then that these minimum quantites could be derived from a single one, which he named "effort." Euler did not accept Maupertuis's definition of the "quantity of action" but identified it with the "effort." Although Euler had acquired the idea of "effort" from Maupertuis's earlier work on the "law of rest," Maupertuis himself did not appraise it so highly. They disagreed over what "quantity of action" meant, and their disagreement was related to the kind of physical problems with which they were concerned; before Lagrange's modern formulation, there were two quite distinct principles of least action.

著者

木場 篤彦

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.250, pp.87-97, 2009 (Released:2021-08-04)

---

This thesis studies the Benxi Steel Complex which was constructed at Penshifu (Benxi), Manchuria by a Japanese zaibatsu group named Okura. It focuses on this Complex's development from its beginning in 1906 to 1945, when it was taken over by China following the Japanese defeat in World War 2. There are a few existing studies on the Complex. But these studies do not offer a good analysis of its overall industrial history. This thesis aims to analyze the Complex's whole history and its development with a reference to its manufacturing structure. The Complex was originally a coal mining company. After Okura Group acquired the mining rights of the Miaoergou's iron ore mine, the Complex became a pig iron maker. Penshifu was an ideal place for steel making, because there were in its vicinity all kind of mines including iron ore, coal and limestone. However, because iron ore is magnetite poor ore, the Complex had to acquire specific manufacturing technologies such as magnetic concentration and low phosphorus pig iron manufacturing. The Complex produced low phosphorus pig iron which the Japanese Navy needed. After the Manchurian Incident, the munitions boom occurred, benefitting the company. The Complex then started to expand its manufacturing facilities. After 1937, the Complex executed "The Manchukuo Industry Five Year Program", and constructed a special steel manufacturing division. However, the complex ran into financial difficulties, and failed in the full-scale production of special steel.

著者

中村 士

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.250, pp.98-108, 2009 (Released:2021-08-04)

---

Although historical records show that a telescope was first brought about into Japan as early as in 1613, existing telescopes in Japan produced before 1750 are rare and have never been examined in detail. In 2003 and 2005, we had a chance to scrutinize the antique telescope owned by one of feudal warlords, Tokugawa Yoshinao, who was the ninth son of the first Shogun Iyeyasu and inherited a large han (clan) at Owari-Nagoya district. Since Yoshinao died in 1650, it means that his telescope was made in or before that year. Our investigations of the telescope revealed that it is of Schyrlean type, namely, a more advanced one than the Galilean telescope, consisting of four convex lenses. In Europe, the invention of the Schyrlean telescope was publicized in 1645. Optical measurements showed that Yoshinao's telescope gave erect images with a measured magnifying power of 3.9 (+/- 0.2-0.3). The design, fabrication technique of the tube and caps of the telescope, and tube decoration all point to that it is neither a Western product at all nor a pure Japanese make. It is likely that the telescope was produced probably under the guidance of the Jesuit missionary in China or by the native Chinese, near cities of Suzhou or Hangzhou in Zhejiang province of the continental China, or at Nagasaki. Based on the Japanese and Chinese historical literature, we also discuss the possibility that production of the Schyrlean telescope could have begun independently in the Far East, nearly simultaneously with the invention of that type in Europe.

著者

日野川 静枝

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.250, pp.109-119, 2009 (Released:2021-08-04)

---

The cyclotron was invented and developed in the 1930s as an experimental device for nuclear physics. The Rockefeller Foundation was deeply involved in the construction and operation of cyclotrons, not only in the United States, where this machine was invented, but also in many other countries. The Foundation's grants, however, were designated not for nuclear physics research but for so-called Experimental Biology, a research program launched by Warren Weaver, then the Rockefeller Foundation's Director for the Natural Sciences. One exception to this policy was the funding granted to Niels Bohr in Copenhagen. In order to justify their new experimental biology program, Weaver and his associates strongly desired the participation of Bohr, a renowned physicist. To accomplish this purpose, they drew Georg Charles von Hevesy, who desired to escape Nazi Germany, to Bohr's laboratory to participate in the experimental biology project in Copenhagen. Their cyclotron was used to produce radioactive isotopes, which were essential to Hevesy's research using isotope tracer techniques. Hence the Foundation made this exception, twice awarding grants to Bohr, who wanted to do nuclear research, for the construction and operation of a cyclotron.

著者

塚原 東吾 柿原 泰 加藤 茂生 ホン ソンジュ 愼 蒼健 飯島 渉

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.249, pp.34-53, 2009 (Released:2021-08-04)

著者

今井 正浩

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.249, pp.22-33, 2009 (Released:2021-08-04)

---

The Pangenetic theory which holds that sperm comes from all the body seems to have been one of the most remarkable doctrines in Greek biology in the fifth and fourth centuries BC, since Aristotle gives a detailed description of the theory and criticizes it severely. The main sources of information about the Pangenetic theory are several medical treatises in the Hippocratic Corpus. There are only some mentions of it in the extant fragments ascribed to Democritus. It would be probable, therefore, that the theory had the origin of its theoretical form in the tradition of Greek medical science, and then came to the focus of attention among the Presocratic philosophers. Some scholars, on the other hand, claim that Democritus had a decisive role in the formation and development of the theory, which was then taken over by the Hippocratic doctors in their attempt to give a systematic explanation for some of the important genetic issues, such as the inheritance of similarities from parents to their children. It must be kept in mind, however, that Hippocratic doctors thought of particular fluids or humours with their inherent powers (δυναμειs) as the essential constituents of human body. This fact leads us to have an idea that the doctors had a completely different view of matter from the corpuscular theory, although Lesky (1950) and Lonie (1981) assume them to have been almost dependent on the atomism of Democritus. We can conclude that the Pangenetic theory came originally from Greek medical science, and then developed into the most influential doctrine before Aristotle.

出版者

日本科学史学会

雑誌

科学史研究 (ISSN:21887535)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.48, no.249, pp.54-60, 2009 (Released:2021-08-04)