{"title":"Robert Dicke and the naissance of experimental gravity physics, 1957–1967","authors":"Phillip James Edwin Peebles","doi":"10.1140/epjh/e2016-70034-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>\nThe experimental study of gravity became much more active in the late 1950s, a change\npronounced enough be termed the birth, or naissance, of experimental gravity physics. I\npresent a review of developments in this subject since 1915, through the broad range of\nnew approaches that commenced in the late 1950s, and up to the transition of experimental\ngravity physics to what might be termed a normal and accepted part of physical science in\nthe late 1960s. This review shows the importance of advances in technology, here as in all\nbranches of natural science. The role of contingency is illustrated by Robert Dicke’s\ndecision in the mid-1950s to change directions in mid-career, to lead a research group\ndedicated to the experimental study of gravity. The review also shows the power of\nnonempirical evidence. Some in the 1950s felt that general relativity theory is so\nlogically sound as to be scarcely worth the testing. But Dicke and others argued that a\npoorly tested theory is only that, and that other nonempirical arguments, based on Mach’s\nPrinciple and Dirac’s Large Numbers hypothesis, suggested it would be worth looking for a\nbetter theory of gravity. I conclude by offering lessons from this history, some peculiar\nto the study of gravity physics during the naissance, some of more general relevance. The\ncentral lesson, which is familiar but not always well advertised, is that physical\ntheories can be empirically established, sometimes with surprising results.\n</p>","PeriodicalId":791,"journal":{"name":"The European Physical Journal H","volume":"42 2","pages":"177 - 259"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1140/epjh/e2016-70034-0","citationCount":"21","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European Physical Journal H","FirstCategoryId":"4","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjh/e2016-70034-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"物理与天体物理","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21
Abstract
The experimental study of gravity became much more active in the late 1950s, a change
pronounced enough be termed the birth, or naissance, of experimental gravity physics. I
present a review of developments in this subject since 1915, through the broad range of
new approaches that commenced in the late 1950s, and up to the transition of experimental
gravity physics to what might be termed a normal and accepted part of physical science in
the late 1960s. This review shows the importance of advances in technology, here as in all
branches of natural science. The role of contingency is illustrated by Robert Dicke’s
decision in the mid-1950s to change directions in mid-career, to lead a research group
dedicated to the experimental study of gravity. The review also shows the power of
nonempirical evidence. Some in the 1950s felt that general relativity theory is so
logically sound as to be scarcely worth the testing. But Dicke and others argued that a
poorly tested theory is only that, and that other nonempirical arguments, based on Mach’s
Principle and Dirac’s Large Numbers hypothesis, suggested it would be worth looking for a
better theory of gravity. I conclude by offering lessons from this history, some peculiar
to the study of gravity physics during the naissance, some of more general relevance. The
central lesson, which is familiar but not always well advertised, is that physical
theories can be empirically established, sometimes with surprising results.
期刊介绍:
The purpose of this journal is to catalyse, foster, and disseminate an awareness and understanding of the historical development of ideas in contemporary physics, and more generally, ideas about how Nature works.
The scope explicitly includes:
- Contributions addressing the history of physics and of physical ideas and concepts, the interplay of physics and mathematics as well as the natural sciences, and the history and philosophy of sciences, together with discussions of experimental ideas and designs - inasmuch as they clearly relate, and preferably add, to the understanding of modern physics.
- Annotated and/or contextual translations of relevant foreign-language texts.
- Careful characterisations of old and/or abandoned ideas including past mistakes and false leads, thereby helping working physicists to assess how compelling contemporary ideas may turn out to be in future, i.e. with hindsight.