Pub Date : 2023-03-09DOI: 10.1007/s00407-022-00302-w
Victor Gysembergh, Alexander Jones, Emanuel Zingg, Pascal Cotte, Salvatore Apicella
The eighth-century Latin manuscript Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Ambrosiana, L 99 Sup. contains fifteen palimpsest leaves previously used for three Greek scientific texts: a text of unknown authorship on mathematical mechanics and catoptrics, known as the Fragmentum Mathematicum Bobiense (three leaves), Ptolemy's Analemma (six leaves), and an astronomical text that has hitherto remained unidentified and almost entirely unread (six leaves). We report here on the current state of our research on this last text, based on multispectral images. The text, incompletely preserved, is a treatise on the construction and uses of a nine-ringed armillary instrument, identifiable as the “meteoroscope” invented by Ptolemy and known to us from passages in Ptolemy's Geography and in writings of Pappus and Proclus. We further argue that the author of our text was Ptolemy himself.
{"title":"Ptolemy’s treatise on the meteoroscope recovered","authors":"Victor Gysembergh, Alexander Jones, Emanuel Zingg, Pascal Cotte, Salvatore Apicella","doi":"10.1007/s00407-022-00302-w","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-022-00302-w","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The eighth-century Latin manuscript Milan, Veneranda Biblioteca Ambrosiana, L 99 Sup. contains fifteen palimpsest leaves previously used for three Greek scientific texts: a text of unknown authorship on mathematical mechanics and catoptrics, known as the <i>Fragmentum Mathematicum Bobiense</i> (three leaves), Ptolemy's <i>Analemma</i> (six leaves), and an astronomical text that has hitherto remained unidentified and almost entirely unread (six leaves). We report here on the current state of our research on this last text, based on multispectral images. The text, incompletely preserved, is a treatise on the construction and uses of a nine-ringed armillary instrument, identifiable as the “meteoroscope” invented by Ptolemy and known to us from passages in Ptolemy's <i>Geography</i> and in writings of Pappus and Proclus. We further argue that the author of our text was Ptolemy himself.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 2","pages":"221 - 240"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00407-022-00302-w.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48791537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-03-09DOI: 10.1007/s00407-023-00305-1
L. D. Kay
Much of the mathematics with which Felix Klein and Sophus Lie are now associated (Klein’s Erlangen Program and Lie’s theory of transformation groups) is rooted in ideas they developed in their early work: the consideration of geometric objects or properties preserved by systems of transformations. As early as 1870, Lie studied particular examples of what he later called contact transformations, which preserve tangency and which came to play a crucial role in his systematic study of transformation groups and differential equations. This note examines Klein’s efforts in the 1870s to interpret contact transformations in terms of connexes and traces that interpretation (which included a false assumption) over the decades that follow. The analysis passes from Klein’s letters to Lie through Lindemann’s edition of Clebsch’s lectures on geometry in 1876, Lie’s criticism of it in his treatise on transformation groups in 1893, and the careful development of that interpretation by Dohmen, a student of Engel, in his 1905 dissertation. The now-obscure notion of connexes and its relation to Lie’s line elements and surface elements are discussed here in some detail.
Felix Klein和Sophus Lie现在所关联的许多数学(Klein的Erlangen程序和Lie的变换群理论)都植根于他们在早期工作中发展起来的思想:对几何对象或由变换系统保留的性质的考虑。早在1870年,李就研究了他后来所说的接触变换的特定例子,这种变换保持相切,在他对变换群和微分方程的系统研究中发挥了至关重要的作用。本注释考察了克莱因在19世纪70年代从连接词的角度解释接触转换的努力,并追溯了随后几十年的解释(包括错误的假设)。分析从克莱因给李的信,到1876年林德曼版的克莱布施关于几何的讲座,再到1893年李在其关于变换群的论文中对其的批评,再到恩格尔的学生多门在1905年的论文中仔细发展了这一解释。这里详细讨论了目前尚不清楚的连接概念及其与李线元和面元的关系。
{"title":"Felix Klein, Sophus Lie, contact transformations, and connexes","authors":"L. D. Kay","doi":"10.1007/s00407-023-00305-1","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-023-00305-1","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Much of the mathematics with which Felix Klein and Sophus Lie are now associated (Klein’s Erlangen Program and Lie’s theory of transformation groups) is rooted in ideas they developed in their early work: the consideration of geometric objects or properties preserved by systems of transformations. As early as 1870, Lie studied particular examples of what he later called <i>contact transformations</i>, which preserve tangency and which came to play a crucial role in his systematic study of transformation groups and differential equations. This note examines Klein’s efforts in the 1870s to interpret contact transformations in terms of <i>connexes</i> and traces that interpretation (which included a false assumption) over the decades that follow. The analysis passes from Klein’s letters to Lie through Lindemann’s edition of Clebsch’s lectures on geometry in 1876, Lie’s criticism of it in his treatise on transformation groups in 1893, and the careful development of that interpretation by Dohmen, a student of Engel, in his 1905 dissertation. The now-obscure notion of connexes and its relation to Lie’s <i>line elements</i> and <i>surface elements</i> are discussed here in some detail.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 4","pages":"373 - 391"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-03-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00407-023-00305-1.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42745210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-21DOI: 10.1007/s00407-023-00306-0
Daniele Macuglia
This essay traces the history of early molecular dynamics simulations, specifically exploring the development of SHAKE, a constraint-based technique devised in 1976 by Jean-Paul Ryckaert, Giovanni Ciccotti and the late Herman Berendsen at CECAM (Centre Européen de Calcul Atomique et Moléculaire). The work of the three scientists proved to be instrumental in giving impetus to the MD simulation of complex polymer systems and it currently underpins the work of thousands of researchers worldwide who are engaged in computational physics, chemistry and biology. Despite its impact and its role in bringing different scientific fields together, accurate historical studies on the birth of SHAKE are virtually absent. By collecting and elaborating on the accounts of Ryckaert and Ciccotti, this essay aims to fill this gap, while also commenting on the conceptual and computational difficulties faced by its developers.
{"title":"SHAKE and the exact constraint satisfaction of the dynamics of semi-rigid molecules in Cartesian coordinates, 1973–1977","authors":"Daniele Macuglia","doi":"10.1007/s00407-023-00306-0","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-023-00306-0","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This essay traces the history of early molecular dynamics simulations, specifically exploring the development of SHAKE, a constraint-based technique devised in 1976 by Jean-Paul Ryckaert, Giovanni Ciccotti and the late Herman Berendsen at CECAM (Centre Européen de Calcul Atomique et Moléculaire). The work of the three scientists proved to be instrumental in giving impetus to the MD simulation of complex polymer systems and it currently underpins the work of thousands of researchers worldwide who are engaged in computational physics, chemistry and biology. Despite its impact and its role in bringing different scientific fields together, accurate historical studies on the birth of SHAKE are virtually absent. By collecting and elaborating on the accounts of Ryckaert and Ciccotti, this essay aims to fill this gap, while also commenting on the conceptual and computational difficulties faced by its developers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 4","pages":"345 - 371"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00407-023-00306-0.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43689315","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-31DOI: 10.1007/s00407-022-00303-9
Craig Fraser, Michiyo Nakane
The idea of a canonical transformation emerged in 1837 in the course of Carl Jacobi's researches in analytical dynamics. To understand Jacobi's moment of discovery it is necessary to examine some background, especially the work of Joseph Lagrange and Siméon Poisson on the variation of arbitrary constants as well as some of the dynamical discoveries of William Rowan Hamilton. Significant figures following Jacobi in the middle of the century were Adolphe Desboves and William Donkin, while the delayed posthumous publication in 1866 of Jacobi's full dynamical corpus was a critical event. François Tisserand's doctoral dissertation of 1868 was devoted primarily to lunar and planetary theory but placed Hamilton–Jacobi mathematical methods at the forefront of the investigation. Henri Poincaré's writings on celestial mechanics in the period 1890–1910 succeeded in making canonical transformations a fundamental part of the dynamical theory. Poincaré offered a mathematical vision of the subject that differed from Jacobi's and would become influential in subsequent research. Two prominent researchers around 1900 were Carl Charlier and Edmund Whittaker, and their books included chapters devoted explicitly to transformation theory. In the first three decades of the twentieth century Hamilton–Jacobi theory in general and canonical transformations in particular would be embraced by a range of researchers in astronomy, physics and mathematics.
{"title":"Canonical transformations from Jacobi to Whittaker","authors":"Craig Fraser, Michiyo Nakane","doi":"10.1007/s00407-022-00303-9","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-022-00303-9","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The idea of a canonical transformation emerged in 1837 in the course of Carl Jacobi's researches in analytical dynamics. To understand Jacobi's moment of discovery it is necessary to examine some background, especially the work of Joseph Lagrange and Siméon Poisson on the variation of arbitrary constants as well as some of the dynamical discoveries of William Rowan Hamilton. Significant figures following Jacobi in the middle of the century were Adolphe Desboves and William Donkin, while the delayed posthumous publication in 1866 of Jacobi's full dynamical corpus was a critical event. François Tisserand's doctoral dissertation of 1868 was devoted primarily to lunar and planetary theory but placed Hamilton–Jacobi mathematical methods at the forefront of the investigation. Henri Poincaré's writings on celestial mechanics in the period 1890–1910 succeeded in making canonical transformations a fundamental part of the dynamical theory. Poincaré offered a mathematical vision of the subject that differed from Jacobi's and would become influential in subsequent research. Two prominent researchers around 1900 were Carl Charlier and Edmund Whittaker, and their books included chapters devoted explicitly to transformation theory. In the first three decades of the twentieth century Hamilton–Jacobi theory in general and canonical transformations in particular would be embraced by a range of researchers in astronomy, physics and mathematics.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 3","pages":"241 - 343"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49249749","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-17DOI: 10.1007/s00407-023-00304-2
Giulio Peruzzi, Valentina Roberti
Modern color science finds its birth in the middle of the nineteenth century. Among the chief architects of the new color theory, the name of the polymath Hermann von Helmholtz stands out. A keen experimenter and profound expert of the latest developments of the fields of physiological optics, psychophysics, and geometry, he exploited his transdisciplinary knowledge to define the first non-Euclidean line element in color space, i.e., a three-dimensional mathematical model used to describe color differences in terms of color distances. Considered as the first step toward a metrically significant model of color space, his work inaugurated researches on higher color metrics, which describes how distance in the color space translates into perceptual difference. This paper focuses on the development of Helmholtz’s mathematical derivation of the line element. Starting from the first experimental evidence which opened the door to his reflections about the geometry of color space, it will be highlighted the pivotal role played by the studies conducted by his assistants in Berlin, which provided precious material for the elaboration of the final model proposed by Helmholtz in three papers published between 1891 and 1892. Although fallen into oblivion for about three decades, Helmholtz’s masterful work was rediscovered by Schrödinger and, since the 1920s, it has provided the basis for all subsequent studies on the geometry of color spaces up to the present time.
{"title":"Helmholtz and the geometry of color space: gestation and development of Helmholtz’s line element","authors":"Giulio Peruzzi, Valentina Roberti","doi":"10.1007/s00407-023-00304-2","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-023-00304-2","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Modern color science finds its birth in the middle of the nineteenth century. Among the chief architects of the new color theory, the name of the polymath Hermann von Helmholtz stands out. A keen experimenter and profound expert of the latest developments of the fields of physiological optics, psychophysics, and geometry, he exploited his transdisciplinary knowledge to define the first non-Euclidean line element in color space, i.e., a three-dimensional mathematical model used to describe color differences in terms of color distances. Considered as the first step toward a metrically significant model of color space, his work inaugurated researches on <i>higher color metrics</i>, which describes how distance in the color space translates into perceptual difference. This paper focuses on the development of Helmholtz’s mathematical derivation of the line element. Starting from the first experimental evidence which opened the door to his reflections about the geometry of color space, it will be highlighted the pivotal role played by the studies conducted by his assistants in Berlin, which provided precious material for the elaboration of the final model proposed by Helmholtz in three papers published between 1891 and 1892. Although fallen into oblivion for about three decades, Helmholtz’s masterful work was rediscovered by Schrödinger and, since the 1920s, it has provided the basis for all subsequent studies on the geometry of color spaces up to the present time.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 2","pages":"201 - 220"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00407-023-00304-2.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49056592","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-06DOI: 10.1007/s00407-022-00301-x
Bernard R. Goldstein, José Chabás
In this article, we report the discovery of a new type of astronomical almanac by Joseph Ibn Waqār (Córdoba, fourteenth century) that begins at second station for each of the planets and may have been intended to serve as a template for planetary positions beginning at any dated second station. For background, we discuss the Ptolemaic tradition of treating stations and retrograde motions as well as two tables in Arabic zijes for the anomalistic cycles of the planets in which the planets stay at first and second stations for a period of time (in contrast to the Ptolemaic tradition). Finally, we consider some medieval astrological texts where stations or retrograde motions are invoked.
在这篇文章中,我们报告了Joseph Ibn Waqār(Córdoba,14世纪)发现的一种新型天文年历,该年历始于每颗行星的第二站,可能旨在作为任何日期的第二点开始的行星位置的模板。作为背景,我们讨论了托勒密处理台站和逆行的传统,以及行星在第一和第二台站停留一段时间(与托勒密传统相反)的两个阿拉伯zijes表。最后,我们考虑一些中世纪的占星术文本,其中援引了位置或逆行。
{"title":"Joseph Ibn Waqār and the treatment of retrograde motion in the middle ages","authors":"Bernard R. Goldstein, José Chabás","doi":"10.1007/s00407-022-00301-x","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-022-00301-x","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In this article, we report the discovery of a new type of astronomical almanac by Joseph Ibn Waqār (Córdoba, fourteenth century) that begins at second station for each of the planets and may have been intended to serve as a template for planetary positions beginning at any dated second station. For background, we discuss the Ptolemaic tradition of treating stations and retrograde motions as well as two tables in Arabic zijes for the anomalistic cycles of the planets in which the planets stay at first and second stations for a period of time (in contrast to the Ptolemaic tradition). Finally, we consider some medieval astrological texts where stations or retrograde motions are invoked.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 2","pages":"175 - 199"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2023-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00407-022-00301-x.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42906865","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-31DOI: 10.1007/s00407-022-00300-y
Markus Ehberger
{"title":"Correction to: “The language of Dirac’s theory of radiation”: the inception and initial reception of a tool for the quantum field theorist","authors":"Markus Ehberger","doi":"10.1007/s00407-022-00300-y","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-022-00300-y","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 1","pages":"121 - 122"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00407-022-00300-y.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"50529219","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-20DOI: 10.1007/s00407-022-00297-4
Michael Friedman, David Garber
We examine one of the well-known mathematical works of Abraham bar Ḥiyya: Ḥibbur ha-Meshiḥah ve-ha-Tishboret, written between 1116 and 1145, which is one of the first extant mathematical manuscripts in Hebrew. In the secondary literature about this work, two main theses have been presented: the first is that one Urtext exists; the second is that two recensions were written—a shorter, more practical one, and a longer, more scientific one. Critically comparing the eight known copies of the Ḥibbur, we show that contrary to these two theses, one should adopt a fluid model of textual transmission for the various manuscripts of the Ḥibbur, because neither of these two theses can account fully for the changes among the various manuscripts. We hence offer to concentrate on the typology of the variations among the various manuscripts, dealing with macro-changes (such as omissions or additions of proofs, additional appendices or a reorganization of the text itself), and micro-changes (such as textual and pictorial variants).
我们研究亚伯拉罕·巴尔的一部著名数学著作Ḥiyya:Ḥibbur ha Meshiḥah-vehaTishbret,写于1116年至1145年,是现存最早的希伯来语数学手稿之一。在关于这部作品的二次文献中,主要提出了两个论点:第一,存在一个Urtext;第二个是写了两个版本——一个更短、更实用的版本,另一个更长、更科学的版本。严格比较Ḥibbur,我们表明,与这两篇论文相反,我们应该对《圣经》的各种手稿采用一种流动的文本传递模式Ḥibbur,因为这两篇论文都不能完全解释各种手稿之间的变化。因此,我们建议专注于各种手稿之间变体的类型学,处理宏观变化(如校样的遗漏或添加、额外的附录或文本本身的重组)和微观变化(如文本和图像变体)。
{"title":"On fluidity of the textual transmission in Abraham bar Hiyya’s Ḥibbur ha-Meshiḥah ve-ha-Tishboret","authors":"Michael Friedman, David Garber","doi":"10.1007/s00407-022-00297-4","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-022-00297-4","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We examine one of the well-known mathematical works of Abraham bar Ḥiyya: <i>Ḥibbur ha-Meshiḥah ve-ha-Tishboret</i>, written between 1116 and 1145, which is one of the first extant mathematical manuscripts in Hebrew. In the secondary literature about this work, two main theses have been presented: the first is that one <i>Urtext</i> exists; the second is that two recensions were written—a shorter, more practical one, and a longer, more scientific one. Critically comparing the eight known copies of the <i>Ḥibbur</i>, we show that contrary to these two theses, one should adopt a fluid model of textual transmission for the various manuscripts of the <i>Ḥibbur</i>, because neither of these two theses can account fully for the changes among the various manuscripts. We hence offer to concentrate on the typology of the variations among the various manuscripts, dealing with macro-changes (such as omissions or additions of proofs, additional appendices or a reorganization of the text itself)<i>,</i> and micro-changes (such as textual and pictorial variants).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 2","pages":"123 - 174"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49504855","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-09-21DOI: 10.1007/s00407-022-00299-2
Helge Kragh
By 1933, the class of generally accepted elementary particles comprised the electron, the photon, the proton as well as newcomers in the shape of the neutron, the positron, and the neutrino. During the following decade, a new and poorly understood particle, the mesotron or meson, was added to the list. By paying close attention to the names of these and other particles and to the sometimes controversial proposals of names, a novel perspective on this well-researched line of development is offered. Part of the study investigates the circumstances around the coining of “positron” as an alternative to “positive electron.” Another and central part is concerned with the many names associated with the discovery of what in the late 1930s was generally called the “mesotron” but eventually became known as the “meson” and later again the muon and pion. The naming of particles in the period up to the early 1950s was more than just a matter of agreeing on convenient terms, it also reflected different conceptions of the particles and in some cases the uncertainty regarding their nature and relations to existing theories. Was the particle discovered in the cosmic rays the same as the one responsible for the nuclear forces? While two different names might just be synonymous referents, they might also refer to widely different conceptual images.
{"title":"A terminological history of early elementary particle physics","authors":"Helge Kragh","doi":"10.1007/s00407-022-00299-2","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-022-00299-2","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>By 1933, the class of generally accepted elementary particles comprised the electron, the photon, the proton as well as newcomers in the shape of the neutron, the positron, and the neutrino. During the following decade, a new and poorly understood particle, the mesotron or meson, was added to the list. By paying close attention to the names of these and other particles and to the sometimes controversial proposals of names, a novel perspective on this well-researched line of development is offered. Part of the study investigates the circumstances around the coining of “positron” as an alternative to “positive electron.” Another and central part is concerned with the many names associated with the discovery of what in the late 1930s was generally called the “mesotron” but eventually became known as the “meson” and later again the muon and pion. The naming of particles in the period up to the early 1950s was more than just a matter of agreeing on convenient terms, it also reflected different conceptions of the particles and in some cases the uncertainty regarding their nature and relations to existing theories. Was the particle discovered in the cosmic rays the same as the one responsible for the nuclear forces? While two different names might just be synonymous referents, they might also refer to widely different conceptual images.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 1","pages":"73 - 120"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00407-022-00299-2.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42323045","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-26DOI: 10.1007/s00407-022-00298-3
Eric-Jan Wagenmakers, Alexander Ly
The Jeffreys–Lindley paradox exposes a rift between Bayesian and frequentist hypothesis testing that strikes at the heart of statistical inference. Contrary to what most current literature suggests, the paradox was central to the Bayesian testing methodology developed by Sir Harold Jeffreys in the late 1930s. Jeffreys showed that the evidence for a point-null hypothesis ({mathcal {H}}_0) scales with (sqrt{n}) and repeatedly argued that it would, therefore, be mistaken to set a threshold for rejecting ({mathcal {H}}_0) at a constant multiple of the standard error. Here, we summarize Jeffreys’s early work on the paradox and clarify his reasons for including the (sqrt{n}) term. The prior distribution is seen to play a crucial role; by implicitly correcting for selection, small parameter values are identified as relatively surprising under ({mathcal {H}}_1). We highlight the general nature of the paradox by presenting both a fully frequentist and a fully Bayesian version. We also demonstrate that the paradox does not depend on assigning prior mass to a point hypothesis, as is commonly believed.
{"title":"History and nature of the Jeffreys–Lindley paradox","authors":"Eric-Jan Wagenmakers, Alexander Ly","doi":"10.1007/s00407-022-00298-3","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s00407-022-00298-3","url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The Jeffreys–Lindley paradox exposes a rift between Bayesian and frequentist hypothesis testing that strikes at the heart of statistical inference. Contrary to what most current literature suggests, the paradox was central to the Bayesian testing methodology developed by Sir Harold Jeffreys in the late 1930s. Jeffreys showed that the evidence for a point-null hypothesis <span>({mathcal {H}}_0)</span> scales with <span>(sqrt{n})</span> and repeatedly argued that it would, therefore, be mistaken to set a threshold for rejecting <span>({mathcal {H}}_0)</span> at a constant multiple of the standard error. Here, we summarize Jeffreys’s early work on the paradox and clarify his reasons for including the <span>(sqrt{n})</span> term. The prior distribution is seen to play a crucial role; by implicitly correcting for selection, small parameter values are identified as relatively surprising under <span>({mathcal {H}}_1)</span>. We highlight the general nature of the paradox by presenting both a fully frequentist and a fully Bayesian version. We also demonstrate that the paradox does not depend on assigning prior mass to a point hypothesis, as is commonly believed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":"77 1","pages":"25 - 72"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5,"publicationDate":"2022-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00407-022-00298-3.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48075356","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}