Annals of Science最新文献

Concentrating on the Qingdao Observatory, this paper will explore the role of scientific facility in asserting China's sovereignty during the first half of the twentieth century. Although scholars have explained the efforts of China's internationalization in diplomacy through the perspectives of politics, economics and culture, they have not paid attention to science. Therefore, this paper aims to shed some light on how scientific issues were solved via diplomacy during the Republic of China, while further asserting that the focus in negotiations was not confined to science itself, but rather to sovereignty within a scientific context. In this process, the meaning of sovereignty has also been expanded basing on the improvement of nation's scientific capability. Besides, the participation of different actors involved in sovereignty assertion is investigated by this paper. Although the diplomatic negotiation was held at the international level, the local government and scientific community were main promoters in this case, which calls for attention on the various subjects in sovereignty issue. Consequently, this paper argues that Asian countries, such as Republic of China, could also employ science as a means to negotiate with foreign powers and claim their due rights.

In 1950, Alan Turing proposed his iconic imitation game, calling it a 'test', an 'experiment', and the 'the only really satisfactory support' for his view that machines can think. Following Turing's rhetoric, the 'Turing test' has been widely received as a kind of crucial experiment to determine machine intelligence. In later sources, however, Turing showed a milder attitude towards what he called his 'imitation tests'. In 1948, Turing referred to the persuasive power of 'the actual production of machines' rather than that of a controlled experiment. Observing this, I propose to distinguish the logical structure from the rhetoric of Turing's argument. I argue that Turing's proposal of a crucial experiment may have been a concession to meet the standards of his interlocutors more than his own, while his construction of machine intelligence rather reveals a method of successive idealizations and exploratory experiments. I will draw a parallel with Galileo's construction of idealized fall in a void and the historiographical controversies over the role of experiment in Galilean science. I suggest that Turing, like Galileo, relied on certain kinds of experiment, but also on rhetoric and propaganda to inspire further research that could lead to convincing scientific and technological progress.

During the English Civil War and subsequent Restoration, beekeeping provided a ready set of moral examples for those seeking answers about the 'natural' structure of society. The practice itself also underwent a number of substantial changes, moving from a traditional craft practice to a more knowledge-focused, technologically complex one. The advent of glass-windowed hives in the latter half of the sixteenth century allowed intellectuals from across the political spectrum to directly observe bees as a way of gathering knowledge about how to understand the divine plan and, with that understanding, improve human society.

ABSTRACTThis paper is divided into a surveying and argumentative part and a slightly longer documentary part, which is meant to verify or at least make more plausible claims made in the first part. The first part deals in broad outline with the relationship of Frank and von Mises to the Vienna Circle of Logical Empiricism on the one hand and to the physicists and mathematicians in the German-speaking world on the other. The varying special positions, partly the non-conformity of the two Austrian scientists are emphasized, in particular, their adherence to Ernst Mach's epistemology and their shared interest in probability theory and applied mathematics. The impact of emigration and the after-effects in the U.S. are discussed. This leads to new insights into the fine structure of the Vienna Circle and the latter's relationship to German academia within 'Weimar Culture'. P. Forman's interpretation (1971) of von Mises' position is critically discussed. The second, documentary part, uses recently discovered correspondence between Frank and von Mises, and, to a lesser extent, von Mises' personal diary. It aims at further substantiating some of the introductory theses and will at the same time provide material for a thorough biographical appreciation of the two scholars and friends.

The brief life of the Accademia del Cimento (1657-1667), the first known society with a purely experimental programme,¹ is entangled with the most surprising advancements in the history of scientific instruments of that century, from the telescope to the microscope, the thermometer to the barometer, the hygrometer to the pendulum as a time-regulator, and more. The making of instruments at the Florentine court shows the interaction of princely, scholarly and artisanal actors. This paper explores this collaboration and shows how the supposed "invisibility' of artisans depended on their proximity to the academicians and princes, who mainly communicated verbally with them, directly or through middlemen. The visibility of artisans increases proportionally to their physical distance from the Court. In this essay I unveil the identity of the artisans of the Cimento and, finally, attempt to attribute five instruments (some lost and others still extant) to specific makers, shedding light also on relations between the artisan and his patron.

This article reconstructs the complex diplomatic negotiations that led to the peculiar organization of molecular biology at the European level, by focusing in particular on the establishment of the European Molecular Biology Conference (EMBC), the intergovernmental structure founded in 1969-70 to support the scientific program of the European Molecular Biology Organization (EMBO). By combining the analysis of the informal decision-making kept in the Nobel Prize laureate John C. Kendrew's personal papers (Oxford) with the in-depth exploration of the institutional documentation available in the EMBO and CERN archives (Heidelberg and Geneva) and the Swiss Federal Archives (Bern), the article sheds light on the importance of the EMBC not only for the construction of molecular biology as a scientific, social, and political field in the European context, but also for the broader process of definition of the European research policy. Far from being just a mere replica of CERN, the EMBO/EMBC inaugurated in fact an alternative and flexible 'bottom-up' model of science policy in the European context, based on competition, networking, and scientific excellence, which paved the way to the establishment of the European Research Council (ERC) in the early 2000s.

Modern commentators have doubts about the authenticity and cogency of the early propositions of Archimedes' On Equilibrium of Planes Book 1. Ernst Mach famously said that the proof of Prop. 6, the so-called law of the lever, assumes what is to be proven. Comparing the initial text in Heiberg's modern edition (1881, 1913) to the first propositions in Eutocius' commentary on EP 1, J. L. Berggren ([1976]. 'Spurious Theorems in Archimedes' Equilibrium of Planes: Book I', Archive for History of Exact Sciences 16.2 (1976), 87-103.) claimed that the propositions up through Proposition 3 of the standard modern edition are schoolbook additions written by an ancient author inferior to Archimedes. The present paper argues for the logical connectedness of Postulates 1-5 to Props. 1-6, by means of a detailed examination of the course of the argument and a re-examination of Eutocius' remarks. The paper reinterprets the role of the empirical in the early propositions and offers a reading of the contribution of Archimedes' mechanics to the method of EP 1.

The life and work of Hermann Günther Graßmann (1809-1877) attract not only ever again the attention of mathematicians, mathematical historians and those interested in the history of mathematics, they constitute also a challenge for the methodology of historiographical research. This challenge persists since Friedrich Engel's biography of 1911; there, two sources were presented and interpreted in a not legitimate manner which even mislead since then various scholars. This paper faces the intricate task to unravel not only the methodological shortcomings of Engel's biography, but also to re-assess the misinterpretations - particularly of alleged influences on Graßmann's approaches - induced by Engel's misleading claims. Based upon broader historically contextualised analyses of Graßmann's innovative elements in his theory of extension and upon new primary sources for his student times at the Gymnasium and Berlin University, the paper presents a novel assessment of Graßmann's approaches.