FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4366809488> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4366809488 endingPage "969" @default.
• W4366809488 startingPage "968" @default.
• W4366809488 abstract "968 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE his major contribution may be to remind us that inventions are the creation of discrete content as well as cognitive process, of local knowledge as much as blinding insight. William S. Pretzer Dr. Pretzer, director of educational programs at Henry Ford Museum & Green­ field Village, recently completed a term on the National Commission for Technology Education, a K-12 educational standards project. Optics in the Age ofEuler: Conceptions ofthe Nature ofLight, 1700-1795. By Casper Hakfoort. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Pp. 243; figures, tables, notes, bibliography, index. $64.95 (hardcover). There is a considerable literature on the debate on the nature of light, and historians of science agree that until the 19th century the corpuscular (or emission) theory of light had the upper hand. The main purpose of this book, as stated by its author, is to “enrich and qualify” this picture by showing that in Germany in the second half of the 18th century Leonhard Euler’s wave theory was preferred to the corpuscular theory. This conclusion is based on a comprehensive study (apparently the first one) of the dispute on the nature of light in Germany. This is the strongest part of the book and provides a wealth of informa­ tion little known even to historians. Hakfoort also attempts to revise the generally accepted outline of the controversy on the nature of light, in particular, the view that the opposition between “the emission and medium traditions” de­ veloped in the second halfof the 17th century. In his view this oppo­ sition emerged after Euler. To prove this point, the author gives a detailed account of Euler’s theory, which he believes to be the first wave theory of light (however, see below), and discusses the German response to it. Finally, Hakfoort offers a new classification of the methodological components of science. In addition to mathematics (“classical tradi­ tion”) and experiment (“Baconian tradition”), used by Thomas Kuhn and others, he suggests a third, “theoretical natural philoso­ phy,” which refers to a qualitative explanation of phenomena. Hak­ foort claims that 18th-century optics was “torn among the three tra­ ditions” (p. 182), each of which developed different methods and objectives. In his view, only Huygens synthesized all three method­ ological components, while Newton’s optics was short on mathemat­ ics and Euler’s, on experiment. In the early 19th century, French researchers revived Huygens’ methodology so that “equal attention was given to all three of these elements” (p. 184). The author uses this scheme to account for the reception both of Newton’s theory TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 969 ofcolors and ofEuler’s theory and concludes that the lack ofcontact among “theory, mathematics, and experiment” (p. 188), prevented a more complete mathematization ofphysical optics in the 18th cen­ tury. In his view, the problem was not in applying mathematics but in finding “an integrated method” (p. 189). The book provides interesting observations about the work of Eu­ ler and others, although readers may disagree with some of the au­ thor’s conclusions, based on his own interpretations of terms or his­ toriographical issues. In particular, he treats optics before 1800 as dealing primarily with colors, and he begins the story of the wave theory with Euler because the only “true” waves, in his view, are the periodical ones. While Hakfoort is correct about Euler’s theory as the best contri­ bution to the “medium tradition” in the 18th century, to say that it was a “full-fledged alternative to the emission theories” (p. 115) is an exaggeration. Euler’s theory could not explain even phenomena already accounted for by Newton, such as rectilinear propagation of light, diffraction, colors of thin films, double refraction, and polar­ ization. For this reason, some historians do not consider Euler’s the­ ory to be an equal alternative to Newton’s emission theory (see, for instance, the paper by L. Minchenko in Physics at the Turn ofthe 17th18th centuries [in Russian] [Moscow, 1974]) While a formal mathe­ matical introduction of periodical waves was an achievement in it­ self, it remained useless for optics until the discovery of the principle ofinterference by Thomas Young, who borrowed the idea ofperiodi..." @default.
• W4366809488 created "2023-04-25" @default.
• W4366809488 creator A5061399347 @default.
• W4366809488 date "1997-10-01" @default.
• W4366809488 modified "2023-10-17" @default.
• W4366809488 title "Optics in the Age of Euler: Conceptions of the Nature of Light, 1700–1795 by Casper Hakfoort" @default.
• W4366809488 doi "https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.1997.0016" @default.
• W4366809488 hasPublicationYear "1997" @default.
• W4366809488 type Work @default.
• W4366809488 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4366809488 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4366809488 hasAuthorship W4366809488A5061399347 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C154775046 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C166957645 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C2780668109 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C29595303 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C519517224 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C74916050 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C144024400 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C154775046 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C166957645 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C17744445 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C199539241 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C2780668109 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C29595303 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C519517224 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C52119013 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C74916050 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C94625758 @default.
• W4366809488 hasConceptScore W4366809488C95457728 @default.
• W4366809488 hasIssue "4" @default.
• W4366809488 hasLocation W43668094881 @default.
• W4366809488 hasOpenAccess W4366809488 @default.
• W4366809488 hasPrimaryLocation W43668094881 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W1559134593 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W2043648648 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W2070764034 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W2091354641 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W2139946143 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W2331964162 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W2728157546 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W2748952813 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W2885488695 @default.
• W4366809488 hasRelatedWork W4302404629 @default.
• W4366809488 hasVolume "38" @default.
• W4366809488 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4366809488 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4366809488 workType "article" @default.