Product Description
In the first half of the 19th century geometry changedradically, and withina century it helped to revolutionizeboth mathematics and physics. It alsoput the epistemologyand the philosophy of science on a new footing. In thisvolume a sound overview of this development is given byleadingmathematicians, physicists, philosophers, andhistorians of science. This interdisciplinary approach givesthis collection a unique character. It can be used byscientists and students, but it also addresses a generalreadership. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Harmless articles
These harmless little articles are not terribly useful, but I was prompted to make some remarks on Gauss. Houzel writes on "The Birth of Non-Euclidean Geometry" and summarises the facts. Basically, in Gauss's correspondence and Nachlass one can find evidence of both conceptual and technical insights on non-Euclidean geometry. Perhaps the clearest technical result is the formula for the circumference of a circle, k(pi/2)(e^(r/k)-e^(-r/k)). This is one instance of the marked analogy with spherical geometry, where circles scale as the sine of the radius, whereas here in hyperbolic geometry they scale as the hyperbolic sine. Even so, one must confess that there is no evidence of Gauss having attacked non-Euclidean geometry on the basis of differential geometry and curvature, although obviously "it is difficult to think that Gauss had not seen the relation". When it comes to assessing Gauss's claims, after the publications of Bolyai and Lobachevsky, that this was known to him already, one should perhaps remember that he made similar claims regarding elliptic functions---saying that Abel had only a third of his results and so on---and that in this case there is more compelling evidence that he was essentially right. Gauss shows up again in Volkert's article on "Mathematical Progress as Synthesis of Intuition and Calculus". Although his thesis is trivially correct, Volkert gets the Gauss stuff all wrong. The discussion concerns Gauss's 1799 doctoral dissertation on the fundamental theorem of algebra. Supposedly, the problem with Gauss's proof, which is supposed to exemplify "an advancement of intuition in relation to calculus" is that "the continuity of the plane ... wasn't exactified". Of course, anyone with the slightest understanding of mathematics will know that "the continuity of the plane" is no more an issue in this proof of Gauss that in Euclid's proposition 1 or any other geometrical work whatsoever during the two thousand years between them. The real issue in Gauss's proof is the nature of algebraic curves, as of course Gauss himself knew. One wonders if Volkert even bothered to read the paper since he claims that "the existance of the point of intersection is treated by Gauss as something absolutely clear; he says nothing about it", which is plainly false. Gauss says a lot about it (properly understood) in a long footnote that shows that he recognised the problem and, I would argue, recognised that his proof was incomplete. ... Read more

Product Description
This is a major revision of a classic, best selling reference book. Originally published by the American Institute of Physics under the title "Physics Vade Mecum" in 1981, and then the second edition in 1989 with the new title "A Physicist's Desk Reference", this third edition has been completely updated and modernized to reflect current modern physics. The book is a concise compilation of the most frequently used physics data and formulae with their derivations. This revision has six more chapters than the second edition, outdated chapters dropped, and new chapters added on atmospheric physics, electricity and magnetism, elementary particle physics, fluid dynamics, geophysics, nonlinear physics, particle accelerators, polymer physics, and quantum theory. There is a new last chapter on practical laboratory data. The references and bibliographies have been updated.This book is an indispensable tool for the researcher, professional and student in physics as well as other scientists who use physics data. The editors of this volume are Richard Cohen, author of the first two chapters of PDR and the "Physics Quick Reference Guide"; David Lide, one of the editors of the previous two editions and the editor of the "CRC Handbook of Physics and Chemistry"; and George Trigg, editor of the "Encyclopedia of Physics" and the "Encyclopedia of Applied Physics" (VCH). The market for this classic reference book includes the practicing scientist, including engineers, chemists, and biologists; and students. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Quite ok
I am not certain if I can say that this book is more of a professional asset, or more of an entertainment. It's a nice book to read. I can't say it's a good book to work with.

The AIP desk reference contains a good deal of equations and expressions. It contains a bit of everything, and therefore One should not expect to find -precisely- what One wants.

Should you buy it? Probably. Is it going to help you? Maybe more on a psychological level, because it's nice to hold the whole spectrum of physics in one hand.

Keep up with physics
It is difficult for physicists to keep track of the latest findings in their field. By necessity, if you work in physics, you often have to specialise. Yet for intellectual reasons, if nothing else, it is good to keep up with what is in your occupation.

For decades, the American Institute of Physics has tried to help, with earlier versions of this book. This is the latest update, from 2003. Compared to, say, the 1981 edition, there have been large changes. Perhaps foremost is the current prominence of computational ideas. Reflecting the decades-long surge of Moore's Law and the now ubiquitous computing power available to most physicists. So much so that simulations are now a de facto equal partner of theory and observation.

The book also describes the current boundaries of particle physics, with updates on recent accelerator capabilities and results. If progress seems naggingly slow here, remember the sheer cost of those accelerators and the long lead time between design and first light. ... Read more

Product Description
Many of the earliest books, particularly those dating back to the 1900s and before, are now extremely scarce and increasingly expensive. We are republishing these classic works in affordable, high quality, modern editions, using the original text and artwork. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (11)

Decent Translation, Abominable Aesthetics
Mr. Joe Sachs is somewhat of a controversial figure in scholarly circles. He has translated the principal theoretical works of the Aristotelian Corpus, and has declared that traditional translation (i.e. those employing Latin cognates) are insufficient at best and misleading at worst.

His translation is decent (that is, mostly literal) until one reaches the key technical terms: ousia, energeia, to ti enai,archai, entelekeia, etc. Sachs wishes to translate these into clear, immediately comprehensible everyday English. Unfortunately, this is precisely what I believe he often fails to do. His translations are but sometimes immediately clear, but (to take three examples) "energeia" is rendered "being-at-work", its mate, "entelecheia", "being-at-work-staying-itself", and "ousia" is "thinghood": phrases which, to the uninitiated, remain as much, if not more obscure than their Latin competitors: "activity" and "actuality". In fact, I could not decipher them without the aid of my professors and a lexicon to return to the Greek.

None of this is much different in other translations nor makes Sachs worse than the other competitors: Aristotle uses unexplained technical terms in his theoretical works and the reader will struggle regardless of translation. But to this end of comprehension, to assert Mr. Sachs's translation as the clearest is mistaken. His translation runs the risk of creating an entirely new technical jargon, the very thing he wished to avoid.

Further, this edition was not seemingly made for serious study: the Bekker numbers are embedded in the text and unbolded, making them almost impossible to find quickly and there is running commentary which is easily confused at first sight for the text itself. These two factors make this edition unsuitable for serious study. Far superior, in aesthetics and in translation, is Glen Coughlin's translation of the Physics, which (appropriately enough) strikes the mean between the Latin cognates and Sachsian terminology.

Best Translation Out There
This translation of Aristotle's Physics is really the best one available - and not simply because the others are terrible (some of them are not terrible), but because this one is extraordinary.As some of the other reviewers may have suggested, it can be hard to read at times because of the unfamiliar phrasings.However, I think this is irrelevant because (a) other translation are not easy reading either, (b) other translations are not as good at capturing Aristotle's meaning so that even if they were much easier to read they just make it that much easier for you to misunderstand Aristotle, (c) in fact the efforts required to follow the unfamiliar phrasings in this translation are themselves part of what makes this translation the most useful for anyone who wants to understand Aristotle, and (d) its really not all that hard to read.(And the same points go for the other translations by Sachs.)Sachs unpacks the richness of the Greek terms in his translation rather than covering it over with English terms that give you the illusion of understanding or force you to constantly adjust your thought about what the English words are supposed to mean in the context of Aristotle's philosophy.For example, Sachs' translation of energeia as "being-at-work" as opposed to "activity," and entelecheia as "being-at-work-staying-itself" as opposed to "actualization."Sachs' translations here really put the nuances of the Greek terms to the forefront, and they give you the opportunity to think through (and to think hard about) what Aristotle must mean in a beautiful way that makes reading this translation a real learning, eye-opening, awakening experience.Also Sachs provides very useful glossary, introduction, and commentary. If you're just starting Aristotle or have been studying him for years, this translation is sure to do you right.I've been studying Aristotle for about a decade and a half and I never cease to very greatly appreciate Sachs' translations.--Michael Russo

What is The Meaning Of Being?
I read this book for a graduate seminar on Aristotle.

PHYSICS--Aristotle addresses the "why" questions.Aetia= causes, there are 4 causes.Only 1 cause actually sounds what like we call a cause today.A better translation is "explanation."4 ways to explanations.Arche=origins/principles, something that is 1st, or rule, or, commanding, or beginning.Thus 1st thought that leads us to understand something and how we proceed.Begin how we think and rule or govern how we think.Phusis= "nature," like physics.He understands nature differently than we do today.For Aristotle the planets orbits never change so not part of nature.Everything below the moon, "lunar," is nature.Thus everything below lunar is not perfect and goes through change.Phusis root= to grow or bloom.Thus, emerging like birth.This term has to do with movement and change.Also connected to "coming to light."Also, connected to "being."

Physics (nature) is an arche (rule) of motion and change.Concept of physics (nature) has to do with motion and change.Paramedes denies change.Aristotle takes umbrage with this.Plato says change is a deficient condition; Aristotle is against both men's notion of change.
IMPORTANT--Aristotle talks about how we talk about how we talk about change all the time.Aristotle says no such things as "being" itself.For Aristotle there is change we always talk about it.

Potentiality and actuality- 2 terms that dominate Aristotle's thinking.Change is potentiality to actuality.Potentiality is a "not yet."He criticizes premises of philosophers for denying or denigrating change.His physics is his thought to explain change.Ousia can't mean something unchanging, it is always a changing phenomena.For Aristotle and the Greeks the "world" has no beginning or end it is always here.No God or creator.Big and small are opposites, but are only conceptual.Small things become big Aristotle sees this.Our language is the guide here.The fact that there is change doesn't mean it is chaotic, you plant a seed, and it grows from small to big, this is normal change.

3 senses Aristotle uses phusis or nature.IMPORTANT- 1."Always or for the most part."2.Telos-end, purposes.3.Movement is self-generated toward something.When a seed falls to the ground it grows and moves towards growing.Contrast Phusis with techne="produce something by humans."Both have to do with change and movement.1 is self-moving, 1 is moved by us.Trees are not brought into being by themselves; beds out of trees are made by us.What is a bed?For Aristotle it has no nature or physics, it can have an essence.Everything other than Techne "things of production" are physics, nature.It is natural that humans have productive capacity and skills.Techne and physics are distinguished to understand change.Aristotle is important in philosophy and science because he uses language of science.He sees that change is internal within phusis in their own nature, not from myth or storytelling.

His phenomenology says our primary access to things is the "whole" like a dog, once we analyze them we can break them down.This is different from the premises of philosophers who believed in "inarticulate wholes."This is a dramatic difference from Platonists and atomists ideas.Atomist says all things made up of individual stuff like atoms.Aristotle is against atomist doesn't accept describing atoms as real.Like atomist the "whole" or dog is real for him.He isn't a Darwinist because the earth is always the way it was, is and will be.He talks about elements earth, fire, water, air.

IMPORTANT- For Aristotle, "being" of a thing comes 1st, knowledge 2nd.He says knowledge comes to rest in the soul.The soul is calmed by knowledge.When the soul or the mind comes to rest this is out of a natural turbulence of the mind.When he says "by nature" it is intrinsic in us we are by nature turbulent like children, this is part of us.Knowledge achieves calming it emerges out of the turbulence like "wonder."

Techne and physics are not opposites they are distinct different ways to explain movement.Both parts of our world can illuminate each other.He doesn't have idea of a creator God but understands if their were nature it would come by way of god.He says nature is self-manifesting.Techne completes nature (physics) Art doesn't quite imitate nature but talking about shapes like a bed or cave like a house.More like impersonates nature.Craft or Techne our natural capacity to make things, we are elated by being able to craft we do have to be taught to produce things.When we build houses, we are completing something nature can't do.Today, modern science rejects idea "nature" has a purpose.Thus, Aristotle doesn't see physics, nature and techne craft as that different.

Aitia=Causes better definition is "explanation."

1. Material Cause, answers question "out of what"
2. Formal Cause, answers question "into what"
3. Efficient Cause, answers question "from what"
4. Final Cause, answers question "for what, or toward what"

Qua= Latin for "as."We understand something by questions we ask.He uses ordinary language.This arms us with information to look at whatever phenomena by deduction.Fill in the 4 causes and categories and then you have knowledge.

IMPORTANT- Most important is #2 the Formal cause.Efficient and Final cause fall under it.Usually he uses artifacts crafted by man to explain this.Example of a house:

1.Material Cause, answers question "out of what" Wood
2.Formal Cause, answers question "into what"A certain shape of house
3.Efficient Cause, answers question "from what" the builder
4.Final Cause, answers question "for what, or toward what" to provide shelter

Things of phusis can be explained by 4 causes a little tricky.Form isn't just shape for Aristotle.
He uses different works for form, like logos = ordering, or pattern, or structure, in this case, organization in living things it is richer our bodies are our being cause.A corpse is no longer organized for a functioning body.Same with material cause.Aristotle distinguishes between wood or real matter and less tangible, he uses idea of material cause thus doesn't just mean stuff like matter.Thus, in his book Politics, what is the material of the polis?The citizens.Material is just a way to explain it.The word matter works like "What subject matter are you taking"?Thus, Aristotle uses matter in the rich and varied linguistic way.Thus, he provides guides and 4 categories and causes to gain knowledge.He thinks his approach is an improvement over Plato and pre-Socratics like materialists.

IMPORTANT- Everything is what it is in combination of matter and form in the world except God.There is a difference between dogs and beds, thus he is against the atomists.If you don't know what a cake is ahead of time you don't ever get to the molecular structure to get you there.To talk about matter without form is to miss something.Any 4 causes alone doesn't work, all together give an apt account of how things are.Modern science breaks with him on #4 the Final cause; scientists say this doesn't exist in nature.

For Aristotle, if it is evident and real in nature it must be real.The Telos shouldn't be understood as "push pull."Understanding can shift based on different issues and topics so Aristotle is a "pluralist."Never think of telos, or end, or purpose as "design."Not all forms of telos are "conscious design" for Aristotle.There is no intelligent design of nature for Aristotle.(No God).He rejects it, no beginning, or end of nature.However, he believes nature has purposeful elements to it, so it is mind like.Therefore, when we think purposefully we are not violating nature.We are rational animals.There is no mind before or behind nature.For Aristotle idea of telos is built into nature.Aristotle's idea of an unmoved, mover is archaic.He believes that movement in nature must ultimately come to stop, can't go to infinity, thus unmoved mover.This is his idea of God.Doesn't mean first cause or creator but more a "draw" not a "push" like draw of a lover.Thus, he doesn't believe in universal laws of motion.This is a limitation in his philosophy.

IMPORTANT-Basic distinction between matter and form, form has efficient and final cause as subsets.Matter and form are separable in analysis but not in reality.Two sides of the same coin, always present together.You can't have a sculpture without matter like clay.Aristotle criticizes Plato and others for delinking form and matter.Form isn't just shape, form is structure and organization.Corpse has same shape as a human but Aristotle says, "The form is gone in the corpse" so form is more than shape.Matter is unknowable; form gives us something that we can gain knowledge with, example a hunk of clay vs. a bowl.

Bottom line of modern physics and science is math, Newton, Kant, etc. said this.Thus, H2O is proportions of elements.A "towards which" is not a phenomena to examine.Here he is saying math is legitimate form of knowledge but it is not primary way or status of understanding how things are.Natural motion has nothing to do with line and math, etc. for Aristotle.One can't explain natural motion with math.We never come across geometric shapes in nature.Form is natural phenomena but different from mathematical form.Thus, you can't understand nature by math, as primary knowledge only secondary.For Plato, math is real for Aristotle they only help explain nature.

I recommend Aristotle's works to anyone interested in obtaining a classical education, and those interested in philosophy.Aristotle is one of the most important philosophers and the standard that all others must be judged by.

The only good translation
Aristotle's Physics is one of the least studied "great books"--physics has come to mean something entirely different than Aristotle's inquiry into nature, and stereotyped Medieval interpretations have buried the original text. Sach's translation is really the only one that I know of that attempts to take the reader back to the text itself.

I do have a few quibbles, mostly with the presentation. The line numbers are buried in the text, rather than set off in the margins, which is annoying. The typeface is difficult and too closely packed. The cover is one of the ugliest ever produced. The book is too expensive, given the quality.

If you are going to study or teach the Physics in English, however, this is absolutely the edition you should use.

Line Number Problem
I have used Sachs' translation of the Nichomachean ethics and found it helpful, so I will not criticize Sachs' translation technique here. Unfortunately though I could not use this edition of the physics for one simple reason. The line numbers are not in the margines but imbeded in the text, and not bolded. This made it very difficult to use in the semenar style discussions of St. John's College (ironically the college that Sach's is a professor at). So I stopped using it emediately and opted for the complete works version so I could participate in semenar discussions. I would like to give Sachs' translation of the physics a chance but the lack of clear line numbers in this edition is a serious problem for me.
... Read more

Product Description
-Would the bus in Speed really have made that jump?
-Could a Star Wars ship actually explode in space?
-What really would have happened if you said "Honey, I shrunk the kids"?

The companion book to the hit website (www.intuitor.com/moviephysics), which boasts more than 1 million visitors per year, Insultingly Stupid Movie Physics is a hilarious guide to the biggest mistakes, most outrageous assumptions, and the outright lunacy at work in Hollywood films that play with the rules of science.

In this fascinating and funny guide, author Tom Rogers examines 20 different topics and shows how, when it comes to filmmaking, the rules of physics are flexible.

Einsteins and film buffs alike will be educated and entertained by this wise and witty guide to science in Hollywood. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (16)

Never look at a movie the same way again
This is a great book that speaks to the reader on many levels. All the math is there for those that want to understand it, but for those that just want a good read it has been separated from the main text into info-boxes that do not need to be read to understand what the author is saying. The author seemed not only to know what he is talking about but has so much fun telling it that the whole book reads like a bunch of collage friends sitting around talking about movies over burgers and beers.
This is a fun book to read for movie and physics geeks alike even if you are neither. Be forewarned though, you will never watch a movie again without this book tickling in the back of your brain.

Excellent reading!
This book uncovers filmmakers' twisted understanding of physics and science. After reading this book your way of watching movies will radically change.Recommended for everyone, especially a must read for all Star Trek and Star Wars fans.

Entertaining, but a little preachy
As someone with an interest in both the cinema and physical sciences, and a fan of the site I thought this book would be a slam dunk. Chalk it up to schadenfreude, but I like picking out goofs in movie, scientific or otherwise. Perhaps that explains the appeal of MST3K to me, but I digress.

For the most part, I found the book both amusing and informative. However, the tone is a bit too preachy and angry. The author seems to take offense that (for example) the director of "Honey I Shrunk the Kids" didn't consider the consequences of the extreme density of a shrunken child. Granted, he gave the movie a pass along with many others for indulgences that were central to the story or particularly interesting. On the other hand, the criteria for which movies escaped his vitriol seemed to be primarily based on his enjoyment of the movie itself more than anything else. Moreover, he took special exception to movies that had silly science and had dialogue devoted to an equally silly explanation trying to support it.

The comparative analysis between Star Wars and Stark trek (complete with chart) was just plain silly and meaningless. This was mostly because of the extremely subjective and arbitrary scoring system he devised and used to compare them.

Also, there were a lot of asides that were more akin to movie reviews than pointing out problems with the science. He exhibits particular ire for Jar-Jar Binks and Hayden Christensen in the Star Wars movies. Fine, I can relate, but it wasn't the point of the book and seemed superfluous.

All in all, there was just too much ink devoted to preaching about how important it is for Hollywood to be accurate in every scientific detail of movies lest it turn us all into science-illiterates. Honestly, I don't see the harm. For example, given the penultimate affront to science, "The Core", the science was so over the top that no reasonable person who has a real-world need to apply science would be side-tracked by it.

"Mom, I'm going to dig a hole to China!"
"Dear, you know that you will be crushed by the extreme temperatures before you get there!"
"Aww mom, they did it in 'The Core' so it probably isn't that bad."


All in all, I would have preferred a more lighthearted approach. This felt too much like a Rush Limbaugh book with the word "Liberals" replaced with "Hollywood Directors."

Book of the website: not up to "book of the film" quality
I really like Tom Rogers' website, so this book was a big disappointment since the level of attention to detail that he puts into his movie reviews and physics explanations clearly didn't go into its editing. A lot of the content of the book is harvested from the website, which was to be expected; the bad part is the slapdash, repetitive way in which it was put together. It just feels like the author copy-pasted large chunks of his work together without regard for the fact that a book flows differently from a website.

The author's ingenuity is in explaining how our intuition can fail when it comes to the way things move under unusual circumstances (e.g. bullets, zero gravity) by using counterxamples from a visual medium that everybody's familiar with - action movies. As mentioned, I've read a lot of his movie reviews. Some material that was new for me in the book was his analysis of the JFK assassination film.

I requested my university's library to buy a copy since I thought it would be amusing and helpful for people taking intro physics. If you haven't read the ISMP website much, or if you're buying the book as a gift, it's worth while. If you've read most of the content on the ISMP site already, skip it.

Great for kids of all ages
The author does a superb job of breaking the movie stunts into easily consumable chunks of information. Enough information is included to give a basic physics lesson to the reader without going over the head of anyone old enough to have seen most of the movies or going into snoozeland. The sections can be read out of order without getting confused, which makes it perfect for impromptu browsing. Well worth the money. ... Read more

Product Description
This book presents Maxwell's equations and the laws ofclassical electromagnetism starting from the equations for theelectric and magnetic fields due to an accelerating classical pointcharge. A microscopic perspective is used to interpret the electricfield due to a current element, the origin of induced electromagneticfields and detached electric field lines, motional electromagneticfields, the mode of action of inductors and capacitors in AC circuits,conduction current flow, the Biot-Savart law, etc. A review ofenergy methods is presented in a way consistent with this microscopicapproach, leading up to discussions of the conservation laws for asystem of spatially separated moving charges and the Poynting vectorhypothesis. After extending Maxwell's equations to field points insidedielectrics and magnetic materials, a brief review of specialrelativity is given stressing those topics that illustrate theessential unity of classical electromagnetism and special relativity.
Audience: This textbook is designed to be used between a coursein classical electromagnetism in which vector analysis has beenintroduced, and an advanced graduate course in electromagnetism. Itwill also be of interest to research physicists and to graduatestudents as a complement to more traditional courses. ... Read more

Product Description

These historical narratives of scientific behavior reveal the often irrational way scientists arrive at and assess their theories. There are stories of Einstein’s stubbornness leading him to reject a correct interpretation of an experiment and miss an important deduction from his own theory, and Newton missing the important deduction from one of his most celebrated discoveries. This enlightening book clearly demonstrates that the greatest minds throughout history arrived at their famous scientific theories in very unorganized ways and they often did not fully grasp the significance and implications of their own work.

Customer Reviews (1)

Good book, bad title
This is a fascinating little book that has 12 self-contained chapters that cover topics including measurements of the Sun and Moon, planetary motion, projectile motion and the expanding universe. Neat stuff about Newton and him linking colour with musical tones. We read about the historical context of work by Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and Einstein. The emphasis is on the discovery process, with detail and wit and understanding from a physics major turned professor of history. This is a good book to supplement history of science texts. And it's a great book to read after Kuhn's classics. It's well illustrated, well researched and has plenty of notes and references to allow further study of the ideas presented.

While there are details of the scientists, I'm really not sure how or why the title of the book came about. But for a fun, idiosyncratic -- yet serious and thought-provoking -- look at science revolutions from a slightly different perspective, I feel good about recommending you give this book a spin. ... Read more

Product Description
This introduction to the history of science in the seventeenth century examines the so-called 'scientific revolution' in terms of the interplay between two major themes. The Platonic-Pythagorean tradition looked on nature in geometric terms with the conviction that the cosmos was constructed according to the principles of mathematical order, while the mechanical philosophy conceived of nature as a huge machine and sought to explain the hidden mechanisms behind phenomena. Pursuing different goals, these two movements of thought tended to conflict with each other, and more than the obviously mathematical sciences were affected - the influence spread as far as chemistry and the life sciences. As this book demonstrates, the full fruition of the scientific revolution required a resolution of the tension between the two dominant trends. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

Another review
First, I want to abandon any pretentions of expertise in the history of ideas or science. With that caveat in mind, or out of mind, I agree with one of the other posters who said "the historiography is dated." Although the author defends himself against the use of "social and political" currents, --- I find that the latter criticism is extrensic to the authors stated purpose. However, As a history of ideas this work fails for me.

First, the author assumes some psuedo- hegalian, "spirit" without naming it as such, as a way of interpreting the development of ideas in the disclipines (chemistry, physics, biology) across time. So, why does author X, (insert Pascal if you like and his tube experiments), fail to realize Y, since he lacked Z (which by the way was not discovered until the 19th century).Wellthe "facts" of science only require the puzzling arrangment of certain variables which are always already discovered in advance.I wonder how the author would respond to this criticism, well he wouldn't read it, but still I wonder with deep awe and all of the psychical imagination of my neoplatonic spirit of the Renaissance.

The freedom of thought!
Classical antiquity and the Greek and Roman worlds are the source of and foundation of modern science. Without Aristotle, Pythagoras, Democritus, Ptolemy, Vitruvius, Archimedes, Ptolemy and many others we would not have Newton, Malpighi, Leibniz, Kepler, Galileo, Descartes, Copernico or Einstein.

In this sense this book is a very interesting journey through the development of the Modern Science, and its countless obstacles to surmount with the Status Quo of different ages and historical moments

Albert Einstein stated once "The science without religion is cripple but the religion without science is blind."

Totally recommended.

A staple of university history of Science courses
Good introduction to the history of early modern science. Historiographically a little dated and therefore lacking in the thorough treatment of the broader social and political origins of science in this time period. Still, it is a classic.

Crystal clear style, illuminating depth on the scientific process
There are several aspects of this book that render it superior but the one aspect which stands out is manner in which the author presents the reasoning behind the development of a revolutionary scientific idea from the perspective of the originator of the idea, and the process by which the originator used developing philosophical trends, and scientific methods to fully realize a new idea despite the mental entanglements of centuries-old "factual" dogma or presuppositions about natural law.Beautifully presented and fully relevant diagrams as well.The first chapter is the clearest description I've ever read of the rationale behind the development of Kepler's Laws.

Great introduction to the 17th century scientific revolution
This book really is a great introduction to the scientific revolution of the 17th century. It's part of a series of books called "History of Science Series" and is dedicated to bringing the history of science to a wider audience. It presents the general reader with an accurate, short narrative and analysis of the scientific revolution of the 17th century. Unlike other books on this subject it does not require the reader to be familiar with a lot of technical background knowledge.

Two major themes dominated the period covered in the book; the Platonic-Pythagorean tradition, which looked on nature in geometric terms, and the mechanical philosophy, which conceived of nature as a huge machine and sought to explain the hidden mechanisms behind phenomena. These themes run through the various chapters of the book. Starting out in the first chapter with the copernican revolution in astronomy (the heliocentric theory) it shows how two men, Kepler and Galileo, reformed the theory and opened up new questions for the comming century. The following chapters cover the various sciences such as mechanics, chemistry and biology. After an interluding chapter covering the organization of the scientific enterprise (showing that universities were not always the principal centers of scientific research) it ends with two chapters in which the two themes mentioned above are drawn together and ultimately lead to the discovery of Newton's laws, solving major problems opened up at the beginning of the century.

I had to read this book as part of a course at the university where I study. I enjoyed the book (and the course) a lot (which I don't say verry often) even though it doesn't have anything to do the primary subject of my study, business information technology. If you're at all 'science minded' this book is a must. You wont regret purchasing it. ... Read more

Product Description
Aided by personal documents and institutional archives that were closed for decades, this book recounts the development of physicsor, more aptly, science under stressin Soviet Russia up to World War II. Focusing on Leningrad, center of Soviet physics until the late 1930s, Josephson discusses the impact of scientific, cultural, and political revolution on physicists' research and professional aspirations.Political and social revolution in Russia threatened to confound the scientific revolution. Physicists eager to investigate new concepts of space, energy, light, and motion were forced to accommodate dialectical materialism and subordinate their interests to those of the state. They ultimately faced Stalinist purges and the shift of physics leadership to Moscow. This account of scientists cut off from their Western colleagues reveals a little-known part of the history of modern physics. ... Read more

Product Description
During the past 200 years, astronomers and geologists have developed and tested several different theories about the origin of the solar system and the nature of the Earth. Together, the three volumes that comprise A History of Modern Planetary Physics present a survey of these theories. Nebulous Earth follows the development of Laplace's Nebular Hypothesis, its connection with ideas about the interior of the Earth, and its role in the establishment of the "evolutionary" worldview that dominated science in the latter part of the nineteenth century.Brush also explores Saturn's rings, Poincaré's contributions to ideas about cosmic evolution, the use of seismology to probe the earth's core, and explanations of the Earth's magnetic field. This series will interest historians and philosophers of science as well as earth scientists and geologists. ... Read more

Product Description

In 1937, Harvard University built its first cyclotron, which was subsequently requisitioned by the U.S. Army and taken to Los Alamos in 1943. The second cyclotron, one of the world's longest-running accelerators, was finished in 1949 and operated until 2002. In its first 20 years, the cyclotron's primary use was for nuclear physics, particularly for understanding the interaction between two nucleons. During the next 30 years, the emphasis switched to treating patients with proton radiotherapy. A total of 9,115 patients were treated by this method and the treatment has been copied all over the world. This book describes the work of the Harvard cyclotron during its 50 years of operation and includes references to about 500 publications and 40 student theses from the work.

Customer Reviews (1)

Book order
Thank you for your speedy shipping of my order. The gift recipient was very pleased...A Brief History of the Harvard University Cyclotrons (Department of Physics) ... Read more

Product Description
This book covers the first 35 years of nuclear physics, especially in the areas of radioactivity and radioactive emissions which were the main discoveries in nuclear physics during its first three decades. It follows the nuclear phenomena step by step, paying special attention to outstanding discoveries, such as Curie's discovery of radium, Rutherford-Soddy law, discovery of isotopes and Rutherford's artificial transmutations. The author aims to present in a critical approach the growth of nuclear physics as seen by a nuclear physicist and historian. ... Read more

Product Description
This is the first of two volumes of essays dedicated to theeminent and pioneering logician, Hugues Leblanc. The volumes comprisethe first, full-scale, English-language collection of studies in thephilosophy and history of science from the French and English cultureof Quebec. They will be appreciated as a major contribution toNorth-American philosophy of science. Audience: The first volume is of particular interest to studentsand scholars engaged in research into the philosophical foundationsand history of logic, mathematics and physics. ... Read more

Product Description
This collection of the finest recent articles from Physics Today is a fascinating chronicle of the people and events shaping modern science and society. Includes profiles, personal memoirs, and histories of important institutions and organizations. Among the more than 60 contributors are such distinguished figures as Murray Gell-Mann, Robert Hofstadter, Irving Langmuir, Abraham Pais, Norman Ramsey, Emilio Segre, and Victor Weisskopf. ... Read more