history of science

Describe the experiments that led to the conclusion that radiation is particulate (behaves like a particle).

Two experiments led to the conclusion that radiation is particulate. The first, performed by Max Planck, uses Black Body radiation to support this conclusion. In Max Planck's experiment, he began to heat metal and found that when you do this, it starts to radiate light (for example, like when a blacksmith heats a horseshoe, you get the orange/red glow). Up until the 1800's, the wave model of light was prevalent, but could not explain this black body radiation. Through experimentation, Planck said that the energy of radiation (E) emitted by an object is proportional to the frequency of vibration (v) of the molecules making up that object, forming the equation E=hv, with h being Planck's constant. This formula required that we assume objects emit energy in chunks, meaning that vibrating molecules release their energy packages, referred to as quanta. He also postulated that when a molecule went from a higher to a lower energy state, it would emit a quantum (energy package) of visible radiation called a photon, which was used by Einstein to explain the photoelectric effect, which is the second of the two experiments leading to the conclusion that radiation is particulate. Einstein was also interested in the issue of whether light behaved more like particles or waves, and thus decided to use the photo electric effect of electrons coming off of metal when light hits them to determine the answer. First, he talked about light as a wave: here, there is only one energy variable, that being intensity of the light. The energy of the wave depends only on its amplitude (intensity) and not on its wavelength (frequency). In this theory, more intense light of the same wavelength should produce more electrons, whereas blue and red light, whicha re of the same intensity, result in the same number of electrons being emitted. However, a problem with this theory arose in that it could not explain that no electrons are emitted if the frequency of light is below a cut off value because in this theory, the energy of light does not depend on frequency, but rather on intensity. Therefore, Einstein turned to the model of light as a particle: in this theory, there are two variables responsible for energy, those being intensity (the number of particles) and the frequency (amount of energy per particle as it bounces off the metal, so E/particle). Here, the higher the frequency of the light, the higher the energy of the photons, thus blue light is expected to result in the emission of faster (not more) electrons than red light of the same intensity because blue light has a higher frequency (energy). This theory also explains that below a certain frequency, no electrons should be emitted. Here, the intensity of light is related to the colour of the light because frequency is defined as 1/wavelength. In this theory, wavelength is related to intensity whereas in the other theory (Wave theory) it is not. The particle theory also holds that the higher the intensity of the light, the more photons hit the surface and more electrons should be emitted, so i) if you keep the frequency constant, but increase the intensity, more electrons are expected to be emitted because there are more photons to hit them, but the electrons will not come out faster because they have the same energy (frequency, which = E/particle). Also, ii) even if the intensity is low, electrons should still be produced at a high frequency, as found in low intensity UV light. According to Einstein, photons can only trigger a current if each individual photon has enough energy to knock and electron free from an atom of the metal. Lower-frequency photons, thus photons with less energy, jolted the atoms without releasing bound electrons but a single photon of sufficient frequency, and therefore enough energy, could set an electron free. Together, these two experiments concluded that the wave character of electromagnetism is called into question, and the particle theory of light and heat radiation called into question the 0065isting and accepted wave theory of light.

During the Renaissance and Reformation, two discoveries disturbed scholarly consensus about the biblical chronology of the world. What were these discoveries, and how did they upset biblical chronology? What were the three main issues raised by the new discoveries and how were they co-opted in conflicts between Christians and non-Christians?

- Two Discoveries 1) Discovery of Ancient Civilizations in Egypt and China. - Comparison of their chronology with biblical chronology revealed that they were older than biblical chronology could account for, so in other words, they were so old that they had to exist before biblical chronology even started 2) Exploratory voyages revealed plants, animals and people were living in distant parts of the world. - If the biblical framework for history is assumed, then these should have all migrated from a central location (The Garden of Eden - from Adam and Eve, people all started in one place). This biblical chronology didn't seem to provide enough time for migration around the entire world, nor did it seem possible that they could have reached other continents in that time - These Two discoveries raised three main issues that were co-opted in conflicts between Christians and non-Christians 1) The antiquity of humanity (ie. How old is the human race?) - Ancient Chinese and Egyptian documents implied a history before biblical history were declared fraudulent by those who supported a Biblical chronology, and were declared legitimate by Anti-Christians - thus debates about the quality of these ancient documents were informed by religious agendas 2) The possible existence of Pre-Adamites (people before Adam and Eve) 3) The distribution of plants, animals and humans on earth (aka Biogeography) - This could not be easily denied as they were brought home by explorers as evidence

Compare and Contrast Medieval and Early Modern Alchemy.

According to Table 1, Medieval Alchemy consisted of merely Chrysopoeia, which is the manufacture and transmutation of metals. As technology developed, so too did the ideas of alchemists of the age. When the Early Modern era came around, the primitive study of Alchemy broadened to include Istrocehmistry (the manufacturing of medicines for health related purposes) as well as Spagyria(the separation, purification and recombination of the three principles). Here we notice many more ideas about to uses of alchemy, as well as the religious connotations involved compared to the somewhat "simple" alchemy of the medieval era.

Which three criticisms were directed at Aristotle by the medieval alchemists?

All the criticisms from the medieval alchemists came from problems in the mixing of Elements. The first criticism directed at Aristotle by the medieval alchemists was directed toward his statement that Forms are unchangeable. The alchemists saw that contributing Elements creating a mixture had Forms from which the Form of the new mixture emerged. For this to occur, the alchemists said that a new form must be contributed by higher powers such as celestial powers or intelligences, or even God. In the second criticism, it was acknowledged that the Elements composing a mixture could be made to reappear. This means that their Forms could reappear. The alchemists then wondered in what sense do the Forms of the contributing Elements continue to exist in the mixture? The third criticism was about the issue of heterogeneous vs. homogeneous mixtures. The metals that alchemists made from mercury and sulfur were, in theory, heterogeneous mixtures, however the metals appeared homogeneous to the senses. This contradicted Aristotle's belief that true compounds are homogenous because a mixture of mercury and sulfur is heterogeneous.

What were "Merton's Norms"? How did they function, and what did Merton hope to achieve with them?

Although Merton assumed that scientific knowledge was the straight-forward result of applying scientific methodology, he argued that particular social conditions, or social "norms," needed to be established in order for the scientific community to be able to flourish and apply the scientific method properly. Without these norms set in place, science would be distorted in various was by ideological contamination. According to Merton, there are four norms: 1) Universalism: scientific claims would be assessed impartially with no reference to the individual scientist making those claims 2) Communism: scientific knowledge belonged to the scientific community rather than to individual scientists 3) Disinteredness: scientists would not develop and emotional or other attachment to their work 4) Organized Skepticism: scientists would systematically subject scientific claims to rigorous checking These norms were meant to provide a way of distinguishing science from other kinds of activities as well as to define the social circumstances under which science could flourish. He held true to the belief that only in societies where these norms could not function (like Nazi Germany) did science become contaminated by ideological factors. So long as these norms were in operation, Merton did not believe that social circumstances could affect the development of scientific knowledge.

Which observations does Aristotle use to separate the sublunar from the heavenly realm? Using his concepts of 'rectilinear motion' and 'natural place', explain how the four elements arrange themselves in the sublunar realm and in what sense his cosmology is 'geocentric'.

Aristotle justified his view of the cosmos with two parts, the heavenly and the sublunar with these 2 observations: (1) The movement of heavenly bodies (stars and planets) can be seen to be permanent, uniform, and circular. (2) The movement of earthly bodies is temporary, non-uniform and rectilinear. The four elements arrange themselves in the sublunar realm by the heavy elements: earth and water, moved down and the light elements: air and fire move up. The four elements separate out and form four concentric shells within the sublunar realm. This is called their 'natural places'.

Explain Aristotle's concept of change as applied to natural and unnatural motion

Aristotle's concept of natural motion was that in living things, motion had a purpose and this motion was fulfilling the "nature" of the animal, just as the animal was moving to someplace it would rather be, its natural growth also fulfilled the nature of the animal. For things not alive, Aristotle suggested that the motion of such inanimate objects could be understood by postulating that elements tend to seek their natural place in the order of things. For example, earth moves downwards most strongly, water flows downwards too, but not so strongly, since a stone will fall through water. Air moves up in water (bubbles) and fire goes upwards most strongly of all. This idea of motion was not applied to planets whose motion was composed of circles. He then said that the heavenly bodies (moon, heavens, planets, stars) were not made up of the four elements (earth, air, water, fire) but of an element called quintessence, (a.k.a ether) whose natural motion was circular. Aristotle's concept of unnatural motion was an external force applied to the body to cause motion not directed toward the centre of the earth. Example: Throwing a rock through the air, it doesn't just drop as soon as your hand leaves it, it continues in the air for a time.

Compare and contrast the interaction of religion and chemistry before and after the 19th C.

Before the 19th Century: · Nature was studied for the sake of knowing and worshipping God, not for the sake of knowing nature Ex. Chemistry was the natural theology ; knowledge of God Ex. Production of chemicals for the benefit of humanity; medicine and fertilizer After the 19th Century: · Expressions of religious symbolism or adoration disappear from scientific writings; decline of Christianity · Decline because of privatization of faith within Christianity and the scientists ceased to see the study of nature as a religious activity

Review the contributions to chemistry by Boyle, Lavoisier, Berzelius and Avogadro.

Boyle Contribution - mostly contributed to the rejection of Aristotle and the alchemists by showing that neither Aristotle's forms not alchemical principles could be isolated · He replaced the elements of A. (form-matter) and the alchemists (atomism) with physical and chemical atoms (replaced with another atomism) Lavoisier Contribution - replaced Boyle's metaphysical definition of a chemical element with an operational definition · Came up with the first Chemistry textbook of the classifications of matter in 1787 Berzelius Contributions - showed that Dalton's atoms had a basis in reality and that some 'atoms' were compounds, not single atoms in the contemporary sense · Showed that Dalton's atoms correspond with Gay-Lussac's volumes Avogadro - also helped with the explanation of atoms being compounds with Berzelius Demonstrated that the ratio of densities of equal volumes of Oxygen and Hydrogen is equal to the ratio of their atomic weights = chemical formulas could be determined correctly

Explain the Four Propositions of Boyle

Boyle attempts to describe the composition of matter in four propositions: 1)"It seems not absurd to conceive that at the first production of mixt bodies (compounds), the universal matter whereof they among other parts of the universe consisted, was actually divided into little particles of several sizes and shapes variously moved." In laymen's terms, he is simply saying that all the substances in the world consist of atoms (little particles). 2) "Neither is it impossible that of these minute particles, divers of the smallest and neighbouring ones were here and there associate into minute masses or clusters, and did by their coalitions constitute great store of such little primary concentrations or amasses as were not easily dissipable into such particles as composed them." In laymen's terms, this means that atoms can be combined into compounds and they cannot easily be split. 3) "I shall not peremptorily deny, that from most of such mixt bodies (compounds) as partake either of animal or vegetable in nature, there may be the help of the fire be actually obtained a determinate number (whether three, four, five or fewer or more) of substances, worthy of differing denominations." In laymen's terms, here he makes a switch to talking about plants and animals, saying that the kinds of substances you find in plants and animals can with the help of fire be decomposed into a fixed number of substances and you can give them different names 4) "It may likewise be granted, that those distinct substances, which concretes generally either afford or are made up of, may without very much inconvenience be called elements or principles of them." In laymen's terms, still talking about the substances in plants and animals, and says once you have decomposed them in fire, the results can be called elements or principles, which he considered to be very fundamental.

Explain Brahe's three main objections to Copernicus' planetary theory and how some of them are due to ignorance.

Brahe's first objection was the motion of the Earth. He said that the earth did not rotate on its own axis or move in an orbit around the Sun. He made this objection based on a Bible passage from Joshua. Brahe's second objection involved the distance of the stars. He could not see a stellar parallax. To explain this, Brahe said that the Earth did not orbit the Sun. This objection was due to ignorance. Stellar parallaxes cannot be seen with the naked eye, which is all that was available to Brahe at the time of his objections. It was not until the 19th century that a stellar parallax was seen with a telescope. Brahe's third objection involved the belief that the Sun was as large as an average star. No parallax was seen, so it was thought that stars must have been immensely large (several hundred million miles in diameter). With this being the case, the sun could not be considered an average-sized star. This objection was also due to ignorance. Brahe and others in his day believed the size of a star was based on its apparent brightness - the brighter, the larger. We now know that this is unreliable, based on understanding human vision. The size of a star's image on the human retina is determined mainly by the diffraction of starlight in the pupil. Diffraction is the bending of light when it passed a sharp edge such as the edge of the pupil. As a result, a point source of light appears as a disk on the retina. The size of the disk is the result of the wavelength of the light and the size of the pupil, not the size of the star.

Describe the planetary theory of Tycho Brahe. Why was it immensely popular in the seventeenth century even if it did not solve the questions of stellar parallax and star size?

Brahe's planetary theory had the five major planets known at the time orbiting the Sun, and the Sun (and the starry heavens) orbiting the Earth. The Earth is stationary in his planetary model. By assuming that the planets circle the Sun on epicycles (secondary circles) and the Sun circles the Earth on the deferent (a primary circle), retrogression of all the planets could be explained. Brahe's theory was immensely popular in the seventeenth century even if it did not solve the questions of stellar parallax and star size. One reason why is because since there was no stellar parallax observed, there was no need for the Earth to orbit the Sun. Therefore, the simplest explanation was to have the Earth be the centre of the planetary system - simplicity decided the issue. Another reason is that this planetary theory allowed theologians at the time to keep the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic view of the planetary system which was accepted by the Church at that time.

How did the unknown substance phlogiston explain the burning of substances?

Burning could be explained by the removal of an invisible substance called phlogiston which is given off into the air during the combustion of things that contain phlogiston such as iron and wood. Metals and all other combustible substances contain phlogiston which is released into the air on burning along with caloric (heat). This causes things such as wood, to lose mass when they burn. Air has a limited ability to absorb phlogiston so a flame goes out in a container when the air becomes saturated with phlogiston. Things that contained little or no phlogiston did not burn.

Describe three experiments and the way phlogiston was used to explain the results.

Charcoal eaves hardly any ash when it burns because it is almost pure phlogiston and little calx is produced. A mouse dies in an airtight container, or in a container where a candle has been burnt until it goes out because the air gets saturated with phlogiston and it cannot absorb anymore. Some metal ashes turn back into metals when heated with charcoal because the charcoal restores the levels of phlogiston in the ash.

Describe the three approaches to the history of science with their advantages and disadvantages

Chronology Themes Case Studies Description -Episodes in chronological order -A treatment of a theme in the development of science -Such as social, political, religious, economic -Study of individual scholars (life & work) Advantages -Clear time line, -uninterrupted thought -Reveals the role of context in the development of science -Draw all aspects of context in which they lived to reveal the complexity of the development of science Disadvantages -Interrupts themes -Suggests history of Science is a logical -Confuses the chronology -Chronology and themes become secondary

Explain how the three approaches to the history of science address the course objectives.

Chronology Themes Case Studies Objective of Course # 1 To Familiarize students with com important episodes in the HofS also, by discussing episodes one can see how scientific knowledge and practice change # 2 To help students discern themes across episodes and science disciplines By considering these themes, we will... -Examine the interaction between sciences and religion -Dispel popular myths about past science -Show how external influences have affected the development of science #3 To sense the complex mutual engagements of the natural sciences and culture The scholar is a human being who relates to society, others, and God and is necessarily involved with these complex engagements. · In each, the common agenda is separation between God and his people by causing a wedge to be driven between: the church and science; study of science and God; and the people's science and God.

Describe the development of atomic physics by listing the six interpretation of light offered, starting with Newton and Huygens and ending with Heisenberg.

Comparison of theories of light in Classical and Quantum Physics: Newton: Light is a particle of matter Huygens: Light is a wave of matter L.de Broglie: Light is a particle/wave Schroedinger: Light is a hypothetical wave= electromagnetic wave Born: Light is a hypothetical wave= probability wave with physical reality Heisenberg: Light is a probability wave which represents tendency to exist= possibility (Aristotle: potential existence)

Describe interactions of religion and chemistry during the 1700's and 1800's.

Conflicts: - Chemistry became to be seen as a secularizing force because every success in chemical synthesis showed no divine intelligence was needed (Richard Carlile) - Gas was also called spirit (Joseph Priestely) - Manufactured urea = no vital forces (no higher powers) were required to explain organic compounds and purpose, materialism was a better context for explanation; no god (Wohler) - The law of conservation of energy was the cause of movement from vitalism to materialism because the vital view had become unnecessary (Thomas Henry Huxley) Consonance: - With the assumption that nature is not perfect, chemists could be seen as co-makers with God for a better world (ex. production of medicines and fertilizers) - God-of-gaps argument = idea that pure substances/properties of bodies had to depend on more than the basic material of which they were made ie. God (Priestley) - Healing nature of chemistry = a form of natural theology (Prout) - Prout as interpreted the synthesis of urea to be showing that the forces involved required intelligence ie. divine forces

Compare and contrast the role of Scripture in the interpretation of earth history between Deluc and Christian natural philosophers who accepted the new 'higher criticism' of the Bible developed by German scholars. Explain how Deluc's interpretation of earth history may have been shaped by a cosmology with a religious function. Does this make his interpretation necessarily subjective or could it also have been informed by what he saw in the field? Support your opinion with argument.

Deluc saw a religious conflict in an eternalistic view of earth history and a denial of creation and human history as depicted in the Bible. He maintained a biblical chronology only for human history, but accepted a symbolic interpretation of Scripture texts describing prehuman history. The new higher critics believed in a world created by God, but considered biblical history as the record of religious insights of early humankind. From this perspective, the search for physical evidence that would confirm or undermine the literal meaning of Bible texts about creation, fall and flood became irrelevant because such texts represented the subjective religious beliefs of humans and not an objective description of earth history. Deluc's interpretation of earth history in terms of catastrophe may have been influenced by the story of Noah's flood, but this does not mean it cannot be true when confirmed by empirical evidence. Provided interpretations are open to empirical testing, the way a geologist interprets geological features can be influenced by values and not be rendered unscientific. Deluc's interpretation is subjective in that he uses biblical chronology for human history but he is using information from the field for prehuman history (fossils) as he is only using the Bible as a symbolic interpretation.

Summarize the events involved in the development of quantum physics.

Didn't really know what the events were specifically because we talked about a LOT of events so here are some personal and societal influences which include events in them: Personal: role of personal religious beliefs illustrated by Einstein: rejected quantum theory because "God does not play dice". Societal: Role of scientific community: the specialized character of knowledge and technical expertise required team work in the development of theories and the execution of experiments. Role of geo-political circumstances: Quantum physics was developed in a few years by a new generation of physicists in their twenties. Where was the influence of classical physics? It had disappeared when the older generation of physicists died in WWI. Role of political and cultural circumstances: Heisenberg intentionally replaced the determinism of classical physics with the probabilism of quantum physics. Some historians interpret this as a personal manifestation of the cultural pessimism that pervaded the Weimar Republic after WWI due to the repair payments required from the Germans by the treaty of Versailles. Role of technological development: Construction of kilometer long particle accelerators as well as super computers for calculations.

Compare and Contrast the views of scientific revolution offered by Draper, Bernal and Whitehead. Have science and religion always been believed to conflict?

Draper: Wrote a book discussing the history of the conflict between science and religion. Writing this book was a pioneering effort in the revival of the Enlightenment program that sought to throw off ancient superstition in attempts to allow the power of human reason to create a better foundation for society. In summary, Draper had a positive view of the Scientific Revolution, and strongly believed that the power of human reason was a major contributor, if not the only contributor, to the development of a functioning society. Bernal: Bernal called for a renewed commitment to use science for the good of all. His book attempts to depict science as a potential force for good that had been perverted by its absorption into the military-industrial complex. As a Marxist, Bernal challenged the assumption that the rise of science represented the progress of human rationality. For him, science has emerged as a by-product of the search for technical mastery over nature, not a disinterested search for knowledge, and the information it accumulated tended to reflect the interests of the society within which the scientist functioned. The aim of the Marxists was not to create a purely objective science, but the reshape society so that the science that was done would benefit everyone, not just the capitalists. In summary, Bernal had a negative view of the Scientific Revolution, and did all he could to rework society for the good of all. Whitehead: Whitehead urged the scientific community to turn its back on the materialist program(the arrogant claim that the laws of nature could explain everything) and return to an earlier vision in which nature was studied on the assumption that it would reveal evidence of divine purpose. In doing so, this model of the history of science portrays the Scientific Revolution as founded on the hope that nature could be seen as the handiwork of a rational and benevolent Creator. According to Whitehead, evolution itself could be seen as the unfolding of a divine purpose. In summary, Whitehead had a negative view of the Scientific Revolution, as it puts everything to science, and leaves no room for the interference of divine purpose. Based on the views of these three thinkers, I believe that science and religion have always been believed to be in conflict. Throughout each of these examples, evidence of this conflict, and various ways that thinkers have tried to resolve the conflict. Where you have science, you will always have those who think more room needs to be made for divine intervention, therefore I believe that it was very difficult for science and religion to exist in complete, non-conflicted harmony.

Relate Aristotle's four causes to the kind of questions they are designed to answer

EXAMPLES: Cause/Condition Statue Table Human Formal Cause Shape Shape Rational bipedal animal Material Cause Marble Wood Egg Efficient Cause Sculptor Carpenter Father Final Cause Decoration Eating Mature human DEFINITIONS: Question To be explained Cause/condition What is it? Character of a thing Formal cause; form received by a thing What is it made of? Composition of a thing Material cause: matter underlying the form, which persists through change How was it made? Origin of a thing Efficient cause: agent that brings about the change Why was it made? Purpose of a thing Final cause: the purpose served by the change Basically, each of the causes seek to answer a specific question about how something came to be, why it was made and what its purpose is. See above for a relation between the causes and the question each answers. The formal cause explains the form or 'idea'. The material cause explains what makes it up, the matter that composes it. The efficient cause answers the question about how it was made, what brought about the change from 'nothing' to something. The final cause discusses reason for which the thing had undergone change and the purpose it now serves.

Explain how the atomic models of Rutherford and Bohr contributed to the development of quantum physics.

Ernst Rutherford à According to his 'plum pudding model' of the atom, atoms of different elements are like a pudding with raisins, and the pudding is the atom. The positive charge of an atomic nucleus is spread throughout the whole volume of the atom, and electrons were thought to vibrate about fixed centres within this sphere (like raisins in a pudding). He then completing the scattering experiement, shooting alpha particles (helium atoms with a positive charge) at a thing sheet of gold foil. This proved that the space around atoms is mostly empty because most alpha particles travelled straight through the foil rather than being attracted to the charges of the atom. In explanation, he said that the positive alpha particles are repulsed by the positive gold nuclei, and thus they should have scattered, but because they didn't, he concluded that the atom must have nearly all its mass, and positive charge, in a central nucleus about 10,000 times smaller than the atom itself. Also, all of the negative charge was held in electrons, which must orbit the nucleus like planets around the sun (aka planetary model of the atom). Neils Bohr à Questioned Rutherford's model: if there is a positive nucleus in the centre and you have electrons swirling around it, then 1) the two opposite charge should attract and the electron should slowly spiral into the nucleus, making the atom unstable, and 2) if this were to happen, than the electron must move from high energy to low energy levels, and the energy change should be emitted as a spectrum of continuous light(continual emmittance of a wavelength of colours) resembling a rainbow. Through experimentation, he found that this was not the case. He worked with hydrogen atoms and found that when he let them go from one energy level to the next, there was a discontinuous spectrum of light, called an emission spectrum. Light was given of in chunks rather than in a continual emission. He applied the notion of a church bell to his model: in the middle is a positive nucleus with various electrons orbiting around it. If you consider these atoms as a bell, then you can solve the problem of electrons spiraling into the middle and emitting energy, because instead, he said that the whole atom changes from one energy state to another, and that energy difference is emitted as a light chunk. In his opinion, electrons jump from one energy level to the next, and in between the levels the atom disappears. Therefore, this disappearance accounts for the lack of a continuous emission, and explains why light is emitted in chunks, representing the jump from one energy level to the next. Although this is not a 100% satisfactory answer, it allowed the notion of a stable atom to continue, disproving the spiral of an electron gradually to the nucleus of the atom. Bohr's model is extremely powerful because it gives an explanation for the periodic table of elements, which is why a lot of physicists took his model seriously, even though it sounds ridiculous: · Found relationship between an equation by Planck § E = hv (Plancks formula) § Bohr argued and could show that the variable in Planck's formula also was necessary to explain what he found - E/v = nx1/2h · h is Planck's constant · v is 1/wavelength · n is new variable which Bohr says equates with the energy level of an electron § This was a very powerful formula because Planck's constant is known, the other two could be calculated, thus you could figure out n which consists of only whole numbers, and these whole number correspond to the levels of energy through which the electrons can move around the nucleus · n as 1 means you have an electron that moves in the first energy level from the nucleus (the energy level closest to the nucleus) § The formula also implies that each energy level has the capacity for a certain fixed number of electrons - when you fill them in, elements in the periodic table in the same column all have the same number of electrons in the outer energy shell - remarkable because in one step, it explains the entire structure of the periodic table of elements Bohr's model contributed to the development of quantum physics as it raised questions such as: 1) Why don't all electrons fall into the nucleus?, 2) What causes electrons to leave their energy level?, and 3) What causes the jump between energy levels?

Explain the function of the unmoved mover and its characteristics in terms of Aristotle's philosophy

Every cause must be the result of another cause. To avoid infinite regress, Aristotle said that a first cause/unmoved mover causes everything else in the universe - but is not caused itself. · There must be a force that initially starts the continual reaction. As seen perhaps in some dominos. They are all in motion after the initial domino moves, but you must discount the motion caused by human hand or any sort of external force. The unmoved mover is that first domino moving completely on its own. · The unmoved mover's function is to avoid the infinite regress of all things being due to a cause. · Unmoved mover is: o Pure actuality: god as fulfillment of all potentiality. He cannot change (exchange forms). What is already perfect can only change for the worse and this is not possible o Eternal o Self-sufficient o Pure form: god is not limited by matter (God is pure thought) o Perfect goodness o Final cause: god moves things as Final Cause. All things strive to fulfill their potential as closely as possible - they strive to become pure form/god. God is the object of love and desire of all things. · God is separate from the world except for being the object of desire. The world is eternal, but not divine. The world and the divine are clearly separate but the separation may not have been complete. The more real things approximate the forms, the more they approach the divine (teleology)

Describe five ways in which the development of quantum physics has been influenced by society.

Five influences society has had on the development of quantum physics: 1) Role of education - highly specialized education in math and physics required government funding for physics institutions. 2) Role of scientific community - specialized character of knowledge and technical expertise required teamwork in the development of theories and the execution of experiments 3) Role of geo-political circumstances - quantum physics was developed in a few years by a new generation of physicists in their twenties. The influence of classical physics had disappeared when the older generation of physicists died in WWI. 4) Role of political and cultural circumstances - Heisenberg intentionally replaced the determinism of classical physics with the probabilism of quantum physics. Some historians interpret this as a personal demonstration of the cultural pessimism that occurred after WWI. 5) Role of technological development - construction of kilometers long particle accelerators as well as super computers for calculations.

Compare and Contrast the explanatory status of Aristotlean and Copernican cosmology (i) as claimed by Copernicus, (ii) as presented by Andreas Osiander and (iii) as generally received in the Middle Ages.

I) Aristotelian cosmology (natural philosophy) claims to explain physical reality. Copernicus in the preface to De revolutionibus also claims to describe physical reality, but his heliocentric system contradicted the principles of Aristotelian cosmology. For instance, the natural motions of the four Aristotelian elements (air, earth, fire and water) dictated that the Earth was located at the centre of the universe, but the Copernican theory had the Sun at the Centre. Further, with Earth away from the centre, Copernicus contradicted the fundamental difference between the terrestrial and celestial realms. · II) and III) Andreas Osiander water to protect his friend Copernicus from criticism at the hands of the Aristotelians, as well as from the Protestant biblical scholars such as Melanchthon. To do so, he wrote a foreword in which he presented Copernican cosmology as an instrument for calculation of navigational charts and calendars. Since mathematical explanations did not claim to explain physical reality, there was no problem. This is also how it was generally received in the Middle Ages.

Describe Plato's interpretation of the natural world in Timaeus.

In Timaeus, Plato states that this world "in very truth is a living creature with soul and reason." Unlike the naturalists who found the source of order in nature, Plato found it in mind. He saw nature as organism and as divine being. As a divine being, nature designs or creates itself (self-organization). However, in order to ensure distance between the sacred and the secular, fabrication(nature designing or creating itself, also called self-organization) and generation(because it's an organism, nature generates offspring which shares the basic characteristics of its predecessors) was envisioned to occur in steps according to a hierarchy of being. The divine being is the one who delegated the fabrication of the world to the demiurge, who then delegates it to the world soul. Further steps were added to the hierarchy of being as part of the generation of the world by the world soul. In this process of delegated creation, the demiurge creates according to a divine plan. Because so, knowledge of nature can be obtained by a reflection on the divine ideas, implying a deductive approach to knowledge. Plato is also famous for presenting the idea that the universe was created to resemble a geometric progression, and that the triangle was the building block of the entire universe. From this notion, he developed the Platonic solids, using combinations of triangles to produce the five regular geometrical solids (See Page 22 of Course pack for diagrams and quotes of the five Platonic Solids).

Describe how the unification of electricity, magnetism and light developed and what effect this had on classical physics generally.

Michael Faraday carried out an experiment with a coil. He found that a moving coil carrying a constant current induces a temporary electrical current in a neighbouring coil *mechanical motion and electricity are linked together. · His conclusion was that every electric current in a closed circuit is equivalent to a magnet so magnetism and electricity are of the same underlying phenomenon. · James Clark Maxwell also conducted an experiment that unified electricity, magnetism, and light. He developed a mechanical model for electromagnetic forces using the Newtonian assumption that mechanical matter in motion must underlie motions caused by electromagnetic forces. · This mechanical matter became the ether visualized as invisible whirlpools separated by rolling layers of particles. Electric force was assumed to distort the ether cells and this produced stresses in the plastic substance of the ether. Maxwell developed mathematical equations for this and determined that at equivalent locations in the equations for light and electromagnetism there is a constant and this value is equal to the velocity of light. · So there were three main conclusions from these two experiments that unified electricity, magnetism, and light: 1) The first conclusion is that electric and magnetic influences are spread in the form of transverse waves in the same medium as light. 2) The second conclusion is that the ether remained mysterious, but this was accepted as a problem to be solved in light of the overwhelming advantage of the unification of electricity, magnetism, and light. 3) The third conclusion was that their wave-character called into question the mechanical explanations of matter in motion of classical physics in general, *Newton's view of light as particle

Why did people in the Middle Ages (and later) think that ideas about the cosmos could have social implications? Rudwick (1986) argues that in the Middle Ages, the history of the individual, the society and the cosmos received meaning because it was coextensive with the biblical view of history. Explain. Which social interest group played a role in the conflict between Christianity and Aristotelianism? What were their views of the natural and social order?

People in the Middle Ages believed that ideas about the cosmos could have social implications because they saw an analogy between the order of nature and the order of society. For the histories of the cosmos and of society to be coextensive mans that their time-lines must coincide. These histories are aspects of one and the same history! Because the origins of these two histories are therefore the same, a medieval person would see the meaning of life, society and the cosmos Biblically, meaning that they see themselves as living in a fallen world and looking forward to redemption. Medieval Christianity had absorbed much of Aristotle's cosmology including a static hierarchical order of nature. Because the order of nature and the order of society were viewed as analogous, the social order was also seen as a static hierarchy with the church at the top. During this time, society was Christian in the sense that the Earth (and therefore society too) had a beginning and an end, and that the cycles of nature could unfold only within those limits. The unfolding of history was defined by Creation à Fall à Flood à Redemption à Judgment à Recreation. Critics of this Christian view could use Aristotle's eternalism as a crutch. For example, if the cosmos has no temporal and spatial boundaries, then society ought not to have social boundaries, and people should not have to have moral limits!

Explain mathematical atomism and the mathematization of nature.

Plato reduced the elements to triangles (geometrical atomism) He then used combinations of triangles to produce the five regular geometrical solids (Platonic Solids) which belong to the group of geometric figures called polyhedra. Only 5 polyhedrons are possible: The Five Platonic Solids Solids Element Explanation Tetrahedron 4 equilateral triangles Fire Most mobile Octahedron 8 equilateral triangles Air Intermediate Icosahedron 20 equilateral triangles Water Least mobile Cube 6 squares Earth Most immobile Dodecahedron 12 pentagons Cosmos The Elements can... 1) Mix in different proportions to produce variety 2) Change into each other Plato's geometric solids are an important step in the mathematization of nature. The mathematization of nature suggests that nature itself is ideally mathematical (solving the problem of subjectivity). Plato used mathematics as an ideal model of material reality. The relationship of a material entity to its mathematical model is like to its ideal Form (note that math in its ideal form only applied to the heavens)

Describe the discovery of three different kinds of 'air.' Who discovered oxygen?

Priestley discovered different types of air according to the phlogiston theory. · Different kinds of air had a range of chemical properties depending on the quantities of phlogiston they contained. · Experiment: burn wood in a sealed container. o Result: It would not burn to completion if there was not enough air. o Conclusion: any given amount of common air could hold only so much phlogiston o Phlogisticated Air: Common air that could hold no more phlogiston · Experiment: Heat Mercury in air to form red calx of mercury. Heat this calx with no air, changes back to mercury and new air (modern O2) · Burn wood in this #1 new air (O2) to point when all air that was left was #2 fixed air (CO2) · Common air (phlogisticated air) was mostly composed of impurity which became known as #3 foul air/ mephitic air (N) Debate over who discovered Oxygen Textbook Pg.67 · Scheele isolated what he called "fire air" in the early 1770's but his results were not made public until later · Priestley discovered this new air in 1774 and called it dephlogisticated air · Lavoisier repeated Priestley's experiments and redesignated the air as oxygen in 1776 Note: discoveries are not simple, straight forward events. They have historical structure and are only possible within the context of a theoretical system.

********* Identify returning themes in the history of cosmology and biology originating in Aristotle

Religion and Understanding of Nature a. Religion and cosmology i. Geo-centrism; planetary orbits are perfect (circular), heavens are eternal (no change - related to historical awareness) b. Analogy between microcosm and macrocosm i. Chain of Being/Scala Naturae c. Religion and biology i. Organisms change (related to historical awareness) Historical Awareness : Not included in change from potential to actual existence d. Planetary system i. Awareness of its historical development came when Galileo saw that the planets were like the earth in that they showed signs of change e. Organisms i. Awareness of historical change came when Cuvier saw that fossils, animals and plants are different than extant organisms. Theory of the Heavens: Conflicting observations f. Comets are indestructible i. So they belonged to the sublunary sphere. But in the 17th century it was discovered that they describe orbits around the sun and that they are hardly ever as close to earth as the moon g. Projectile Motion i. Natural motion on earth is rectilinear. Therefore a projectile when fired horizontally will move horizontally and then drop down vertically to its natural resting place. Galileo discovered that projectiles move in a parabola h. Geocentrism i. Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo had to combat the authority of Aristotle both in natural philosophy and in theology in order to establish the view that it rotates once a day around its own axis and once a year around the sun i. Sublunary Natural Motion i. N1L of motion originally enunciated by Galileo states that every body when left to itself continue to move in a straight line. Outside causes are not required to explain motion (as Aristotle thought), but only to explain change of motion j. Superlunary Natural Motion i. Aristotle though that natural motion in the superlunary realm is circular. However, circular motion involves a continual change in the direction of motion. Therefore, it requires a force directed towards the centre of the circle as in Newton's law of gravitation

When Darwin published Descent of Man in 1871 it entered an existing debate about human origins between religious thinkers and atheists. Describe the religious issues and the scientific arguments in this debate.

Religious Issued: 1) Immortality of the soul 2) Uniquness of higher mental and moral faculties in humans Arguments in favour of common ancestry of animals and humans a) human mind is product of human brain which is formed by evolution b) anatomical similarities c) mental similarities

Describe three ways in which quantum physics has been abused for the promotion of philosophical and religious agendas.

Scientific theories have often been used for social, cultural, and religious purposes. Three examples are the following: 1) Heisenberg interpreted his uncertainty principle as saying "everything is uncertain". Another interpretation is that the principle tells us where the limits of uncertainty lie when we make measurements of sub-atomic events. 2) The boundary between the knower and the known in physics was erased. This has been interpreted in two ways. One is the subjectivity of all knowledge. This interpretation says that all knowledge is based on individual impressions, feelings, and opinions instead of on external facts. The other interpretation was a justification for relativism. That is, justification that all points of view have no absolute truth. In both ways, it was abused by some for the promotion of their different agendas. 3) Anti-reductionism in science can be interpreted as the plurality of truths. However, it really only is a new awareness of how truth is multi-dimensional.

Compare and contrast Bernal's view of the history of science with the Institutional Purpose of Redeemer University College.

Similarly, both the institutional purpose of RUC and Bernal have in common the concern for the greater good of everyone. Both are very interested in construction an environment in which each individual has access to the same means and has the same chance of success, providing equal opportunity. Although RUC has a much more God-focused statement, both are still concerned greatly with using science and all resources to benefit everyone equally. Unlike RUC, Bernal sees the development of science as a by-product of the search for mastery over nature. In contrast, RUC focuses more on God as the master plan maker, and we strive to figure out ways in which our actions as students and scientists can align with His plans. We don't seek to master nature, but rather seek to function in concert with nature. However, in common, both statements desire to use science and study for the greater good.

Summarize the six types of fact Darwin used in support of his theory of evolution as well as Darwin's explanation of these facts. Hint: Use Ruse and Waters.

Six types of fact: i) Paleontology: there is a specific sequence of fossils which supports a specific sequence of evolution. For example, there are strata with marine fossils such as corrals that contain no fish because at the time there were not yet fish, only corrals. According to this evidence, Darwin believed there was a specific sequence to evolution. ii) Biogeography: there is a correlation between geographic proximity and anatomical similarity, so those that are the most similar live within the same geographic area, and are more similar than the same species that lives far away. For instance, cave salamanders around the world have rudimentary eyes and no pigment, but there are more similarities between cave salamanders and seeing salamanders in the same location than there are between them and salamanders in another location. This is a pattern of geographical distribution which would be expected assuming common descent of the animals in one location, but not between locations. iii) Rudimentary Organs: Organisms have rudimentary organs, such as eyes in cave animals. Darwin explained them as the result of transmutation, which to him meant the change from one thing to another. It involves the changing of life habits which make an organ useless, like living in the dark for eyes, and that disuse will make the organ rudimentary. Essentially, this is a form of adaptation. iv) Comparative Anatomy: There are anatomical similarities between body parts with different functions, such as the human hand and the birds wing, which can be explained by common descent and modification. v) Comparative Embryology: In embryos of different species, earlier stages are more similar than later stages, which can be explained by common origin. vi) Classification: Classification of plants and animals shows a hierarchical pattern with the most groups at the lowest level. The groups could have been disjunctive, meaning that there would have been one single species per phylum. But as one moves up from Species via Genus, Family, Order, Class to phylum, the groups are progressively more inclusive, which is a feature expected as a result of common descent.

Discuss the problem of the stellar parallax, showing that Galilei has ultimately failed to provide physical evidence for Copernicanism

Stellar parallax is a phenomenon that should be seen if the earth was rotating. At different times during the year, the background of stars would be seen at a different angle and other planets should be projected onto that different background of stars at a different angle. Untill the 1900's, this was not seen. Copernicanism required that stellar parallax be evident and when Galilei used his telescope to search for it but was unable because the stars and the distances between them were magnified much less than the planets so Galilei concluded that they must be very far away and stellar parallax would be impossible to detect if it existed. Thus, he was unable to prove Copernicanism.

Articulate the Enlightenment ideal for the history of science. How was this ideal modified by William Whewell, Draper, Alfred North Whitehead, Bernal, Koyre, Charles Gillispie, Thomas Kuhn, Robert Merton, Michael Foucault, and Steven Shapin & Simon Schaffer? Which schools of thought or traditions are represented by these individuals?

The Englightenment ideal for the history of science involves explaining science entirely through natural means, not through divine means at all. It encourages scientists to abandon their objectivity in favour of the claim that the laws of nature can explain everything. This ideal was modified by many people. William Whewell: agreed with the Enlightenment idea that science was a progressive force, but had a new vision of how it should set about building an understanding of nature. He said that knowledge was not simply derived from the observation of nature, but it was influenced by the human mind via the theories we use to describe the world. It involved not only observation, but the rigorous testing of new hypotheses by experimentation. Whewell was more conservative than the Enlightenment thinkers in that he defended the possibility that the scientist might find phenomena that could only be explained as the result of divine intervention. The school of thought/tradition represented by Whewell is Kant's school of thought. Draper: After Whewell, Draper revived the Enlightenment program. The school of thought/tradition represented by Draper is the Enlightenment tradition. Alfred North Whitehead: Whitehead urged the scientific community to turn its back on the Enlightenment program and return to an earlier vision in which nature was studied on the assumption that it would reveal evidence of divine purpose. Whitehead felt that even evolution itself could be seen as the unfolding of divine purpose. The school of thought/tradition represented by Whitehead is that of the Scientific Revolution. Bernal: Bernal scolded the scientific community for selling out to the industrialists. He called for a renewed commitment to use science for the good of all. He depicted science as a potential force for good, saying it could benefit everyone, not just the capitalists. The school of thought/tradition represented by Bernal is Marxism. Koyre: Koyre was a leading influence in a new historiography of science which was willing to admit that scientists were deeply involved with philosophical and religious concerns and often shaped their theories in accordance with their views on these wider questions. For example, he argued that Galileo was deeply influenced by Greek philosopher Plato when making his discoveries. The school of thought/tradition represented by Koyre is the Scientific Revolution. Charles Gillispie: Before Gillispie, there was a clear distinction between internal history of science, which studied the intellectual factors involved in the development of theories, and external history of science, which looked at the wider implications of what was discovered. Gillispie in the postwar generation of historians who had a clear preference for internal history. Gillispie wanted a history of science firmly situated within the history of ideas, with the external applications left for the separate disciplines of the history of technology and the history of medicine. Thomas Kuhn: Kuhn argued that the replacement of theories is a very complex affair because successful previous theories are established as complete fact. The previous theories define acceptable techniques for tackling problems, and also which problems are relevant for investigation. Science is done under the influence of the dominant theories. Therefore, new or opposing theories are extremely hard to get out there. Science done under the influence of a dominant theory (or paradigm) is what Kuhn calls "normal science". He stats that it is real research, but it is more concerned with filling in minor details rather than probing the foundations of the theory. Kuhn believes that scientific education involves brainwashing students so they accept certain theories uncritically. Even when there are experiments that give results that contradict a set theory, the scientific community has become so loyal to that theory that older scientists refuse to admit that a theory has been falsified. It is only when many anomalies are found that scientists will attempt to change a theory and find a new one. In this way, science is treated as a social acitivity because scientists develop loyalties for certain theories. Scientists were deeply unhappy about Kuhn's analysis, but historians liked it. The school of thought/tradition represented by Kuhn is postmodernism. Robert Merton: Merton was a sociologist of science who argued that particular social conditions, or "norms", needed to be established in order for the scientific community to be able to flourish and apply the scientific method properly. Without these norms (generally understood rules of behaviour), science would be distorted in many ways by ideological contamination. The school of thought/tradition represented by Merton is scientific sociology. Michel Foucault: Foucault was a French philosopher who was one of the main sources of postmodernism. He believes that science has no privileged position as a source of knowledge, because scientific literature is just one form of literature among many rival literary texts that seek to gain control of our thoughts and activities. The resulting controversy is known as the "science wars". Scientists defended their role as experts offering factual information about the world against sociologist who insisted that no one version of knowledge should be accorded such priviledged status. The school of thought/tradition that Foucault represented is postmodernism. Steven Shapin & Simon Schaffer: Shapin & Schaffer recognized that science is a practical activity in which the devising of new techniques is as crucial as conceptual innovation. New ideas often involve not only new theories, but also new forms of apparatus, requiring skilled operation to obtain meaningful results out of them. They represent the school of thought/tradition of modern scientists.

Summarize the events referred to as the breakdown of classical physics.

The breakdown of classical physics occurred through the discoveries made in three main experiments. First, Thomson discovered that atoms have parts. According to Dalton previously, atoms are not divisible and cannot be broken down, however by the use of the Cathode Ray tube, Thomson found that the gas put in the Cathode Ray tube would light up with a glow, and because it this lighting up, you could see a stream of particles moving from this cathode through the tube and ending up by the deflection meter (see page 140 for experiment diagram), and this stream of light would move up and down depending on the voltage applied to the tube. This observation meant that cathode rays are material particles smaller than hydrogen atoms, and that they carry an electrical charge, which we now know to be negative. He also found that using different noble gasses didn't make any difference in terms of the relationship between the voltage and the extent of deflection, which suggests that atoms of different elements are composed of the same subatomic particles. Thus, he also proved that atoms are not indivisible, contrary to what Dalton proposed. Second, the oil drop experiment performed by Wilson and Millikan established the existence of electrons as fact. Through this experiement, he found that he could control the charge in such a way that it was possible to let one of the oil particles to float, meaning that it would stop falling under the influence of gravity, which meant that there must be an electrical charge of the electron which is counteracting the force of gravity. If no charge is applied to the plates, then the only force acting on the oil drop is gravity, and thus the oil drop falls. You can apply the field up to a strength that counterbalances the force of gravity, so particle stops moving - then you can say that there must be an electrical charge on the oil particle, otherwise you couldn't use electricity to stop it from moving (electrical charge is small e in picture on page 141). With a known E (the electrical charge between the two plates), you can calculate the electrical charge of the oil drop(e) using G = mg = eE. HE applied this experiment to a variety of particles in 1911 and came up with measurements that were all a multiple of 1.602x10^-19 coulomb, which are close to whole numbers, with each of these whole numbers representing the charges on the oil drop, and thus the number of electrons. The question from the previous experiment is answered, that is if these gases(different noble gases from previous experiment) can be decomposed into charged particles, and chemically different gases consist of the same particles, what kind of particles are they? Millikan and Wilson prove that electrons exist, are real things, and are a large part of the answer to this question. Finally, we look at the work of Marie and Pierre Curie. Together, they worked with uranium and radium, finding that they emit three types of radiation (alpha, beta and gamma). In the process, two things were happening: 1) The Atom they were working with changed its physical properties, which is what the alchemists in the middle ages were looking for, and 2) As this change was happening, the weight of the atoms of that element changed as well. Their observations indicated that atoms were divisible, another blow to classical view of physics which stated things in the universe were made of atoms, which cannot be broken down further. Together, the work on cathode rays, oil droplets and isotopes created trouble for classical physics generally because it showed that atoms are divisible.

The development of the history of science since the Enlightenment can be characterized as a struggle to understand the complexity of science as an historical phenomenon. Support this evaluation with concrete examples.

The development of the history of science since the Enlightenment has been a struggle to understand the complexity of science as a historical phenomenon. There occurred what people called the "Scientific Revolution" which led into modern science that we know today . However, some people do not believe in this Scientific Revolution. For example, a new sociological approach to the revolution is given by Steven Shapin. He believes that there was no such thing as the revolution because modern science emerged from a complex of changing attitudes and activities that influenced all areas of life and belief at the time. He is basically saying that the complexity of science is not something that has occurred gradually through history. It is not a historical phenomenon. Another example of why it is a struggle to understand the current science as a historical phenomenon is that new developments in the history of science have tended to focus on the modern period. This is because it is the past few centuries that have showed the kind of activity that we recognize as science. The changes become even bigger in the modern era where "big science" occurs, driven by industrial and military concerns. For these reasons, it is difficult to see modern science as a historical phenomenon.

Explain why the distinction between corporeal and incorporeal phenomena in classical physics became undone.

The distinction between corporeal(particles, bodies) and incorporeal phenomena(waves, energy) in classical physics became undone due to two discoveries: 1) The discovery that atoms have parts 2) The discovery that particles behave like energy, and vice versa Further research on both the corporeal and incorporeal phenomena created trouble for the metaphysical atomism of classical physics (the discovery that atoms have part shattered the indivisibility idea). The discovery that corpuscles behave like `incorporeals and vice versa destroyed the idea that mater and energy are fundamentally different phenomena.

Observations about the moon's surface, novae, sunspots, the moons of Jupiter and the phases of Venus moved Galileo to reject the Aristotelian - Ptolemaic view of the world. Describe the five types of astronomical evidence and explain how Galileo used them to justify the Copernican view.

The five types of astronomical evidence that moved Galileo to reject the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic view of the world and how Galileo used them to justify the Copernican view are as follows: 1) Moon Surface - The moon's surface is covered with spots and mountains which changed their appearance - thus there is no celestial perfection. 2) Nova - Galileo saw another unusually bright spot ("nova") like Brahe had seen. Galileo said the nova must be far outside the sublunar realm because it had no parallax. This was a criticism of Aristotelian geocentrism and of the perfection of the celestial realm. 3) Sunspots - Aristotle said that the Sun was in the perfect supralunar realm, thus it should not change. However, Galileo saw changing sunspots which contradicted this view. 4) Moon of Jupiter - Galileo saw these moons and thought they were unusually bright stars at first, however he soon discovered they were circling around Jupiter. The Aristotelians believed the planetary system had one single centre, but the satellites of Jupiter justified Copernicus's view that the planetary system had several centres around which bodies circled. 5) Phases of Venus - In the view of Ptolemy, the orbit of Venus around the Earth is inside the Sun's orbit. From the Earth, the Sun would always be behind Venus (Venus would always be a crescent). On the Copernicus system, the orbit of Venus around the Sun is inside the Earth's orbit. From the Earth, the Sun would sometimes be behind Venus, creating a crescent, but sometimes be in front of Venus, creating a full Venus. This was observed, so this is what Galileo agreed with.

Which five themes of Plato's thought recur in the history of science?

The idea that... 1. Material reality has a mathematical order 2. The heavens are perfect (circularity of planetary orbits) 3. Abstract entities have existence (concepts, natural law) 4. Biological species cannot change 5. The hierarchy of being

How was the phlogiston theory proved false?

The phlogiston theory made some sense however quantitative experiments convinced chemists more and more that it was incorrect · Antiphlogistians weighed every substance involved in their experiment o When charcoal burns, the resultant CO2 weighs more than the original charcoal o Phlogiston theory suggests that substances lose mass when they burn because they lose phlogiston o (Modern science: substances gain mass when they burn because they bind oxygen) · While better explanations than the phlogiston theory were eventually discovered, the phlogistians were serious chemists that helped resolve some of the basic questions of chemistry by playing devil's advocate and discovering important experiments.

Explain the relationship between Early Modern Alchemy and Religion.

The relationship between Early Modern Alchemy and Religion is a complex one. According to Paracelsus, using Aristotelian ideals was a great way for him to incorporate religion into his atomistic ideas, thus he interpreted the book of Genesis according to Aristotelian alchemy. From this, he wrote two books that emphasize the relationship between atomism and religion, and how a previously pagan idea (atomism thanks to Democritus) could be viewed in the light of Christianity. Although Paracelsus' ideas were often very "out there," for example, his notion that 'Moscus' was in fact Moses as well as the fact that he had observed the four elements himself, meaning that he personally saw the earth coagulate into dry land, they were a great example of how atomism can be accepted as a Christian idea if the right things are applied, such as God as the creator of the machine. Other individuals who accepted alchemy, viewing it as sanctioned by theology include Luther(saw creation as a chemical process) as well as Newton and Priestly(saw creation as revealing divine providence - Priestly viewed nature as an interconnected system designed to promote human happiness, and chemistry revealed those connections). On the other hand, there were those who opposed the practice of alchemistry, believing it to be in conflict with theology: Libavius(A Lutheran - only God can improve nature) and Croll(A Calvinist - Only God can redeem nature, although he accepted Paracelsus' ideas because he saw them as true philosophy, meaning grounded in nature and in agreement with Genesis). Furthermore, the Roman Catholics saw alchemy as an outrage and believed all forms of it should be suppressed. The Council of Trent felt that faith needed to be protected from magic for the following reasons: 1) Natural magic easily became supernatural magic which involved dealing with demons 2) The supernatural was often depicted as natural, ex. A natural explanation of miracles 3) Magic involved divination, ie. Palm reading, which interfered with the Calvinist notion of predestination 4) Magic inflated the role of the individual magus, a reminder of Protestant Individualism (thinking of the self only, no concern for society or others) For the Roman Catholics, both astrology and magic were forbidden ad viewed as taking the place of God and His predestination.

Darwin applied Herschel's 4 requirements for a vera causa to his theory of biological evolutions. Summarize each of the four applications.

The theory is the theory of biological evolution. The causes are hereditary variation and natural selection. The result to be explained is adaptation. The causes exist: Variation exists in domestic animals and artificial selection is applied by breeders. Together, variation and artificial selection causes change in domestic animals. This can be applied to natural circumstances because variation and natural selection exist in nature (argument by analogy). The causes can produce the effects in theory: Artificial selection is able to produce changes in domestic animals by means of variation and differential fitness (variation in number of offspring). This can be applied to natural circumstances because variation and differential fitness exist in nature (argument by analogy). The causes actually produce the effect. Hereditary variation and natural selection cause adaptation. For instance, mimicry is an adaptation in butterflies to predators. By mimicking a poisonous butterfly, a nonpoisonous species is protected from being eaten and the mimicking trait is transmitted to offspring. The theory explains facts not originally intended to be explained (universality). The theory can explain the six facts that support evolution (paleontology, biogeography, rudimentary organs, comparative anatomy, comparative embryology, and classification).

Describe the beliefs and strategies of the two groups that shaped the reception of the idea of a long prehuman history of the Earth in 18th century enlightenment France and Germany.

The two groups that shaped the reception of the idea of a long prehuman history were the enlightenment philosophers and christian scholars. The enlightenment philosophers considered the church as an agent of social conservatism and used science to discredit the Bible and paint the church as an institutionalized form of superstition. They used two strategies: They used the idea of prehuman history to question the credibility of the text of the book of Genesis. In explanations of earth history they substituted material causes for divine providence. Christian scholars defended traditional Christian beliefs and tried to define which areas in natural philosophy were of critical importance for maintaining traditional Christian beliefs and harmonize the two. For example, they used different attempts to harmonize the idea of a prehuman history with the book of Genesis. Their strategies were: Replacing an eternalistic interpretation of earth history with a temporal interpretation Accepting explanations in terms of material causes but to interpret material causes and their effects as manifestation of divine providence. Criticizing eternalistic theorists like Hutton for implicitly denying the biblical account of origin and history of humanity by showing that a long and temporal earth history could be incorporated into a biblical account.

Why could Darwin not accept that God has made a range of distinct species of finches to occupy each of the Galapagos Islands in a series of original and independent acts of creation?

There were three reasons as to why Darwin could not accept this: i) Geological Fact à the Galapagos Islands were (and still are) being formed from volcanic eruptions. The Andes Mountains on the South American mainland consist of many alternating layers of volcanic basalt and marine sandstone. The latter indicates a long history of repeated deposit of sand in the sea followed by volcanic activity and elevation above sea level. In conclusion, the Galapagos Islands are geologically much younger than the South American mainland. Therefore, if the finches had been created in the beginning, they could not have been created on the Galapagos Islands because they did not yet exist. ii) Biogeographical Fact à No other species of this genus of finch is found anywhere in the world except on mainland South America. This means that the Galapagos Finches have descended from an ancestor which immigrated from the South American mainland. iii) Anatomical Fact à The finches between islands were more different than within one island. Also, the finches on all the islands together were more different from the mainland species than from each other. This means there had been a historical development in which the finches diversified.

Explain the three meanings of the concept of purpose in Aristotle

Things happen not by chance/coincidence, but by orderly development towards ends. There are three meanings: 1. Intrinsic Purpose: goal/end toward which something aims o Does not benefit goal o Ex: the goal of the hunter's arrow is the buck. The goal directs and explains the process that leads up to it. The arrow does not benefit the goal 2. Extrinsic Purpose: that for the benefit of which something is done o Ex: A tree is molded for the benefit of making a chair. The goal directs and explains the process that leads up to it. The tree benefits the maker of the chair. The purpose of a tree is not to be a chair, so the chair is a purpose extrinsic to the tree. 3. Natural Purpose: combination of intrinsic and extrinsic o That the mature process (intrinsic) is completed o Ex: in the generation of an oak tree from an acorn, the mature tree is both that toward which the generation process is intrinsically directed and that for the benefit of which the process exists § Intrinsic purpose of an acorn is to become an oak - 21st century people agree § It is good for the acorn to achieve its natural purpose - 21st century people would disagree because they do not believe in an extrinsic purpose such as that given by the Creator

Identify three problems in Ptolemy's theory which Copernicus failed to solve. Which problem did Copernicus solve?

Three problems in Ptolemy's theory that Copernicus failed to solve were the following: 1) Copernicus failed to simplify the number of concentric spheres in the Ptolemaic system because he had to add spheres to the 34 he had promised to require for the seven planets then known. 2) He failed to remove eccentrics. He failed to place the Sun at the centre of the planetary circles and had to use a geometric point instead. 3) He failed to remove epicycles because they were needed for further corrections. The problem that Copernicus did solve was that he removed the equant from Ptolemy's theory.

Mention the two reasons why Aristarchos proposed a heliocentric model and four reasons why it was rejected.

Two reasons why Aristarchus proposed a heliocentric model 1. the daily motion of the stars could be explained as the result of the rotation of the earth on its own axis relative to as a background of fixed stars 2. The second reason was the annual motion of the Sun could be explained by the translation of the Earth on its own orbit around the sun . Four reasons why these reasons were rejected 1. were because there was no stellar parallax observed until 19th C 2. In order for the stars to be fixed the diameter of the orbit of the earth had to be as small as a point relative to its distance to the stars (Greeks found this incredible) 3. Also, if the stars are so distant that there is no stellar parallax than how can we still see them, or are they really large. 4. given the earth's rotation and motion why is not everything swept off the surface?

Characterize the transition in the history of geology at the end of the eighteenth-century both in terms of what was discarded and what was accepted as good geology. Mention two achievements of the new geology.

What was discarded at the end of the 18th Century: o geologists rejected geological theories derived from worldviews (cosmological speculation) o Use of geology by rival cosmologies · What was accepted o Good geology started with observation, not speculation · 2 Main Achievements of the new geology 1) A global classification of strata into more than 3 layers into which local sequences could be fitted 2) An explanation of sudden changes in fossil plants and animals between adjacent strata as result of natural catastrophes (B) Which questions continued to be raised by the new geology for Christians who did not accept a higher critical view of the Bible, but continued to practice geology within the framework of the biblical chronology of the 16th and 17th centuries (consult Fig. 12.1 D)? Addition of pre-human history of the Earth raised questions about human origins and the nature of humans a created in God's image Biblical chronology implies: human and earth history are parallel Pre-human history implies: (Some geologists suggest) humans had a natural origin Christians (Buckland) suggest that creation of humans occurred recently on the geological time scale

Explain how Wilson and Millikan established the existence of electrons.

Wilson & Millikan conducted the Oil drop experiment which established the existence of electrons: · Oil drops are charged by an integral number of electrons by atomizer · When the electric field is off, the velocity can be measured and from this G could determined at a constant velocity of fall in gravitational field · With electric field on, the oil drop buoys and can be observed by microscope, e (the charge on the oil drop) can be calculated: G= mg= e*E · Result: e always a multiple of a Fundamental Charge= 1.602 x 10-19 Coulomb · Note: this whole # represents the # of electrons on the oil droplet, different elements have different whole # · This is empirical evidence that one oil droplet has little particles called electrons. Conclusion: the existence of electrons is a FACT proven by this experiment

State the 7 Assumptions of the Copernican system and explain their rationales.

· 1) The celestial Spheres have no centre. o Rationale: Copernicus was forced to reintroduce eccentrics and the Sun could not be maintained as the exact centre of any of the planetary circles. · 2) The centre of the Earth is not the centre of the Universe, but only of gravity (ie. Weight) and the lunar sphere. o Rationale: This was implied by the sun -centred theory of Copernicus. · 3) All the spheres rotate about the Sun as their midpoint, and so the Sun is the centre of the Universe. o Rationale: This was required to achieve a simpler planetary model than Ptolemy's. · 4) The Earth's distance from the Sun is imperceptible when compared with the height of the fixed stars (firmament). o Rationale: This explains the absence of a stellar parallax. · 5) Any apparent motion of the firmament is the result of the Earth's motion rather than the firmament moving itself. The Earth rotates on its axis while the firmament remains unaltered. o Rationale: It is the only explanation left after rejection of the earth-centred theory. · 6) What appear to us as annual motions of the Sun results not from its moving itself, but from the linear motion of the Earth and its sphere, with which we travel around the Sun just like any other planet. The Earth has, accordingly, more than one motion. o Rationale: For an Earthbound observer, it will look as if the Sun moves against the background of the celestial sphere. · 7) The apparent retrograde motions and returns to direct motions of the planets are the result of the Earth's motion, not their own motion. The motion of the Earth alone, therefore, is enough to explain many apparent anomalies in the heavens. o Rationale: Retrograde motion of a planet is a visual illusion due to the difference in speed with which the Earth and the planet orbit around the sun .

Give three examples of how the history of science has been distorted to serve the pursuit of present agendas of historians of science. Identify the agenda for each example. What is the common denominator in these agendas?

· A. Distortion of the past for political reasons o As seen in White's writings which discussed the conflict between the church and science and expanded on that conflict. He made it seem like science was the thing that was being beaten down, and not the church (according to him, the church was anti-science), which was a very biased view. He had this view because he hoped to get support for a non-religious school (first of its kind) that he was the president of. · B. The name of studying science o Previous scientists studied science as a way to know God, not just to learn more about the world we are in. Kepler's prayer is an example of his incorporation of God into his studies, or rather, his incorporation of his studies into God. Present day historians of science would rather see these as separate and tend to exclude the references of the reasons as to why the first scientists really studied science so that it becomes all about us humans, rather than God. The agenda of this distortion shows again, the separation of God and science, rather than the unity. · C. Distorting the past for ideological reasons o The dark ages were a time in which humanity went through the 'dark times', or through an intense low point in our existence. Historians present Galileo, Newton and Darwin as having shed a light on that meager existence and brought about enlightenment. They liberated humanity and that was their goal according to historians. Although if we look at the rest of their studies, the ones not publicized, we see that that was not their goal. They were still trying to reach God through science, to know God.. not to exclude God from the picture as presented by many non Christian historians.

How did Ptolemy's planetary system account for variations in brightness and size of the planets as well as for retrogression and the associated variation in speed of the planets?

· Both eccentric motion and epicycles explain variation in brightness and size of the planets as a result of varying distance between earth and planet. o Eccentric motion/circle: motion of a planet around Earth in which the Earth is not in the centre of the planet's orbit o Epicycle: a circle on a circle · To account for retrogression and the associated variation in speed of the planets o He created epicycles and equants. o Epicycles are the way the planets were described by circular orbits around fixed points as well as a circular orbit around the earth (accounts for retrogression). o Equants are a complex device where the velocity at which a heavenly body circled the earth could be calculated (accounts for variation in speed). · Note: no one thought that epicycles and equants described reality. They were simply geometrical techniques to save the appearances because Aristotelian natural philosophy maintained that only perfect circular motion was possible int the incorruptible superlunary sphere.

Explain Dalton's atomic theory.

· While Lavoisier considered discussions of the ultimate nature of elements as being metaphysical, Dalton set out to give the elements a real physical existence. Dalton's Atomic Theory · chemical elements are composed of small indivisible particles termed atoms (Physical atomism *metaphysical theory) · each element has atoms associated with it that have unique characteristics and weight o therefore as many different kinds of atoms as there are different kinds of elements o (chemical atomism *linking definition of atom to that of an element) · Atoms preserve their individuality in all chemical changes (chemical atomism) · 3 types of atoms exist o Simple (elements), o Compound (simple molecules) o Complex (complex molecules · Chemical combinations involve joining atoms in simple numerical ratios