极限集邮网

标题: 科学家百人箓 (one hundred most influential scientists of all times) [打印本页]

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-7-30 00:09
标题: 科学家百人箓 (one hundred most influential scientists of all times)
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-13 01:44 编辑

有史以来最有影响力的一百位科学家 (one hundred most influential scientists of all times) 由大英百科全书编译。

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

引言摘录如下：

From the very first moment humans appeared on the planet, we have attempted to understand and explain the world around us. The most insatiably curious among us often have become scientists.

The scientists discussed in this book have shaped humankind’s knowledge and laid the foundation for virtually every scientific discipline, from basic biology to black holes. Some of these individuals were inclined to ponder questions about what was contained within the human body, while others were intrigued by celestial bodies. Their collective vision has been concentrated enough to examine microscopic particles and broad enough to unlock tremendous universal marvels such as gravity, relativity— even the nature of life itself.

498F21B0-FC28-492E-B739-CD698C718866.jpeg (107.49 KB, 下载次数: 112)

469BA70A-8756-48DC-A97B-47CD1BD42DDE.jpeg (125.37 KB, 下载次数: 124)

E41DD679-7A46-445B-B7E0-057D11AA0EE1.jpeg (121.46 KB, 下载次数: 125)

7D07EF98-2245-43E5-959A-4E60BC1CE99C.jpeg (126.28 KB, 下载次数: 111)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-7-30 00:10
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-7-30 00:11 编辑

In 1675, Isaac Newton wrote a letter to Robert Hooke in which he said, “If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants.” Thanks to the pioneering efforts of the scientists mentioned in this introduction, along with the other chemists, biologists, astronomers, ecologists, and geneticists in the remainder of this book, today’s scientists have a solid foundation upon which to make astounding leaps of logic. Without the work of these men and women, we would not have computers, electricity, or many other modern conveniences. We would not have the vaccines and medications that help keep us healthy. And, in general, we would know a lot less about the way the human body functions and the way the world works.

Today’s scientists owe a huge debt of gratitude to the scientists of days past. By standing on the shoulders of these giants, who knows how far they may be able to see.

(全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载)

向所有科学家和同行致敬。

站在巨人肩膀上的矮人（拉丁语：nanos gigantum humeris insidentes）表达了“借用前人的成果来邁向下一步”的含义。这个概念可以追溯到12世纪，归功于沙特尔的伯纳德。 1675年艾萨克·牛顿（Isaac Newton）最熟悉的英语表达是：“如果我能看到远方那是因为我是站在巨人的肩膀上。” 。

The metaphor of dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants (Latin: nanos gigantum humeris insidentes) expresses the meaning of "discovering truth by building on previous discoveries". This concept has been traced to the 12th century, attributed to Bernard of Chartres. Its most familiar expression in English is by Isaac Newton in 1675: "If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants." (en.m.wikipedia.org/standing on the shoulders of giants).

454721A2-D98D-43F8-BB78-B96F116E35C0.gif (10.68 KB, 下载次数: 98)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-7-30 11:27
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-7-30 11:29 编辑

阿斯克勒庇厄斯（希腊语：Ἀσκληπιός，拉丁語：Asclepius），是古希腊神话中的医神，在古罗马神话中被称为埃斯库拉庇乌斯（拉丁语：Aesculapius），他是太阳神阿波罗之子，形象為手持蛇杖。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/阿斯克勒庇俄斯)

In the Iliad, the writer Homer mentions Asclepius only as a skillful physician and the father of two Greek doctors at Troy, Machaon and Podalirius. In later times, however, he was honoured as a hero, and eventually worshiped as a god. Asclepius (Greek: Asklepios, Latin: Aesculapius), the son of Apollo (god of healing, truth, and prophecy) and the mortal princess Coronis, became the Greco-Roman god of medicine. Legend has it that the Centaur Chiron, who was famous for his wisdom and knowledge of medi- cine, taught Asclepius the art of healing. At length Zeus, the king of the gods, afraid that Asclepius might render all men immortal, slew him with a thunderbolt. Apollo slew the Cyclopes who had made the thunderbolt and was then forced by Zeus to serve Admetus.
Asclepius’s cult began in Thessaly but spread to many parts of Greece. Because it was supposed that Asclepius effected cures of the sick in dreams, the practice of sleeping in his temples in Epidaurus in South Greece became common. This practice is often described as Asclepian incubation. In 293 BCE his cult spread to Rome, where he was worshiped as Aesculapius.
Asclepius was frequently represented standing, dressed in a long cloak, with bare breast; his usual attribute was a staff with a serpent coiled around it. This staff is the only true symbol of medicine. A similar but unrelated emblem, the caduceus, with its winged staff and intertwined serpents, is frequently used as a medical emblem but is without medical relevance since it represents the magic wand of Hermes, or Mercury, the messenger of the gods and the patron of trade. However, its similarity to the staff of Asclepius resulted in modern times in the adoption of the caduceus as a symbol of the physician and as the emblem of the U.S. Army Medical Corp.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

9AE19B21-7C05-49AC-8BFC-4ABC4A51FAA4.jpeg (113.84 KB, 下载次数: 114)

F1AA9070-4F7C-4743-B31D-D698438702A3.jpeg (116.84 KB, 下载次数: 109)

作者: jamestang 时间: 2019-7-30 20:29

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-1 00:01
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-1 00:03 编辑

希波克拉底（古希臘文：Ἱπποκράτης，前460年－前370年），為古希臘伯里克利時代之醫師，約生於公元前460年，後世人普遍認為其為醫學史上傑出人物之一。在其所身處之上古時代，醫學並不發達，然而他卻能將醫學發展成為專業學科，使之與巫術及哲學分離，並創立了以之為名的醫學學派，對古希臘之醫學發展貢獻良多，故今人多尊稱之為「醫學之父」。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/希波克拉底)

Breakthroughs in the medical sciences have been numerous and extremely valuable. Study in this discipline begins with a contemporary of Aristotle’s named Hippocrates, who is commonly regarded as the “father of medicine.” Perhaps Hippocrates’ most enduring legacy to the field is the Hippocratic Oath, the ethical code that doctors still abide by today. By taking the Hippocratic Oath, doctors pledge to Asclepius, the Greco-Roman god of medicine, that to the best of their knowledge and abilities, they will prescribe the best course of medical care for their patients. They also promise to, above all, cause no harm to any patient.

Technical medical science developed in the Hellenistic period and after. Surgery, pharmacy, and anatomy advanced; physiology became the subject of serious speculation; and philosophic criticism improved the logic of medical theories. Competing schools in medicine (first Empiricism and later Rationalism) claimed Hippocrates as the origin and inspiration of their doctrines. For later physicians, Hippocrates stood as the inspirational source, and today Hippocrates still continues to represent the humane, ethical aspects of the medical profession.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

D1130B76-C205-4B83-BB16-4DE103E3BC53.jpeg (258.81 KB, 下载次数: 108)

BCC980CF-9BB1-420F-AE51-65FC3F58F5F2.jpeg (110.87 KB, 下载次数: 96)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-1 00:29
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-1 00:32 编辑

亚里士多德（希臘語：Αριστοτέλης，Aristotélēs，前384年－前322年3月7日），古希腊哲学家，柏拉圖的學生、亚历山大大帝的老師。他的著作牽涉許多學科，包括了物理學、形而上學、詩歌（包括戲劇）、音乐、生物學、經濟學、動物學、邏輯學、政治、政府、以及倫理學。和柏拉圖、蘇格拉底（柏拉圖的老師）一起被譽為西方哲學的奠基者。亞里士多德的著作是西方哲學的第一個廣泛系統，包含道德、美學、邏輯和科學、政治和形而上学。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/亚里士多德)

Aristotle (Greek: Aristoteles) was an ancient Greek philosopher and scientist, and one of the greatest intellectual figures of Western history. He was the author of a philosophical and scientific system that became the framework and vehicle for both Christian Scholasticism and medieval Islamic philosophy. Aristotle’s intellectual range was vast, covering most of the sciences and many of the arts, including biology, botany, chemistry, ethics, history, logic, metaphysics, rhetoric, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, physics, poetics, political theory, psychology, and zoology. He was the founder of formal logic, devising for it a finished system that for centuries was regarded as the sum of the discipline. Aristotle also pioneered the study of zoology, both observational and theoretical, in which some of his work remained unsurpassed until the 19th century. His writings in metaphysics and the philosophy of science continue to be studied, and his work remains a powerful current in contemporary philosophical debate.

Physics and Metaphysics.
Aristotle divided the theoretical sciences into three groups: physics, mathematics, and theology. Physics as he understood it was equivalent to what would now be called “natural philosophy,” or the study of nature; in this sense it encompasses not only the modern field of physics but also biology, chemistry, geology, psychology, and even meteorology. Metaphysics, however, is notably absent from Aristotle’s classification; indeed, he never uses the word, which first appears in the posthumous catalog of his writings as a name for the works listed after the Physics. He does, however, recognize the branch of philosophy now called metaphysics. He calls it “first philosophy” and defines it as the discipline that studies “being as being.”
Aristotle’s contributions to the physical sciences are less impressive than his researches in the life sciences. In works such as On Generation and Corruption and On the Heavens, he presented a world-picture that included many features inherited from his pre-Socratic predecessors. From Empedocles (c. 490–430 BCE) he adopted the view that the universe is ultimately composed of different combinations of the four fundamental elements of earth, water, air, and fire. Each element is characterized by the possession of a unique pair of the four elementary qualities of heat, cold, wetness, and dryness: earth is cold and dry, water is cold and wet, air is hot and wet, and fire is hot and dry. Each element also has a natural place in an ordered cosmos, and each has an innate tendency to move toward this natural place. Thus, earthy solids naturally fall, while fire, unless prevented, rises ever higher. Other motions of the elements are possible but are considered “violent.” (A relic of Aristotle’s distinction is preserved in the modern- day contrast between natural and violent death.)
Aristotle’s vision of the cosmos also owes much to Plato’s dialogue Timaeus. As in that work, the Earth is at the centre of the universe, and around it the Moon, the Sun, and the other planets revolve in a succession of concentric crystalline spheres. The heavenly bodies are not compounds of the four terrestrial elements but are made up of a superior fifth element, or “quintessence.” In addition, the heavenly bodies have souls, or supernatural intellects, which guide them in their travels through the cosmos.
Even the best of Aristotle’s scientific work has now only a historical interest. The abiding value of treatises such as the Physics lies not in their particular scientific assertions but in their philosophical analyses of some of the concepts that pervade the physics of different eras— concepts such as place, time, causation, and determinism.

Philosophy of Science
In his Posterior Analytics, Aristotle applies the theory of the syllogism (a form of deductive reasoning) to scientific and epistemological ends (epistemology is the philosophy of the nature of knowledge). Scientific knowledge, he urges, must be built up out of demonstrations. A demonstration is a particular kind of syllogism, one whose premises can be traced back to principles that are true, necessary, universal, and immediately intuited. These first, self-evident principles are related to the conclusions of science as axioms are related to theorems: the axioms both necessitate and explain the truths that constitute a science. The most important axioms, Aristotle thought, would be those that define the proper subject matter of a science. Thus, among the axioms of geometry would be the definition of a tri- angle. For this reason much of the second book of the Posterior Analytics is devoted to definition.
The account of science in the Posterior Analytics is impressive, but it bears no resemblance to any of Aristotle’s own scientific works. Generations of scholars have tried in vain to find in his writings a single instance of a demon- strative syllogism. Moreover, the whole history of scientific endeavour contains no perfect instance of a demonstra- tive science.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

Sculpture with portraitlike features is characteristic of the Hellenistic Age and even more so of Roman times and is even encountered in isolated cases in the Greek art of the 5th and 4th centuries BC. This head of Aristotle (384 – 322 BC) is probably based on a bronze statue, which according to literary sources was erected after the death of the philosopher in the school he had founded in Athens, the Peripatos, or Lyceum. Of the total of 20 known replicas of this head, the one in Vienna is in the best state of preservation. It is believed to be a copy from the time of the Roman emperor Claudius in the middle of the 1st century AD and is probably the most faithful rendition of the lost Greek original. The large number of replicas demonstrates the popularity of this portrait in Roman times, when the colonnaded courtyards and libraries of Roman villas were decorated with portraits of Greek poets and philosophers in order to demonstrate the high educational level of their owners. The head of Aristotle is not a stylised image of a philosopher, but rather a portrait of pronounced individuality. The wide head with its prominent, relatively flat skull is further emphasised by the ample hair at the temples. In an attempt to conceal incipient baldness, individual strands of hair fall across the forehead, which characteristically for a philosopher is lined with wrinkles (“thinker’s brow”). A short beard frames the face. The treatment of the eyes and cheeks is primarily responsible for the discreetly suggested impression of advanced age. The heavy upper eyelids make the small eyes appeared tired, and the cheeks are somewhat hollow. The mouth, which is slightly turned down at the corners, gives the face an expression of superiority and perhaps even scepticism. For several years, Aristotle tutored Alexander the Great, and Alexander is said to have honoured his teacher with a portrait statue, presumably a work by his favourite sculptor, Lysippus of Sicyon. It cannot be proved, however, that the present portrait is based on that sculpture. © Kurt Gschwantler, Alfred Bernhard-Walcher, Manuela Laubenberger, Georg Plattner, Karoline Zhuber-Okrog, Masterpieces in the Collection of Greek and Roman Antiquities. A Brief Guide to the Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna 2011.

0CEB0ED4-2E12-4DDD-82FF-FA8E3222298C.jpeg (122.85 KB, 下载次数: 115)

BE65CA04-CE33-4F4A-B2B8-961705F2B4CA.jpeg (122.85 KB, 下载次数: 97)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-4 00:12
蓋乌斯·普林尼·塞孔杜斯（拉丁語：Gaius Plinius Secundus，23年－79年8月24日），常稱为老普林尼或大普林尼，古羅馬作家、博物学者、军人、政治家，以《自然史》(一译《博物志》)一書留名後世。其外甥为小普林尼。

老普林尼是罗马骑士与元老院议员加伊乌斯·凯奇利乌斯的外孫。他出生在科莫，而非訛傳的维罗纳。学过法律，任西班牙代理总督，后担任那不勒斯舰队司令。老普林尼在观察维苏威火山爆发时，不幸被火山噴出的毒氣毒死。

其一生著有7部著作，其中六本散失，僅剩片段。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/老普林尼)

1961年意大利邮票是小普林尼。

Pliny the Elder (Latin: Gaius Plinius Secundus) was a Roman savant and author of the celebrated Natural History, an encyclopaedic work of uneven accuracy that was an authority on scientific matters up to the Middle Ages. Seven writings are ascribed to Pliny, of which only the Natural History is extant. There survive, however, a few fragments of his earlier writings on grammar, a biography of Pomponius Secundus, a history of Rome, a study of the Roman campaigns in Germany, and a book on hurling the lance. These writings probably were lost in antiquity and have played no role in perpetuating Pliny’s fame, which rests solely on the Natural History.
The Natural History, divided into 37 libri, or “books,” was completed, except for finishing touches, in 77 CE. In the preface, dedicated to Titus (who became emperor shortly before Pliny’s death), Pliny justified the title and explained his purpose on utilitarian grounds as the study of “the nature of things, that is, life.” Heretofore, he continued, no one had attempted to bring together the older, scattered material that belonged to “encyclic culture” (enkyklios paideia, the origin of the word encyclopaedia). Disdaining high literary style and political mythology, Pliny adopted a plain style—but one with an unusually rich vocabulary—as best suited to his purpose. A novel feature of the Natural History is the care taken by Pliny in naming his sources, more than 100 of which are mentioned. Book I, in fact, is a summary of the remaining 36 books, listing the authors and sometimes the titles of the books (many of which are now lost) from which Pliny derived his material.
The Natural History properly begins with Book II, which is devoted to cosmology and astronomy. Here, as elsewhere, Pliny demonstrated the extent of his reading, especially of Greek texts. By the same token, however, he was sometimes careless in translating details, with the result that he distorted the meaning of many technical and mathematical passages. In Books III through VI, on the physical and historical geography of the ancient world, he gave much attention to major cities, some of which no longer exist.
Books VII through XI treat zoology, beginning with humans, then mammals and reptiles, fishes and other marine animals, birds, and insects. Pliny derived most of the biological data from Aristotle, while his own contributions were concerned with legendary animals and unsupported folklore.
In Books XII through XIX, on botany, Pliny came closest to making a genuine contribution to science. Although he drew heavily upon Theophrastus, he reported some independent observations, particularly those made during his travels in Germany. Pliny is one of the chief sources of modern knowledge of Roman gardens, early botanical writings, and the introduction into Italy of new horticultural and agricultural species. Book XVIII, on agriculture, is especially important for agricultural techniques such as crop rotation, farm management, and the names of legumes and other crop plants. His description of an ox-driven grain harvester in Gaul, long regarded by scholars as imaginary, was confirmed by the discovery in southern Belgium in 1958 of a 2nd-century stone relief depicting such an implement. Moreover, by recording the Latin synonyms of Greek plant names, he made most of the plants mentioned in earlier Greek writings identifiable.
Books XX through XXXII focus on medicine and drugs. Like many Romans, Pliny criticized luxury on moral and medical grounds. His random comments on diet and on the commercial sources and prices of the ingredients of costly drugs provide valuable evidence relevant to contemporary Romanlife.ThesubjectsofBooksXXXIIIthrough XXXVII include minerals, precious stones, and metals, especially those used by Roman craftsmen. In describing their uses, he referred to famous artists and their creations and to Roman architectural styles and technology.

Influence
Perhaps the most important of the pseudoscientific methods advocated by Pliny was the doctrine of signatures: a resemblance between the external appearance of a plant, animal, or mineral and the outward symptoms of a disease was thought to indicate the therapeutic usefulness of the plant. With the decline of the ancient world and the loss of the Greek texts on which Pliny had so heavily depended, the Natural History became a substitute for a general education. In the European Middle Ages many of the larger monastic libraries possessed copies of the work. These and many abridged versions ensured Pliny’s place in European literature. His authority was unchallenged, partly because of a lack of more reliable information and partly because his assertions were not and, in many cases, could not be tested.
However, Pliny’s influence diminished starting in the late 15th century , when writers began to question his statements. By the end of the 17th century, the Natural History had been rejected by the leading scientists. Up to that time, however, Pliny’s influence, especially on nonscientific writers, was undiminished. He was, for example, almost certainly known to William Shakespeare and John Milton. Although Pliny’s work was never again accepted as an authority in science, 19th-century Latin scholars conclusively demonstrated the historical importance of the Natural History as one of the greatest literary monu- ments of classical antiquity.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

3EF62EE9-C7B3-408E-8E45-774906BF5EDD.jpeg (141.12 KB, 下载次数: 111)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-4 00:15
克勞狄烏斯·托勒密（古希臘語：Κλαύδιος Πτολεμαῖος；拉丁語：Claudius Ptolemaeus，约100年－170年，又译托勒玫或多禄某）是一位學者，同时也是数学家、天文学家、地理学家、占星家，公元168年于埃及亚历山大港逝世。身為罗马公民的托勒密生活在埃及行省的亚历山大港，并以希腊语写作，歷史上關於他的記述不多，最為著名的便是他所提出的“地心說”。14世纪時的天文学家 Theodore Meliteniotes（英语：Theodore Meliteniotes）宣称托勒密出生于埃及的托勒密赫米歐（英语：Ptolemais Hermiou）。这个说法距离托勒密生活的年代已有一段時間，因此目前没有证据显示出他曾在亚历山大港以外的任何地方居住過。

托勒密著有许多科學著作，其中有三部對拜占庭、伊斯蘭世界以及歐洲的科學發展影響頗大。第一部是《天文學大成》（古希臘語：Η μεγάλη Σύνταξις，意謂「巨著」）。第二部是《地理學指南》，是一部探討希臘羅馬地區的地理知識的典籍。而第三部是有關占星學的《占星四書》，書中嘗試改進占星術中繪製星圖的方法，以便融入當時亞里士多德的自然哲學。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/克劳狄乌斯·托勒密)

Ptolemy (Latin: Claudius Ptolemaeus) was an Egyptian astronomer, mathematician, and geographer of Greek descent who flourished in Alexandria during the 2nd century CE. In several fields his writings represent the culminating achievement of Greco-Roman science, particularly his geocentric (Earth-centred) model of the universe now known as the Ptolemaic system.
Virtually nothing is known about Ptolemy’s life except what can be inferred from his writings. His first major astronomical work, the Almagest, was completed about 150 CE and contains reports of astronomical observations that Ptolemy had made over the preceding quarter of a century. The size and content of his subsequent literary production suggests that he lived until about 170 CE.
The book that is now generally known as the Almagest (from a hybrid of Arabic and Greek, “the greatest”) was called by Ptolemy Hē mathēmatikē syntaxis(TheMathematical Collection) because he believed that its subject, the motions of the heavenly bodies, could be explained in mathematical terms. The opening chapters present empirical arguments for the basic cosmological framework within which Ptolemy worked. Earth, he argued, is a stationary sphere at the centre of a vastly larger celestial sphere that revolves at a perfectly uniform rate around Earth, carrying with it the stars, planets, Sun, and Moon—thereby causing their daily risings and settings. Through the course of a year the Sun slowly traces out a great circle, known as the ecliptic, against the rotation of the celestial sphere. The Moon and planets similarly travel backward against the “fixed stars” found in the ecliptic. Hence, the planets were also known as “wandering stars.” The fundamental assumption of the Almagest is that the apparently irregular movements of the heavenly bodies are in reality combinations of regular, uniform, circular motions.
How much of the Almagest is original is difficult to determine because almost all of the preceding technical astronomical literature is now lost. Ptolemy credited Hipparchus (mid-2nd century BCE) with essential elements of his solar theory, as well as parts of his lunar theory, while denying that Hipparchus constructed planetary models. Ptolemy made only a few vague and disparaging remarks regarding theoretical work over the intervening three centuries; yet the study of the planets undoubtedly made great strides during that interval. Moreover, Ptolemy’s veracity, especially as an observer, has been controversial since the time of the astronomer Tycho Brahe (1546–1601). Brahe pointed out that solar observations Ptolemy claimed to have made in 141 BCE are definitely not genuine, and there are strong arguments for doubting that Ptolemy independently observed the more than 1,000 stars listed in his star catalog. What is not disputed, however, is the mastery of mathematical analysis that Ptolemy exhibited.
Ptolemy was preeminently responsible for the geocentric cosmology that prevailed in the Islamic world and in medieval Europe. This was not due to the Almagest so much as a later treatise, Hypotheseis tōn planōmenōn (Planetary Hypotheses). In this work he proposed what is now called the Ptolemaic system, a unified system in which each heavenly body is attached to its own sphere and the set of spheres nested so that it extends without gaps from the Earth to the celestial sphere. The numerical tables in the Almagest (which enabled planetary positions and other celestial phenomena to be calculated for arbitrary dates) had a profound influence on medieval astronomy, in part through a separate, revised version of the tables that Ptolemy published as Procheiroi kanones (Handy Tables). Ptolemy taught later astronomers how to use dated, quantitative observations to revise cosmological models.
Ptolemy also attempted to place astrology on a sound basis in Apotelesmatika (Astrological Influences), later known as the Tetrabiblos for its four volumes. He believed that astrology is a legitimate, though inexact, science that describes the physical effects of the heavens on terrestrial life. Ptolemy accepted the basic validity of the traditional astrological doctrines, but he revised the details to reconcile the practice with an Aristotelian conception of nature, matter, and change. Of Ptolemy’s writings, the Tetrabiblos is the most foreign to modern readers, who do not accept astral prognostication and a cosmology driven by the interplay of basic qualities such as hot, cold, wet, and dry.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

0FBA2E89-59A8-460D-B4E7-EF6E52199F4A.jpeg (133.85 KB, 下载次数: 114)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-5 00:10
盖伦（129年－200年）是一位古罗马的医学家及哲學家。他的见解和理论在他身后的一千多年里是欧洲起支配性的医学理论。出生于别迦摩，逝世于罗马。

盖伦将希波克拉底的医学理论一直传递到文艺复兴。他的《希波克拉底的元素》描写了基于四元素说上的四气说的哲学系统。从这个理论上他发展了自己的理论。他对瑟尔苏的用拉丁语写的反对的理论基本上一字不提。

盖伦最主要的著作是他的17卷的“人体各部位的作用”。此外他还写了关于哲学和语言学的著作。他的著作一共有22卷。

盖伦的理论与柏拉图的一致，他认为世界是由一个造世者故意建造的——这是为什么他的著作后来这样容易被基督教徒和穆斯林接受。他最基本的理论是生命来自于“气”，后来的作家将盖伦的气与灵魂相结合。脑中的“精气”（Pneuma psychicon）决定运动、感知和感觉。心的“活气”（Pneuma zoticon）控制体内的血液和体温。肝的“动气”（Pneuma physicon）控制营养和新陈代谢。

盖伦的许多知识来自于他对活体动物的解剖。他的一个方式是公开地解剖活猪。他切断猪的神经来显示它们的作用，最后他切断喉神经（今天也称为盖伦神经）猪就不叫了。他系住活动物的输尿管来显示尿来自于肾，他破坏脊椎来显示瘫痪的原因。

从今天的角度来看，盖伦的理论部分是对的，部分是错的。他证明动脉是送血的，而不是送空气的，此外他首次研究了神经的作用以及脑和心的作用。他还认为思考是脑的作用，而不是像亚里斯多德所说的那样是心的作用。

但从今天的角度出发盖伦的其它许多观点是错的。他没有认识到血液循环而认为静脉系统与动脉系统是无关的。这个观点一直到17世纪才被威廉·哈维纠正。由于他的大多数解剖知识是从解剖猪、狗和猴得来的，他错误地以为人也有迷网，一个在食草动物中常见的血管节。他还反对使用止血带来停止出血的疗法而坚持使用放血疗法。

直到16世纪盖伦在欧洲是一个医学权威。学者不对实物进行观察而相信盖伦已经描述了一切可以描述的事物。放血疗法成为一个基本疗法。第一个严肃地改变这个状况的是维萨里。

盖伦的著作也是波斯学者如阿维森纳等的主要学术来源。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/盖伦)

Galen of Pergamum (Latin: Galenus) was a Greek physician, writer, and philosopher who exercised a dominant influence on medical theory and practice in Europe from the Middle Ages until the mid-17th century. His authority in the Byzantine world and the Muslim Middle East was similarly long-lived.

Anatomical and Medical Studies
Galen regarded anatomy as the foundation of medical knowledge, and he frequently dissected and experimented on such lower animals as the Barbary ape (or African monkey), pigs, sheep, and goats. Galen’s advocacy of dissection, both to improve surgical skills and for research purposes, formed part of his self-promotion, but there is no doubt that he was an accurate observer. He distinguished seven pairs of cranial nerves, described the valves of the heart, and observed the structural differences between arteries and veins. One of his most important demonstrations was that the arteries carry blood, not air, as had been taught for 400 years. Notable also were his vivisection experiments, such as tying off the recurrent laryngeal nerve to show that the brain controls the voice, performing a series of transections of the spinal cord to establish the functions of the spinal nerves, and tying off the ureters to demonstrate kidney and bladder functions. Galen was seriously hampered by the prevailing social taboo against dissecting human corpses, however, and the inferences he made about human anatomy based on his dissections of animals often led him into errors. His anatomy of the uterus, for example, is largely that of the dog’s.
Galen’s physiology was a mixture of ideas taken from the philosophers Plato and Aristotle as well as from the physician Hippocrates, whom Galen revered as the fount of all medical learning. Galen viewed the body as consisting of three connected systems: the brain and nerves, which are responsible for sensation and thought; the heart and arteries, responsible for life-giving energy; and the liver and veins, responsible for nutrition and growth. According to Galen, blood is formed in the liver and is then carried by the veins to all parts of the body, where it is used up as nutriment or is transformed into flesh and other substances. A small amount of blood seeps through the lungs between the pulmonary artery and pulmonary veins, thereby becoming mixed with air, and then seeps from the right to the left ventricle of the heart through minute pores in the wall separating the two chambers. A small proportion of this blood is further refined in a network of nerves at the base of the skull (in reality found only in ungulates) and the brain to make psychic pneuma, a subtle material that is the vehicle of sensation. Galen’s physiological theory proved extremely seductive, and few possessed the skills needed to challenge it in succeeding centuries.
Building on earlier Hippocratic conceptions, Galen believed that human health requires an equilibrium between the four main bodily fluids, or humours—blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm. Each of the humours is built up from the four elements and displays two of the four primary qualities: hot, cold, wet, and dry. Unlike Hippocrates, Galen argued that humoral imbalances can be located in specific organs, as well as in the body as a whole. This modification of the theory allowed doctors to make more precise diagnoses and to prescribe specific remedies to restore the body’s balance. As a continuation of earlier Hippocratic conceptions, Galenic physiology became a powerful influence in medicine for the next 1,400 years.
Galen was both a universal genius and a prolific writer. About 300 titles of works by him are known, of which about 150 survive wholly or in part. He was perpetually inquisitive, even in areas remote from medicine, such as linguistics, and he was an important logician who wrote major studies of scientific method. Galen was also a skilled polemicist and an incorrigible publicist of his own genius, and these traits, combined with the enormous range of his writings, help to explain his subsequent fame and influence.

Influence
Galen’s writings achieved wide circulation during his life- time, and copies of some of his works survive that were written within a generation of his death. By 500 CE his works were being taught and summarized at Alexandria, and his theories were already crowding out those of others
in the medical handbooks of the Byzantine world. Greek manuscripts began to be collected and translated by enlightened Arabs in the 9th century, and in about 850 Hunayn ibn Ishāq, an Arab physician at the court of Baghdad, prepared an annotated list of 129 works of Galen that he and his followers had translated from Greek into Arabic or Syriac. Learned medicine in the Arabic world thus became heavily based upon the commentary, exposition, and understanding of Galen.
Galen’s influence was initially almost negligible in western Europe except for drug recipes, but from the late 11th century Hunayn’s translations, commentaries on them by Arab·physicians, and sometimes the original Greek writings themselves were translated into Latin. These Latin versions came to form the basis of medical education in the new medieval universities. From about 1490, Italian humanists felt the need to prepare new Latin versions of Galen directly from Greek manuscripts in order to free his texts from medieval preconceptions and misunderstandings. Galen’s works were first printed in Greek in their entirety in 1525, and printings in Latin swiftly followed. These texts offered a different picture from that of the Middle Ages, one that emphasized Galen as a clinician, a diagnostician, and above all, an anatomist. His new followers stressed his methodical techniques of identifying and curing illness, his independent judgment, and his cautious empiricism. Galen’s injunctions to investigate the body were eagerly followed, since physicians wished to repeat the experiments and observations that he had recorded. Paradoxically, this soon led to the overthrow of Galen’s authority as an anatomist. In 1543 the Flemish physician Andreas Vesalius showed that Galen’s anatomy of the body was more animal than human in some of its aspects, and it became clear that Galen and his medieval followers had made many errors. Galen’s notions of physiology, by contrast, lasted for a further century, until the English physician William Harvey correctly explained the circulation of the blood. The renewal and then the overthrow of the Galenic tradition in the Renaissance had been an important element in the rise of modern science.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

0D1016F9-A4B6-4F0E-A241-1FCBD1C818BE.jpeg (122.55 KB, 下载次数: 110)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-5 00:11
阿布·阿里·侯赛因·本·阿卜杜拉·本·哈桑·本·阿里·本·西那（阿拉伯文：أبو علي الحسين بن عبد الله بن الحسن بن علي بن سينا，波斯文：ابوعلی حسین بن عبدالله بن حسن بن علي بن سینا；980年－1037年6月），一般简称伊本·西那（阿拉伯文、波斯文：ابن سينا），欧洲人尊其为阿维森纳（阿维真纳）（希腊文：Aβιτζιανός，拉丁文：Avicenna），塔吉克人，生于布哈拉附近。中世纪波斯哲学家、医学家、自然科学家、文学家。

伊本·西那青年时曾任宫廷御医；二十岁时，因王朝覆灭而迁居花剌子模；十一年后，因政治原因逃至伊朗。他博学多才，有多方面的成就。医学上，丰富了内科知识，重视解剖，所著《医典（英语：The Canon of Medicine）》是十七世纪以前亚洲、欧洲广大地区的主要医学教科书和参考书。哲学上，他是阿拉伯/波斯亚里士多德学派的主要代表之一。持二元论，并创造了自己的学说。肯定物质世界是永恒的、不可创造的，同时又承认真主是永恒的。主张灵魂不灭，也不轮回，反对死者复活之说。主要著作还有《治疗论（英语：The Book of Healing）》、《知识论》等。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/伊本·西那)

Avicenna (Arabic: Ibn Sīnā) was an Iranian physician and the most famous and influential of the philosopher-scientists of Islam. He was particularly noted for his contributions in the fields of Aristotelian philosophy and medicine. He composed the Kitāb al-shifā’ (Book of Healing), a vast philosophical and scientific encyclopaedia, and Al-Qānūn f ī al-tibb (The Canon of Medicine), which is among the most famous books in the history of medicine.
Avicenna’s Book of Healing is probably the largest work of its kind ever written by one man. It discusses logic, the natural sciences, including psychology, the quadrivium (geometry, astronomy, arithmetic, and music), and metaphysics, but there is no real exposition of ethics or of politics. His thought in this work owes a great deal to Aristotle but also to other Greek influences and to Neoplatonism.
The Canon of Medicine is the most famous single book in the history of medicine in both East and West. It is a systematic encyclopaedia based for the most part on the achievements of Greek physicians of the Roman imperial age and on other Arabic works and, to a lesser extent, on his own experience (his own clinical notes were lost during his journeys). Occupied during the day with his duties at court as both physician and administrator, Avicenna spent almost every night with his students composing these and other works and carrying out general philosophical and scientific discussions related to them.
Avicenna’s Book of Healing was translated partially into Latin in the 12th century, and the complete Canon appeared in the same century. These translations and others spread the thought of Avicenna far and wide in the West. His thought, blended with that of St. Augustine, the Christian philosopher and theologian, was a basic ingredient in the thought of many of the medieval Scholastics, especially in the Franciscan schools. In medicine, the Canon became the medical authority for several centuries, and Avicenna enjoyed an undisputed place of honour equaled only by the early Greek physicians Hippocrates and Galen. In the East his dominating influence in medicine, philosophy, and theology has lasted over the ages and is still alive within the circles of Islamic thought.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

961ED450-B643-4096-BFB1-2AEE88512786.jpeg (142.8 KB, 下载次数: 113)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-5 23:22
罗吉尔·培根（英语：Roger Bacon，1214年－1294年），英国方济各会修士、哲学家、炼金术士。他学识渊博，著作涉及当时所知的各门类知识，并对阿拉伯世界的科学进展十分熟悉。提倡经验主义，主张通过实验获得知识。

培根受到的科学教育和他自己的研究使他看到了当时学术争论的很多缺陷：没有教师懂得希腊文，使得他们仅仅通过低劣的翻译来了解亚里士多德的思想。物理学并不像亚里士多德提倡的通过实验来研究，而是对典籍进行争论。目睹这一切的培根反对这种空洞的争论，提倡实验的重要性，并且出于他直率的个性，他到处宣扬他认为正确的方法，猛烈抨击他所不同意的，这给他带来了很多的麻烦。1256年培根一向抨击的康沃尔的理查德开始担任英国方济各会的首脑。不久，培根被转到法国的一所修道院。此后十年他只能通过写信和朋友们交流。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/罗吉尔·培根)

Roger Bacon, who was also known as Doctor Mirabilis (Latin for “Wonderful Teacher”), was an English Franciscan philosopher and educational reformer, as well as a major medieval proponent of experimental science. Bacon studied mathematics, astronomy, optics, alchemy, and languages. He was the first European to describe in detail the process of making gunpowder, and he proposed flying machines and motorized ships and carriages. Bacon (as he himself complacently remarked) displayed a prodigious energy and zeal in the pursuit of experimental science; indeed, his studies were talked about everywhere and eventually won him a place in popular literature as a kind of wonder worker. Bacon therefore represents a historically precocious expression of the empirical spirit of experimental science, even though his actual practice of it seems to have been exaggerated.

By 1257, Bacon had entered into the Order of Friars Minor, a branch of the Franciscan Christian religious order. However, he soon fell ill and felt (as he wrote) forgotten by everyone and all but buried. Furthermore, his feverish activity, his amazing credulity, his superstition, and his vocal contempt for those not sharing his interests displeased his superiors in the order and brought him under severe discipline. He appealed to Pope Clement IV, arguing that a more accurate experimental knowledge of nature would be of great value in confirming the Christian faith. Bacon felt that his proposals would be of great importance for the welfare of the church and of the universities.
The pope desired to become more fully informed of these projects. In obedience to the pope’s command, Bacon set to work and in a remarkably short time had dispatched the Opus majus (“Great Work”), the Opus minus (“Lesser Work”), and the Opus tertium (“Third Work”). He had to do this secretly, and even when the irregularity of his conduct attracted the attention of his superiors and the terrible weapons of spiritual coercion were brought to bear upon him, he was deterred from explaining his position by the papal command of secrecy. Under the circumstances, his achievement was truly astounding. The Opus majus was an effort to persuade the pope of the urgent necessity and broad utility of the reforms that he proposed. But the death of Clement in 1268 extinguished Bacon’s dreams of gaining for the sciences their rightful place in the curriculum of university studies.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

4A1CA62B-7148-4D82-AFDE-7984A9061D6A.jpeg (181.94 KB, 下载次数: 99)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-6 00:04
列奥纳多·达·芬奇（意大利語：Leonardo da Vinci；儒略历1452年4月15日－1519年5月2日)，又譯达文西，全名李奧納多·迪·瑟皮耶罗·达·芬奇（Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci，意为「文西城皮耶羅先生之子──李奧納多」），是意大利文藝復興時期的一个博學者：在繪畫、音樂、建築、數學、幾何學、解剖學、生理學、動物學、植物學、天文學、氣象學、地質學、地理學、物理學、光學、力學、發明、土木工程等領域都有顯著的成就。这使他成为文艺复兴时期人文主义的代表人物，也使得他成為文藝復興時期典型的藝術家，也是歷史上最著名的畫家之一，與米開朗基羅和拉斐尔並稱文艺复兴三杰。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/列奥纳多·达·芬奇)

Leonardo da Vinci was an Italian painter, draftsman, sculptor, architect, and engineer. His genius, perhaps more than that of any other figure, epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal. His Last Supper (1495–98) and Mona Lisa (c. 1503–06) are among the most widely popular and influential paintings of the Renaissance. His notebooks reveal a spirit of scientific inquiry and a mechanical inventiveness that were centuries ahead of their time.
The unique fame that Leonardo enjoyed in his lifetime and that, filtered by historical criticism, has remained undimmed to the present day rests largely on his unlimited desire for knowledge, which guided all his thinking and behaviour. An artist by disposition and endowment, he considered his eyes to be his main avenue to knowledge; to Leonardo, sight was man’s highest sense because it alone conveyed the facts of experience immediately, correctly, and with certainty. Hence, every phenomenon perceived became an object of knowledge. Saper vedere (“knowing how to see”) became the great theme of his studies. He applied his creativity to every realm in which graphic representation is used: He was a painter, sculptor, architect, and engineer. But he went even beyond that. He used his superb intellect, unusual powers of observation, and mastery of the art of drawing to study nature itself, a line of inquiry that allowed his dual pursuits of art and science to flourish.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

D517DDF5-D0B8-4FBE-843A-C045679EEF26.jpeg (119.4 KB, 下载次数: 108)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-13 00:02
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-13 00:35 编辑

Anatomical Studies and Drawings
Leonardo’s fascination with anatomical studies reveals a prevailing artistic interest of the time. In his own 1435 treatise Della pittura (“On Painting”), theorist Leon Battista Alberti urged painters to construct the human figure as it exists in nature, supported by the skeleton and musculature, and only then clothed in skin. The date of Leonardo’s initial involvement with anatomical study is not known nor can it be determined exactly when Leonardo began to perform dissections, but it might have been several years after he first moved to Milan, at the time a centre of medical investigation. His study of anatomy, originally pursued for his training as an artist, had grown by the 1490s into an independent area of research. As his sharp eye uncovered the structure of the human body, Leonardo became fascinated by the the figuraistrumentaledell’omo(“man’sinstrumental figure”), and he sought to comprehend its physical working as a creation of nature. Over the following two decades, he did practical work in anatomy on the dissection table in Milan, then at hospitals in Florence and Rome, and in Pavia, where he collaborated with the physician anatomist Marcantonio della Torre. By his own count Leonardo dissected 30 corpses in his lifetime.
Leonardo’s early anatomical studies dealt chiefly with the skeleton and muscles. Yet even at the outset, he combined anatomical with physiological research. From observing the static structure of the body, Leonardo proceeded to study the role of individual parts of the body in mechanical activity. This led him finally to the study of the internal organs; among them he probed most deeply into the brain, heart, and lungs as the “motors” of the senses and of life. His findings from these studies were recorded in the famous anatomical drawings, which are among the most significant achievements of Renaissance science. The drawings are based on a connection between natural and abstract representation. He represented parts of the body in transparent layers that afford an “insight” into the organ by using sections in perspective, reproducing muscles as “strings,” indicating hidden parts by dotted lines, and devising a hatching system. The genuine value of these dimostrazione lay in their ability to synthesize a multiplicity of individual experiences at the dissecting table and make the data immediately and accurately visible. As Leonardo proudly emphasized, these drawings were superior to descriptive words. The wealth of Leonardo’s anatomical studies that have survived forged the basic principles of modern scientific illustration. It is worth noting, however, that during his lifetime, Leonardo’s medical investigations remained private. He did not consider himself a professional in the field of anatomy, and he neither taught nor published his findings.
Although he kept his anatomical studies to himself, Leonardo did publish some of his observations on human proportion. Working with the mathematician Luca Pacioli, he considered the proportional theories of Vitruvius, the 1st-century BCE Roman architect, as presented in his treatise De architectura (On Architecture). Imposing the principles of geometry on the configuration of the human body, Leonardo demonstrated that the ideal proportion of the human figure corresponds with the forms of the circle and the square. In his illustration of this theory, the so-called Vitruvian Man, Leonardo demonstrated that when a man places his feet firmly on the ground and stretches out his arms, he can be contained within the four lines of a square, but when in a spreadeagle position, he can be inscribed in a circle.

Leonardo envisaged the great picture chart of the human body he had produced through his anatomical drawings and Vitruvian Man as a cosmografia del minor mondo (“cosmography of the microcosm”). He believed the workings of the human body to be an analogy, in microcosm, for the workings of the universe. Leonardo wrote: “Man has been called by the ancients a lesser world, and indeed the name is well applied; because, as man is composed of earth, water, air, and fire . . . this body of the earth is similar.” He compared the human skeleton to rocks (“supports of the earth”) and the expansion of the lungs in breathing to the ebb and flow of the oceans.

Mechanics and Cosmology
According to Leonardo’s observations, the study of mechanics, with which he became quite familiar as an architect and engineer, also reflected the workings of nature. Throughout his life Leonardo was an inventive builder. He thoroughly understood the principles of mechanics of his time and contributed in many ways to advancing them. His two Madrid notebooks deal extensively with his theory of mechanics; the first was written in the 1490s, and the sec- ond was written between 1503 and 1505. Their importance lay less in their description of specific machines or work tools than in their use of demonstration models to explain the basic mechanical principles and functions employed in buildingmachinery.Asinhisanatomicaldrawings,Leonardo developed definite principles of graphic representation— stylization, patterns, and diagrams—that offer a precise demonstration of the object in question.
Leonardo was especially intrigued by problems of friction and resistance, and with each of the mechanical elements he presented—such as screw threads, gears, hydraulic jacks, swiveling devices, and transmission gears—drawings took precedence over the written word. Throughout his career he also was intrigued by the mechanical potential of motion. This led him to design a machine with a differential transmission, a moving fortress that resembles a modern tank, and a flying machine. His “helical airscrew” (c. 1487) almost seems a prototype for the modern helicopter, but, like the other vehicles Leonardo designed, it presented a singular problem: it lacked an adequate source of power to provide propulsion and lift.
Wherever Leonardo probed the phenomena of nature, he recognized the existence of primal mechanical forces that govern the shape and function of the universe. This is seen in his studies of the flight of birds, in which his youthful idea of the feasibility of a flying apparatus took shape and that led to exhaustive research into the element of air; in his studies of water, the vetturale della natura (“conveyor of nature”), in which he was as much concerned with the physical properties of water as with its laws of motion and currents; in his research on the laws of growth of plants and trees, as well as the geologic structure of earth and hill formations; and finally in his observation of air currents, which evoked the image of the flame of a candle or the picture of a wisp of cloud and smoke. In his drawings based on the numerous experiments he undertook, Leonardo found a stylized form of representation that was uniquely his own, especially in his studies of whirlpools. He managed to break down a phenomenon into its component parts—the traces of water or eddies of the whirlpool—yet at the same time preserve the total picture, creating both an analytic and a synthetic vision.

Leonardo as Artist Scientist
In an era that often compared the process of divine creation to the activity of an artist, Leonardo reversed the analogy, using art as his own means to approximate the mysteries of creation, asserting that, through the science of painting, “the mind of the painter is transformed into a copy of the divine mind, since it operates freely in creating many kinds of animals, plants, fruits, landscapes, countrysides, ruins, and awe-inspiring places.” With this sense of the artist’s high calling, Leonardo approached the vast realm of nature to probe its secrets. His utopian idea of transmitting in encyclopaedic form the knowledge thus won was still bound up with medieval Scholastic conceptions; however, the results of his research were among the first great achievements of the forthcoming age’s thinking because they were based to an unprecedented degree on the principle of experience.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

《维特鲁威人》（意大利語：Uomo vitruviano）是达·芬奇在1490年前後创作的世界著名素描。根据约1500年前维特鲁威在《建筑十书》中的描述，达·芬奇努力绘出了完美比例的人体。这幅由钢笔和墨水绘制的手稿，描绘了一个男人在同一位置上的“十”字型和“火”字型的姿态，并同时被分别嵌入到一个矩形和一个圆形当中。这幅画有时也被称作卡侬比例或男子比例，现藏於意大利威尼斯的学院美术馆中，和大部分纸质作品一样，它只会偶尔被展出。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/维特鲁威人)

《维特鲁威人》出现在三枚1938年意大利邮票上。这枚《维特鲁威人》是否与Luigi Morera教授有关，正在与他的家人一起研究。在结果确定之前，邮戳将保持隐密状态。

F866680B-6F3A-48DA-A69F-4C8B90F289DC.jpeg (114.59 KB, 下载次数: 106)

59E165D6-FCBD-4750-9447-8C90B9099B79.jpeg (233.82 KB, 下载次数: 122)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-14 00:06
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-14 00:07 编辑

尼古拉·哥白尼（拉丁語：Nicolaus Copernicus，波蘭語：Mikołaj Kopernik，1473年2月19日－1543年5月24日）是文艺复兴时期的波兰数学家、天文学家，他提倡日心说模型，提到太陽為宇宙的中心。1543年哥白尼临终前发表了《天體運行論》一般認為他著的是現代天文學的起步點。它开启了哥白尼革命，并对推动科学革命作出了重要贡献。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/尼古拉·哥白尼)

哥白尼出生于皇家普魯士，该地区自1466年隶属于波兰王国波兰皇家普魯士托伦市（位於今波兰庫亞維-波美拉尼亞省）。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/托伦)

Polish astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus (Polish: Mikołaj Kopernik) proposed that the planets have the Sun as the fixed point to which their motions are to be referred; that the Earth is a planet which, besides orbiting the Sun annually, also turns once daily on its own axis; and that very slow, long-term changes in the direction of this axis account for the precession of the equinoxes. This representation of the heavens is usually called the heliocentric, or “Sun-centred,” system—derived from the Greek helios, meaning “Sun.”
Copernicus’s theory had important consequences for later thinkers of the scientific revolution, including such major figures as Galileo, Kepler, Descartes, and Newton. Copernicus probably hit upon his main idea sometime between 1508 and 1514, and during those years he wrote a manuscript usually called the Commentariolus (“Little Commentary”). However, the book that contains the final version of his theory, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium libri vi (“Six Books Concerning the Revolutions of the Heavenly Orbs”), did not appear in print until 1543, the year of his death.

Science of the Stars
In Copernicus’s period, astrology and astronomy were considered subdivisions of a common subject called the “science of the stars,” whose main aim was to provide a description of the arrangement of the heavens as well as the theoretical tools and tables of motions that would permit accurate construction of horoscopes and annual prognostications. At this time the terms astrologer, astronomer, and mathematician were virtually interchangeable; they generally denoted anyone who studied the heavens using mathematical techniques. Furthermore, practitioners of astrology were in disagreement about everything, from the divisions of the zodiac to the minutest observations to the order of the planets; there was also a long-standing disagreement concerning the status of the planetary models.
From antiquity, astronomical modeling was governed by the premise that the planets move with uniform angular motion on fixed radii at a constant distance from their centres of motion. Two types of models derived from this premise. The first, represented by that of Aristotle, held that the planets are carried around the centre of the universe embedded in unchangeable, material, invisible spheres at fixed distances. Since all planets have the same centre of motion, the universe is made of nested, concentric spheres with no gaps between them. As a predictive model, this account was of limited value. Among other things, it had the distinct disadvantage that it could not account for variations in the apparent brightness of the planets since the distances from the centre were always the same.

A second tradition, deriving from Claudius Ptolemy, solved this problem by postulating three mechanisms: uniformly revolving, off-centre circles called eccentrics; epicycles, little circles whose centres moved uniformly on the circumference of circles of larger radius (deferents); and equants. The equant, however, broke with the main assumption of ancient astronomy because it separated the condition of uniform motion from that of constant distance from the centre. A planet viewed from a specific point at the centre of its orbit would appear to move sometimes faster, sometimes slower. As seen from the Earth and removed a certain distance from the specific centre point, the planet would also appear to move nonuniformly. Only from the equant, an imaginary point at a calculated distance from the Earth, would the planet appear to move uniformly. A planet-bearing sphere revolving around an equant point will wobble; situate one sphere within another, and the two will collide, disrupting the heavenly order. In the 13th century a group of Persian astronomers at Marāgheh discovered that, by combining two uniformly revolving epicycles to generate an oscillating point that would account for variations in distance, they could devise a model that produced the equalized motion without referring to an equant point. This insight was the starting point for Copernicus’s attempt to resolve the conflict raised by wobbling physical spheres.

An Orderly Universe
In the Commentariolus, Copernicus postulated that, if the Sun is assumed to be at rest and if the Earth is assumed to be in motion, then the remaining planets fall into an orderly relationship whereby their sidereal periods increase from the Sun as follows: Mercury (88 days), Venus (225 days), Earth (1 year), Mars (1.9 years), Jupiter (12 years), and Saturn (30 years). This theory did resolve the disagreement about the ordering of the planets but, in turn, raised new problems. To accept the theory’s premises, one had to abandon much of Aristotelian natural philosophy and develop a new explanation for why heavy bodies fall to a moving Earth. It was also necessary to explain how a transient body like the Earth, filled with meteorological phenomena, pestilence, and wars, could be part of a perfect and imperishable heaven. In addition, Copernicus was working with many observations that he had inherited from antiquity and whose trustworthiness he could not verify. In constructing a theory for the precession of the equinoxes, for example, he was trying to build a model based upon very small, long-term effects. Also, his theory for Mercury was left with serious incoherencies.
Any of these considerations alone could account for Copernicus’s delay in publishing his work. (He remarked in the preface to De revolutionibus that he had chosen to withhold publication not for merely the nine years recommended by the Roman poet Horace but for 36 years, four times that period.) When a description of the main elements of the heliocentric hypothesis was first published in 1540 and 1541 in the Narratio Prima (“First Narration”), it was not under Copernicus’s own name but under that of the 25-year-old Georg Rheticus, a Lutheran from the University of Wittenberg, Germany, who stayed with Copernicus at Frauenburg for about two and a half years, between 1539 and 1542. The Narratio prima was, in effect, a joint production of Copernicus and Rheticus, something of a “trial balloon” for the main work. It provided a summary of the theoretical principles contained in the manuscript of De revolutionibus, emphasized their value for computing new planetary tables, and presented Copernicus as following admiringly in the footsteps of Ptolemy even as he broke fundamentally with his ancient predecessor. It also provided what was missing from the Commentariolus: a basis for accepting the claims of the new theory.
Both Rheticus and Copernicus knew that they could not definitively rule out all possible alternatives to the heliocentric theory. But they could underline what Copernicus’s theory provided that others could not: a singular method for ordering the planets and for calculating the relative distances of the planets from the Sun. Rheticus compared this new universe to a well-tuned musical instrument and to the interlocking wheel-mechanisms of a clock. In the preface to De revolutionibus, Copernicus used an image from Horace’s Ars poetica (“Art of Poetry”). The the- ories of his predecessors, he wrote, were like a human figure in which the arms, legs, and head were put together in the form of a disorderly monster. His own representation of the universe, in contrast, was an orderly whole in which a displacement of any part would result in a disruption of the whole. In effect, a new criterion of scientific adequacy was advanced together with the new theory of the universe.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

347AC54D-43A7-476E-912D-C479B5BBCF12.jpeg (112.48 KB, 下载次数: 94)

4D040C5B-8618-43A5-9903-68BB2A31D079.jpeg (111.69 KB, 下载次数: 101)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-14 00:08
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2020-2-6 01:40 编辑

在1491-92年的冬季学期，哥白尼以Nicolaus Nicolai de Thuronia的名字和兄弟安德鲁一同被克拉科夫大学所录取（也就是如今的亞捷隆大學）。哥白尼就读的是艺术系，时间从1491年秋天到大致1495年的夏天或秋天。当时正是克拉科夫大学的天文学和数学学院如日中天的时候，这里的学习经历为他将来在数学方面所取得的成绩奠定了基础。按照后来Jan Brożek的一种可靠说法，哥白尼成为了阿尔伯特·布鲁楚斯基（Albert Brudzewski）的学生，后者在当时（1491年）是一名亚里士多德哲学教授，但是他在大学校外私下里教授天文学；哥白尼就此熟悉了布鲁楚斯基广泛阅读的评论文章，参加了许多讲座。

哥白尼在克拉科夫的学习经历帮他奠定了数学天文学方面的坚实基础，校方教授的课程包括数学、几何学、几何光学、宇宙结构学、天文学的理论和计算等，使他掌握了亚里士多德有关哲学和自然科学的著作《形而上学》（De coelo, Metaphysics），这些都激发了他的学习兴趣，并实现对人文文化的精深把握。在克拉科夫求学的过程中，哥白尼通过参加大学讲座以及独立阅读著作来拓展自己的知识，诸如古希腊数学家欧几里德和阿拉伯天文学家哈里·阿本拉吉（英语：Haly Abenragel）的著作，阿方索星表（英语：Alfonsine Tables），德国数学家、天文学家雷格蒙塔努斯（约翰·缪勒）的《方位册》（Tabulae directionum），等等。在这期间的阅读资料，其中还标注有他最早的科学笔记，现在部分保存在瑞典乌普萨拉大学。在克拉科夫，哥白尼开始搜集大量的天文学方面的藏书，后在17世纪50年代的大洪水时代，被瑞典当作战利品运往本国，现在瑞典乌普萨拉大学图书馆收藏。

哥白尼在克拉科夫的四年学习生活为他重要才能的发展发挥了重要作用，并促使他在天文学的两大流行体系亚里士多德的同心球面学说和托勒密的偏心圆和本轮理论进行逻辑比较分析，对之进行扬弃之后，构建出哥白尼自己对于宇宙结构的理论的第一步。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/尼古拉·哥白尼)

克拉科夫大學院（波蘭語：Collegium Maius）的哥白尼纪念碑。克拉科夫大學院是亞捷隆大學最古老的建築，其歷史可以追溯至14世紀。雅盖隆大学图书馆建于1364年，现有藏书650万部，是波兰最大的图书馆之一。藏有大量中世纪手稿，其中包括哥白尼《天体运行论》的原稿。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/克拉科夫大學院)&(zh.m.wikipedia.org/亞捷隆大學)

F8D0360F-4548-4A3E-BF6B-296EE16D2090.jpeg (146.6 KB, 下载次数: 121)

1013FB0F-8091-4DE1-8766-4F81C913DE52.jpeg (183.43 KB, 下载次数: 114)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-15 00:01
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-15 00:02 编辑

帕拉塞尔斯（Paracelsus，或譯帕拉塞尔苏斯，1493年－1541年），中世纪瑞士医生、煉金術士、占星师。帕拉塞尔斯全名菲利普斯·奥里欧勒斯·德奥弗拉斯特·博姆巴斯茨·冯·霍恩海姆，是苏黎世一个名叫W·冯·霍恩海姆医生的儿子。他自称为帕拉塞尔斯，是因为他自认为他比罗马医生凯尔苏斯更加伟大的意思。

帕拉塞尔斯把医学和煉金術结合起来成为今日的医疗化学。他给煉金術下的结论是：煉金術的真正目的并非练成黄金，而是要制造有益人体健康的医药品。而这包括了所有化学工艺和生物化学工艺的定义。冶炼工把矿物变为金属是一个炼金士，所以厨师和烘面包的人从肉类和麦子里制造出食物来也是炼金士。他采取了炼金士的基本观点，即矿物在地下生长并发展成为更完善的形式，而人在实验室里却能够人工地模仿地下天然发生的东西。他主张一切物质都是活的并且自然地生长，而人能为实现自己的目的而加速或改造这种天然过程。

在医学上，帕拉塞尔斯提出人体本质上是一个化学系统的学说。这个化学系统由煉金術士的两种元素即汞和硫同他自己所增加的第三种元素盐所组成。在帕拉塞尔斯看来，疾病可能是由于元素之间的不平衡引起，正像盖仑派医生们认为疾病是由于体液之间的失调所引起的一样，意即任何東西的過量或者不足都有可能造成疾病，帕拉塞尔斯亦被稱為毒理學之父。但帕拉塞尔斯的学说指出平衡的恢复可以用矿物的药物而不用有机药物。

帕拉塞尔斯认为疾病的行为具有高度的特殊性，而且每一种疾病都有一种特效的化学治疗法。因此帕拉塞尔斯反对旧时的含有许多成分的万灵药而主张服用单一的物质作为药剂。这样一个转变促进了对于专科疾病的研究，并有助于把有益和有害的药物加以区别。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/帕拉塞尔苏斯)

Philippus Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus Von Hohenheim, better known as Paracelsus, was a German-Swiss physician and alchemist. He established the role of chemistry in medicine. He published Der grossen Wundartzney (“Great Surgery Book”) in 1536 and a clinical description of syphilis in 1530.

Education
Paracelsus is said to have graduated from the University of Vienna with a baccalaureate in medicine in 1510. It is believed that he received his doctoral degree in 1516 from the University of Ferrara in Italy, where he was free to express his rejection of the prevailing view that the stars and planets controlled all the parts of the human body. He is thought to have begun using the name “para-Celsus” (above or beyond Celsus) at about that time because he regarded himself as even greater than Celsus, a renowned 1st-century Roman physician.
Soon after taking his degree, he set out upon many years of wandering through Europe and took part in the “Netherlandish wars” as an army surgeon. Later Paracelsus went to Russia, was held captive by the Tatars, escaped into Lithuania, went south into Hungary, and again served as an army surgeon in Italy in 1521. Ultimately his wanderings brought him to Egypt, Arabia, the Holy Land, and, finally, Constantinople. Everywhere he sought out the most learned exponents of practical alchemy, not only to discover the most effective means of medical treatment but also—and even more important—to discover “the latent forces of Nature,” and how to use them.

Career at Basel
In 1524 Paracelsus returned to his home at Villach in southern Austria to find that his fame for many miraculous cures had preceded him. He was subsequently appointed town physician and lecturer in medicine at the University of Basel in Switzerland, and students from all parts of Europe came to the city to hear his lectures. Pinning a program of his forthcoming lectures to the notice board of the univer- sity on June 5, 1527, he invited not only students but anyone and everyone.
Three weeks later, on June 24, 1527, Paracelsus reportedly burned the books of Avicenna, the Arab “Prince of Physicians,” and those of Galen, in front of the university. This incident is said to have recalled in many people’s minds Martin Luther, who on Dec. 10, 1520, at the Elster Gate of Wittenberg had burned a papal bull, or edict, that threatened excommunication. While Paracelsus seemingly remained a Catholic to his death, it is suspected that his books were placed on the Index Expurgatorius, a catalogue of books from which passages of text considered immoral or against the Catholic religion are removed.
Paracelsus reached the peak of his career at Basel. In his lectures he stressed the healing power of nature and dis- couraged the use of methods of treating wounds, such as padding with moss or dried dung, that prevented natural draining. He also attacked many other medical malpractices of his time, including the use of worthless salves, fumigants, and drenches. However, by the spring of 1528 Paracelsus fell into disrepute with local doctors, apothecaries, and magistrates. He left Basel, heading first to Colmar in Upper Alsace, about 50 miles north of the university. He continued to travel for the next eight years. During this time, he revised old manuscripts and wrote new treatises. With the publication of Der grossen Wundartzney in 1536 he restored, and even extended, the revered reputation he had earned at Basel.

Contributions to Medicine
In 1530 Paracelsus wrote a clinical description of syphilis, in which he maintained that the disease could be success- fully treated by carefully measured doses of mercury compounds taken internally. He stated that the “miners’ disease” (silicosis) resulted from inhaling metal vapours and was not a punishment for sin administered by moun- tain spirits. He was the first to declare that, if given in small doses, “what makes a man ill also cures him,” an anticipation of the modern practice of homeopathy. Paracelsus is said to have cured many people in the plague-stricken town of Stertzing in the summer of 1534 by administering orally a pill made of bread containing a minute amount of the patient’s excreta he had removed on a needle point.
Paracelsus was the first to connect goitre with minerals, especially lead, in drinking water. He prepared and used new chemical remedies, including those containing mercury, sulfur, iron, and copper sulfate—thus uniting medicine with chemistry, as the first London Pharmacopoeia, in 1618, indicates. Paracelsus, in fact, contributed substantially to the rise of modern medicine, including psychiatric treatment.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

44DA92EC-CB15-4684-BBEC-841D8B7ECF0D.jpeg (145.83 KB, 下载次数: 60)

45F7EE61-4F02-45A1-B460-3B943DA23A3B.jpeg (128.31 KB, 下载次数: 70)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-16 00:05
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-11-30 07:03 编辑

安德雷亚斯·维萨里（拉丁語：Andreas Vesalius，荷蘭語：Andries van Wesel；1514年12月31日於布鲁塞尔－1564年10月15日於扎金索斯）是一名文藝復興時期的解剖学家、医生，他编写的《人体的构造》（拉丁語：De humani corporis fabrica）是人体解剖学的权威著作之一。維薩里被认为是近代人体解剖学的创始人。
在帕多瓦大學博士學位毕业后，他留在帕多瓦教授外科和解剖学。同时，他还被邀请到博洛尼亚大学和比萨大学做演讲。演讲的对象都学习过盖伦的理论——一般都是通过讲授者聘请外科医生对动物的解剖来进行说明。没有人试图去验证一下盖伦的理论：它们被认为是无懈可击的。但维萨里做的与众不同。他使用解剖工具亲自演示操作，而学生则围在桌子周围观察学习。面对面的亲身体验式教学被认为是唯一可靠的教学方式，也是对中世纪实践的一个重大突破。
1541年，维萨里在博洛尼亚发现盖伦所有的研究结果都不是源于人体而是动物的解剖：因为古代罗马人体解剖是被禁止的，所以盖伦选用了巴巴利猕猴来代替，还坚称两者在解剖学上是相近的。于是，维萨里对盖伦的文章做了校正，并开始撰写自己的著作。在维萨里发现之前，医学界从没有注意到这一点，并且盖伦的著作一直是研究人类解剖学的基础。尽管如此，仍有人坚持采信盖伦的论点，并且嫉恨维萨里取得了这样瞩目的成果。
在文藝復興時期，很多醫生把屍體解剖，找出人生病的真正原因（因當時的教會認為人生病的原因是神懲罰人的罪，但人們受人文主義（humanism）影響，開始質疑其信仰及思想）。而维萨里則在1543年寫的《人體的構造》（De humani corporis fabrica）。這本書詳細地介紹和研究解剖學，更附有他親手繪畫、有關人體骨骼和神經的插圖。這也是他被稱為“解剖學之父”的原因之一。
1543年，维萨里邀请约翰内斯·奥坡瑞努斯帮助他印刷七卷本的《人体的构造》一书，这本关于人类解剖学的划时代巨著邀请了提香的弟子让·范·卡尔卡做插画。几周后，维萨里又为学生重新出版了一本节录，《安德里亚·维萨里-人体的构造-目录梗概》。
尽管维萨里不是第一个进行实际解剖的人，但是他的作品的价值仍是毫无疑义的——高度详细和精细的版画，即使是现在仍然被认为是经典的。而当《构造》一书出版时，维萨里只有30岁。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/安德雷亚斯·维萨里)

Andreas Vesalius (Flemish: Andries Van Wesel) was a Renaissance Flemish physician who revolutionized the study of biology and the practice of medicine by his careful description of the anatomy of the human body. Basing his observations on dissections he made himself, he wrote and illustrated the first comprehensive textbook of anatomy.

Life
Vesalius was from a family of physicians and pharmacists. He attended the Catholic University of Leuven (Louvain) from 1529 to 1533. From 1533 to 1536, he studied at the medical school of the University of Paris, where he learned to dissect animals. He also had the opportunity to dissect human cadavers, and he devoted much of his time to a study of human bones, at that time easily available in the Paris cemeteries.
In 1536 Vesalius returned to his native Brabant to spend another year at the Catholic University of Leuven, where the influence of Arab medicine was still dominant.
Following the prevailing custom, he prepared, in 1537, a paraphrase of the work of the 10th-century Arab physician, Rhazes, probably in fulfillment of the requirements for the bachelor of medicine degree. He then went to the University of Padua, a progressive university with a strong tradition of anatomical dissection. On receiving the M.D. degree the same year, he was appointed a lecturer in surgery with the responsibility of giving anatomical demonstrations. Since he knew that a thorough knowl- edge of human anatomy was essential to surgery, he devoted much of his time to dissections of cadaversFollowing the prevailing custom, he prepared, in 1537, a paraphrase of the work of the 10th-century Arab physi- cian, Rhazes, probably in fulfillment of the requirements for the bachelor of medicine degree. He then went to the University of Padua, a progressive university with a strong tradition of anatomical dissection. On receiving the M.D. degree the same year, he was appointed a lecturer in sur- gery with the responsibility of giving anatomical demonstrations. Since he knew that a thorough knowledge of human anatomy was essential to surgery, he devoted much of his time to dissections of cadavers and insisted on doing them himself, instead of relying on untrained assistants.
At first,Vesalius had no reason to question the theories of Galen, the Greek physician who had served the emperor Marcus Aurelius in Rome and whose books on anatomy were still considered as authoritative in medical education in Vesalius’s time. In January 1540, breaking with this tradition of relying on Galen, Vesalius openly demonstrated his own method—doing dissections himself, learning anatomy from cadavers, and critically evaluating ancient texts. He did so while visiting the University of Bologna. Such methods soon convinced him that Galenic anatomy had not been based on the dissection of the human body, which had been strictly forbidden by the Roman religion. Galenic anatomy, he maintained, was an application to the human form of conclusions drawn from the dissections of animals, mostly dogs, monkeys, or pigs.
It was this conclusion that he had the audacity to declare in his teaching as he hurriedly prepared his complete textbook of human anatomy for publication. Early in 1542 he traveled to Venice to supervise the preparation of drawings to illustrate his text, probably in the studio of the great Renaissance artist Titian. The draw- ings of his dissections were engraved on wood blocks, which he took, together with his manuscript, to Basel, Switzerland, where his major work, De humani corporis fabrica libri septem (“The Seven Books on the Structure of the Human Body”), commonly known as the Fabrica, was printed in1543. In this epochal work,Vesalius deployed all his scientific, humanistic, and aesthetic gifts. The Fabrica was a more extensive and accurate description of the human body than any put forward by his predecessors. It gave anatomy a new language, and, in the elegance of its printing and organization, an unparalleled perfection.
Early in 1543, Vesalius left for Mainz, to present his book to the Holy Roman emperor Charles V, who engaged him as regular physician to the household. Thus, when not yet 28 years old, Vesaliushadattainedhisgoal had attained his goal. After relinquishing his post in Padua, and returning in the spring of 1544 to his native land to marry Anne van Hamme, he took up new duties in the service of the Emperor on his travels in Europe. From 1553 to 1556 Vesalius spent most of his time in Brussels, where he built an imposing house in keeping with his growing affluence and attended to his flourishing medical practice. His prestige was further enhanced when Charles V, on abdication from the Spanish throne in 1556, provided him with a lifetime pension and made him a count.
Vesalius went to Spain in 1559 with his wife and daughter to take up an appointment, made by Philip II, son of CharlesV, as one of the physicians in the Madrid court. In 1564 Vesalius obtained permission to leave Spain to go on pilgrimage to the Holy Sepulchre. He traveled to Jerusalem, with stops at Venice and Cyprus, his wife and daughter having returned to Brussels.

Assessment
Vesalius’s work represented the culmination of the humanistic revival of ancient learning, the introduction of human dissections into medical curricula, and the growth of a European anatomical literature. Vesalius performed his dissections with a thoroughness hitherto unknown. After Vesalius, anatomy became a scientific discipline, with far- reaching implications not only for physiology but for all of biology. During his own lifetime, however, Vesalius found it easier to correct points of Galenic anatomy than to challenge his physiological framework.
Conflicting reports obscure the final days of Vesalius’s life. Apparently he became ill aboard ship while returning to Europe from his pilgrimage. He was put ashore on the Greek island of Zacynthus, where he died.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

A595069A-E0E9-4AE8-B850-567B803B1B35.jpeg (109.49 KB, 下载次数: 60)

991DBA60-B599-4EF5-8F28-40DBA7089027.jpeg (127.33 KB, 下载次数: 79)

824D40A3-8B38-458A-96E6-9F90DDC51525.jpeg (167.06 KB, 下载次数: 66)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-27 00:01
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-27 00:02 编辑

第谷·布拉赫（Tycho Brahe，1546年12月14日－1601年10月24日），丹麥貴族，天文學家兼占星術士和煉金術士。他最著名的助手是克卜勒 (Johannes Kepler)。

1577年一颗巨大彗星在丹麥上空，第谷首次將彗星視為獨立天體進行了觀測。第谷通過對彗星視動研究認為，彗星軌道不可能是完美圓周形，必然是被拉長的，且由視差判斷該彗星與地球距離比地月距離更遠。這是對亞里士多德天空完美無缺論的沉重打擊，後者曾堅持認為運動不定的彗星不能與其他天體的永恆性、規律性相一致，堅持彗星是一種大氣現象。 1583年第谷出版《論彗星》一書，提出一種介於地心說與日心說之間的理論，認為地球作為靜止的中心，太陽圍繞地球作圓周運動，而除地球之外的其他行星圍繞太陽作圓周運動。

克卜勒多次嘗試令第谷接受日心說，但不成功。第谷相信他的第谷系統，中国明朝使用了主要依据第谷的观测结果而编制的时宪曆。由于相同的原因，他認為1572年出現的超新星不近地球。其論據為若地球一直在移動，天上的恆星應該會轉換位置，但第谷觀測不到這點。事實上，那是存在的，但用肉眼看不到。另一個方法是長期觀測200年，因為最近的星系比當時的天文學家想像中遠得多。當然，當時的人無法有這麼長期的數據。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/第谷·布拉赫)

Tycho Brahe was a Danish astronomer whose work in developing astronomical instruments and in measuring and fixing the positions of stars paved the way for future discoveries. His observations—the most accurate possible before the invention of the telescope—included a comprehensive study of the solar system and accurate positions of more than 777 fixed stars.
The new star in the constellation Cassiopeia caused Tycho to dedicate himself to astronomy; one immediate decision was to establish a large observatory for regular observations of celestial events. His plan to establish this observatory in Germany prompted King Frederick II to keep him in Denmark by granting him title in 1576 to the island of Ven (formerly Hven), in the middle of The Sound and about halfway between Copenhagen and Helsingør, together with financial support for the observatory and laboratory buildings. Tycho called the observatory Uraniborg, after Urania, the Muse of astronomy. Surrounded by scholars and visited by learned travelers from all over Europe, Tycho and his assistants collected observations and substantially corrected nearly every known astronomical record.
Tycho was an artist as well as a scientist and craftsman, and everything he undertook or surrounded himself with had to be innovative and beautiful. He established a printing shop to produce and bind his manuscripts in his own way, he imported Augsburg craftsmen to construct the finest astronomical instruments, he induced Italian and Dutch artists and architects to design and decorate his observatory, and he invented a pressure system to provide the then uncommon convenience of sanitary lavatory facilities. Uraniborg fulfilled the hopes of Tycho’s king and friend, Frederick II, that it would become the centre of astronomical study and discovery in northern Europe. But Frederick died in 1588, and under his son, Christian IV, Tycho’s influence dwindled; most of his income was stopped, partly because of the increasing needs of the state for money. Spoiled by Frederick, however, Tycho had become both unreasonably demanding of more money and less inclined to carry out the civic duties required by his income from state lands.
At odds with the three great powers—king, church, and nobility—Tycho left Ven in 1597, and, after short stays at Rostock and at Wandsbek, near Hamburg, he settled in Prague in 1599 under the patronage of Emperor Rudolf II, who also in later years supported the astronomer Johannes Kepler.
The major portion of Tycho’s lifework—making and recording accurate astronomical observations—had already been done at Uraniborg. To his earlier observations, particularly his proof that the nova of 1572 was a star, he added a comprehensive study of the solar system and his proof that the orbit of the comet of 1577 lay beyond the Moon 597. He proposed a modified Copernican system in which the planets revolved around the Sun, which in turn moved around the stationary Earth. What Tycho accomplished, using only his simple instruments and practical talents, remains an outstanding accomplishment of the Renaissance.
Tycho attempted to continue his observations at Prague with the few instruments he had salvaged from Uraniborg, but the spirit was not there, and he died in 1601, leaving all his observational data to Kepler, his pupil and assistant in the final years. With these data Kepler laid the groundwork for the work of Sir Isaac Newton.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

49B2CB66-D8E2-40CB-B24C-21C732CC7BAC.jpeg (187.11 KB, 下载次数: 65)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-28 00:20
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-28 00:39 编辑

焦爾達諾·布鲁诺（義大利語：Giordano Bruno，1548年－1600年2月17日）是文藝復興時期的意大利哲学家、數學家、詩人、宇宙學家和宗教人物，1593年起，布鲁诺以异端罪名接受罗马宗教法庭审问，指控包括否认数项天主教核心信条（如否认地狱永罚、三位一体、基督天主性、玛利亚童贞性、圣餐化质变体论等）。布鲁诺的泛神论思想也属严重关切之点。宗教法庭判其有罪，他于1600年在罗马鲜花广场被处以火刑。

布鲁诺死后获得了可观声誉，尤其被19世纪至20世纪早期的评论者们当作科学烈士加以纪念，尽管历史学家们对此点已有争论，即对布鲁诺的异端审讯究竟在多大程度上是一种对于他天文观点的回应，还是对他哲学、神学等其他思想的回应。他因坚定支持日心说而为普通大众所熟悉，但日心说是否是他招惹天主教迫害的主要原因存在争议。布鲁诺的案例仍被认为是一个有关自由思想与新兴科学历史的重要事件。

布魯諾的主要著作有《論無限宇宙和世界》，書中支持哥白尼的日心說，並明確指出：“宇宙是無限大的”，“宇宙不僅是無限的，而且是物質的”。還著有《諾亞方舟》，抨擊死抱《聖經》的學者。

19世紀末，布魯諾的彫像矗立於當年殉難的罗马鲜花广场（義大利語：Campo dei Fiori）。是共济会修建的。(zh.wikipedia.org/焦爾達諾·布魯諾)

Giordano Bruno was an Italian philosopher, astronomer, mathematician, and occultist whose theories anticipated modern science. The most notable of these were his theories of the infinite universe and the multiplicity of worlds, in which he rejected the traditional geocentric astronomy and intuitively went beyond the Copernican heliocentric theory, which still maintained a finite universe with a sphere of fixed stars. Bruno is, perhaps, chiefly remembered for the tragic death he suffered at the stake because of the tenacity with which he maintained his unorthodox ideas at a time when both the Roman Catholic and the Reformed churches were reaffirming rigid Aristotelian and Scholastic principles in their struggle for the evangelization of Europe.

Works

In the spring of 1583 Bruno moved from Paris to London and was soon attracted to Oxford, where, during the summer, he started a series of lectures in which he expounded the Copernican theory maintaining the reality of the movement of the Earth. In February 1584 he was invited to discuss his theory of the movement of the Earth with some doctors from the University of Oxford. However, the discussion degenerated into a quarrel, and a few days later he started writing his Italian dialogues, which constitute the first systematic exposition of his philosophy. There are six dialogues, three of which are cosmologicalon the theory of the universe. In the Cena de le Ceneri (1584; “The Ash Wednesday Supper”), he not only reaffirmed the reality of the heliocentric theory but also suggested that the universe is infinite, constituted of innumerable worlds substantially similar to those of the solar system. In the same dialogue he anticipated his fellow Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei by maintaining that the Bible should be followed for its moral teaching but not for its astronomical implications. He also strongly criticized the manners of English society and the pedantry of the Oxford doctors.In the De la causa, principio e uno (1584; Concerning the Cause, Principle, and One) he elaborated the physical theory on which his conception of the universe was based: “form” and “matter” are intimately united and constitute the “one.” Thus, the traditional dualism of the Aristotelian physics was reduced by him to a monistic conception of the world, implying the basic unity of all substances and the coincidence of opposites in the infinite unity of Being. In the De l’infinito universo e mondi (1584; On the Infinite Universe and Worlds), he developed his cosmological theory by systematically criticizing Aristotelian physics; he also formulated his Averroistic view of the relation between philosophy and religion, according to which religion is considered as a means to instruct and govern ignorant people, philosophy as the discipline of the elect who are able to behave themselves and govern others.

In October 1585 Bruno returned to Paris, but found himself at odds with the political climate there. As a result, he went to Germany, where he wandered from one university city to another, lecturing and publishing a variety of minor works, including the Articuli centum et sexaginta (1588; “160 Articles”) against contemporary mathematicians and philosophers, in which he expounded his conception of religion—a theory of the peaceful coexistence of all religions based upon mutual understanding and the freedom of reciprocal discussion. At Helmstedt, however, in January 1589 he was excommunicated by the local Lutheran Church. He remained in Helmstedt until the spring, completing works on natural and mathematical magic (posthumously published) and working on three Latin poems—De triplici minimo et mensura (“On the Threefold Minimum and Measure”), De monade, numero et figura (“On the Monad, Number, and Figure”), and De immenso, innumerabilibus et infigurabilibus(“On the Immeasurable and Innumerable”)—which reelaborated the theories expounded in the Italian dialogues and developed Bruno’s concept of an atomic basis of matter and being. To publish these, he went in 1590 to Frankfurt am Main, where the senate rejected his application to stay. Nevertheless, he took up residence in the Carmelite convent, lecturing to Protestant doctors and acquiring a reputation of being a “universal man” who, the Prior thought, “did not possess a trace of religion” and who “was chiefly occupied in writing and in the vain and chimerical imagining of novelties.”

Final Years

In August 1591, at the invitation of the Venetian patrician Giovanni Mocenigo, Bruno made the fatal move of returning to Italy. During the late summer of 1591, he composed the Praelectiones geometricae (“Lectures on Geometry”) and Ars deformationum (“Art of Deformation”). In Venice, as the guest of Mocenigo, Bruno took part in the discussions of progressive Venetian aristocrats who, like Bruno, favoured philosophical investigation irrespective of its theological implications. Bruno’s liberty came to an end when Mocenigo—disappointed by his private lessons from Bruno on the art of memory and resentful of Bruno’s intention to go back to Frankfurt to have a new work published—denounced him to the Venetian Inquisition in May 1592 for his heretical theories. Bruno was arrested and tried. He defended himself by admitting minor theological errors, emphasizing, however, the philosophical rather than the theological character of his basic tenets. The Roman Inquisition demanded his extradition, and on Jan. 27, 1593, Bruno entered the jail of the Roman palace of the Sant’Uffizio (Holy Office). During the seven-year Roman period of the trial, Bruno at first developed his previous defensive line, disclaiming any particular interest in theological matters and reaffirming the philosophical character of his speculation. This distinction did not satisfy the inquisitors, who demanded an unconditional retraction of his theories. Bruno then made a desperate attempt to demonstrate that his views were not incompatible with the Christian conception of God and creation. The inquisitors rejected his arguments and pressed him for a formal retraction. Bruno finally declared that he had nothing to retract and that he did not even know what he was expected to retract. At that point, Pope Clement VIII ordered that he be sentenced as an impenitent and pertinacious heretic. On Feb. 8, 1600, when the death sentence was formally read to him, he addressed his judges, saying, “Perhaps your fear in passing judgment on me is greater than mine in receiving it.” Not long after, he was brought to the Campo de’ Fiori, his tongue in a gag, and burned alive.

Influence

Bruno’s theories influenced 17th-century scientific and philosophical thought and, since the 18th century, have been absorbed by many modern philosophers. As a symbol of the freedom of thought, he inspired the European liberal movements of the 19th century, particularly the Italian Risorgimento (the movement for national political unity). Because of the variety of his interests, modern scholars are divided as to the chief significance of his work. Bruno’s cosmological vision certainly anticipates some fundamental aspects of the modern conception of the universe. His ethical ideas, in contrast with religious ascetical ethics, appeal to modern humanistic activism, and his ideal of religious and philosophical tolerance has influenced liberal thinkers. On the other hand, his emphasis on the magical and the occult has been the source of criticism as has his impetuous personality. Bruno stands, however, as one of the important figures in the history of Western thought, a precursor of modern civilization.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

70651E55-CDEA-4949-8FDA-F8AE36CBF4C5.jpeg (114.4 KB, 下载次数: 64)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-30 00:01
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-31 00:04 编辑

伽利略·伽利莱（Galileo Galilei, 1564年2月15日－1642年1月8日)，義大利物理學家、數學家、天文學家及哲學家，科學革命中的重要人物。其成就包括改進望遠鏡和其所帶來的天文觀測，以及支持哥白尼的日心说。伽利略做实验证明，感受到引力的物体并不是呈等速運動，而是呈加速度運動；物體只要不受到外力的作用，就會保持其原來的靜止狀態或勻速運動狀態不變。他又發表惯性原理阐明，未感受到外力作用的物体会保持不变其原来的静止状态或匀速运动状态。伽利略被譽為“現代觀測天文學之父”、“現代物理學之父”、“科學之父”及“現代科學之父”。

史蒂芬·霍金說，“自然科學的誕生要歸功於伽利略。”(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/伽利略·伽利莱)

Galileo Galilei was an Italian natural philosopher, astronomer, and mathematician who made fundamental contributions to the sciences of motion, astronomy, and strength of materials and to the development of the scientific method. His formulation of (circular) inertia, the law of falling bodies, and parabolic trajectories marked the beginning of a fundamental change in the study of motion. His insistence that the book of nature was written in the language of mathematics changed natural philosophy from a verbal, qualitative account to a mathematical one in which experimentation became a recognized method for discovering the facts of nature. Finally, his discoveries with the telescope revolutionized astronomy and paved the way for the acceptance of the Copernican heliocentric system, but his advocacy of that system eventually resulted in an Inquisition process against him.

Telescopic Discoveries

In the spring of 1609 Galileo heard that in the Netherlands an instrument had been invented that showed distant things as though they were nearby. By trial and error, he quickly figured out the secret of the invention and made his own three-powered spyglass from lenses for sale in spectacle makers’ shops. Others had done the same; what set Galileo apart was that he quickly figured out how to improve the instrument, taught himself the art of lens grinding, and produced increasingly powerful telescopes. In the fall of 1609 Galileo began observing the heavens with instruments that magnified up to 20 times. In December he drew the Moon’s phases as seen through the telescope, showing that the Moon’s surface is not smooth, as had been thought, but is rough and uneven. In January 1610 he discovered four moons revolving around Jupiter. He also found that the telescope showed many more stars than are visible with the naked eye. These discoveries were earthshaking, and Galileo quickly produced a little book, Sidereus Nuncius (The Sidereal Messenger), in which he described them. He dedicated the book to Cosimo II de Medici (1590–1621), the grand duke of his native Tuscany, whom he had tutored in mathematics for several summers, and he named the moons of Jupiter after the Medici family: the Sidera Medicea, or “Medicean Stars.”

Galileo also had discovered the puzzling appearance of Saturn , later to be shown as caused by a ring surrounding it, and he discovered that Venus goes through phases just as the Moon does. Although these discoveries did not prove that the Earth is a planet orbiting the Sun, they undermined Aristotelian cosmology: the absolute difference between the corrupt earthly region and the perfect and unchanging heavens was proved wrong by the mountainous surface of the Moon, the moons of Jupiter showed that there had to be more than one centre of motion in the universe, and the phases of Venus showed that it (and, by implication, Mercury) revolves around the Sun. As a result, Galileo was confirmed in his belief, which he had probably held for decades but which had not been central to his studies, that the Sun is the centre of the universe and that the Earth is a planet, as Copernicus had argued. Galileo’s conversion to Copernicanism would be a key turning point in the scientific revolution. After a brief controversy about floating bodies, Galileo again turned his attention to the heavens and entered a debate with Christoph Scheiner (1573–1650), a German Jesuit and professor of mathematics at Ingolstadt, about the nature of sunspots (of which Galileo was an independent discoverer). This controversy resulted in Galileo’s Istoria e dimostrazioni intorno alle macchie solari e loro accidenti(“History and Demonstrations Concerning Sunspots and Their Properties,” or “Letters on Sunspots”), which appeared in 1613. Against Scheiner, who, in an effort to save the perfection of the Sun, argued that sunspots are satellites of the Sun, Galileo argued that the spots are on or near the Sun’s surface, and he bolstered his argument with a series of detailed engravings of his observations.

Galileo’s Copernicanism

Following the appearance of three comets in 1618, Galileo entered a controversy about the nature of comets, which led to the publication of Il saggiatore ( The Assayer ) in 1623. This work was a brilliant polemic on physical reality and an exposition of the new scientific method. In 1624 Galileo went to Rome and met with Pope Urban VIII. Galileo told the pope about his theory of the tides (developed earlier), which he put forward as proof of the annual and diurnal motions of the Earth. The pope gave Galileo permission to write a book about theories of the universe but warned him to treat the Copernican theory only hypothetically. The book, Dialogo sopra i due massimi sistemi del mondo, tolemaico e copernicano (Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, Ptolemaic & Copernican), was finished in 1630, and Galileo sent it to the Roman censor. Because of an outbreak of the plague, communications between Florence and Rome were interrupted, and Galileo asked for the censoring to be done instead in Florence. The Roman censor had a number of serious criticisms of the book and forwarded these to his colleagues in Florence. After writing a preface in which he professed that what followed was written hypothetically, Galileo had little trouble getting the book through the Florentine censors, and it appeared in Florence in 1632. In the Dialogue Galileo gathered together all the arguments (mostly based on his own telescopic discoveries) for the Copernican theory and against the traditional geocentric cosmology. As opposed to Aristotle’s, Galileo’s approach to cosmology is fundamentally spatial and geometric: the Earth’s axis retains its orientation in space as the Earth circles the Sun, and bodies not under a force retain their velocity (although this inertia is ultimately circular). But in the work, Galileo ridiculed the notion that God could have made the universe any way he wanted to and still made it appear to us the way it does. The reaction against the book was swift. The pope convened a special commission to examine the book and make recommendations; the commission found that Galileo had not really treated the Copernican theory hypothetically and recommended that a case be brought against him by the Inquisition.

He was pronounced to be vehemently suspect of heresy and was condemned to life imprisonment. However, Galileo was never in a dungeon or tortured; during the Inquisition process he stayed mostly at the house of the Tuscan ambassador to the Vatican and for a short time in a comfortable apartment in the Inquisition building. After the process he spent six months at the palace of Ascanio Piccolomini (c. 1590–1671), the archbishop of Siena and a friend and patron, and then moved into a villa near Arcetri, in the hills above Florence. He spent the rest of his life there. Galileo was then 70 years old. Yet he kept working. In Siena he had begun a new book on the sciences of motion and strength of materials. The book was published in Leiden, Netherlands, in 1638 under the title Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze attenenti alla meccanica (Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences). Galileo here treated for the first time the bending and breaking of beams and summarized his mathematical and experimental investigations of motion, including the law of falling bodies and the parabolic path of projectiles as a result of the mixing of two motions, constant speed and uniform acceleration. By then Galileo had become blind, and he spent his time working with a young student, Vincenzo Viviani, who was with him when he died on Jan. 8, 1642.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

F63756B3-C753-4400-B097-BFB50EB9C033.jpeg (116.05 KB, 下载次数: 55)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-8-31 00:01
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-8-31 00:03 编辑

约翰内斯·开普勒（德語：Johannes Kepler，1571年12月27日－1630年11月15日），德国天文學家、數學家。开普勒是十七世紀科學革命的關鍵人物。他最為人知的成就為开普勒定律，這是稍後天文學家根據他的著作《新天文学》、《世界的和諧》、《哥白尼天文学概要》萃取而成的三條定律。這些傑作對艾薩克·牛頓影響極大，啟發牛頓後來想出牛頓萬有引力定律。

在他的职业生涯中，开普勒曾在奥地利格拉茨的一家神学院担任数学教师，成为汉斯·乌尔里奇·艾根伯格亲王的同事。后来，他成了天文学家第谷·布拉赫的助手，并最终成为皇帝鲁道夫二世及其两任继任者马蒂亚斯和费迪南二世的皇家数学家。他还曾经在奥地利林茨担任过数学教师及华伦斯坦将军的顾问。此外，他在光学领域做了基础性的工作，发明了一种改进型的折光式望远镜（开普勒望远镜），并提及了同时期的伽利略利用望远镜得到的发现。

开普勒生活的年代，天文学与占星学没有清楚的区分，但是天文学（文科中数学的分支）与物理学（自然哲学的分支）却有着明显的区分。因為宗教信仰，克卜勒將宗教論點和理由寫進他的作品。因為相信上帝用智慧創造世界，人只要透過自然理性之光，也可理解上帝創造的計畫。。开普勒将他的新天文学描述为“天体物理学”、“到亚里士多德的《形而上学》的旅行”、“亚里士多德宇宙论的补充”、通过将天文学作为通用数学物理学的一部分改变古代传统的物理宇宙学。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/约翰内斯·开普勒)

German astronomer Johannes Kepler discovered three major laws of planetary motion, conventionally designated as follows: (1) the planets move in elliptical orbits with the Sun at one focus; (2) the time necessary to raverse any arc of a planetary orbit is proportional to the area of the sector between the central body and that arc (the “area law”); and (3) there is an exact relationship between the squares of the planets’ periodic times and the cubes of the radii of their orbits (the “harmonic law”).
Kepler himself did not call these discoveries “laws,” as would become customary after Isaac Newton derived them from a new and quite different set of general physical principles. He regarded them as celestial harmonies that reflected God’s design for the universe. Kepler’s discoveries turned Nicolaus Copernicus’s Sun-centred system into a dynamic universe, with the Sun actively pushing the planets around in noncircular orbits. And it was Kepler’s notion of a physical astronomy that fixed a new problematic for other important 17th-century world-system builders, the most famous of whom was Newton.
Among Kepler’s many other achievements, he provided a new and correct account of how vision occurs; he developed a novel explanation for the behaviour of light in the newly invented telescope; he discovered several new, semiregular polyhedrons; and he offered a new theoretical foundation for astrology while at the same time restricting the domain in which its predictions could be considered reliable. A list of his discoveries, however, fails to convey the fact that they constituted for Kepler part of a common edifice of knowledge. The matrix of theological, astrological, and physical ideas from which Kepler’s scientific achievements emerged is unusual and fascinating in its own right.
Although Kepler’s scientific work was centred first and foremost on astronomy, that subject as then understood—the study of the motions of the heavenly bodies—was classified as part of a wider subject of investigation called “the science of the stars.” The science of the stars was regarded as a mixed science consisting of a mathematical and a physical component and bearing a kinship to other like disciplines, such as music (the study of ratios of tones) and optics (the study of light). It also was subdivided into theoretical and practical categories. Besides the theory of heavenly motions, one had the practical construction of planetary tables and instruments; similarly, the theoretical principles of astrology had a corresponding practical part that dealt with the making of annual astrological forecasts about individuals, cities, the human body, and the weather. Within this framework, Kepler made astronomy an integral part of natural philosophy, but he did so in an unprecedented way—in the process, making unique contributions to astronomy as well as to all its auxiliary disciplines.
The ideas that Kepler would pursue for the rest of his life were already present in his first work, Mysterium cosmographicum (1596; “Cosmographic Mystery”). In 1595 Kepler realized that the spacing among the six Copernican planets might be explained by circumscribing and inscribing each orbit with one of the five regular polyhedrons. If the ratios of the mean orbital distances agreed with the ratios obtained from circumscribing and inscribing the polyhedrons, then, Kepler felt confidently, he would have discovered the architecture of the universe. Remarkably, Kepler did find agreement within 5 percent, with the exception of Jupiter.
In place of the tradition that individual incorporeal souls push the planets and instead of Copernicus’s passive, resting Sun, Kepler hypothesized that a single force from the Sun accounts for the increasingly long periods of motion as the planetary distances increase. Kepler did not yet have an exact mathematical description for this relation, but he intuited a connection. A few years later he acquired William Gilbert’s groundbreaking book De Magnete, Magneticisque Corporibus, et de Magno Magnete Tellure (1600; “On the Magnet, Magnetic Bodies, and the Great Magnet, the Earth”), and he immediately adopted Gilbert’s theory that the Earth is a magnet. From this Kepler generalized to the view that the universe is a system of magnetic bodies in which, with corresponding like poles repelling and unlike poles attracting, the rotating Sun sweeps the planets around.
In 1601 Kepler published De Fundamentis Astrologiae Certioribus (Concerning the More Certain Fundamentals of Astrology). This work proposed to make astrology “more certain” by basing it on new physical and harmonic principles. In 1605 Kepler discovered his “first law”—that Mars moves in an elliptical orbit. During the creative burst when Kepler won his “war on Mars” (he did not publish his discoveries until 1609 in the Astronomia Nova [New Astronomy]), he also wrote important treatises on the nature of light and on the sudden appearance of a new star (1606; De Stella Nova, “On the New Star”). Kepler first noticed the star—now known to have been a supernova-—in October 1604, not long after a conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in 1603. The astrological importance of the long-anticipated conjunction (such configurations take place every 20 years) was heightened by the unexpected appearance of the supernova. Kepler used the occasion both to render practical predictions (e.g., the collapse of Islam and the return of Christ) and to speculate theoretically about the universe—for example, that the star was not the result of chance combinations of atoms and that stars are not suns.
Kepler’s interest in light was directly related to his astronomical concerns. Kepler wrote about his ideas on light in Ad Vitellionem Paralipomena, Quibus Astronomiae Pars Optica Traditur (1604; “Supplement to Witelo, in Which Is Expounded the Optical Part of Astronomy”). Kepler wrote that every point on a luminous body in the field of vision emits rays of light in all directions but that the only rays that can enter the eye are those that impinge on the pupil. He also stated that the rays emanating from a single luminous point form a cone the circular base of which is in the pupil. All the rays are then refracted within the normal eye to meet again at a single point on the retina. For more than three centuries eyeglasses had helped people see better. But nobody before Kepler was able to offer a good theory for why these little pieces of curved glass had worked.
After Galileo built a telescope in 1609 and announced hitherto-unknown objects in the heavens (e.g., moons revolving around Jupiter ) and imperfections of the lunar surface, he sent Kepler his account in Siderius Nuncius (1610; The Sidereal Messenger). Kepler responded with three important treatises. The first was his Dissertatio cum Nuncio Sidereo (1610; “Conversation with the Sidereal Messenger”), in which, among other things, he speculated that the distances of the newly discovered Jovian moons might agree with the ratios of the rhombic dodecahedron, triacontahedron, and cube. The second was a theoretical work on the optics of the telescope, Dioptrice (1611; “Dioptrics”), including a description of a new type of telescope using two convex lenses. The third was based upon his own observations of Jupiter, made between August 30 and September 9, 1610, and published as Narratio de Jovis Satellitibus (1611; “Narration Concerning the Jovian Satellites”). These works provided strong support for Galileo’s discoveries.
Kepler also published the first textbook of Copernican astronomy, Epitome Astronomiae Copernicanae (1618–21; Epitome of Copernican Astronomy), which proved to be the most important theoretical resource for the Copernicans in the 17th century. Galileo and French mathematician and philosopher René Descartes were probably influenced by it.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

74E5284D-9ACB-4251-9DDA-C86A5BD1B889.jpeg (110.12 KB, 下载次数: 65)

9177218A-27E6-4247-AF96-6A5505E632B8.jpeg (143.62 KB, 下载次数: 52)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-1 00:01
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-9-1 00:02 编辑

勒内·笛卡尔（法语：René Descartes，1596年3月31日－1650年2月11日），法国著名哲学家、数学家、物理学家。他对现代数学的发展做出了重要的贡献，因将几何坐标体系公式化而被认为是解析几何之父。他是二元论唯心主义跟理性主義的代表人物，留下名言「我思故我在」（或译为「思考是唯一确定的存在」），提出了「普遍怀疑」的主张，是西方现代哲学的奠基人。他的哲学思想深深影响了之后的几代欧洲人，開拓了歐陸理性主义（理性主義）哲學。

笛卡尔致力于哲学研究发表了多部重要的文集，包括了《方法论》（Discours de la méthode）、《形而上学的沉思》（Méditations métaphysiques）和《哲学原理》（les Principes de la philosophie）等，成为欧洲最有影响力的哲学家之一。

笛卡兒被广泛认为是西方现代哲学的奠基者，他第一个创立了一套完整的哲学体系。哲学上，笛卡尔是一个二元论者以及理性主义者。笛卡尔认为，人类应该可以使用数学的方法——也就是理性——来进行哲学思考。他相信，理性比感官的感受更可靠。（他举出了一个例子：在我们做梦时，我们以为自己身在一个真实的世界中，然而其实这只是一种幻觉而已）。他从逻辑学、几何学和代数学中发现了4条规则：

1. 絕不承認任何事物為真，對於我完全不懷疑的事物才視為真理；
2. 必须将每个问题分成若干个简单的部分来处理；
3. 思想必须从简单到复杂；
4. 我们应该时常进行彻底的检查，确保没有遗漏任何东西。
笛卡尔将这种方法不仅运用在哲学思考上，还运用于几何学，并创立了解析几何。

由此，笛卡兒第一步認為懷疑就是出發點，感官知覺的知識是可以被懷疑的，我們並不能信任我们的感官。所以他不會說「我看故我在」、「我聽故我在」。从这里他悟出一个道理：我們所不能懷疑的是「我們的懷疑」。意指:我們無法去懷疑的，是我們正在「懷疑」這件事時的「懷疑本身」，只有這樣才能肯定我們的「懷疑」是有真實性的，並非虛假的產物。人們覺得理所當然或習以為常的事物，他卻感到疑惑，由此他推出了著名的哲学命题——“我思故我在”（Cogito ergo sum）。笛卡尔将此作为形而上学中最基本的出发点，从这里他得出结论，“我”必定是一个独立于肉体的、在思维的东西。笛卡尔还试图从该出发点证明出上帝的存在。笛卡尔认为，我们都具有对完美实体的概念，由于我们不可能从不完美的实体上得到完美的概念，因此必定有一个完美实体——即上帝——的存在來讓我們得到這個概念。从所得到的两点出发，笛卡尔繼續推論出既然完美的事物(神)存在，那麼我們可以確定之前的惡魔假設是不能成立的，因為一個完美的事物不可能容許這樣的惡魔欺騙人們，因此藉由不斷的懷疑我們可以確信「這個世界真的存在」，而且經由證明過後的數學邏輯都應該是正確的。现实世界中有诸多可以用理性来察觉的特性，即它们的数学特性（如长、宽、高等），当我们的理智能够清楚地认知一件事物时，那么该事物一定不会是虚幻的，必定是如同我们所认知的那樣。

虽然笛卡尔证明了真实世界的存在，他认为宇宙中共有2个不同的实体，既思考(心靈)和外在世界(物質)，两者本体都来自于上帝，而上帝是独立存在的。他认为，只有人才有灵魂，人是一种二元的存在物，既会思考，也会占空间。而动物只属于物质世界。

笛卡尔强调思想是不可怀疑的这个出发点，对此后的欧洲哲学产生了重要的影响。我思故我在所產生的爭議在於所謂的上帝存在及動物一元論(黑猩猩、章魚、鸚鵡、海豚、大象等等都證實有智力)，而懷疑的主要思想，確實對研究方面很有貢獻。

同行評審(peer-review)的制度淵源於笛卡兒。在《第一哲學沉思集》出版前，Mersenne 收到委託手稿後，將其發給多位哲學家與神學家閱讀；隨後收到了六組反對意見，這些《反駁》與笛卡兒所作的《答辯》被收錄在書中的附錄一同印行，為歷史上最早的同儕評論。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/勒内·笛卡尔)

邮票上的书名是《谈谈方法》（Discours de la méthode），全名《谈谈正确引导理性在各门科学上寻找真理的方法》（法语：Discours de la méthode pour bien conduire sa raison, et chercher la vérité dans les sciences；英语：Discourse on the Method of Rightly Conducting One's Reason and of Seeking Truth in the Sciences），是笛卡儿在1637年出版的著名哲学论著，对西方人的思维方式，思想观念和科学研究方法有极大的影响。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/談談方法)

英語詞語 Philosophy（拉丁語：philosophia）源于古希臘語中的φιλοσοφία，意思為「愛智慧」，有时也译为「智慧的朋友」，该词由φίλος（philos，爱）的派生词φιλεῖν（Philein，去爱）和σοφία（Sophia，智慧）组合而成。一般认为，古希腊思想家毕达哥拉斯最先在著作中引入“哲学家”和“哲学”这两个术语。

“哲”一词在中国起源很早，如“孔门十哲”，“古圣先哲”等词，“哲”或“哲人”，专指那些善于思辨，学问精深者，即西方近世“哲学家”，“思想家”之谓。在《易經》當中已經開始討論哲學問題，形而上学的中文名稱取自《易經·繫辭上傳》「形而上者谓之道，形而下者谓之器」一語。1874年，日本啟蒙家西周，在《百一新論》中首先用漢文「哲學」來翻譯philosophy一詞。

英国哲学家罗素对哲学的定义是：

“ 哲学，就我对这个词的理解来说，乃是某种介乎神学与科学之间的东西。它和神学一样，包含着人类对于那些迄今仍为科学知识所不能肯定之事物的思考；但它又像科学一样，是诉之于人类的理性而不是诉之于权威的，不论是传统的权威还是启示的权威。一切确切的知识（罗素认为）都属于科学；一切涉及超乎确切知识之外的教条都属于神学。但介乎神学与科学之间还有一片受到双方攻击的无人之域，這片无人之域就是哲学。 ”
胡適在《中国哲学史大纲》中称「凡研究人生切要的问题，从根本上着想，要寻一个根本的解决：这种学问叫做哲学」。

今天大多数科学家都是哲學博士, 有一些是医学博士。哲學博士（拉丁語：Philosophiæ Doctor，英语：Doctor of Philosophy，簡稱：PhD／Ph.D.／D.Phil.，又譯研究博士）學位擁有人一般在大學本科（學士)，再進行相當年數的研修後，撰畢論文並通過答辯，方獲發哲學博士學位。哲學博士的擁有人是指擁有人對其知識範疇的理論、內容及發展等都具有相當的認識，能独立進行研究，並在該範疇內對學術界有所建樹，对该学科的研究已经达到其哲学层面。因此，哲學博士基本上可以授予任何學科的博士畢業生。惟非研究性質的專業課程博士畢業生通常會用其他的學銜，例如工程學的工程學博士（簡稱D. Eng.）。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/哲學博士)

8607B966-11FE-4651-AB9F-328FA76C8CC5.jpeg (111.28 KB, 下载次数: 60)

428A3BA8-3B7F-4143-B69D-F8205C2DCECC.jpeg (136.65 KB, 下载次数: 58)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-1 00:03
大英百科全书编译没有提名勒内·笛卡尔为有史以来最有影响力的一百位科学家 (one hundred most influential scientists of all times) 之一。基于理性思考哲学在所有科学研究中的重要性，我提名勒内·笛卡尔为有史以来最有影响力的101位科学家 (one hundred and one most influential scientists of all times) 之一。

请建议其他值得提名的科学家，特别是中国科学家。请参考 zh.m.wikipedia.org/中国科学史 and en.m.wikipedia.org/List of Chinese Discoveries 與 zh.m.wikipedia.org/四大发明和 zh.m.wikipedia.org/中国的100个世界第一中的例子。

最有影响力的科学家的定义可能与达尔文的儿子所说的一样: 最有影响力归功于最早说服世界的科学家，而不一定是最早想到新意识的科学家。新发现只是迈出了第一步, 这个新发现需要激励其他科学家继续研究下去并让这新发现使世界(不仅是少数国家)受益将成为有影响力的科学家。

But in science the credit goes to the man who convinces the world, not to the man to whom the idea first occurs. Not the man who finds a grain of new and precious quality but to him who sows it, reaps it, grinds it and feeds the world on it。 Francis Darwin (1848–1925)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-10 00:01
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-9-15 23:04 编辑

威廉·哈维（英語：William Harvey，1578年4月1日－1657年6月3日）英国医生，实验生理学的创始人之一。
他根据实验，证实了动物体内的血液循环现象，并阐明了心脏在循环过程中的作用，指出血液受心脏推动，沿着动脉血管流向全身各部，再沿着静脉血管返回心脏，环流不息。他还测定过心脏每博的输出量。

他在1628年发表《关于动物心脏与血液运动的解剖研究》（Exercitatio Anatomica de Motu Cordis et Sanguinis in Animalibus），1651年发表《动物的生殖》（De Generatione）等。这些成就对生理学和胚胎学的发展起了很大作用。(zh.wikipedia.org/威廉·哈维)

English physician William Harvey was the first to recognize the full circulation of the blood in the human body and to provide experiments and arguments to support this idea.

Discovery of Circulation

Harvey’s key work was Exercitatio Anatomica de Motu Cordis et Sanguinis in Animalibus (Anatomical Exercise on the Motion of the Heart and Blood in Animals), published in 1628. Harvey’s greatest achievement was to recognize that the blood flows rapidly around the human body, being pumped through a single system of arteries and veins, and to support this hypothesis with experiments and arguments.

Prior to Harvey, it was believed there were two separate blood systems in the body. One carried purple, “nutritive” blood and used the veins to distribute nutri- tion from the liver to the rest of the body. The other carried scarlet, “vivyfying” (or “vital”) blood and used the arteries to distribute a life-giving principle from the lungs. Today these blood systems are understood as deoxygen- ated blood and oxygenated blood. However, at the time, the influence of oxygen on blood was not understood. Furthermore, blood was not thought to circulate around the body—it was believed to be consumed by the body at the same rate that it was produced. The capillaries, small vessels linking the arteries and veins, were unknown at the time, and their existence was not confirmed until later in the 17th century, after Harvey, when the microscope had been invented.

Harvey claimed he was led to his discovery of the circulation by consideration of the venous valves. It was known that there were small flaps inside the veins that allowed free passage of blood in one direction but strongly inhibited the flow of blood in the opposite direction. It was thought that these flaps prevented pooling of the blood under the influence of gravity, but Harvey was able to show that all these flaps are cardiocentrically oriented. For example, he showed that in the jugular vein of the neck they face downward, inhibiting blood flow away from the heart, instead of upward, inhibiting pooling due to gravity.

Harvey’s main experiment concerned the amount of blood flowing through the heart. He made estimates of the volume of the ventricles, how efficient they were in expelling blood, and the number of beats per minute made by the heart. He was able to show, even with conservative estimates, that more blood passed through the heart than could possibly be accounted for based on the then current understanding of blood flow. Harvey’s values indicated the heart pumped 0.5–1 litre of blood per minute (modern values are about 4 litres per minute at rest and 25 litres per minute during exercise). The human body contains about 5 litres of blood. The body simply could not produce or consume that amount of blood so rapidly; therefore, the blood had to circulate It is also important that Harvey investigated the nature of the heartbeat. Prior to Harvey, it was thought that the active phase of the heartbeat, when the muscles contract, was when the heart increased its internal volume. So the active motion of the heart was to draw blood into itself. Harvey observed the heart beating in many animals—particularly in cold-blooded animals and in animals near death, because their heartbeats were slow. He concluded that the active phase of the heartbeat, when the muscles contract, is when the heart decreases its internal volume and that blood is expelled with considerable force from the heart. Although Harvey did quantify blood flow, his quantification is very approximate, and he deliberately used underestimates to further his case. This is very different from the precise quantification leading to the mathematical laws of someone like Galileo.

Harvey’s theory of circulation was opposed by conservative physicians, but it was well established by the time of his death. It is likely that Harvey actually made his discovery of the circulation about 1618–19. Such a major shift in thinking about the body needed to be very well supported by experiment and argument to avoid immediate ridicule and dismissal; hence the delay before the publication of his central work. In 1649 Harvey published Exercitationes Duae Anatomicae de Circulatione Sanguinis, ad Joannem Riolanem, Filium, Parisiensem (Two Anatomical Exercises on the Circulation of the Blood) in response to criticism of the circulation theory by French anatomist Jean Riolan.

Renaissance Influences

Harvey was very much influenced by the ideas of Greek philosopher Aristotle and the natural magic tradition of the Renaissance. His key analogy for the circulation of the blood was a macrocosm/microcosm analogy with the weather system. A macrocosm/microcosm analogy sees similarities between a small system and a large system. Thus, one might say that the solar system is a macrocosm and the atom is a microcosm. The Renaissance natural magic tradition was very keen on the idea of the human body as a microcosm. The macrocosm for Harvey was the Earth’s weather cycle. Water was changed into vapour by the action of the Sun, and the vapour rose, was cooled, and fell again as rain. The microcosm was the human body, where the action of the heart was supposed to heat and change the blood, which was cooled again in the extremities of the body. It also should be noted that much of his terminology for change was drawn from the alchemy of his time. Harvey was very much a man of the later Renaissance—not a man of the scientific revolution and its mechanical nature.

Studies of Reproduction

Harvey spent much of the latter part of his career working on the nature of reproduction in animals. He worked on chickens as an example of oviparous reproduction, in which embryonic development occurs within eggs hatched outside the mother’s body, and on deer as an example of viviparous reproduction, in which embryonic development occurs within the mother’s body, resulting in the birth of live young. Harvey’s work in this area generated a wealth of observational detail. At the time, reproduction was poorly understood, and Harvey investigated issues of the role of sperm and menstrual blood in the formation of the embryo. His observations were excellent, but such matters could not be resolved properly without the use of the microscope.

(全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载)

这枚PHQ不是英国皇家邮政极限明信片，因为它是把邮票放大印为明信片，包括齿孔，皇冠和面值。由于他们的存在，英国很少人用非PHQ片来自制极限明信片。PHQ 不能参加极限邮展，也许作为明信片类别展出。谁有极限明信片？
The 'PHQ' stands for Postal Headquarters. All items published by the Post Office are given a number which is prefixed by letters. The first card issued, on 16 May 1973, was numbered PHQ1, and the numbering sequence has continued to the present day.
There are three main areas of collecting interest. Many collectors like to collect only the unused cards, but some like to obtain them with first day of issue postmarks. Others like to obtain them with special handstamps that have some connection to the stamp subject matter. Also, stamp collectors will usually put the stamp on the back of the card, but a very popular variation is for the stamp to be applied to the face of the card, so that the postcard picture, stamp and postmark are all visible on the same face. (en.wikipedia.org/PHQ card)

E6BA96B7-24EC-400C-A650-0285BCC7A319.jpeg (109.92 KB, 下载次数: 59)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-11 00:55
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-4-30 02:39 编辑

罗伯特·波义耳（英語：Robert Boyle，1627年1月25日－1691年12月30日），又译波意耳，爱尔兰自然哲学家，炼金术师，在化学和物理学研究上都有杰出贡献。虽然他的化学研究仍然带有炼金术色彩，他的《怀疑派的化学家》一书仍然被视作化学史上的里程碑。

1657年他在罗伯特·胡克的辅助下对奥托·格里克发明的气泵进行改进。1659年制成了“波义耳机器”和“风力发动机”。接下来他用这一装置对气体性质进行了研究，并于1660年发表对这一设备的研究成果。这一论文遭到以弗朗西斯·莱恩为代表的科学家的反对，为了反驳异议，波义耳阐明了在温度一定的条件下气体的压力与体积成反比的这一性质。法国物理学家马略特得到了同样的结果，但是一直到1676年才发表。于是在英语国家，这一定律被称为波义耳定律，而在欧洲大陆则被称为马略特定律。

1661年波义耳发表了《怀疑派的化学家》，在这部著作中波义耳批判了一直存在的四元素说，认为在科学研究中不应该将组成物质的物质都称为元素，而应该采取类似海尔蒙特的观点，认为不能互相转变和不能还原成更简单的东西为元素，他说：“我说的元素...是指某种原始的、简单的、一点也没有掺杂的物体。元素不能用任何其他物体造成，也不能彼此相互造成。元素是直接合成所谓完全混合物的成份，也是完全混合物最终分解成的要素。”而元素的微粒的不同聚合体导致了性质的不同。由于波义耳在实验与理论两方面都对化学发展有重要贡献，他的工作为近代化学奠定了初步基础，故被认为是近代化学的奠基人。(zh.wikipedia.org/罗伯特·波义耳)

British natural philosopher and theological writer Robert Boyle was a preeminent figure of 17th-century intellectual culture. He was best known as a natural philosopher, particularly in the field of chemistry, but his scientific work covered many areas including hydrostatics, physics, medicine, earth sciences, natural history, and alchemy. His prolific output also included Christian devotional and ethical essays and theological tracts on biblical language, the limits of reason, and the role of the natural philosopher as a Christian. He sponsored many religious missions as well as the translation of the Scriptures into several languages. In 1660 he helped found the Royal Society of London.
Boyle spent much of 1652–54 in Ireland overseeing his hereditary lands, and he also performed some anatomic dissections. In 1654 he was invited to Oxford, and he took up residence at the university from c. 1656 until 1668. In Oxford he was exposed to the latest developments in natural philosophy and became associated with a group of notable natural philosophers and physicians, including John Wilkins, Christopher Wren, and John Locke. These individuals, together with a few others, formed the “Experimental Philosophy Club,” which at times convened in Boyle’s lodgings. Much of Boyle’s best-known work dates from this period.
In 1659 Boyle and Robert Hooke, the clever inventor and subsequent curator of experiments for the Royal Society, completed the construction of their famous air pump and used it to study pneumatics. Their resultant discoveries regarding air pressure and the vacuum appeared in Boyle’s first scientific publication, New Experiments Physico- Mechanicall, Touching the Spring of the Air and its Effects (1660). Boyle and Hooke discovered several physical characteristics of air, including its role in combustion, respiration, and the transmission of sound. One of their findings, published in 1662, later became known as “Boyle’s law.” This law expresses the inverse relationship that exists between the pressure and volume of a gas, and it was determined by measuring the volume occupied by a constant quantity of air when compressed by differing weights of mercury. Other natural philosophers, including Henry Power and Richard Towneley, concurrently reported similar findings about air.
Boyle’s scientific work is characterized by its reliance on experiment and observation and its reluctance to formulate generalized theories. He advocated a “mechanical philosophy” that saw the universe as a huge machine or clock in which all natural phenomena were accountable purely by mechanical, clockwork motion. His contributions to chemistry were based on a mechanical “corpuscularian hypothesis”—a brand of atomism which claimed that everything was composed of minute (but not indivisible) particles of a single universal matter and that these particles were only differentiable by their shape and motion. Among his most influential writings were The Sceptical Chymist (1661), which assailed the then-current Aristotelian and especially Paracelsian notions about the composition of matter and methods of chemical analysis, and the Origine of Formes and Qualities (1666), which used chemical phenomena to support the corpuscularian hypothesis.
Boyle also maintained a lifelong pursuit of transmutation all alchemy, endeavouring to discover the secret of transmuting base metals into gold and to contact individuals believed to possess alchemical secrets. Overall, Boyle argued so strongly for the need of applying the principles and methods of chemistry to the study of the natural world and to medicine that he later gained the appellation of the “father of chemistry.”

第二枚PHQ不是英国皇家邮政极限明信片，因为它是把邮票放大印为明信片，包括齿孔，皇冠和面值。由于他们的存在，英国很少人用非PHQ片来自制极限明信片。PHQ 不能参加极限邮展，也许作为明信片类别展出。波义耳实验室位于牛津大学，因此第二枚的剑桥和牛顿的邮戳并不理想。剑桥大学教授印制第三枚的惠特徹奇（Whitchurch）与化学邮戳好一点点，但波义耳与惠特徹奇（Whitchurch) 或威德尼斯（Widnes）的联系并不明显。我的首选邮戳是牛津或伦敦。谁有自然极限明信片？

22 02 2022 伦敦世展戳在五十二樓。

421E6AA7-EEDE-4DB8-ADEB-D079FEDA9D3D.jpeg (118.15 KB, 下载次数: 52)

0CE85BB2-4D80-433E-B0B7-0C4FF8CA4C9A.jpeg (116.38 KB, 下载次数: 65)

C856133F-5659-4F5D-8A7A-A32721222FD0.jpeg (105.29 KB, 下载次数: 60)

B4E1FE7C-64C5-42F4-B69B-D70E3D47994D.gif (8.26 KB, 下载次数: 64)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-12 00:38
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-9-12 00:40 编辑

安東尼‧菲利普斯·范‧雷文霍克（荷蘭語：Antonie Philips van Leeuwenhoek；1632年10月24日~1723年8月26日）是一位荷蘭貿易商與科學家，有光學顯微鏡與微生物學之父的稱號。最為著名的成就之一，是改進了顯微鏡以及微生物學的建立。
他經由手工自製的顯微鏡，首先觀察並描述單細胞生物，他當時將這些生物稱為「animalcules」。此外，他也是最早紀錄觀察肌纖維、細菌、精蟲、微血管中血流的科學家。雷文霍克觀察自己的精液，在顯微鏡觀察下從中發現精細胞，他自認這是他生涯中的重大發現，並觀察兩棲類、軟體動物、鳥類、魚類與哺乳動物的精細胞，獲致一個新的結論，受精就是在精細胞穿進卵中而發生的。(zh.wikipedia.org/安東尼·范·列文虎克)

Dutch microscopist Antonie van Leeuwenhoek was the first to observe bacteria and protozoa. His researches on lower animals refuted the doctrine of spontaneous generation, and his observations helped lay the foundations for the sciences of bacteriology and protozoology. The dramatic nature of his discoveries made him world famous, and he was visited by many notables— including Peter I the Great of Russia, James II of England, and Frederick II the Great of Prussia.
Little is known of Leeuwenhoek’s early life. When his stepfather died in 1648, he was sent to Amsterdam to become an apprentice to a linendraper. Returning to Delft when he was 20, he established himself as a draper and haberdasher. In 1660 he obtained a position as chamberlain to the sheriffs of Delft. His income was thus secure and sufficient enough to enable him to devote much of his time to his all-absorbing hobby, that of grinding lenses and using them to study tiny objects.
Leeuwenhoek made microscopes consisting of a single, high-quality lens of very short focal length; at the time, such simple microscopes were preferable to the compound microscope, which increased the problem of chromatic aberration. Although Leeuwenhoek’s studies lacked the organization of formal scientific research, his powers of careful observation enabled him to make discoveries of fundamental importance. In 1674 he began to observe bacteria and protozoa, his “very little animalcules,” which he was able to isolate from different sources, such as rainwater, pond and well water, and the human mouth and intestine, and he calculated their sizes.
In 1677 he described for the first time the spermatozoa from insects, dogs, and man, though Stephen Hamm probably was a codiscoverer. Leeuwenhoek studied the structure of the optic lens, striations in muscles, the mouthparts of insects, and the fine structure of plants and discovered parthenogenesis in aphids. In 1680 he noticed that yeasts consist of minute globular particles. He extended Marcello Malpighi’s demonstration in 1660 of the blood capillaries by giving (in 1684) the first accurate description of red blood cells. In his observations on rotifers in 1702, Leeuwenhoek remarked that “in all falling rain, carried from gutters into water-butts, animalcules are to be found; and that in all kinds of water, standing in the open air, animalcules can turn up. For these animal- cules can be carried over by the wind, along with the bits of dust floating in the air.”
A friend of Leeuwenhoek put him in touch with the Royal Society of England, to which, from 1673 until 1723, he communicated by means of informal letters most of his discoveries and to which he was elected a fellow in 1680. His discoveries were for the most part made public in the society’s Philosophical Transactions. The first representation of bacteria is to be found in a drawing by Leeuwenhoek in that publication in 1683.
His researches on the life histories of various low forms of animal life were in opposition to the doctrine that they could be produced spontaneously or bred from corruption. Thus, he showed that the weevils of granaries (in his time commonly supposed to be bred from wheat as well as in it) are really grubs hatched from eggs deposited by winged insects. His letter on the flea, in which he not only described its structure but traced out the whole history of its metamorphosis, is of great interest, not so much for the exactness of his observations as for an illustration of his opposition to the spontaneous generation of many lower organisms, such as “this minute and despised creature.” Some theorists asserted that the flea was produced from sand, others from dust or the like, but Leeuwenhoek proved that it bred in the regular way of winged insects.
Leeuwenhoek also carefully studied the history of the ant and was the first to show that what had been com- monly reputed to be ants’ eggs were really their pupae, containing the perfect insect nearly ready for emergence, and that the true eggs were much smaller and gave origin to maggots, or larvae. He argued that the sea mussel and other shellfish were not generated out of sand found at the seashore or mud in the beds of rivers at low water but from spawn, by the regular course of generation. He maintained the same to be true of the freshwater mussel, whose embryos he examined so carefully that he was able to observe how they were consumed by “animalcules,” many of which, according to his description, must have included ciliates in conjugation, flagellates, and the Vorticella. Similarly, he investigated the generation of eels, which were at that time supposed to be produced from dew without the ordinary process of generation.
Leeuwenhoek’s methods of microscopy, which he kept secret, remain something of a mystery. During his lifetime he ground more than 400 lenses, most of which were very small—some no larger than a pinhead—and usually mounted them between two thin brass plates, riveted together. A large sample of these lenses, bequeathed to the Royal Society, were found to have magnifying powers of between 50 and, at the most, 300 times. In order to observe phenomena as small as bacteria, Leeuwenhoek must have employed some form of oblique illumination, or other technique, for enhancing the effectiveness of the lens, but this method he would not reveal. Leeuwenhoek continued his work almost to the end of his long life of 90 years.
Leeuwenhoek’s contributions to the Philosophical Transactions amounted to 375 and those to the Memoirs of the Paris Academy of Sciences to 27. Two collections of his works appeared during his life, one in Dutch (1685–1718) and the other in Latin (1715–22); a selection was translated by S. Hoole, The Select Works of A. van Leeuwenhoek (1798–1807).

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

7630B6C8-4DF0-4BE7-83E5-891E5AB30C06.jpeg (85.17 KB, 下载次数: 64)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-13 00:06
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-9-13 00:16 编辑

罗伯特·胡克（英語：Robert Hooke，又譯為虎克，1635年7月28日－1703年3月3日），英国博物学家、发明家。在物理学研究方面，他提出了描述材料弹性的基本定律——胡克定律，且提出了万有引力的平方反比关系。在机械制造方面，他设计制造了真空泵、显微镜和望远镜，并将自己用显微镜观察所得写成《显微术》一书；“细胞”的英文：cell，即由他命名。中文翻譯後即稱為細胞。在新技术发明方面，他发明的很多设备至今仍然在使用。除去科学技术，胡克还在城市设计和建筑方面有着重要的贡献。但由于与牛顿的论争导致他去世后鲜为人知，近来对胡克的研究逐渐兴起。胡克也因其兴趣广泛、贡献重要而被某些科学史家称为“伦敦的李奥纳多”。

1665年胡克根據英國皇家學會一院士的資料設計了一台複雜的複合顯微鏡。有一次他從樹皮切了一片軟木薄片，並放到自己發明的顯微鏡觀察。他观察到了植物细胞（已死亡），并且觉得他们的形状类似教士们所住的单人房间，所以他使用单人房间的cell一词命名植物细胞为cellua。是為史上第一次成功觀察細胞。

同年胡克出版了《顯微術》一书，该书包括了一些他使用显微镜或望远镜进行的观察，包括上述的軟木切片。胡克所用的显微镜至今仍然保存在华盛顿国家健康与医学博物馆中。荷兰工匠列文虎克受《显微术》一书启发，对胡克的显微镜镜片进行了改进，对微生物进行了细致的观察，被称为微生物学之父。胡克随后被皇家学会要求确证列文虎克的发现并予以发表。

胡克和牛顿的关系问题一直充满了争论。一般认为，两人彼此存在较大的敌意。争论起源于光学，1672年牛顿在皇家学会阐述自己的观点，认为白光经过棱镜产生色散，分成七色光，他将其解释为不同颜色微粒的混合与分开，遭到主张光波动说的胡克的尖锐批评。牛顿大怒，称胡克完全没有理解自己这一劃时代发现的意义，并威胁要离开皇家学会。这使得主张光微粒说的牛顿一直将已完成的著作《光学》延迟到胡克過世后才出版。光学出版后，奠定了光微粒说的统治地位，直到一百多年以后的菲涅耳才重新发现胡克的光波动說。

1674年－1679年间两人曾通信讨论物体的圆周运动问题，胡克给牛顿写信，说明了他从1660年以后就有的平方反比定律（见万有引力定律）的思想，但是他无法从中推导出开普勒的行星运动定律。通信中出现了常被引用的名言：“如果我看得远一些，那是因为我站在了巨人的肩膀上”。在考慮上文下理的語境後，这句话被認為是在讽刺胡克矮小。1684年1月胡克在和爱德蒙·哈雷及雷恩的谈话中声称他已经完成推导，但是哈雷和雷恩并不相信，哈雷随后告诉了牛顿。牛顿则表示在他已经完成的《自然哲学的数学原理》中有推导，哈雷随后促成此书出版，这件事使得胡克十分怀疑牛顿剽窃了他的成果，并从此不愿意公开自己的任何发现。牛顿也因此删去了手稿中所有引用胡克工作的声明。

牛顿对胡克的敌意在胡克去世后仍未消减。在牛顿影响下，皇家学会取下了胡克的肖像。这可能是胡克没有留下任何肖像的原因。牛顿还试图烧毁大量胡克的手稿和文章，但被阻止。2003年历史学家Lisa Jardine宣称发现了他的肖像，随后被证明这一画像实际上是尼德兰化学家海尔蒙特。胡克所用的印章上的人头像也被人认为是胡克的像。1728年的钱伯斯百科全书的首页插画也被认为是胡克的半身像。(zh.wikipedia.org/罗伯特·胡克)

English physicist Robert Hooke discovered the law of elasticity, known as Hooke’s law. He also conducted research in a remarkable variety of fields.

In 1655 Hooke was employed by Robert Boyle to construct the Boylean air pump. Five years later, Hooke discovered his law of elasticity, which states that the stretching of a solid body (e.g., metal, wood) is proportional to the force applied to it. The law laid the basis for studies of stress and strain and for understanding of elastic materials. He applied these studies in his designs for the balance springs of watches. In 1662 he was appointed curator of experiments to the Royal Society of London and was elected a fellow the following year.

One of the first men to build a Gregorian reflecting telescope, Hooke discovered the fifth star in the Trapezium, an asterism in the constellation Orion, in 1664 and first suggested that Jupiter rotates on its axis. His detailed sketches of Mars were used in the 19th century to determine that planet’s rate of rotation. In 1665 he was appointed professor of geometry in Gresham College. In Micrographia (1665; “Small Drawings”) he included his studies and illustrations of the crystal structure of snow flakes, discussed the possibility of manufacturing artificial fibres by a process similar to the spinning of the silkworm, and first used the word cell to name the microscopic honeycomb cavities in cork. His studies of microscopic fossils led him to become one of the first proponents of a theory of evolution.

Hooke suggested that the force of gravity could be measured by utilizing the motion of a pendulum (1666) and attempted to show that the Earth and Moon follow an elliptical path around the Sun. In 1672 he discovered the phenomenon of diffraction (the bending of light rays around corners); to explain it, he offered the wave theory of light. He stated the inverse square law to describe planetary motions in 1678, a law that Newton later used in modified form. Hooke complained that he was not given sufficient credit for the law and became involved in bitter controversy with Newton. Hooke was the first man to state in general that all matter expands when heated and that air is made up of particles separated from each other by relatively large distances.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

F934CCD9-953B-486A-8956-4E30ADC95C72.jpeg (124.85 KB, 下载次数: 56)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-14 00:03
约翰·雷（John Ray，1627年11月29日－1705年1月17日）为英国博物学家，其有时被誉为英国博物学之父。他发表了大量植物学、动物学及自然神学方面的著作。在其专著《Historia Plantarum》中对植物的分类是现代分类学历史中重要的一步。 (zh.wikipedia.org/约翰·雷)

John Ray (spelled Wray until 1670) was a leading 17th- century English naturalist and botanist who contributed significantly to progress in taxonomy. His enduring legacy to botany was the establishment of species as the ultimate unit of taxonomy.

Education and Expeditions
Ray was the son of the village blacksmith in Black Notley and attended the grammar school in nearby Braintree. In 1644, with the aid of a fund that had been left in trust to support needy scholars at the University of Cambridge, he enrolled at one of the colleges there, St. Catherine’s Hall, and moved to Trinity College in 1646. Ray had come to Cambridge at the right time for one with his talents, for he found a circle of friends with whom he pursued anatomical and chemical studies. He also progressed well in the cur- riculum, taking his bachelor’s degree in 1648 and being elected to a fellowship at Trinity the following year; during the next 13 years he lived quietly in his collegiate cloister.
Ray’s string of fortunate circumstances ended with the Restoration. Although he was never an excited partisan, he was thoroughly Puritan in spirit and refused to take the oath that was prescribed by the Act of Uniformity. In 1662 he lost his fellowship. Prosperous friends supported him during the subsequent 43 years while he pursued his career as a naturalist, which began with the publication of his first work in 1660, a catalog of plants growing around Cambridge. After he had exhausted the Cambridge area as a subject for his studies, Ray began to explore the rest of Britain. An expedition in 1662 to Wales and Cornwall with the naturalist Francis Willughby was a turning point in his life. Willughby and Ray agreed to undertake a study of the complete natural history of living things, with Ray respon- sible for the plant kingdom and Willughby the animal.
The first fruit of the agreement, a tour of the European continent lasting from 1663 to 1666, greatly extended Ray’s first-hand knowledge of flora and fauna. Back in England, the two friends set to work on their appointed task. In 1670 Ray produced a Catalogus Plantarum Angliae (“Catalog of English Plants”). Then in 1672 Willughby suddenly died, and Ray took up the completion of Willughby’s portion of their project. In 1676 Ray published F. Willughbeii . . . Ornithologia (The Ornithology of F. Willughby . . .) under Willughby’s name, even though Ray had contributed at least as much as Willughby. Ray also completed F. Willughbeii . . . de Historia Piscium (1685; “History of Fish”), with the Royal Society, of which Ray was a fellow, financing its publication.

Important Publications
Ray had never interrupted his research in botany. In 1682 he had published a Methodus Plantarum Nova (revised in 1703 as the Methodus Plantarum Emendata . . . ), his contribution to classification, which insisted on the taxonomic importance of the distinction between monocotyledons and dicotyledons, plants whose seeds germinate with one leaf and those with two, respectively. Ray’s enduring legacy to botany was the establishment of species as the ultimate unit of taxonomy. On the basis of the Methodus, he constructed his masterwork, the Historia Plantarum, three huge volumes that appeared between 1686 and 1704. After the first two volumes, he was urged to compose a complete system of nature. To this end he compiled brief synopses of British and European plants, a Synopsis Methodica Avium et Piscium (published posthumously, 1713; “Synopsis of Birds and Fish”), and a Synopsis Methodica Animalium Quadrupedum et Serpentini Generis (1693; “Synopsis of Quadrupeds”). Much of his final decade was spent on a pioneering investigation of insects, published posthu- mously as Historia Insectorum.
In all this work, Ray contributed to the ordering of taxonomy. Instead of a single feature, he attempted to base his systems of classification on all the structural characteristics, including internal anatomy. By insisting on the importance of lungs and cardiac structure, he effectively established the class of mammals, and he divided insects according to the presence or absence of metamorphoses. Although a truly natural system of taxonomy could not be realized before the age of Darwin, Ray’s system approached that goal more than the frankly artificial systems of his contemporaries. He was one of the great predecessors who made possible Carolus Linnaeus’s contributions in the following century.

Nor was this the sum of his work. In the 1690s Ray also published three volumes on religion. The Wisdom of God Manifested in the Works of the Creation (1691), an essay in natural religion that called on the full range of his biological learning, was his most popular and influential book. It argued that the correlation of form and function in organic nature demonstrates the necessity of an omniscient cre- ator. This argument from design, common to most of the leading scientists of the 17th century, implied a static view of nature that was distinctly different from the evolution- ary ideas of the early and mid-19th century. Still working on his Historia Insectorum, John Ray died at the age of 77.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

0C2F39E2-5112-4C3A-B838-0515852A5CAF.jpeg (83.46 KB, 下载次数: 59)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-15 00:37
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-9-15 23:05 编辑

艾萨克·牛顿爵士，PRS MP（英語：Sir Isaac Newton，1643年1月4日－1727年3月31日）是一位英格兰物理学家、数学家、天文学家、自然哲学家和煉金術士。1687年他发表《自然哲学的数学原理》，阐述了万有引力和三大运动定律，奠定了此后三个世纪里力学和天文学的基础，成为了现代工程学的基础。他通过论证开普勒行星运动定律与他的引力理论间的一致性，展示了地面物体与天体的运动都遵循着相同的自然定律；为太阳中心学说提供了强而有力的理论支持，并推动了科学革命。

在力学上，牛顿阐明了动量和角动量守恒的原理。在光学上，他发明了反射望远镜，并基于对三棱镜将白光发散成可见光谱的观察，发展出了颜色理论。他还系统地表述了冷却定律，并研究了音速。

在数学上，牛顿与戈特弗里德·莱布尼茨分享了发展出微积分学的荣誉。他也证明了广义二项式定理，提出了“牛顿法”以趋近函数的零点，并为幂级数的研究作出了贡献。

牛顿於1727年3月31日在伦敦睡夢中辭世，于西敏寺舉行國葬，成為史上第一個獲得國葬的自然科學家。牛頓之墓位於西敏寺中殿，墓地上方聳立著一尊牛頓的雕像，其石像倚坐在一堆書籍上。身邊有兩位天使，還有一個巨大的地球造型以紀念他在科學上的功績。(zh.wikipedia.org/艾萨克·牛顿)

English physicist and mathematician Sir Isaac Newton was the culminating figure of the scientific revolution of the 17th century. In optics, his discovery of the composition of white light integrated the phenomena of colours into the science of light and laid the foundation for modern physical optics. In mechanics, his three laws of motion, the basic principles of modern physics, resulted in the formulation of the law of universal gravitation. In mathematics, he was the original discoverer of the infinitesimal calculus. Newton’s Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy), 1687, was one of the most important single works in the history of modern science.

The Opticks
Newton was elected to a fellowship in Trinity College in 1667, and from 1670 to 1672 he delivered a series of lectures and developed them into the essay “Of Colours,” which was later revised to become Book One of his Opticks. Newton held that light consists of material corpuscles in motion. The corpuscular conception of light was always a speculative theory on the periphery of his optics, however. The core of Newton’s contribution had to do with colours. He realized that light is not simple and homogeneous—it is instead complex and heterogeneous and the phenomena of colours arise from the analysis of the heterogeneous mixture into its simple components.
The ultimate source of Newton’s conviction that light is corpuscular was his recognition that individual rays of light have immutable properties. He held that individual rays (that is, particles of given size) excite sensations of individual colours when they strike the retina of the eye. He also concluded that rays refract at distinct angles— hence, the prismatic spectrum, a beam of heterogeneous rays, i.e., alike incident on one face of a prism, separated or analyzed by the refraction into its component parts—and that phenomena such as the rainbow are produced by refractive analysis. Because he believed that chromatic aberration could never be eliminated from lenses, Newton turned to reflecting telescopes; he constructed the first ever built. The heterogeneity of light has been the foundation of physical optics since his time.
In 1675 Newton brought forth a second paper, an examination of the colour phenomena in thin films, which was identical to most of Book Two as it later appeared in the Opticks. The purpose of the paper was to explain the colours of solid bodies by showing how light can be analyzed into its components by reflection as well as refraction. The paper was significant in demonstrating for the first time the existence of periodic optical phenomena. He dis- covered the concentric coloured rings in the thin film of air between a lens and a flat sheet of glass; the distance between these concentric rings (Newton’s rings) depends on the increasing thickness of the film of air.
A second piece which Newton had sent with the paper of 1675 provoked new controversy. Entitled “An Hypothesis Explaining the Properties of Light,” it was in fact a general system of nature. Robert Hooke, who had earlier established himself as an opponent of Newton’s ideas, apparently claimed that Newton had stolen its content from him. The issue was quickly controlled, however, by an exchange of formal, excessively polite letters that fail to conceal the complete lack of warmth between the men.
Newton was also engaged in another exchange on his theory of colours with a circle of English Jesuits in Liège, perhaps the most revealing exchange of all. Although their objections were shallow, their contention that his experiments were mistaken lashed him into a fury. The correspondence dragged on until 1678, when a final shriek of rage from Newton, apparently accompanied by a complete nervous breakdown, was followed by silence. For six years he withdrew from intellectual commerce except when others initiated a correspondence, which he always broke off as quickly as possible.
During his time of isolation, Newton, who was always somewhat interested in alchemy, now immersed himself in it. His conception of nature underwent a decisive change. Newton’s “Hypothesis of Light” of 1675, with its universal ether, was a standard mechanical system of nature. However, about 1679, Newton abandoned the ether and its invisible mechanisms and began to ascribe the puzzling phenomena—chemical affinities, the generation of heat in chemical reactions, surface tension in fluids, capillary action, the cohesion of bodies, and the like—to attractions and repulsions between particles of matter.
More than 35 years later, in the second English edition of the Opticks, Newton accepted an ether again, although it was an ether that embodied the concept of action at a distance by positing a repulsion between its particles. As he conceived of them, attractions were quantitatively defined, and they offered a bridge to unite the two basic themes of 17th-century science—the mechanical tradition, which had dealt primarily with verbal mechanical imagery, and the Pythagorean tradition, which insisted on the mathematical nature of reality. Newton’s reconciliation through the concept of force was his ultimate contribution to science.

The Principia
In 1684 Newton was at work on the problem of orbital dynamics, and two and a half years later, a short tract he had written, entitled De Motu (“On Motion”), had grown into Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica. This work is not only Newton’s masterpiece but also the fundamental work for the whole of modern science. Significantly, De Motu did not state the law of universal gravitation. For that matter, even though it was a treatise on planetary dynamics, it did not contain any of the three Newtonian laws of motion. Only when revising De Motu did Newton embrace the principle of inertia (the first law) and arrive at the second law of motion.
The mechanics of the Principia was an exact quantitative description of the motions of visible bodies. It rested on Newton’s three laws of motion: (1) that a body remains in its state of rest unless it is compelled to change that state by a force impressed on it; (2) that the change of motion (the change of velocity times the mass of the body) is proportional to the force impressed; (3) that to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Using these laws, Newton found that the centripetal force holding the planets in their given orbits about the Sun must decrease with the square of the planets’ distances from the Sun.

Newton also compared the distance by which the Moon, in its orbit of known size, is diverted from a tan- gential path in one second with the distance that a body at the surface of the Earth falls from rest in one second. When the latter distance proved to be 3,600 (60 × 60) times as great as the former, he concluded that one and the same force, governed by a single quantitative law, is operative in all three cases, and from the correlation of the Moon’s orbit with the measured acceleration of gravity on the surface of the Earth, he applied the ancient Latin word gravitas (literally, “heaviness” or “weight”) to it. The law of universal gravitation, which he also confirmed from such further phenomena as the tides and the orbits of comets, states that every particle of matter in the universe attracts every other particle with a force that is proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between their centres. The Principia immediately raised Newton to international prominence.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

这枚PHQ不是英国皇家邮政极限明信片，因为它是把邮票放大印为明信片，包括齿孔，皇冠和面值。由于他们的存在，英国很少人用非PHQ片来自制极限明信片。PHQ 不能参加极限邮展，也许作为明信片类别展出。谁有极限明信片？. 剑桥大学教授印制两枚不同戳但是非卖品。

Based on a sample size of two, thus not valid statistically, here we have two scientists, neither of whom are physicist (actually both are molecular biologists), who have realized Newton maximum cards. Hopefully there are many more physicists who have realized Newton maximum cards as well.

A2E3F752-60B2-48DE-97F6-EEC129EC9D03.jpeg (117.92 KB, 下载次数: 60)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-15 00:38
1661年6月，牛顿进入了剑桥大学的三一学院。在1665年，牛顿获得了学位，而大学为了预防伦敦大瘟疫而关闭了。在此后两年裡，牛顿在家中继续研究微积分学、光学和万有引力定律。

1667年，牛顿获得奖学金，作为研究生重返剑桥大学三一学院。按照规定，只有被正式任命的牧师才有资格成为剑桥大学三一学院的研究生，由于持有非正统的宗教观点，牛顿不愿意成为牧师。但牧师职位的任命没有最后期限，因此牛顿先获得了研究生的名额，而牧师职位的任命被无限期地延后了。

牛顿在1669年被授予卢卡斯数学教授席位。在那一天以前，剑桥或牛津的所有成员都是经过任命的圣公会牧师。不过，卢卡斯教授之职的条件要求其持有者不得活跃于教堂（大概是如此可让持有者把更多时间用于科学研究上）。牛顿认为应免除他担任神职工作的条件，这需要查理二世的许可，后者接受了牛顿的意见。这样避免了牛顿的宗教观点与圣公会信仰之间的冲突。(zh.wikipedia.org/艾萨克·牛顿)

2010年的剑桥邮戳盖在牛顿极限明信片上正好片票戳三图一致。
法国和其他国家邮票的牛顿极限明信片很常见，但罕见的是英国邮票的极限明信片。

06473F6B-D257-45B7-AF9E-BF2415EDBE75.jpeg (109.6 KB, 下载次数: 63)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-9-16 00:01
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-9-16 00:10 编辑

有观点认为牛顿本人对他自己的成就非常谦逊，1676年，在他写给罗伯特·胡克的一封信中出现了一句名言：
“ 如果我比别人看得更远，那是因为我站在巨人的肩上 ”
(zh.wikipedia.org/艾萨克·牛顿)
它出现在2010年的邮戳中。正好盖在牛顿极限明信片上。
法国和其他国家邮票的牛顿极限明信片很常见，但罕见的是英国邮票的极限明信片。

D3CE603A-C0E1-4896-A4E1-8291DB07F385.gif (10.68 KB, 下载次数: 70)

63FD1A36-CC5D-4C12-86D9-2F6F3E44D635.jpeg (109.73 KB, 下载次数: 73)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-10-13 11:25
卡尔·冯·林奈（瑞典語：Carl von Linné，1707年5月23日－1778年1月10日），也譯為林内，受封貴族前名为卡尔·林奈乌斯（Carl Linnaeus），由于瑞典学者阶层的姓常拉丁化，又作卡罗卢斯·林奈烏斯（拉丁語：Carolus Linnaeus），瑞典植物学家、动物学家和医生，瑞典科学院创始人之一，並且担任第一任主席，他也是智人的正模标本。他奠定了现代生物学命名法二名法的基础，是现代生物分类学之父，也被认为是现代生态学之父之一。他的很多著作使用拉丁文撰写，他的名字在拉丁语中寫作Carolus Linnæus（在1761年之后作Carolus a Linné）。

林奈身處的世紀，也正是歐洲的大航海世紀，許多航海歸來的生物學家和博物學家帶回世界各地的動植物，並用自己的喜好為之命名，造成一物多名，或异物同名的混亂現象。

林奈在烏普薩拉大學其間，发现花的花粉囊和雌蕊可以被作为植物分类的基础。他将此发现写成一篇短论文。这个发现为他提供了一个非常教授的职位。1732年乌普萨拉科学院资助他去瑞典北部的拉普兰考察。到那个时候为止，欧洲人对拉普兰还一无所知，在這4600英里的土地上，林奈發現100多種新種植物，1737年林奈将他对拉普兰植物世界的考察写成一本书发表，在這本書中，林奈首次發表了以植物生殖器官進行分類的方法。

1753年林奈發表《植物種誌》（Species Plantarum），採用雙名法，以拉丁文來為生物命名，其中第一个名字是属的名字，第二个是种的名字，屬名為名詞，種名為形容詞，形容些物種的特性，或可加上發現者的名字，以紀念這位發現者，也有負責的意思。林奈用這種方法幫植物命名，後來他也用同樣的方法為動物命名，此種命名法也一直延用至今。

此后林奈开始了他对欧洲大陆的科学访问。在荷兰时他第一次将他的分类学手稿《自然系統》（Systema Naturae）给别人看。其中他放弃了过去混淆不清的命名法，引进了一直沿用至今的双名法如“Homo sapiens”。属以上的分类也被给予清晰的定义。(zh.wikipedia.org/卡尔·林奈)

Swedish naturalist and explorer Carolus Linnaeus was the first to frame principles for defining natural genera and species of organisms and to create a uniform system for naming them (binomial nomenclature).

The “Sexual System” of Classification
In 1735 Linnaeus published Systema Naturae (“The System of Nature”), a folio volume of only 11 pages, which presented a hierarchical classification, or taxonomy, of the three kingdoms of nature: stones, plants, and animals. Each kingdom was subdivided into classes, orders, genera, species, and varieties. This hierarchy of taxonomic ranks replaced traditional systems of biological classification that were based on mutually exclusive divisions, or dichotomies.
In particular, it was the botanical section of Systema Naturae that built Linnaeus’s scientific reputation. After reading essays on sexual reproduction in plants by Vaillant and by German botanist Rudolph Jacob Camerarius, Linnaeus had become convinced of the idea that all organisms reproduce sexually. As a result, he expected each plant to possess male and female sexual organs (stamens and pistils), or “husbands and wives,” as he also put it. On this basis, he designed a simple system of distinctive characteristics to classify each plant. The number and position of the stamens, or husbands, determined the class to which it belonged, whereas the number and position of pistils, or wives, determined the order. This “sexual system,” as Linnaeus called it, became extremely popular.

Classification by “Natural Characters”
In 1736 Linnaeus, then in the Netherlands, published a booklet, the Fundamenta Botanica (“The Foundations of Botany”), that framed the principles and rules to be followed in the classification and naming of plants. The year before, Linnaeus was introduced to George Clifford, a local English merchant and banker who had close connections to the Dutch East India Company. Impressed by Linnaeus’s knowledge, Clifford offered Linnaeus a position as curator of his botanical garden. Linnaeus accepted the position and used this opportunity to expand certain chapters of the Fundamenta Botanica in separate publications: the Bibliotheca Botanica (1736; “The Library of Botany”); Critica Botanica (1737; “A Critique of Botany”), on botanical nomenclature; and Classes Plantarum (1738; “Classes of Plants”). He applied the theoretical framework laid down in these books in two further publications: Hortus Cliffortianus (1737), a catalogue of the species contained in Clifford’s collection; and the Genera Plantarum (1737; “Genera of Plants”), which modified and updated definitions of plant genera first offered by Joseph Pitton de Tournefort.
Genera Plantarum was considered by Linnaeus to be his crowning taxonomic achievement. In contrast to earlier attempts by other botanists at generic definition, which proceeded by a set of arbitrary divisions, Genera Plantarum presented a system based on what Linnaeus called the “natural characters” of genera—morphological descriptions of all the parts of flower and fruit. In contrast to systems based on arbitrary divisions (including his own sexual system), a system based on natural characters could accommodate the growing number of new species—often possessing different morphological features—pouring into Europe from its oversea trading posts and colonies.
Linnaeus’s distinction between artificial and natural classifications of organisms, however, raised the question of the mechanism that allowed organisms to fall into natural hierarchies. He could only answer this question with regard to species: species, according to Linnaeus, were similar in form because they derived from the same parental pair created by God at the beginning of the world. Linnaeus tried to explain the existence of natural genera, orders, or classes within the context of hybridization; however, the question of natural hierarchies would not receive a satisfying answer until English naturalist Charles Darwin explained similarity by common descent in his Origin of Species (1859).

Binomial Nomenclature
In 1738 Linnaeus began a medical practice in Stockholm, Sweden, which he maintained until 1742, when he received the chair in medicine and botany at Uppsala University. Linnaeus built his further career upon the foundations he laid in the Netherlands. Linnaeus used the international contacts to create a network of correspondents that provided him with seeds and specimens from all over the world. He then incorporated this material into the botanical garden at Uppsala, and these acquisitions helped him develop and refine the empirical basis for revised and enlarged editions of his major taxonomic works. During his lifetime he completed 12 editions of the Systema Naturae, six editions of the Genera Plantarum, two editions of the Species Plantarum (“Species of Plants,” which succeeded the Hortus Cliffortianus in 1753), and a revised edition of the Fundamenta Botanica (which was later renamed the Philosophia Botanica [1751; “Philosophy of Botany”]).
Linnaeus’s most lasting achievement was the creation of binomial nomenclature, the system of formally classifying and naming organisms according to their genus and species. In contrast to earlier names that were made up of diagnostic phrases, binomial names (or “trivial” names as Linnaeus himself called them) conferred no prejudicial information about the plant species named. Rather, they served as labels by which a species could be universally addressed. This naming system was also implicitly hierarchical, as each species is classified within a genus. The first use of binomial nomenclature by Linnaeus occurred within the context of a small project in which students were asked to identify the plants consumed by different kinds of cattle. In this project, binomial names served as a type of shorthand for field observations. Despite the advantages of this naming system, binomial names were used consis- tently in print by Linnaeus only after the publication of the Species Plantarum (1753).
The rules of nomenclature that Linnaeus put forward in his Philosophia Botanica rested on a recognition of the “law of priority,” the rule stating that the first properly published name of a species or genus takes precedence over all other proposed names. These rules became firmly established in the field of natural history and also formed the backbone of international codes of nomenclature— such as the Strickland Code (1842)—created for the fields of botany and zoology in the mid-19th century. The first edition of the Species Plantarum (1753) and the 10th edition of the Systema Naturae (1758) are the agreed starting points for botanical and zoological nomenclature, respectively.

Other Contributions
Toward the end of his life, Linnaeus became interested in other aspects of the life sciences. Of greatest influence were his physico-theological writings, Oeconomia Naturae (1749; “The Economy of Nature”) and Politiae Naturae (1760; “The Politics of Nature”). Both works were of great importance to Charles Darwin. His studies of plant hybridization influenced the experimental tradition that led directly to the pea plant experiments of Austrian botanist Gregor Mendel.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

CD6D788B-26B5-4F00-A39F-6E9F81F8C407.jpeg (109.47 KB, 下载次数: 52)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-11-14 22:39
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-11-14 23:36 编辑

亨利·卡文迪什（英語：Henry Cavendish，又译亨利·卡文迪许、亨利·卡文狄西、亨利·卡文迪西，1731年10月10日－1810年2月24日），英国物理学家、化学家。他首次对氢气的性质进行了细致的研究，证明了水并非单质，预言了空气中稀有气体的存在。他首次发现了库伦定律和欧姆定律，将电势概念广泛应用于电学，并精确测量了地球的密度，被认为是牛顿之后英国最伟大的科学家之一。(zh.wikipedia.org/亨利·卡文迪什)

Henry Cavendish was a natural philosopher and is considered to be the greatest experimental and theoretical English chemist and physicist of his age. Cavendish was distinguished for great accuracy and precision in researches into the composition of atmospheric air, the properties of different gases, the synthesis of water, the law governing electrical attraction and repulsion, a mechanical theory of heat, and calculations of the density (and hence the weight) of the Earth. His experiment to weigh the Earth has come to be known as the Cavendish experiment.

Research in Chemistry
Cavendish was a shy man who was uncomfortable in society and avoided it when he could. About the time of the times of his father’s death, Cavendish began to work closely with Charles Blagden, an association that helped Blagden enter fully into London’s scientific society. In return, Blagden helped to keep the world at a distance from Cavendish. Cavendish published no books and few papers, but he achieved much. Several areas of research, including mechanics, optics, and magnetism, feature extensively in his manuscripts, but they scarcely feature in his published work.
His first publication (1766) was a combination of three short chemistry papers on “factitious airs,” or gases produced in the laboratory. He produced “inflammable air” (hydrogen) by dissolving metals in acids and “fixed air” (carbon dioxide) by dissolving alkalis in acids, and he collected these and other gases in bottles inverted over water or mercury. He then measured their solubility in water and their specific gravity and noted their combustibility. Cavendish was awarded the Royal Society’s Copley Medal for this paper. Gas chemistry was of increasing importance in the latter half of the 18th century and became crucial for Frenchman Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier’s reform of chemistry, generally known as the chemical revolution.
In 1783 Cavendish published a paper on eudiometry (the measurement of the goodness of gases for breathing). He described a new eudiometer of his own invention, with which he achieved the best results to date, using what in other hands had been the inexact method of measuring gases by weighing them. He next published a paper on the production of water by burning inflammable air (that is, hydrogen) in dephlogisticated air (now known to be oxygen), the latter a constituent of atmospheric air. Cavendish concluded that dephlogisticated air was dephlogisticated water and that hydrogen was either pure phlogiston or phlogisticated water. He reported these findings to Joseph Priestley, an English clergyman and scientist, no later than March 1783, but did not publish them until the following year.
The Scottish inventor James Watt published a paper on the composition of water in 1783; Cavendish had performed the experiments first but published second. Controversy about priority ensued. In 1785 Cavendish carried out an investigation of the composition of common (i.e., atmospheric) air, obtaining, as usual, impressively accurate results. He observed that, when he had determined the amounts of phlogisticated air (nitrogen) and dephlogisticated air (oxygen), there remained a volume of gas amounting to 1/120 of the original volume of common air.
In the 1890s, two British physicists, William Ramsay and Lord Rayleigh, realized that their newly discovered inert gas, argon, was responsible for Cavendish’s problematic residue; he had not made an error. What he had done was perform rigorous quantitative experiments, using standardized instruments and methods, aimed at reproducible results; taken the mean of the result of several experiments; and identified and allowed for sources of error.
Cavendish, as noted before, used the language of the old phlogiston theory in chemistry. In 1787 he became one of the earliest outside France to convert to the new antiphlogistic theory of Lavoisier, though he remained skeptical about the nomenclature of the new theory. He also objected to Lavoisier’s identification of heat as having a material or elementary basis. Working within the frame- work of Newtonian mechanism, Cavendish had tackled the problem of the nature of heat in the 1760s, explaining heat as the result of the motion of matter. In 1783 he published a paper on the temperature at which mercury freezes and in that paper made use of the idea of latent heat, although he did not use the term because he believed that it implied acceptance of a material theory of heat. He made his objections explicit in his 1784 paper on air. He went on to develop a general theory of heat, and the manuscript of that theory has been persuasively dated to the late 1780s. His theory was at once mathematical and mechanical; it contained the principle of the conservation of heat (later understood as an instance of conservation of energy) and even contained the concept (although not the label) of the mechanical equivalent of heat.

Experiments with Electricity
Cavendish also worked out a comprehensive theory of electricity. Like his theory of heat, this theory was mathematical in form and was based on precise quantitative experiments. In 1771 he published an early version of his theory, based on an expansive electrical fluid that exerted pressure. He demonstrated that if the intensity of electric force was inversely proportional to distance, then the electric fluid in excess of that needed for electrical neutrality would lie on the outer surface of an electrified sphere; and he confirmed this experimentally. Cavendish continued to work on electricity after this initial paper, but he published no more on the subject.
Beginning in the mid-1780s Cavendish carried out most of his experiments at his house in London. The most famous of those experiments, published in 1798, was to determine the density of the Earth. His apparatus for weighing the world was a modification of the Englishman John Michell’s torsion balance. The balance had two small lead balls suspended from the arm of a torsion balance and two much larger stationary lead balls. Cavendish calculated the attraction between the balls from the period of oscillation of the torsion balance, and then he used this value to calculate the density of the Earth. What was extraordinary about Cavendish’s experiment was its elimination of every source of error and every factor that could disturb the experiment and its precision in measuring an astonishingly small attraction, a mere 1/50,000,000 of the weight of the lead balls. The result that Cavendish obtained for the density of the Earth is within 1 percent of the currently accepted figure.
The combination of painstaking care, precise experimen- tation, thoughtfully modified apparatus, and fundamental theory carries Cavendish’s unmistakable signature. It is fitting that the University of Cambridge’s great physics laboratory is named the Cavendish Laboratory.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

13E7D213-31A7-4D4E-BC84-346162E541CE.jpeg (135.95 KB, 下载次数: 50)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-11-28 06:05
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-11-28 06:07 编辑

约瑟夫·普利斯特里（英語：Joseph Priestley，1733年3月13日－1804年2月6日），18世紀英国的自然哲学家、化学家、牧师、教育家和自由政治理论家。出版过150部以上的著作，对气体特别是氧气的早期研究做出过重要贡献，但由于他坚持燃素说的理论，使其未成为化学革命的先驱者。(zh.wikipedia.org/约瑟夫·普利斯特里)

English clergyman, political theorist, and physical scientist Joseph Priestley contributed to advances in liberal political and religious thought and in experimental chemistry. He is best remembered for his contribution to the chemistry of gases.

Work in Electricity
In 1765 Priestley met the American scientist and statesman Benjamin Franklin, who encouraged him to publish The History and Present State of Electricity, with Original Experiments (1767). In this work, Priestley used history to show that scientific progress depended more on the accumulation of “new facts” that anyone could discover than on the theoretical insights of a few men of genius. This view shaped Priestley’s electrical experiments, in which he anticipated the inverse square law of electrical attraction, discovered that charcoal conducts electricity, and noted the relationship between electricity and chemical change.

The Chemistry of Gases
In 1767 Priestley began intensive experimental investigations into chemistry. Between 1772 and 1790, he published six volumes of Experiments and Observations on Different Kinds of Air and more than a dozen articles in the Royal Society’s Philosophical Transactions describing his experiments on gases, or “airs,” as they were then called. British pneumatic chemists had previously identified three types of gases: air, carbon dioxide (fixed air), and hydrogen (inflammable air). Priestley incorporated an explanation of the chemistry of these gases into the phlogiston theory, according to which combustible substances released phlogiston (an immaterial “principle of inflammability”) during burning.
Priestley discovered 10 new gases: nitric oxide (nitrous air), nitrogen dioxide (red nitrous vapour), nitrous oxide (inflammable nitrous air, later called “laughing gas”), hydrogen chloride (marine acid air), ammonia (alkaline air), sulfur dioxide (vitriolic acid air), silicon tetrafluoride (fluor acid air), nitrogen (phlogisticated air), oxygen (dephlogisticated air, independently codiscovered by Carl Wilhelm Scheele), and a gas later identified as carbon monoxide. Priestley’s experimental success resulted predominantly from his ability to design ingenious apparatuses and his skill in their manipulation. He gained particular renown for an improved pneumatic trough in which, by collecting gases over mercury instead of in water, he was able to isolate and examine gases that were soluble in water. For his work on gases, Priestley was awarded the Royal Society’s prestigious Copley Medal in 1773. Upon contemplating the processes of vegetation and the “agitation” of seas and lakes, Priestley envisioned the means by which a benevolent nature restored the “common air” that had been “vitiated and diminished” by such “noxious” processes as combustion and respiration. Apart from strengthening his own spiritual views, these observations informed the photosynthesis experiments performed by his contemporaries, the Dutch physician Jan Ingenhousz and the Swiss clergyman and naturalist Jean Senebier.
When confronted by the multitude of diseases that plagued the growing populations in towns and military installations, Priestley designed an apparatus that produced carbonated water, a mixture that he thought would provide medicinal benefit to sufferers of scurvy and vari- ous fevers. Although it ultimately proved ineffective in treating these disorders, the “gasogene” that employed this technique later made possible the soda-water industry. Priestley also designed the “eudiometer,” which was used in the general movement for sanitary reform and urban design to measure the “purity” (oxygen content) of atmospheric air.

The Discovery of Oxygen and the Chemical Revolution
Priestley’s lasting reputation in science is founded upon the discovery he made on Aug. 1, 1774, when he obtained a colourless gas by heating red mercuric oxide. Finding that a candle would burn and that a mouse would thrive in this gas, he called it “dephlogisticated air,” based upon the belief that ordinary air became saturated with phlogiston once it could no longer support combustion and life. Priestley was not yet sure, however, that he had discovered a “new species of air.” The following October, while in Paris on a journey through Europe, he informed the French chemist Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier how he obtained the new “air.” This meeting between the two scientists was highly significant for the future of chemistry. Lavoisier immediately repeated Priestley’s experiments and, between 1775 and 1780, conducted intensive investigations from which he derived the elementary nature of oxygen, recognized it as the “active” principle in the atmosphere, interpreted its role in combustion and respiration, and gave it its name. Lavoisier’s pronouncements of the activity of oxygen revolutionized chemistry.
In 1800 Priestley published a slim pamphlet, Doctrine of Phlogiston Established, and That of the Composition of Water Refuted, which he expanded to book length in 1803. The Doctrine of Phlogiston provided a detailed account of what he envisioned to be the empirical, theoretical, and methodological shortcomings of the oxygen theory. Priestley called for a patient, humble, experimental approach to God’s infinite creation. Chemistry could support piety and liberty only if it avoided speculative theorizing and encouraged the observation of God’s benevolent creation. The phlogiston theory was superseded by Lavoisier’s oxi- dation theory of combustion and respiration.

Turmoil and Exile
The English press and government decreed that Priestley’s support, together with that of his friend, the moral philosopher Richard Price, of the American and French Revolutions was “seditious.” On July 14, 1791, the “Church-and-King mob” destroyed Priestley’s house and laboratory. Priestley and his family retreated to the security of Price’s congregation at Hackney, near London. Priestley later began teaching at New College, Oxford, and defended his anti-British government views in Letters to the Right Honourable Edmund Burke (1791).
In 1794 Priestley fled to the United States, where he discovered a form of government that was “relatively tolerable.” His best-known writing in the United States, Letters to the Inhabitants of Northumberland (1799), became part of the Republican response to the Federalists. Priestley died at Northumberland, Pennsylvania, mourned and revered by Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

E76A7C32-4B82-4409-AB1A-DF3569C09D6F.jpeg (73.05 KB, 下载次数: 52)

EA5AD93E-A9FB-4526-AB51-1E4CD4F634C8.jpeg (133.28 KB, 下载次数: 50)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-11-29 00:21
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-11-29 00:39 编辑

路易吉·阿罗西奥·伽伐尼（意大利文：Luigi Aloisio Galvani, 拉丁文：Aloysius Galvani）1737年9月9日－1798年12月4日）是意大利醫生、物理學家与哲学家，現代產科學的先驅者。他在意大利博洛尼亞出生和逝世。在1780年，他發現死青蛙的腿部肌肉接觸电火花時會顫動，從而發現神經元和肌肉會產生電力。他是第一批涉足生物电领域研究的人物之一，这一领域在今天仍然在研究神经系统的电信号和电模式。(zh.wikipedia.org/路易吉·伽伐尼)

Luigi Galvani was an Italian physician and physicist who investigated the nature and effects of what he conceived to be electricity in animal tissue. His discoveries led to the invention of the voltaic pile, a kind of battery that makes possible a constant source of current electricity.

Early Years
Galvani followed his father’s preference for medicine by attending the University of Bologna, graduating in 1759. On obtaining the doctor of medicine degree, with a thesis (1762) De ossibus on the formation and development of bones, he was appointed lecturer in anatomy at the University of Bologna and professor of obstetrics at the separate Institute of Arts and Sciences. Beginning with his doctoral thesis, his early research was in comparative anatomy—such as the structure of renal tubules, nasal mucosa, and the middle ear—with a tendency toward physiology, a direction appropriate to the later work for which he is noted.
Galvani’s developing interest was indicated by his lectures on the anatomy of the frog in 1773 and in electrophysiology in the late 1770s, when, following the acquisition of an electrostatic machine (a large device for making sparks) and a Leyden jar (a device used to store static electricity), he began to experiment with muscular stimulation by electrical means. His notebooks indicate that, from the early 1780s, animal electricity remained his major field of investigation. Numerous ingenious observa- tions and experiments have been credited to him; in 1786, for example, he obtained muscular contraction in a frog by touching its nerves with a pair of scissors during an electrical storm. He also observed the legs of a skinned frog kick when a scalpel touched a lumbar nerve of the animal while an electrical machine was activated.
Galvani assured himself by further experiments that the twitching was, in fact, related to the electrical action. He also elicited twitching without the aid of the electrostatic machine by pressing a copper hook into a frog’s spinal cord and hanging the hook on an iron railing. Although twitching could occur during a lightning storm or with the aid of an electrostatic machine, it also occurred with only a metallic contact between leg muscles and nerves leading to them. A metallic arc connecting the two tissues could therefore be a substitute for the electrostatic machine.

Electrical Nature of Nerve Impulse
Galvani delayed the announcement of his findings until 1791, when he published his essay De Viribus Electricitatis in Motu Musculari Commentarius (Commentary on the Effect of Electricity on Muscular Motion). He concluded that animal tissue contained a heretofore neglected innate, vital force, which he termed “animal electricity,” which activated nerve and muscle when spanned by metal probes. He believed that this new force was a form of electricity in addition to the “natural” form that is produced by lightning or by the electric eel and torpedo ray and to the “artificial” form that is produced by friction (i.e., static electricity). He consid- ered the brain to be the most important organ for the secretion of this “electric fluid” and the nerves to be conductors of the fluid to the nerve and muscle, the tissues of which act as did the outer and inner surfaces of the Leyden jar. The flow of this electric fluid provided a stimulus for the irritable muscle fibres, according to his explanation.
Galvani’s scientific colleagues generally accepted his views, but Alessandro Volta, the outstanding professor of physics at the University of Pavia, was not convinced by the analogy between the muscle and the Leyden jar. Deciding that the frog’s legs served only as an indicating electroscope, he held that the contact of dissimilar metals was the true source of stimulation; he referred to the electricity so generated as “metallic electricity” and decided that the muscle, by contracting when touched by metal, resembled the action of an electroscope. Furthermore, Volta said that, if two dissimilar metals in contact both touched a muscle, agitation would also occur and increase with the dissimilarity of the metals. Thus Volta rejected the idea of an “animal electric fluid,” replying that the frog’s legs responded to differences in metal temper, composition, and bulk. Galvani refuted this by obtaining muscular action with two pieces of the same material. Galvani’s gen- tle nature and Volta’s high principles precluded any harshness between them. Volta, who coined the term galvanism, said of Galvani’s work that “it contains one of the most beautiful and most surprising discoveries.”
In retrospect, Galvani and Volta are both seen to have been partly right and partly wrong. Galvani was correct in attributing muscular contractions to an electrical stimulus but wrong in identifying it as an “animal electricity.” Volta correctly denied the existence of an “animal electricity” but was wrong in implying that every electrophysiological effect requires two different metals as sources of current.
Galvani, shrinking from the controversy over his discovery, continued his work as teacher, obstetrician, and surgeon, treating both wealthy and needy without regard to fee. In 1794 he offered a defense of his position in an anonymous book, Dell’uso e dell’attività dell’arco conduttore nella contrazione dei muscoli (“On the Use and Activity of the Conductive Arch in the Contraction of Muscles”), the supplement of which described muscular contraction without the need of any metal. He caused a muscle to con- tract by touching the exposed muscle of one frog with a nerve of another and thus established for the first time that bioelectric forces exist within living tissue.
Galvani provided the major stimulus for Volta to dis- cover a source of constant current electricity; this was the voltaic pile, or a battery, with its principles of operation combined from chemistry and physics. This discovery led to the subsequent age of electric power. Moreover, Galvani opened the way to new research in the physiology of muscle and nerve and to the entire subject of electrophysiology.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

76267642-B37A-417A-823C-B1AB0BC8636A.jpeg (129.21 KB, 下载次数: 50)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-11-29 23:31
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-11-29 23:33 编辑

弗里德里希·威廉·赫歇爾爵士，FRS，KH（德語：Friedrich Wilhelm Herschel，英語：Frederick William Herschel，1738年11月15日－1822年8月25日），出生於德國漢諾威，英國天文學家及音樂家，曾作出多項天文發現，包括天王星等。被譽為「恆星天文學之父」。(zh.wikipedia.org/威廉·赫歇爾)

German-born British astronomer Sir William Herschel was the founder of sidereal astronomy for the systematic observation of the heavens. He discovered the planet Uranus, hypothesized that nebulae are composed of stars, and developed a theory of stellar evolution. He was knighted in 1816.

Discovery of Uranus
The intellectual curiosity that Herschel acquired from his father led him from the practice to the theory of music, which he studied in Robert Smith’s Harmonics. From this book he turned to Smith’s A Compleat System of Opticks, which introduced him to the techniques of telescope construction. Herschel soon began to grind his own mirrors. They were ground from metal disks of copper, tin, and antimony in various proportions. He later produced large mirrors of superb quality—his telescopes proved far superior even to those used at the Greenwich Observatory. He also made his own eyepieces, the strongest with a magnifying power of 6,450 times. Herschel’s largest instrument, too cumbersome for regular use, had a mirror made of speculum metal, with a diameter of 122 centimetres (48 inches) and a focal length of 12 metres (40 feet). Completed in 1789, it became one of the technical wonders of the 18th century.
In 1781, during his third and most complete survey of the night sky, Herschel came upon an object that he realized was not an ordinary star. It proved to be the planet Uranus, the first planet to be discovered since prehistoric times. Herschel became famous almost overnight. His friend Dr. William Watson, Jr., introduced him to the Royal Society of London, which awarded him the Copley Medal for the discovery of Uranus, and elected him a Fellow. He was subsequently appointed as an astronomer to George III.
Herschel’s big telescopes were ideally suited to study the nature of nebulae, which appear as luminous patches in the sky. Some astronomers thought they were nothing more than clusters of innumerable stars the light of which blends to form a milky appearance. Others held that some nebulae were composed of a luminous fluid. However, Herschel found that his most powerful telescope could resolve into stars several nebulae that appeared “milky” to less well equipped observers. He was convinced that other nebulae would eventually be resolved into individual stars with more powerful instruments. This encouraged him to argue in 1784 and 1785 that all nebulae were formed of stars and that there was no need to postulate the existence of a mysterious luminous fluid to explain the observed facts. Nebulae that could not yet be resolved must be very distant systems, he maintained; and, since they seem large to the observer, their true size must indeed be vast—possibly larger even than the star system of which the Sun is a member. By this reasoning, Herschel was led to postulate the existence of what later were called “island universes” of stars.

Theory of the Evolution of Stars
In order to interpret the differences between these star clusters, Herschel emphasized their relative densities by contrasting a cluster of tightly packed stars with others in which the stars were widely scattered. These formations showed that attractive forces were at work. In other words, a group of widely scattered stars was at an earlier stage of its development than one whose stars were tightly packed. Thus, Herschel made change in time, or evolution, a fundamental explanatory concept in astronomy.
In 1785 Herschel developed a cosmogony—a theory concerning the origin of the universe: the stars originally were scattered throughout infinite space, in which attrac- tive forces gradually organized them into even more fragmented and tightly packed clusters. Turning then to the system of stars of which the Sun is part, he sought to determine its shape on the basis of two assumptions: (1) that with his telescope he could see all the stars in the sys- tem, and (2) that within the system the stars are regularly spread out. Both of these assumptions he subsequently had to abandon. But in his studies he gave the first major example of the usefulness of stellar statistics in that he could count the stars and interpret this data in terms of the extent in space of the Galaxy’s star system.

Theory of the Structure of Nebulae
On Nov. 13, 1790, Herschel observed a remarkable nebula, which he was forced to interpret as a central star surrounded by a cloud of “luminous fluid.” This discovery contradicted his earlier views. Hitherto Herschel had reasoned that many nebulae that he was unable to resolve (separate into distinct stars), even with his best telescopes, might be distant “island universes” (such objects are now known as galaxies). He was able, however, to adapt his earlier theory to this new evidence by concluding that the central star he had observed was condensing out of the surrounding cloud under the forces of gravity. In 1811 he extended his cosmogony backward in time to the stage when stars had not yet begun to form out of the fluid.
In dealing with the structural organization of the heavens, Herschel assumed that all stars were equally bright, so that differences in apparent brightness are an index only of differences in distances. Throughout his career he stubbornly refused to acknowledge the accumulating evidence that contradicted this assumption. Herschel’s labours through 20 years of systematic sweeps for nebulae (1783–1802) resulted in three catalogs listing 2,500 nebulae and star clusters that he substituted for the 100 or so milky patches previously known. He also cataloged 848 double stars—pairs of stars that appear close together in space, and measurements of the comparative brightness of stars. He observed that double stars did not occur by chance as a result of random scattering of stars in space but that they actually revolved about each other. His 70 published papers include not only studies of the motion of the solar system through space and the announcement in 1800 of the discovery of infrared rays but also a succession of detailed investigations of the planets and other members of the solar system.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

1EF68DE1-FA3C-448D-B2DF-DEFA835C9565.jpeg (108.17 KB, 下载次数: 55)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-17 02:36
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-12-17 02:56 编辑

安托万-洛朗·德·拉瓦锡（法語：Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier，1743年8月26日－1794年5月8日），法国貴族，著名化学家、生物学家，被後世尊稱為“近代化學之父l。他使化学从定性转为定量，給出了氧與氫的命名，並且預測了硅的存在。他幫助建立了公制。拉瓦锡提出了「元素」的定義，按照這定義，於1789年發表第一個現代化學元素列表，列出33種元素，其中包括光與熱和一些當時被認為是元素的化合物。拉瓦锡的貢獻促使18世紀的化學更加物理及數學化。他提出规范的化学命名法，撰写了第一部真正現代化学教科书《化學基本論述》（Traité élémentaire de Chimie）。他倡导并改进定量分析方法并用其验证了质量守恒定律。他創立氧化说以解释燃烧等实验现象，指出动物的呼吸实质上是缓慢氧化。这些划时代贡献使得他成为历史上最伟大的化学家之一。拉瓦锡不幸在法国大革命中被送上断头台而死。(zh.wikipedia.org/安托万-洛朗·德·拉瓦锡)

Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier was a prominent French chemist and leading figure in the 18th-century chemical revolution who developed an experimentally based theory of the chemical reactivity of oxygen and coau- thored the modern system for naming chemical substances. Having also served as a leading financier and public admin- istrator before the French Revolution, he was executed with other financiers during the revolutionary terror.

Pneumatic Chemistry
The chemistry Lavoisier studied as a student was not a subject particularly noted for conceptual clarity or theoretical rigour. Although chemical writings contained considerable information about the substances chemists studied, little agreement existed upon the precise composition of chemical elements or between explanations of changes in composition. Many natural philosophers still viewed the four elements of Greek natural philosophy— earth, air, fire, and water—as the primary substances of all matter. Chemists like Lavoisier focused their attention upon analyzing “mixts” (i.e., compounds), such as the salts formed when acids combine with alkalis. They hoped that by first identifying the properties of simple substances they would then be able to construct theories to explain the properties of compounds.
Pneumatic chemistry was a lively subject at the time Lavoisier became interested in a particular set of problems that involved air: the linked phenomena of combustion, respiration, and what 18th-century chemists called calcination (the change of metals to a powder [calx], such as that obtained by the rusting of iron).

Conservation of Mass
The assertion that mass is conserved in chemical reactions was an assumption of Enlightenment investigators rather than a discovery revealed by their experiments. Lavoisier believed that matter was neither created nor destroyed in chemical reactions, and in his experiments he sought to demonstrate that this belief was not violated. Still he had difficulty proving that his view was universally valid. His insistence that chemists accepted this assumption as a law was part of his larger program for raising chemistry to the investigative standards and causal explanation found in contemporary experimental physics.
While other chemists were also looking for conserva- tion principles capable of explaining chemical reactions, Lavoisier was particularly intent on collecting and weigh- ing all the substances involved in the reactions he studied. His success in the many elaborate experiments he con- ducted was in large part due to his independent wealth, which enabled him to have expensive apparatus built to his design, and to his ability to recruit and direct talented research associates. Today the conservation of mass is still sometimes taught as “Lavoisier’s law,” which is indicative of his success in making this principle a foundation of modern chemistry.

Phlogiston Theory
After being elected a junior member of the Academy of Sciences, Lavoisier began searching for a field of research in which he could distinguish himself. Chemists had long recognized that burning, like breathing, required air, and they also knew that iron rusts only upon exposure to air. Noting that burning gives off light and heat, that warm- blooded animals breathe, and that ores are turned into metals in a furnace, they concluded that fire was the key causal element behind these chemical reactions. The Enlightenment German chemist Georg Ernst Stahl pro- vided a well-regarded explanation of these phenomena. Stahl hypothesized that a common “fiery substance” he called phlogiston was released during combustion, respi- ration, and calcination, and that it was absorbed when these processes were reversed. Although plausible, this theory raised a number of problems for those who wished to explain chemical reactions in terms of substances that could be isolated and measured.
In the early stages of his research Lavoisier regarded the phlogiston theory as a useful hypothesis, but he sought ways either to solidify its firm experimental foundation or to replace it with an experimentally sound theory of com- bustion. In the end his theory of oxygenation replaced the phlogiston hypothesis, but it took Lavoisier many years and considerable help from others to reach this goal.

Oxygen Theory of Combustion
The oxygen theory of combustion resulted from a demanding and sustained campaign to construct an experimentally grounded chemical theory of combustion, respiration, and calcination. Lavoisier’s research in the early 1770s focused upon weight gains and losses in calcination. It was known that when metals slowly changed into powders (calxes), as was observed in the rusting of iron, the calx actually weighed more than the original metal, whereas when the calx was “reduced” to a metal, a loss of weight occurred. The phlogiston theory did not account for these weight changes, for fire itself could not be isolated and weighed. Lavoisier hypothesized that it was probably the fixation and release of air, rather than fire, that caused the observed gains and losses in weight. This idea set the course of his research for the next decade.
Along the way, he encountered related phenomena that had to be explained. Mineral acids, for instance, were made by roasting a mineral such as sulfur in fire and then mixing the resultant calx with water. Lavoisier had initially conjectured that the sulfur combined with air in the fire and that the air was the cause of acidity. However, it was not at all obvious just what kind of air made sulfur acidic. The problem was further complicated by the concurrent discovery of new kinds of airs within the atmosphere. British pneumatic chemists made most of these discoveries, with Joseph Priestley leading the effort.
And it was Priestley, despite his unrelenting adherence to the phlogiston theory, who ultimately helped Lavoisier unravel the mystery of oxygen. Priestley isolated oxygen in August 1774 after recognizing several properties that distinguished it from atmospheric air. In Paris at the same time, Lavoisier and his colleagues were experimenting with a set of reactions identical to those that Priestley was studying, but they failed to notice the novel properties of the air they collected. Priestley visited Paris later that year and at a dinner held in his honour at the Academy of Sciences informed his French colleagues about the properties of this new air. Lavoisier, who was familiar with Priestley’s research and held him in high regard, hurried back to his laboratory, repeated the experiment, and found that it produced precisely the kind of air he needed to complete his theory. He called the gas that was produced oxygen, the generator of acids. Isolating oxygen allowed him to explain both the quantitative and qualitative changes that occurred in combustion, respiration, and calcination.

The Chemical Revolution
In the canonical history of chemistry Lavoisier is celebrated as the leader of the 18th-century chemical revolution and consequently one of the founders of modern chemistry. Lavoisier was fortunate in having made his contributions to the chemical revolution before the disruptions of political revolution. By 1785 his new theory of combustion was gaining support, and the campaign to reconstruct chemistry according to its precepts began. One tactic to enhance the wide acceptance of his new theory was to propose a related method of naming chemical substances.
In 1787 Lavoisier and three prominent colleagues published a new nomenclature of chemistry, and it was soon widely accepted, thanks largely to Lavoisier’s eminence and the cultural authority of Paris and the Academy of Sciences. Its fundamentals remain the method of chemical nomenclature in use today. Two years later Lavoisier published a programmatic Traité élémentaire de chimie (Elementary Treatise on Chemistry) that described the pre- cise methods chemists should employ when investigating, organizing, and explaining their subjects. It was a worthy culmination of a determined and largely successful program to reinvent chemistry as a modern science.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

D8CEB502-5782-452F-912F-34E91D9C63AE.jpeg (133.87 KB, 下载次数: 43)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-18 00:02
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-12-18 00:21 编辑

皮埃尔-西蒙·拉普拉斯侯爵（法語：Pierre-Simon marquis de Laplace，1749年3月23日－1827年3月5日），法国著名的天文学家和数学家，他的工作对天体力学和统计学有举足轻重的发展。(zh.wikipedia.org/皮埃尔-西蒙·拉普拉斯)

Pierre-Simon, marquis de Laplace was a French mathematician, astronomer, and physicist and is best known for his investigations into the stability of the solar system. Laplace successfully accounted for all the observed deviations of the planets from their theoretical orbits by applying Sir Isaac Newton’s theory of gravitation to the solar system, and he developed a conceptual view of evolu- tionary change in the structure of the solar system. He also demonstrated the usefulness of probability for interpreting scientific data.
Laplace was the son of a peasant farmer. Little is known of his early life except that he quickly showed his mathematical ability at the military academy at Beaumont. In 1766 Laplace entered the University of Caen, but he left for Paris the next year, apparently without taking a degree. He arrived with a letter of recommendation to the mathematician Jean d’Alembert, who helped him secure a professorship at the école Militaire, where he taught from 1769 to 1776.
In 1773 he began his major lifework—applying Newtonian gravitation to the entire solar system—by taking up a particularly troublesome problem: why Jupiter’s orbit appeared to be continuously shrinking while Saturn’s continually expanded. The mutual gravitational interactions within the solar system were so complex that mathematical solution seemed impossible; indeed, Newton had concluded that divine intervention was periodically required to preserve the system in equilibrium. Laplace announced the invariability of planetary mean motions (average angular velocity). This discovery in 1773, the first and most important step in establishing the stability of the solar system, was the most important advance in physical astronomy since Newton. It won him associate membership in the French Academy of Sciences the same year.
Applying quantitative methods to a comparison of liv- ing and nonliving systems, Laplace and the chemist Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier in 1780, with the aid of an ice calorimeter that they had invented, showed respiration to be a form of combustion. Returning to his astronomical investigations with an examination of the entire subject of planetary perturbations—mutual gravitational effects— Laplace in 1786 proved that the eccentricities and inclinations of planetary orbits to each other will always remain small, constant, and self-correcting. The effects of perturbations were therefore conservative and periodic, not cumulative and disruptive.
During 1784–85 Laplace worked on the subject of attraction between spheroids; in this work the potential function of later physics can be recognized for the first time. Laplace explored the problem of the attraction of any spheroid upon a particle situated outside or upon its surface. Through his discovery that the attractive force of a mass upon a particle, regardless of direction, can be obtained directly by differentiating a single function, Laplace laid the mathematical foundation for the scien- tific study of heat, magnetism, and electricity.
Laplace removed the last apparent anomaly from the theoretical description of the solar system in 1787 with the announcement that lunar acceleration depends on the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit. Although the mean motion of the Moon around the Earth depends mainly on the gravitational attraction between them, it is slightly diminished by the pull of the Sun on the Moon. This solar action depends, however, on changes in the eccentricity of the Earth’s orbit resulting from perturbations by the other planets. As a result, the Moon’s mean motion is accelerated as long as the Earth’s orbit tends to become more circular; but, when the reverse occurs, this motion is retarded. The inequality is therefore not truly cumulative, Laplace concluded, but is of a period running into millions of years. The last threat of instability thus disappeared from the theoretical description of the solar system.
In 1796 Laplace published Exposition du système du monde (The System of the World), a semipopular treatment of his work in celestial mechanics and a model of French prose. The book included his “nebular hypothesis”—attributing the origin of the solar system to cooling and contracting of a gaseous nebula—which strongly influenced future thought on planetary origin. His Traité de mécanique céleste (Celestial Mechanics), appearing in five volumes between 1798 and 1827, summarized the results obtained by his mathematical development and application of the law of gravitation. He offered a complete mechanical interpretation of the solar system by devising methods for calculating the motions of the planets and their satellites and their perturbations, including the resolution of tidal problems. The book made him a celebrity.
In 1814 Laplace published a popular work for the general reader, Essai philosophique sur les probabilités (A Philosophical Essay on Probability). This work was the introduction to the second edition of his comprehensive and important Théorie analytique des probabilités (Analytic Theory of Probability), first published in 1812, in which he described many of the tools he invented for mathematically predicting the probabilities that particular events will occur in nature. He applied his theory not only to the ordinary problems of chance but also to the inquiry into the causes of phenomena, vital statistics, and future events, while emphasizing its importance for physics and astronomy. The book is notable also for including a special case of what became known as the central limit theorem. Laplace proved that the distribution of errors in large data samples from astronomical observations can be approximated by a Gaussian or normal distribution.
Probably because he did not hold strong political views and was not a member of the aristocracy, he escaped imprisonment and execution during the French Revolution. Laplace was president of the Board of Longitude, aided in the organization of the metric system, helped found the scientific Society of Arcueil, and was created a marquis. He served for six weeks as minister of the interior under Napoleon, who famously reminisced that Laplace “carried the spirit of the infinitesimal into administration.”

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

936DAA41-CBAC-4977-A097-045CB43F81CD.jpeg (122.38 KB, 下载次数: 62)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-19 01:30
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-4-30 02:41 编辑

愛德華·詹納（英文：Edward Jenner，1749年5月17日－1823年1月26日），FRS，亦譯作愛德華·金納或琴納，是一名英國醫生，生於英國告羅士打郡伯克利牧區一個牧師家庭，以研究及推廣牛痘疫苗，防止天花而聞名，被稱為疫苗之父。并且为后人的研究打开了通道，促使巴斯德、科赫等人针对其他疾病寻求治疗和免疫的方法。(zh.wikipedia.org/愛德華·詹納)

这枚PHQ不是英国皇家邮政极限明信片，因为它是把邮票放大印为明信片，包括齿孔，皇冠和面值。由于他们的存在，英国很少人用非PHQ片来自制极限明信片。PHQ 不能参加极限邮展，也许作为明信片类别展出。谁有极限明信片？

The 'PHQ' stands for Postal Headquarters. All items published by the Post Office are given a number which is prefixed by letters. The first card issued, on 16 May 1973, was numbered PHQ1, and the numbering sequence has continued to the present day.
There are three main areas of collecting interest. Many collectors like to collect only the unused cards, but some like to obtain them with first day of issue postmarks. Others like to obtain them with special handstamps that have some connection to the stamp subject matter. Also, stamp collectors will usually put the stamp on the back of the card, but a very popular variation is for the stamp to be applied to the face of the card, so that the postcard picture, stamp and postmark are all visible on the same face. (en.wikipedia.org/PHQ card)

22 02 2022 伦敦世展戳在五十三樓。

068F8024-0595-4D5A-BD43-3792DE4864A2.jpeg (269.45 KB, 下载次数: 57)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-19 01:31
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-4-30 02:42 编辑

English surgeon Edward Jenner is best known as the discoverer of vaccination for smallpox. Jenner lived at a time when the patterns of British medical practice and education were undergoing gradual change. During this time, the division between the trained physicians and the apothecaries or surgeons—who acquired their medical knowledge through apprenticeship rather than through academic work—was becoming less sharp, and hospital work was becoming much more important.
Jenner attended grammar school and at the age of 13 was apprenticed to a nearby surgeon. In the following eight years Jenner acquired a sound knowledge of medical and surgical practice. On completing his apprenticeship at the age of 21, he went to London and became the house pupil of John Hunter, who was on the staff of St. George’s Hospital and was one of the most prominent surgeons in London. Even more important, however, he was an anatomist, biologist, and experimentalist of the first rank; not only did he collect biological specimens, but he also concerned himself with problems of physiology and function.
The firm friendship that grew between the two men lasted until Hunter’s death in 1793. From no one else could Jenner have received the stimuli that so confirmed his natural bent—a catholic interest in biological phenomena, disciplined powers of observation, sharpening of critical faculties, and a reliance on experimental investigation. From Hunter, Jenner received the characteristic advice, “Why think [i.e., speculate]—why not try the experiment?”
In addition to his training and experience in biology, Jenner made progress in clinical surgery. After studying in London from 1770 to 1773, he returned to country practice in Berkeley and enjoyed substantial success. He was capable, skillful, and popular. In addition to practicing medicine, he joined two medical groups for the promotion of medical knowledge and wrote occasional medical papers. He played the violin in a musical club, wrote light verse, and, as a naturalist, made many observations, particularly on the nesting habits of the cuckoo and on bird migration. He also collected specimens for Hunter; many of Hunter’s letters to Jenner have been preserved, but Jenner’s letters to Hunter have unfortunately been lost. After one disappointment in love in 1778, Jenner married in 1788.
Smallpox was widespread in the 18th century, and occasional outbreaks of special intensity resulted in a very high death rate. The disease, a leading cause of death at the time, respected no social class, and disfigurement was not uncommon in patients who recovered. The only means of combating smallpox was a primitive form of vaccination called variolation—intentionally infecting a healthy person with the “matter” taken from a patient sick with a mild attack of the disease. The practice, which originated in China and India, was based on two distinct concepts: first, that one attack of smallpox effectively protected against any subsequent attack and, second, that a person deliberately infected with a mild case of the disease would safely acquire such protection. It was, in present-day terminology, an “elective” infection—i.e., one given to a person in good health. Unfortunately, the transmitted disease did not always remain mild, and mortality sometimes occurred. Furthermore, the inoculated person could disseminate the disease to others and thus act as a focus of infection.
Jenner had been impressed by the fact that a person who had suffered an attack of cowpox—a relatively harmless disease that could be contracted from cattle—could not take the smallpox—i.e., could not become infected whether by accidental or intentional exposure to small- pox. Pondering this phenomenon, Jenner concluded that cowpox not only protected against smallpox but could be transmitted from one person to another as a deliberate mechanism of protection.
The story of the great breakthrough is well known. In May 1796 Jenner found a young dairymaid, Sarah Nelmes, who had fresh cowpox lesions on her hand. On May 14, using matter from Sarah’s lesions, he inoculated an eight- year-old boy, James Phipps, who had never had smallpox. Phipps became slightly ill over the course of the next 9 days but was well on the 10th. On July 1 Jenner inoculated the boy again, this time with smallpox matter. No disease developed; protection was complete. In 1798 Jenner, having added further cases, published privately a slender book entitled An Inquiry into the Causes and Effects of the Variolae Vaccinae.The procedure spread rapidly to America and the rest of Europe and soon was carried around the world.
Despite errors and occasional chicanery, the death rate from smallpox plunged. Jenner received worldwide recognition and many honours, but he made no attempt to enrich himself through his discovery and actually devoted so much time to the cause of vaccination that his private practice and personal affairs suffered severely. Parliament voted him a sum of ￡10,000 in 1802 and a further sum of ￡20,000 in 1806. Jenner not only received honours but also aroused opposition and found himself subjected to attacks and calumnies, despite which he continued his activities on behalf of vaccination. His wife, ill with tuberculosis, died in 1815, and Jenner retired from public life.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

这枚是英国剑桥大学教授印制品。

22 02 2022 伦敦世展戳在五十三樓。

FC0EF728-0F02-46CC-8BFA-35CEBE586CB7.jpeg (112.4 KB, 下载次数: 53)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-20 01:15
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-12-20 01:30 编辑

约翰·道尔顿（英語：John Dalton，/ˈdɔːltən/，1766年9月6日－1844年7月27日），英国皇家学会成员，化学家、物理学家。近代原子理论的提出者，对色盲亦有研究。很多化学家使用道尔顿作为原子量的单位。(zh.wikipedia.org/约翰·道尔顿).

English meteorologist and chemist John Dalton was a pioneer in the development of modern atomic theory.

Early Scientific Career
In 1793 Dalton published a collection of essays, Meteorological Observations and Essays, on meteorologic topics based on his own observations together with those of his friends John Gough and Peter Crosthwaite. It created little stir at first but contained original ideas that, together with Dalton’s more developed articles, marked the transition of meteorology from a topic of general folklore to a serious scientific pursuit.
Dalton upheld the view, against contemporary opinion, that the atmosphere was a physical mixture of approximately 80 percent nitrogen and 20 percent oxygen rather than being a specific compound of elements. He measured the capacity of the air to absorb water vapour and the variation of its partial pressure with temperature. He defined partial pressure in terms of a physical law whereby every constituent in a mixture of gases exerted the same pressure it would have if it had been the only gas present. One of Dalton’s contemporaries, the British scientist John Frederic Daniell, later hailed him as the “father of meteorology.”
Soon after the publication of the essays, Dalton wrote a description of the defect he had discovered in his own and his brother’s vision. This paper was the first publication on colour blindness, which for some time thereafter was known as Daltonism.

Atomic Theory
By far Dalton’s most influential work in chemistry was his atomic theory. Attempts to trace precisely how Dalton developed this theory have proved futile; even Dalton’s own recollections on the subject are incomplete. He based his theory of partial pressures on the idea that only like atoms in a mixture of gases repel one another, whereas unlike atoms appear to react indifferently toward each other. This conceptualization explained why each gas in a mixture behaved independently. Although this view was later shown to be erroneous, it served a useful purpose in allowing him to abolish the idea, held by many previous atomists from the Greek philosopher Democritus to the 18th-century mathematician and astronomer Ruggero Giuseppe Boscovich, that atoms of all kinds of matter are alike. Dalton claimed that atoms of different elements vary in size and mass, and indeed this claim is the cardinal feature of his atomic theory. He focused upon determining the relative masses of each different kind of atom, a process that could be accomplished, he claimed, only by considering the number of atoms of each element present in different chemical compounds.
Although Dalton had taught chemistry for several years, he had not yet performed actual research in this field. In a memoir read to the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society on Oct. 21, 1803, he claimed: “An inquiry into the relative weights of the ultimate particles of bodies is a subject, as far as I know, entirely new; I have lately been prosecuting this inquiry with remarkable success.” He described his method of measuring the masses of various elements, including hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen, according to the way they combined with fixed masses of each other. If such measurements were to be meaningful, the elements had to combine in fixed pro- portions. His measurements, crude as they were, allowed him to formulate the Law of Multiple Proportions: When two elements form more than one compound, the masses of one element that combine with a fixed mass of the other are in a ratio of small whole numbers. Thus, taking the ele- ments as A and B, various combinations between them naturally occur according to the mass ratios A:B = x:y or x:2y or 2x:y, and so on. Different compounds were formed by combining atomic building blocks of different masses. As the Swedish chemist Jöns Jacob Berzelius wrote to Dalton: “The law of multiple proportions is a mystery without the atomic theory.” And Dalton provided the basis for this theory.
The problem remained, however, that a knowledge of ratios was insufficient to determine the actual number of elemental atoms in each compound. For example, meth- ane was found to contain twice as much hydrogen as ethylene. Following Dalton’s rule of “greatest simplicity,” namely, that AB is the most likely combination for which he found a meretricious justification in the geometry of close-packed spheres, he assigned methane a combination of one carbon and two hydrogen atoms and ethylene a combination of one carbon and one hydrogen atom. This is now known to be incorrect because the methane mole- cule is chemically symbolized as CH4 and the ethylene molecule as C2H4. Nevertheless, Dalton’s atomic theory triumphed over its weaknesses because his foundational argument was correct. However, overcoming the defects of Dalton’s theory was a gradual process, finalized in 1858 only after the Italian chemist Stanislao Cannizzaro pointed out the utility of Amedeo Avogadro’s hypothesis in deter- mining molecular masses. Since then, chemists have shown
the theory of Daltonian atomism to be a key factor underlying further advances in their field. Organic chemistry in particular progressed rapidly once Dalton’s theory gained acceptance. Dalton’s atomic theory earned him the sobriquet “father of chemistry.”

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

937071F2-8751-4BDD-887F-B061995BD01D.jpeg (158.42 KB, 下载次数: 57)

74658AB5-DD95-4D67-A09E-AEFE15C9019D.jpeg (195.69 KB, 下载次数: 51)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-20 01:18
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-12-21 07:14 编辑

喬治·利奧波德·克雷蒂安·弗列德里克·達戈貝爾·居維葉男爵（法語：Baron Georges Léopold Chrétien Frédéric Dagobert Cuvier；1769年8月23日－1832年5月13日），簡稱喬治·居維葉（Georges Cuvier），法國博物學家、比较解剖学家與動物學家，也被称为“古生物学之父”。為博物學家弗列德利克·居維葉之兄，为19世紀早期的巴黎科學界名人之一。他在动物和化石方面的研究开启了比较解剖学和古生物学领域。

维叶的研究被认为是脊椎动物古生物学的基础，他扩展了卡尔·林奈分类法，将门分入不同的纲，并将化石和动物纳入分类系统。居维叶是最早确认了生物灭绝的生物学家。在他1813年的《对地球理论的论文》（Theory of the Earth）中，提出新的物种在周期性的灾难性的洪水后产生。他是19世纪初灾变论学说最具影响力的支持者。他与亚历山大·布隆尼亚尔对巴黎盆地地层的研究确立了生物地层学的基本原则。他的其他成就包括，确认了在美国发现的类似大象的骨头属于一种灭绝的动物，并将其命名为乳齿象；在巴拉圭挖掘的大骨骼是大地懒，一种巨大的史前地面树懒；命名了翼龙；描述了水生爬行动物沧龙。并且他第一个提出史前地球由爬行动物（而非哺乳动物）占据主导地位。(zh.wikipedia.org/喬治·居維葉)

French zoologist and statesman Baron Georges Cuvier established the sciences of comparative anatomy and paleontology. From 1784 to 1788 Cuvier attended the Académie Caroline (Karlsschule) in Stuttgart, Ger., where he studied comparative anatomy and learned to dissect. After graduation Cuvier served in 1788–95 as a tutor, during which time he wrote original studies of marine invertebrates, particularly the mollusks. His notes were sent to étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, a professor of zoology at the Museum of Natural History in Paris, and at Geoffroy’s urging Cuvier joined the staff of the museum. For a time the two scientists collaborated, and in 1795 they jointly published a study of mammalian classification, but their views eventually diverged.

Cuvier remained at the museum and continued his research in comparative anatomy. His first result, in 1797, was Tableau élémentaire de l’histoire naturelle des animaux (“Elementary Survey of the Natural History of Animals”), a popular work based on his lectures. In 1800–05, he published his Leçons d’anatomie comparée (“Lessons on Comparative Anatomy”). In this work, based also on his lectures at the museum, he put forward his principle of the “correlation of parts,” according to which the anatomical structure of every organ is functionally related to all other organs in the body of an animal, and the functional and structural characteristics of organs result from their interaction with their environment. Moreover, according to Cuvier, the functions and habits of an animal determine its anatomical form, in contrast to Geoffroy, who held the reverse theory—that anatomical structure preceded and made necessary a particular mode of life.

Cuvier also argued that the anatomical characteristics distinguishing groups of animals are evidence that species had not changed since the Creation. Each species is so well coordinated, functionally and structurally, that it could not survive significant change. He further maintained that each species was created for its own special purpose and each organ for its special function. In denying evolution, Cuvier disagreed with the views of his colleague Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, who published his theory of evolution in 1809, and eventually also with Geoffroy, who in 1825 published evidence concerning the evolution of crocodiles.

While continuing his zoological work at the museum, Cuvier served as imperial inspector of public instruction and assisted in the establishment of French provincial universities. For these services he was granted the title “chevalier” in 1811. He also wrote the Rapport historique sur les progrès des sciences naturelles depuis 1789, et sur leur état actuel (“Historical Report on the Progress of the Sciences”), published in 1810. These publications are lucid expositions of the European science of his time.

Meanwhile, Cuvier also applied his views on the correlation of parts to a systematic study of fossils that he had excavated. He reconstructed complete skeletons of unknown fossil quadrupeds. These constituted astonishing new evidence that whole species of animals had become extinct. Furthermore, he discerned a remarkable sequence in the creatures he exhumed. The deeper, more remote strata contained animal remains—giant salamanders, flying reptiles, and extinct elephants—that were far less similar to animals now living than those found in the more recent strata. He summarized his conclusions, first in 1812 in his Recherches sur les ossements fossiles de quadrupèdes (“Researches on the Bones of Fossil Vertebrates”), which included the essay “Discours préliminaire” (“Preliminary Discourse”), as well as in the expansion of this essay in book form in 1825, Discours sur les révolutions de la surface du globe (“Discourse on the Revolutions of the Globe”).

Cuvier’s work gave new prestige to the old concept of catastrophism according to which a series of “revolutions,” or catastrophes—sudden land upheavals and floods—had destroyed entire species of organisms and carved out the present features of the Earth. He believed that the area laid waste by these spectacular paroxysms, of which Noah’s flood was the most recent and dramatic, was sometimes repopulated by migration of animals from an area that had been spared. Catastrophism remained a major geologic doctrine until it was shown that slow changes over long periods of time could explain the features of the Earth.

In 1817 Cuvier published Le Règne animal distribué d ’après son organisation (“The Animal Kingdom, Distributed According to Its Organization”), which, with its many subsequent editions, was a significant advance over the systems of classification established by Linnaeus. Cuvier showed that animals possessed so many diverse anatomical traits that they could not be arranged in a single linear system. Instead, he arranged animals into four large groups of animals (vertebrates, mollusks, articulates, and radiates), each of which had a special type of anatomical organization. All animals within the same group were classified together, as he believed they were all modifications of one particular anatomical type. Although his classification is no longer used, Cuvier broke away from the 18th-century idea that all living things were arranged in a continuous series from the simplest up to man.

Cuvier’s lifework may be considered as marking a transition between the 18th-century view of nature and the view that emerged in the last half of the 19th century as a result of the doctrine of evolution. By rejecting the 18th- century method of arranging animals in a continuous series in favour of classifying them in four separate groups, he raised the key question of why animals were anatomically different. Although Cuvier’s doctrine of catastrophism did not last, he did set the science of palaeontology on a firm, empirical foundation. He did this by introducing fossils into zoological classification, showing the progressive relation between rock strata and their fossil remains, and by demonstrating, in his comparative anatomy and his reconstructions of fossil skeletons, the importance of functional and anatomical relationships.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

587513FD-B775-403F-842C-89C61E54DC78.jpeg (190.83 KB, 下载次数: 57)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-22 00:10
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-12-22 00:37 编辑

弗里德里希·威廉·海因里希·亚历山大·冯·洪堡（德语：Friedrich Wilhelm Heinrich Alexander von Humboldt，1769年9月14日－1859年5月6日），德国自然科学家、自然地理学家，近代气候学、植物地理学、地球物理学的创始人之一；涉猎科目很广，特别是生物学与地质学。教育家、柏林大學創始人威廉·馮·洪堡是其兄。他被誉为现代地理学的金字塔和现代地理学之父。还是英国皇家学会外籍会员。

晚年所写的5卷《宇宙》（德語：Kosmos，原著用法文写成）是他描述地球自然地理的著作。其对地理学和生物学有巨大贡献。如他认为自然界为一巨大的整体，各种自然现象相互联系，并依其内部力量不断运动发展；亦常从直接观察的事实出发，运用比较法，揭示自然现象之间的因果关系。同时，他开创了许多地理学界的重要概念，如等温线、等压线、地形剖面图、海拔温度梯度、洋流、植被的水平与垂直分布、气候带分布、温度垂直递减率、大陆东西岸温度差异、大陆性与海洋气候、地形对气候形成的作用等，并探讨气候同动植物的水平分异和垂直分异的关系；此外，他也发现地磁强度从极地向赤道递减的规律，火山分布与地下裂隙的关系等。(zh.wikipedia.org/亚历山大·冯·洪堡)

E2DDCA46-01F4-40A8-A3D5-CD9133ABAAF4.jpeg (138.71 KB, 下载次数: 56)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-22 00:37
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-12-26 00:26 编辑

German naturalist and explorer Alexander von Humboldt was a major figure in the classical period of physical geography and biogeography—areas of science now included in the earth sciences and ecology. With his book Kosmos he made a valuable contribution to the popularization of science. The Humboldt Current off the west coast of South America was named after him.

Expedition to South America
The conviction had grown in Humboldt that his real aim in life was scientific exploration, and in 1797 he set himself to acquiring a thorough knowledge of the systems of geodetic, meteorological, and geomagnetic measurements. He obtained permission from the Spanish government to visit the Spanish colonies in Central and South America. Completely shut off from the outside world, these colonies offered enormous possibilities to a scientific explorer. Humboldt’s social standing assured him of access to official circles, and in the Spanish prime minister Mariano de Urquijo he found an enlightened man who supported his application to the king for a royal permit. In the summer of 1799 he set sail from Marseille accompanied by the French botanist Aimé Bonpland, whom he had met in Paris, then the liveliest scientific centre in Europe. The estate he had inherited at the death of his mother enabled Humboldt to finance the expedition entirely out of his own pocket. Humboldt and Bonpland spent five years, from 1799 to 1804, in Central and South America, covering more than 6,000 miles (9,650 kilometres) on foot, on horseback, and in canoes. It was a life of great physical exertion and serious deprivation.

Starting from Caracas, they travelled south through grasslands and scrublands until they reached the banks of the Apure, a tributary of the Orinoco River. They continued their journey on the river by canoe as far as the Orinoco. Following its course and that of the Casiquiare, they proved that the Casiquiare River formed a connection between the vast river systems of the Amazon and the Orinoco. For three months Humboldt and Bonpland moved through dense tropical forests, tormented by clouds of mosquitoes and stifled by the humid heat. Their provisions were soon destroyed by insects and rain; the lack of food finally drove them to subsist on ground-up wild cacao beans and river water.

After a short stay in Cuba, Humboldt and Bonpland returned to South America for an extensive exploration of the Andes. From Bogotá to Trujillo, Peru, they wandered over the Andean Highlands—following a route now traversed by the Pan-American Highway, in their time a series of steep, rocky, and often very narrow paths. They climbed a number of peaks, including all the volcanoes in the sur- roundings of Quito, Ecuador; Humboldt’s ascent of Chimborazo (20,702 feet [6,310 metres]) to a height of 19,286 feet (5,878 metres), but short of the summit, remained a world mountain-climbing record for nearly 30 years. All these achievements were carried out without the help of modern mountaineering equipment, without ropes, crampons, or oxygen supplies; hence, Humboldt and Bonpland suffered badly from mountain sickness. But Humboldt turned his discomfort to advantage: he became the first person to ascribe mountain sickness to lack of oxygen in the rarefied air of great heights. He also studied the oceanic current off the west coast of South America that was originally named after him but is now known as the Peru Current.

In the spring of 1803, the two travellers sailed from Guayaquil to Acapulco, Mex., where they spent the last year of their expedition in a close study of this most developed and highly civilized part of the Spanish colonies. After a short stay in the United States, where Humboldt was received by President Jefferson, they sailed for France. Humboldt and Bonpland returned with an immense amount of information. In addition to a vast collection of new plants, there were determinations of longitudes and latitudes, measurements of the components of the Earth’s geomagnetic field, and daily observations of temperatures and barometric pressure, as well as statistical data on the social and economic conditions of Mexico.

Professional Life in Paris
The years from 1804 to 1827 Humboldt devoted to publi- cation of the data accumulated on the South American expedition. With the exception of brief visits to Berlin, he lived in Paris during this important period of his life. There he found not only collaborators among the French scientists—the greatest of his time—but engravers for his maps and illustrations and publishers for printing the 30 volumes into which the scientific results of the expedition were distilled. Of great importance were the meteorologi- cal data, with an emphasis on mean daily and nightly temperatures, and Humboldt’s representation on weather maps of isotherms (lines connecting points with the same mean temperature) and isobars (lines connecting points with the same barometric pressure for a given time or period)—all of which helped lay the foundation for the science of comparative climatology.

Even more important were his pioneering studies on the relationship between a region’s geography and its flora and fauna, and, above all, the conclusions he drew from his study of the Andean volcanoes concerning the role played by eruptive forces and metamorphosis in the history and ongoing development of the Earth’s crust. Lastly, his Political Essay on the Kingdom of New Spain contained a wealth of material on the geography and geology of Mexico, including descriptions of its political, social, and economic conditions, and also extensive population statistics.

During his years in Paris, Humboldt had the ability to cultivate deep and long-lasting friendships with well- known scientists, such as the renowned physicist and astronomer François Arago, and to evoke respect and admiration from the common man, an ability that reflected his generosity, humanity, and vision of what science could do. He was, moreover, always willing and anxious to assist young scientists at the beginning of their careers. Such men as the German chemist Justus von Liebig and the Swiss-born zoologist Louis Agassiz owed to Humboldt the means to continue their studies and embark on an aca career. The best proof of his wide interests and affectionate nature lies in his voluminous correspondence: about 8,000 letters remain.

Later Years
In 1827 Humboldt had to return to Berlin, where the King impatiently demanded his presence at court. In 1829 Humboldt was given the opportunity to visit Russia and Siberia. On the initiative of the Russian minister of finance, Count Yegor Kankrin, he was invited to visit the gold and platinum mines in the Urals. This expedition, lasting only one summer, was very different from the South American journey; the members, Humboldt and two young scien- tists, were accompanied throughout by an official guard, since they were guests of the Tsar. Humboldt and his companions had to endure tiresome receptions at the imperial court and in the homes of provincial governors. They travelled in carriages as far as the Altai Mountains and the Chinese frontier. The resulting geographical, geological, and meteorological observations, especially those regarding the Central Asian regions, were of great importance to the Western world, for Central Asia was then to a large degree unknown territory.

Even before his visit to Russia, he had returned to an investigation of a phenomenon that had aroused his interest in South America: the sudden fluctuations of the Earth’s geomagnetic field—the so-called magnetic storms. With the help of assistants, he carried out observations of the movement of a magnetometer in a quiet garden pavilion in Berlin; but it had been clear to him for a number of years that, to discover whether these magnetic storms were of terrestrial or extraterrestrial origin, it would be necessary to set up a worldwide net of magnetic observatories. The German mathematician Carl Friedrich Gauss had already begun to organize simultaneous measurements of the magnetic field by several observatories in Germany, England, and Sweden.

In 1836 Humboldt, still interested in the problem, approached the Royal Society in London with the request that it establish an additional series of stations in the British possessions overseas. As a result, the British government provided the means for permanent observatories in Canada, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand and equipped an Antarctic expedition. With the help of the mass of data produced by this international scientific collaboration, one of the first of its kind, the English geophysicist Sir Edward Sabine later succeeded in correlating the appearance of magnetic storms in the Earth’s atmosphere with the periodically changing activity of sunspots, thus proving the extraterrestrial origin of the storms.

During the last 25 years of his life, Humboldt was chiefly occupied with writing Kosmos, one of the most ambitious scientific works ever published. Four volumes appeared during his lifetime. Written in a pleasant, literary style, Kosmos gives a generally comprehensible account of the structure of the universe as then known, at the same time communicating the scientist’s excitement and aesthetic enjoyment at his discoveries. Humboldt had taken immense pains to discipline his inclination to discursive- ness, which often gave his writing a certain lack of logical coherence. He was rewarded for his effort by the success of his book, which, within a few years, had been translated into nearly all European languages.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

这枚德国邮票纪念弗里德里希·威廉·海因里希·亚历山大·冯·洪堡诞生250年今年9月发行。

1BB07B18-DA05-416B-BD91-28E096500CE5.jpeg (129.95 KB, 下载次数: 63)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-22 13:40
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-12-26 00:22 编辑

纪念名人而发行的邮票是司空见惯的，例如皇族，政治家，将军，艺术家，音乐家和科学家。这些邮票已经被制成了许多极限明信片。一个例子是为纪念皇家学会的著名成员而发行的2010年皇家邮政邮票。现有所有的极限明信片都是自制的，包括我的牛顿极限明信片（请参阅第30和31层）以及剑桥大学植物学教授自制的其他几枚（请参阅第25和40层以及未来的内容）。

我在将近五个月前开始写这个主题，研究科学家极限明信片的供求如何。由于中国的目标是成为本世纪及以后的科技大国，所以我也希望大众对科学家极限明信片有高度的兴趣。今年9月发行的这枚德国邮票纪念弗里德里希·威廉·海因里希·亚历山大·冯·洪堡诞生250年是今年的测试题。是否会有其他收集家(不一定是专业科学家)当他/她知道此邮票发行时，便会自制类似的极限明信片吗？等待结果中。

F09B1F86-D601-4367-976B-445DF567BD04.jpeg (114.21 KB, 下载次数: 63)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2019-12-23 12:56
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2019-12-26 00:31 编辑

安德烈-馬里·安培（法語：André-Marie Ampère，FRS，1775年1月20日－1836年6月10日) 是法国物理学家、数学家，经典电磁学的创始人之一。为了纪念他的贡献，国际单位制中电流的单位“安培”以他的姓氏命名。

1820年九月，丹麦物理学家奥斯特发现电流的磁效应。于是，安培开始着手建立描述电磁关系的物理理论与数学方程。为了进行定量研究，安培设计了一个检流计，可通过指针的偏转检测电流的方向并测量电流的大小。1822年，安培发表了一篇论文，对实验现象进行定量总结，发现两根平行载流导线以各自产生的磁场对另一根导线产生作用力。1826年，安培提出载流导线中的电流与其产生的磁场之间的关系，即安培定律。此后，安培的代表作《关于电动力学现象之数学理论的回忆录，独一无二的经历》出版，“电动力学”一词自此产生。(zh.wikipedia.org/安德烈-馬里·安培)

French physicist André-Marie Ampère founded and named the science of electrodynamics, now known as electromagnetism. His name endures in everyday life in the ampere, the unit for measuring electric current.

Early Life
Ampère, who was born into a prosperous bourgeois fam- ily during the height of the French Enlightenment, personified the scientific culture of his day. His father, Jean-Jacques Ampère, was a successful merchant, and also an admirer of the philosophy of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whose theories of education, as outlined in his treatise émile, were the basis of Ampère’s education. Rousseau argued that young boys should avoid formal schooling and pursue instead
an “education direct from nature.” Ampère’s father actualized this ideal by allowing his son to educate himself within the walls of his well-stocked library. French Enlightenment masterpieces such as Georges-Louis Leclerc, comte de Buffon’s Histoire naturelle, générale et particulière (begun in 1749) and Denis Diderot and Jean Le Rond d’Alembert’s Encyclopédie (volumes added between 1751 and 1772) thus became Ampère’s schoolmasters. In addition, he used his access to the latest mathematical books to begin teaching himself advanced mathematics at age 12. His mother was a devout woman, so Ampère was also initiated into the Catholic faith along with Enlightenment science.
The French Revolution (1787–99) that erupted during his youth was also formative. Ampère’s father was called into public service by the new revolutionary government, becoming a justice of the peace in a small town near Lyon. Yet when the Jacobin faction seized control of the Revolutionary government in 1792, Jean-Jacques Ampère resisted the new political tides, and he was guillotined on Nov. 24, 1793, as part of the Jacobin purges of the period.

While the French Revolution brought these personal traumas, it also created new institutions of science that ultimately became central to André-Marie Ampère’s professional success. Ampère’s maturation corresponded with the transition to the Napoleonic regime in France, and he found new opportunities for success within the technocratic structures favoured by the new French emperor.

In 1802 Ampère produced Considérations sur la théorie mathématique de jeu (“Considerations on the Mathematical Theory of Games”), a treatise on mathematical probabil- ity that he sent to the Paris Academy of Sciences in 1803. In the following years Ampère engaged in a diverse array of scientific inquiries—writing papers and engaging in topics ranging from mathematics and philosophy to chem- istry and astronomy. Such breadth was customary among the leading scientific intellectuals of the day.

Founding of Electromagnetism
In 1820 Ampère’s friend and eventual eulogist François Arago demonstrated before the members of the French Academy of Sciences the surprising discovery of Danish physicist Hans Christiaan Ørsted that a magnetic needle is deflected by an adjacent electric current. Ampère was well prepared to throw himself fully into this new line of research.

Ampère immediately set to work developing a mathematical and physical theory to understand the relationship between electricity and magnetism. Extending Ørsted’s experimental work, Ampère showed that two parallel wires carrying electric currents repel or attract each other, depending on whether the currents flow in the same or opposite directions, respectively. He also applied mathe- matics in generalizing physical laws from these experimental results. Most important was the principle that came to be called Ampère’s law, which states that the mutual action of two lengths of current-carrying wire is proportional to their lengths and to the intensities of their currents. Ampère also applied this same principle to magnetism, showing the harmony between his law and French physicist Charles Augustin de Coulomb’s law of magnetic action. Ampère’s devotion to, and skill with, experimental techniques anchored his science within the emerging fields of experimental physics.

Ampère also offered a physical understanding of the electromagnetic relationship, theorizing the existence of an “electrodynamic molecule” (the forerunner of the idea of the electron) that served as the constituent element of electricity and magnetism. Using this physical understanding of electromagnetic motion, Ampère developed a physical account of electromagnetic phenomena that was both empirically demonstrable and mathematically pre- dictive. In 1827 Ampère published his magnum opus, Mémoire sur la théorie mathématique des phénomènes électrodynamiques uniquement déduite de l’experience (Memoir on the Mathematical Theory of Electrodynamic Phenomena, Uniquely Deduced from Experience), the work that coined the name of his new science, electrodynamics, and became known ever after as its founding treatise. In recognition of his contri- bution to the making of modern electrical science, an international convention signed in 1881 established the ampere as a standard unit of electrical measurement, along with the coulomb, volt, ohm, and watt, which are named, respectively, after Ampère’s contemporaries Coulomb, Alessandro Volta of Italy, Georg Ohm of Germany, and James Watt of Scotland.

The 1827 publication of Ampère’s synoptic Mémoire brought to a close his feverish work over the previous seven years on the new science of electrodynamics. The text also marked the end of his original scientific work. His health began to fail, and he died while performing a university inspection, decades before his new science was canonized as the foundation stone for the modern science of electromagnetism.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

今天的考题: 这两枚同样的邮票和明信片，但其中之一枚是赝品，谁能看出端倪？

提示：看看日历或背诵一月大，二月小等。

28296B25-0FD7-4616-B3F4-F5F565A9DCAA.jpeg (124.25 KB, 下载次数: 68)

08C14055-77B4-4488-872B-988A4FC28F4C.jpeg (117.76 KB, 下载次数: 73)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2020-2-4 07:06
阿梅代奥·阿伏伽德罗（Amedeo Avogadro，1776年－1856年），意大利化学家，生于都灵。全名Lorenzo Romano Amedeo Carlo Avogadro di Quaregua。1811年发表了阿伏伽德罗假說，也就是今日的阿伏伽德罗定律，并提出分子概念及原子、分子区别等重要化学问题。著名的阿伏伽德罗常數（NA=6.02214129±0.00000027×1023，一般计算时常取6.02×1023或6.022×1023为近似值）以他的姓氏命名。(zh.wikipedia.org/阿梅代奥·阿伏伽德罗)

Italian mathematical physicist Amedeo Avogadro showed in what became known as Avogadro’s law that, under controlled conditions of temperature and pressure, equal volumes of gases contain an equal number of molecules.

Education and Early Career
The son of Filippo Avogadro, conte di Quaregna e Cerreto, a distinguished lawyer and senator in the Piedmont region of northern Italy, Avogadro graduated in jurisprudence in 1792 but did not practice law until after receiving his doc- torate in ecclesiastical law four years later. In 1801 he became secretary to the prefecture of Eridano.
Beginning in 1800 Avogadro privately pursued studies in mathematics and physics, and he focused his early research on electricity. In 1804 he became a corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences of Turin, and in 1806 he was appointed to the position of demonstrator at the academy’s college. Three years later he became professor of natural philosophy at the Royal College of Vercelli, a post he held until 1820 when he accepted the first chair of mathematical physics at the University of Turin. Due to civil disturbances in the Piedmont, the university was closed and Avogadro lost his chair in July 1822. The chair was reestablished in 1832 and offered to the French mathematical physicist Augustin-Louis Cauchy. A year later Cauchy left for Prague, and on Nov 28,1834, Avogadro was reappointed.

Molecular Hypothesis of Combining Gases
Avogadro is chiefly remembered for his molecular hypothesis, first stated in 1811, in which he claimed that equal volumes of all gases at the same temperature and pressure contain the same number of molecules. He used this hypothesis further to explain the French chemist Joseph- Louis Gay-Lussac’s law of combining volumes of gases (1808) by assuming that the fundamental units of elemen- tary gases may actually divide during chemical reactions. It also allowed for the calculation of the molecular weights of gases relative to some chosen standard. Avogadro and his contemporaries typically used the density of hydrogen gas as the standard for comparison. Thus, the following relationship was shown to exist:
Weight of 1 volume of gas or vapour / Weight of 1 volume of hydrogen =
Weight of 1 molecule of gas or vapour / Weight of 1 molecule of hydrogen

To distinguish between atoms and molecules of different kinds, Avogadro adopted terms including molécule intégrante (the molecule of a compound), molécule constituante (the molecule of an element), and molécule élémentaire (atom). Although his gaseous elementary molecules were predominantly diatomic, he also recognized the existence of monatomic, triatomic, and tetratomic elementary molecules.
In 1811 he provided the correct molecular formula for water, nitric and nitrous oxides, ammonia, carbon monoxide, and hydrogen chloride. Three years later he described the formulas for carbon dioxide, carbon disulfide, sulfur dioxide, and hydrogen sulfide. He also applied his hypothesis to metals and assigned atomic weights to 17 metallic elements based upon analyses of particular compounds that they formed. However, his references to gaz métalliques may have actually delayed chemists’ acceptance of his ideas. In 1821 he offered the correct formula for alcohol (C2H6O) and for ether (C4H10O).
Priority over who actually introduced the molecular hypothesis of gases was disputed throughout much of the 19th century. Avogadro’s claim rested primarily upon his repeated statements and applications. Others attributed this hypothesis to the French natural philosopher André- Marie Ampère, who published a similar idea in 1814. Many factors account for the fact that Avogadro’s hypothesis was generally ignored until after his death. First, the distinction between atoms and molecules was not generally understood. Furthermore, as similar atoms were thought to repel one another, the existence of polyatomic elementary molecules seemed unlikely.
Avogadro also mathematically represented his findings in ways more familiar to physicists than to chemists. Consider, for example, his proposed relationship between the specific heat of a compound gas and its chemical constituents: c2 = p c 2 + p c 2 + etc.

(Here c, c1, c2, etc., represent the specific heats at constant volume of the compound gas and its constituents; p1, p2, etc., represent the numbers of molecules of each component in the reaction). Based upon experimental evidence, Avogadro determined that the specific heat of a gas at constant volume was proportional to the square root of its attractive power for heat. In 1824 he calculated the “true affinity for heat” of a gas by dividing the square of its specific heat by its density. The results ranged from 0.8595 for oxygen to 10.2672 for hydrogen, and the numerical order of the affinities coincided with the electrochemical series, which listed the elements in the order of their chemical reactivities. Mathematically dividing an element’s affinity for heat by that of his selected standard, oxygen, resulted in what he termed the element’s “affinity number.” Between 1843 and his retirement in 1850, Avogadro wrote four memoirs on atomic volumes and designated affinity numbers for the elements using atomic volumes according to a method “independent of all chemical considerations”—
a claim that held little appeal for chemists.

Legacy
Avogadro’s minimal contact with prominent scientists and his habit of citing his own results increased his isolation. Although he argued in 1845 that his molecular hypothesis for determining atomic weights was widely accepted, considerable confusion still existed over the concept of atomic weights at that time. Avogadro’s hypothesis began to gain broad appeal among chemists only after his compatriot and fellow scientist Stanislao Cannizzaro demonstrated its value in 1858, two years after Avogadro’s death. Many of Avogadro’s pioneering ideas and methods anticipated later developments in physical chemistry. His hypothesis is now regarded as a law, and the value known as Avogadro’s number (6.02214179 × 1023), the number of molecules in a gram molecule, or mole, of any substance, has become a fundamental constant of physical science.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

4F53F208-F95B-4F03-861E-C3F8E8D41203.jpeg (196.37 KB, 下载次数: 57)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2020-2-5 02:49
约瑟夫·路易·盖-吕萨克（法語：Joseph Louis Gay-Lussac，1778年12月6日－1850年5月10日），法国化学家和物理学家，以研究氣體而聞名。1802年盖-吕萨克发现了气体在恒压、升温时的线性膨胀的定律（查理-盖-吕萨克定律）。在法國巴黎大学附近有一条街道是以他命名的，在他的出生地有一个广场以他命名。盖-吕萨克葬于著名的巴黎拉雪茲神父公墓（Cimetière du Père-Lachaise）。(zh.wikipedia.org/约瑟夫·路易·盖-吕萨克)

French chemist and physicist Joseph-Louis Gay-Lussac pioneered investigations into the behaviour of gases, established new techniques for analysis, and made notable advances in applied chemistry.

Searching for Laws of Nature
In 1801 Gay-Lussac became involved in experiments on capillarity in order to study short-range forces. Gay-Lussac’s first publication (1802), however, was on the thermal expan- sion of gases. To ensure more accurate experimental results, he used dry gases and pure mercury. He concluded from his experiments that all gases expand equally over the temper- ature range 0–100 °C (32–212 °F). This law, usually (and mistakenly) attributed to French physicist J.-A.-C. Charles as “Charles’s law,” was the first of several regularities in the behaviour of matter that Gay-Lussac established.
Of the laws Gay-Lussac discovered, he remains best known for his law of the combining volumes of gases (1808). He had previously (1805) established that hydrogen and oxygen combine by volume in the ratio 2:1 to form water. Later experiments with boron trifluoride and ammonia produced spectacularly dense fumes and led him to investigate similar reactions, such as that between hydrogen chloride and ammonia, which combine in equal volumes to form ammonium chloride. Further study enabled him to generalize about the behaviour of all gases. Gay-Lussac’s approach to the study of matter was consistently volumetric rather than gravimetric, in contrast to that of his English contemporary John Dalton.
Another example of Gay-Lussac’s fondness for volumetric ratios appeared in an 1810 investigation into the composition of vegetable substances performed with his friend Louis-Jacques Thenard. Together they identified a class of substances (later called carbohydrates) including sugar and starch that contained hydrogen and oxygen in the ratio of 2:1. They announced their results in the form of three laws, according to the proportion of hydrogen and oxygen contained in the substances.

Other Researches
As a young man, Gay-Lussac participated in dangerous exploits for scientific purposes. In 1804 he ascended in a hydrogen balloon with Jean-Baptiste Biot in order to investigate the Earth’s magnetic field at high altitudes and to study the composition of the atmosphere. They reached an altitude of 4,000 metres (about 13,000 feet). In a following solo flight, Gay-Lussac reached 7,016 metres (more than 23,000 feet), thereby setting a record for the highest balloon flight that remained unbroken for a half-century. In 1805–06, amid the Napoleonic wars, Gay-Lussac embarked upon a European tour with the Prussian explorer Alexander von Humboldt.
In 1807 Gay-Lussac published an important study of the heating and cooling produced by the compression and expansion of gases. This was later to have significance for
the law of conservation of energy.

Rivalry with Davy
When Gay-Lussac and his colleague Louis-Jacques Thenard heard of the English chemist Humphry Davy’s isolation of the newly discovered reactive metals sodium and potassium by electrolysis in 1807, they worked to produce even larger quantities of the metals by chemical means and tested their reactivity in various experiments. Notably they isolated the new element boron. They also studied the effect of light on reactions between hydrogen and chlorine, though it was Davy who demonstrated that the latter gas was an element.
Rivalry between Gay-Lussac and Davy reached a climax over the iodine experiments Davy carried out during an extraordinary visit to Paris in November 1813, at a time when France was at war with Britain. Both chemists claimed pri- ority over discovering iodine’s elemental nature. Although Davy is typically given credit for this discovery, most of his work was hurried and incomplete. Gay-Lussac presented a much more complete study of iodine in a long memoir presented to the National Institute on Aug. 1, 1814, and subsequently published in the Annales de chimie. In 1815 Gay- Lussac experimentally demonstrated that prussic acid was simply hydrocyanic acid, a compound of carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen, and he also isolated the compound cyanogen [(CN)2 or C2N2]. His analyses of prussic acid and hydriodic acid (HI) necessitated a modification of Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier’s theory that oxygen was present in all acids.

Applied Science
Beginning in 1816, Gay-Lussac served in a wide array of appointments, attesting to the value his contemporaries placed upon applying chemistry toward solving social and economic concerns. Among his more lucrative positions was his 1829 appointment as director of the assay department at the Paris Mint, for which he developed a precise and accurate method for the assaying of silver.
Gay-Lussac was a key figure in the development of the new science of volumetric analysis. Previously a few crude trials had been carried out to estimate the strength of chlorine solutions in bleaching, but Gay-Lussac introduced a scientific rigour to chemical quantification and devised important modifications to apparatuses. In a paper on commercial soda (sodium carbonate, 1820), he identified the weight of a sample required to neutralize a given amount of sulfuric acid, using litmus as an indicator. He went on to estimate the strength of bleaching powder (1824), using a solution of indigo to signify when the reaction was complete. In his publications are found the first use of the chemical terms burette, pipette, and titrate. The principles of volumetric analysis could be established only through Gay- Lussac’s theoretical and practical genius but, once established, the analysis itself could be carried out by a junior assistant with brief training. Gay-Lussac published an entire series of Instructions on subjects ranging from the estimation of potash (1818) to the construction of lightning conductors. Among the most influential Instructions was his estimation of silver in solution (1832), which he titrated with a solution of sodium chloride of known strength. This method was later employed at the Royal Mint.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

4DE92931-C9AA-4791-BD12-B49A583AC01C.jpeg (206.66 KB, 下载次数: 57)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2020-2-6 01:37
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2020-2-6 01:38 编辑

汉弗里·戴维爵士，第一代從男爵（英語：Sir Humphry Davy, 1st Baronet，1778年12月17日－1829年5月29日），英国化学家。是发现化学元素最多的人，被譽為「無機化學之父」。

1799年，戴维发现了一氧化二氮（又名笑气）具有麻醉作用，能使病人丧失痛觉。1802年開創了農業化學。1807年用電解法離析出金屬鉀和鈉；1808年分離出金屬鈣、鍶、鋇和鎂。1813年他在法国研究碘，指出碘是與氯類似的元素，並製備出碘化鉀和碘酸鉀等許多碘的化合物。後還證實金剛石和木炭的化學成分相同。1815年發明安全礦燈。1817年發現鉑能促使醇蒸氣在空氣中氧化的催化作用。(zh.wikipedia.org/汉弗里·戴维)

English chemist Sir Humphry Davy discovered several chemical elements (including sodium and potassium) and compounds, invented the miner’s safety lamp, and became one of the greatest exponents of the scientific method.

Early Career
Early in his career Davy formed strongly independent views on topics of the moment, such as the nature of heat, light, and electricity and the chemical and physical doctrines of Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier. In his small private laboratory, he prepared and inhaled nitrous oxide (laughing gas), in order to test a claim that it was the “principle of contagion,” that is, caused diseases. Davy subsequently investigated the composition of the oxides and acids of nitrogen, as well as ammonia, and persuaded his scientific and literary friends to report the effects of inhaling nitrous oxide. He nearly lost his own life inhaling water gas, a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide sometimes used as fuel. The account of his work, published as Researches, Chemical and Philosophical (1800), immediately established his reputation.
In 1801 Davy moved to London, where he delivered lectures and furthered his researches on voltaic cells, early forms of electric batteries. His carefully prepared and rehearsed lectures rapidly became important social functions and added greatly to the prestige of science. In 1802 he conducted special studies of tanning: he found catechu, the extract of a tropical plant, as effective as and cheaper than the usual oak extracts, and his published account was long used as a tanner’s guide.
In 1803 Davy was admitted a fellow of the Royal Society and an honorary member of the Dublin Society and delivered the first of an annual series of lectures before the board of agriculture. This led to his Elements of Agricultural Chemistry (1813), the only systematic work available for many years. For his researches on voltaic cells, tanning, and mineral analysis, he received the Copley Medal in 1805. He was elected secretary of the Royal Society in 1807.

Major Discoveries
Davy early concluded that the production of electricity in simple electrolytic cells resulted from chemical action and that chemical combination occurred between substances of opposite charge. He therefore reasoned that electrolysis, the interactions of electric currents with chemical compounds, offered the most likely means of decomposing all substances to their elements. These views were explained in 1806 in his lecture “On Some Chemical Agencies of Electricity,” for which, despite the fact that England and France were at war, he received the Napoleon Prize from the Institut de France (1807). This work led directly to the isolation of sodium and potassium from their compounds (1807) and of the alkaline-earth metals from theirs (1808). He also discovered boron (by heating borax with potassium), hydrogen telluride, and hydrogen phosphide (phosphine). He showed the correct relation of chlorine to hydrochloric acid and the untenability of the earlier name (oxymuriatic acid) for chlorine; this negated Lavoisier’s theory that all acids contained oxygen. He explained the bleaching action of chlorine (through its lib- eration of oxygen from water) and discovered two of its oxides (1811 and 1815), but his views on the nature of chlo- rine were disputed. He was not aware that chlorine is a chemical element, and experiments designed to reveal oxygen in chlorine failed.
Davy later published the first part of the Elements of Chemical Philosophy, which contained much of his own work; his plan was too ambitious, however, and nothing further appeared. Its completion, according to a Swedish chemist, J.J. Berzelius, would have “advanced the science of chemistry a full century.”
Davy conducted a number of other studies as well. He investigated the substance “X” (later called iodine), whose properties and similarity to chlorine he quickly discovered, and he analyzed many specimens of classical pigments and proved that diamond is a form of carbon. Davy also inves- tigated the conditions under which mixtures of firedamp and air explode. This led to the invention of the miner’s safety lamp and to subsequent researches on flame.
After being created a baronet in 1818, he again went to Italy, where he had been years earlier, inquiring into volcanic action and trying unsuccessfully to find a way of unrolling the papyri found at Herculaneum. During the 1820s, he examined magnetic phenomena caused by electricity and electrochemical methods for preventing saltwater corrosion of copper sheathing on ships by means of iron and zinc plates. Though the protective principles were made clear, considerable fouling occurred, and the method’s failure greatly vexed him. His Bakerian lecture for 1826, “On the Relation of Electrical and Chemical Changes,” contained his last known thoughts on electrochemistry and earned him the Royal Society’s Royal Medal.
In the last months of his life, Davy wrote a series of dialogues, which were published posthumously as Consolations in Travel, or the Last Days of a Philosopher (1830).

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

A01F0E88-C230-4DF4-94B1-58F7EF2E1EB7.jpeg (107.93 KB, 下载次数: 57)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2020-2-7 00:41
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2020-2-7 02:08 编辑

永斯·雅各布·貝采利烏斯男爵（瑞典語：Jöns Jacob Berzelius，1779年8月20日－1848年8月7日），又譯贝采利乌斯、贝吉里斯、柏濟力阿斯、貝齊里烏斯、白則里，是一名瑞典化學家。他就讀烏普薩拉大學，獲得醫學學位後投身於研究工作，並先後在醫學外科學院（卡羅琳學院前身）擔任教師（無薪）和教授（有薪）。貝采利烏斯發現了鈰、硒、矽和釷這四種化學元素，成功測定幾乎所有已知化學元素的原子量，提出了同分異構物、聚合物、同素異形體和催化等重要化學術語，提出了近似現制的元素符號系統，還在化學教育、學術機構管理、礦物學、分析化學作出貢獻；然而，他生前所主張的電化二元論和活力論後來被確認是錯誤的。貝采利烏斯在1848年逝世，他被譽為現代化學發展的關鍵人物之一、以及「瑞典化學之父」。(zh.wikipedia.org/永斯·贝采利乌斯)

Jöns Jacob Berzelius was one of the founders of modern chemistry. He is especially noted for his determination of atomic weights, the development of modern chemical symbols, his electrochemical theory, the discovery and isolation of several elements, the development of classical analytical techniques, and his investigation of isomerism and catalysis, phenomena that owe their names to him. He was a strict empiricist and insisted that any new theory be consistent with the sum of chemical knowledge.

Electrochemical Dualism
Berzelius is best known for his system of electrochemical dualism. The electrical battery, invented in 1800 by Alessandro Volta and known as the voltaic pile, provided the first experimental source of current electricity. In 1803 Berzelius demonstrated, as did the English chemist Humphry Davy at a slightly later date, the power of the voltaic pile to decompose chemicals into pairs of electrically opposite constituents. For example, water decomposed into electropositive hydrogen and electronegative oxygen, whereas salts degraded into electronegative acids and electropositive bases. Based upon this evidence, Berzelius revised and generalized the acid/base chemistry chiefly promoted by Lavoisier. For Berzelius, all chemical compounds contained two electrically opposing constituents, the acidic, or electronegative, and the basic, or electropositive. Furthermore, according to Berzelius, all chemicals, whether natural or artificial, mineral or organic, could be distinguished and specified qualitatively by iden- tifying their electrically opposing constituents.

Stoichiometry
In addition to his qualitative specification of chemicals, Berzelius investigated their quantitative relationships as well. As early as 1806, he began to prepare an up-to-date Swedish chemistry textbook and read widely on the subject of chemical combination. Finding little information on the subject, he decided to undertake further investigations. His teaching interests focused his attention upon inorganic chemistry. Around 1808 he launched what became a vast and enduring program in the laboratory analysis of inorganic matter. To this end, he created most of his apparatuses, prepared his own reagents, and estab- lished the atomic weights of the elements, the formulas of their oxides, sulfides, and salts, and the formulas of virtu- ally all known inorganic compounds.
Berzelius’s experiments led to a more complete depiction of the principles of chemical combining proportions, an area of investigation that the German chemist Jeremias Benjamin Richter named “stoichiometry” in 1792. Berzelius was able to establish the quantitative specificity by which substances combined. He reported his analytical results in a series of famous publications, most promi- nently his Essai sur la théorie des proportions chimiques et sur l’influence chimique de l’électricité (1819; “Essay on the Theory of Chemical Proportions and on the Chemical Influence of Electricity”), and the atomic weight tables that appeared in the 1826 German translation of his Lärbok i kemien (Textbook of Chemistry).

Atomism and Nomenclature
The project of specifying substances had several important consequences. In order to establish and display the laws of stoichiometry, Berzelius invented and perfected more exacting standards and techniques of analysis. His generalization of the older acid/base chemistry led him to extend chemical nomenclature that Lavoisier had introduced to cover the bases (mostly metallic oxides), a change that allowed Berzelius to name any compound consistently with Lavoisier’s chemistry. For this purpose, Berzelius created a Latin template for translation into diverse vernacular languages.
The project of specifying substances also led Berzelius to develop a new system of notation that could portray the composition of any compound both qualitatively (by showing its electrochemically opposing ingredients) and quantitatively (by showing the proportions in which the ingredients were united). His system abbreviated the Latin names of the elements with one or two letters and applied superscripts to designate the number of atoms of each element present in both the acidic and basic ingredient. In his own work, however, Berzelius preferred to indicate the proportions of oxygen with dots placed over the letters of the oxidized elements, but most chemists rejected that practice. Instead, they followed Berzelius’s younger German colleagues, who replaced his superscripts with subscripts and thus created the system still used today. Berzelius’s new nomenclature and notation were promi- nently displayed in his 1819 Essai.

Mineralogy
Berzelius applied his analytical method to two primary areas, mineralogy and organic chemistry. Mineralogy had long stimulated Berzelius’s analytical interest. Berzelius himself discovered several new elements, including cerium (1803) and thorium (1828), in samples of naturally occurring minerals, and his students discovered lithium, vanadium, lanthanum, didymium (later resolved into pra- seodymium and neodymium), erbium (later resolved into erbium, ytterbium, scandium, holmium, and thulium), and terbium. Berzelius also discovered selenium (1818), though this element was isolated in the mud resulting from the manufacture of sulfuric acid rather than from a mineral sample.
In 1813 Berzelius received a mineral collection from a visiting British physician, William MacMichael, that prompted him to take up the analysis and classification of minerals. His major contribution, reported in 1814, was recognizing that silica, formerly seen as a base, frequently served as the electronegative or acidic constituent of minerals and that the traditional mineralogical class of “earths” could be reduced primarily to silicate salts. Distinguishing mineral species therefore demanded a knowledge of the stoichiometry of complex silicates, a conviction that led Berzelius in 1815 to develop his dualistic doctrine, which now anticipated a dualistic structure for substances formerly seen as “triple salts” and for other complex minerals.
Many remaining problems in the specification of minerals were resolved by the law of isomorphism, the recognition that chemically similar substances possess similar crystal forms, discovered in 1818 by the German chemist Eilhardt Mitscherlich. Berzelius had provided both the patronage and the foundational concepts for Mitscherlich’s own career. Ultimately, Berzelius trans- formed the field and established a flourishing tradition of chemical mineralogy.

Organic Chemistry
Organic chemistry also posed problems in the discrimination between substances. In 1814 Berzelius again turn his attention to organic analysis. At this point, he isolated stoichiometric compounds and worked to determine their elemental constituents. Berzelius argued that, despite dif- ferences between organic and inorganic matter, organic compounds could be assigned a dualistic composition and therefore could be specified in the same manner as inorganic ones. The application of his precept that organic chemistry could be understood in terms of the principles that govern inorganic chemistry reached its zenith in the 1830s, especially as it was embodied in the older theory of radicals. However, it was also at this time that younger chemists discovered phenomena such as chlorine substi- tution and began to recast inorganic chemistry in the light of organic substances.

A Man of Influence
Among Berzelius’s other accomplishments were his improvements of laboratory apparatuses and techniques used for chemical and mineral analysis, especially solvent extraction, elemental analysis, quantitative wet chemistry, and qualitative mineral analysis. Berzelius also characterized and named two new concepts: “isomerism,” in which chemically diverse substances possess the same composi- tion; and “catalysis,” in which certain chemical reactions are facilitated by the presence of substances that are them- selves unaffected. He also coined the term protein while attempting to apply a dualistic organic chemistry to the constituents of living things.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

1D78600F-918A-499A-880D-3509895DA5FC.jpeg (120.35 KB, 下载次数: 57)

A4E0C834-F5F2-4F9F-B654-05A7E1B1F67C.jpeg (123.22 KB, 下载次数: 53)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2020-2-8 00:30
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2020-2-8 00:32 编辑

约翰·詹姆斯·奥杜邦（John James Audubon，1785年4月26日－1851年1月27日），美国画家、博物学家，法裔美國人。奥杜邦一生留下了无数的画作，他的作品不仅是科学研究的重要资料，也是不可多得的艺术杰作，他先后出版了《美洲鸟类》和《美洲的四足动物》两本画谱。其中的《美洲鸟类》曾被誉为19世纪最伟大和最具影响力的著作。

奥杜邦的作品对后世野生动物绘画产生了深刻的影响，同时，在普通公众中，奥杜邦的作品也有着很大的影响力。除了绘画作品，奥杜邦在他的日记和随笔中流露出的保护自然、保护野生动物、尊重生命的理念，对整个社会产生了非常深远的影响，在英语世界，奥杜邦的名字就是环境保护和野生动物保护的象征。

在奥杜邦逝世之后，美国出现了很多以他名字命名的博物馆、动物园和科研机构，在北美，以奥杜邦名字命名的奥杜邦学会始终致力于野生动物保护和环境保护，是美国最具影响力的社会团体之一。(zh.wikipedia.org/约翰·詹姆斯·奥杜邦)

John James Audubon, whose original name was Fougère Rabin, or Jean Rabin, was an ornithologist, artist, and naturalist who became particularly well known for his drawings and paintings of North American birds. The ille- gitimate son of a French merchant, planter, and slave trader and a Creole woman of Saint-Domingue, Audubon and his illegitimate half-sister (who was also born in the West Indies) were legalized by adoption in 1794, five years after their father returned to France.

Young Audubon developed an interest in drawing birds during his boyhood in France. At age 18 he was sent to the United States in order to avoid conscription and to enter business. He began his study of North American birds at that time; this study would eventually lead him from Florida to Labrador, Can. With Frederick Rozier, Audubon attempted to operate a mine, then a general store. The lat- ter venture they attempted first in Louisville, Ky., later in Henderson, Ky., but the partnership was dissolved after they failed utterly. Audubon then attempted some busi- ness ventures in partnership with his brother-in-law; these, too, failed. By 1820 he had begun to take what jobs he could to provide a living and to concentrate on his steadily growing interest in drawing birds; he worked for a time as a taxidermist, later making portraits and teaching drawing, while his wife worked as a governess.

By 1824 he began to consider publication of his bird drawings, but he was advised to seek a publisher in Europe, where he would find better engravers and greater interest in his subject. In 1826 he went to Europe in search of patrons and a publisher. He was well received in Edinburgh and, after the king subscribed for his books, in London as well. The engraver Robert Havell of London undertook publication of his illustrations as The Birds of America, 4 vol. (435 hand-coloured plates, 1827–38). William MacGillivray helped write the accompanying text, Ornithological Biography, 5 vol. (octavo, 1831–39), and A Synopsis of the Birds of North America, 1 vol. (1839), which serves as an index. Until 1839 Audubon divided his time between Europe and the United States, gathering material, completing illustra- tions, and financing publication through subscription. His reputation established, Audubon then settled in New York City and prepared a smaller edition of his Birds of America, 7 vol. (octavo, 1840–44), and a new work, Viviparous Quadrupeds of North America, 3 vol. (150 plates, 1845–48), and the accompanying text (3 vol., 1846–53), completed with the aid of his sons and the naturalist John Bachman.

Critics of Audubon’s work have pointed to certain fan- ciful (or even impossible) poses and inaccurate details, but few argue with their excellence as art. To many, Audubon’s work far surpasses that of his contemporary (and more scientific) fellow ornithologist, Alexander Wilson.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

06097498-9D00-4240-8B8D-A2CE41527C5D.jpeg (80.17 KB, 下载次数: 61)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-5-1 00:07
第二十五楼之罗伯特·波义耳（英語：Robert Boyle，1627年1月25日－1691年12月30日），又译波意耳，爱尔兰自然哲学家，炼金术师，在化学和物理学研究上都有杰出贡献。虽然他的化学研究仍然带有炼金术色彩，他的《怀疑派的化学家》一书仍然被视作化学史上的里程碑。

1657年他在罗伯特·胡克的辅助下对奥托·格里克发明的气泵进行改进。1659年制成了“波义耳机器”和“风力发动机”。接下来他用这一装置对气体性质进行了研究，并于1660年发表对这一设备的研究成果。这一论文遭到以弗朗西斯·莱恩为代表的科学家的反对，为了反驳异议，波义耳阐明了在温度一定的条件下气体的压力与体积成反比的这一性质。法国物理学家马略特得到了同样的结果，但是一直到1676年才发表。于是在英语国家，这一定律被称为波义耳定律，而在欧洲大陆则被称为马略特定律。

1661年波义耳发表了《怀疑派的化学家》，在这部著作中波义耳批判了一直存在的四元素说，认为在科学研究中不应该将组成物质的物质都称为元素，而应该采取类似海尔蒙特的观点，认为不能互相转变和不能还原成更简单的东西为元素，他说：“我说的元素...是指某种原始的、简单的、一点也没有掺杂的物体。元素不能用任何其他物体造成，也不能彼此相互造成。元素是直接合成所谓完全混合物的成份，也是完全混合物最终分解成的要素。”而元素的微粒的不同聚合体导致了性质的不同。由于波义耳在实验与理论两方面都对化学发展有重要贡献，他的工作为近代化学奠定了初步基础，故被认为是近代化学的奠基人。(zh.wikipedia.org/罗伯特·波义耳)

22 02 2022 伦敦世展戳。

68C24D1E-AD70-4D43-BFDF-2C4658D48F91.jpeg (133.49 KB, 下载次数: 33)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-5-8 00:21
笫三十九～四十楼之愛德華·詹納（英文：Edward Jenner，1749年5月17日－1823年1月26日），FRS，亦譯作愛德華·金納或琴納，是一名英國醫生，生於英國告羅士打郡伯克利牧區一個牧師家庭，以研究及推廣牛痘疫苗，防止天花而聞名，被稱為疫苗之父。并且为后人的研究打开了通道，促使巴斯德、科赫等人针对其他疾病寻求治疗和免疫的方法。(zh.wikipedia.org/愛德華·詹納)

22.02.2022伦敦世展戳。

50A27445-11A2-46F1-806F-9A349E2225A8.jpeg (124.98 KB, 下载次数: 38)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-5-15 00:12
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-5-15 00:26 编辑

米高·法拉第（英語：Michael Faraday，1791年9月22日－1867年8月25日），英國物理学家，在電磁學及電化學領域做出許多重要貢獻，其中主要的貢獻為電磁感應、抗磁性、電解。

法拉第是一位優秀的實驗家。他詳細地研究在載流導線四周的磁場，想出了磁場線的點子，因此建立了電磁場的概念。法拉第觀察到磁場會影響光線的傳播，他找出了兩者之間的關係。他發現了電磁感應的原理、抗磁性、法拉第電解定律。他發明了一種電磁旋轉機器，這就是今天電動機的雛型。由於法拉第的努力，電磁現象開始出現於具有實際用途的科技發展。

法拉第在化學上也頗有建樹，他發現了苯，研究氯晶籠化合物，發明了本生燈的早期形式及氧化數，同時也推廣了陽極、陰極、電極及離子等術語。他最終當上了第一位也是最重要的大英皇家科學研究所的富勒化學教授。

為了紀念法拉第，在國際單位制裏，電容的單位是法拉。(zh.wikipedia.org/麥可·法拉第)

English physicist and chemist Michael Faraday is known for his many experiments that contributed greatly to the understanding of electromagnetism. Faraday, who became one of the greatest scientists of the 19th century, began his career as a chemist. He wrote a manual of practical chemistry that reveals his mastery of the technical aspects of his art, discovered a number of new organic compounds, among them benzene, and was the first to liquefy a “permanent” gas (i.e., one that was believed to be incapable of liquefaction). His major contribution, however, was in the field of electricity and magnetism. He was the first to produce an electric current from a magnetic field, invented the first electric motor and dynamo, demonstrated the relation between electricity and chemical bonding, discovered the effect of magnetism on light, and discovered and named diamagnetism, the peculiar behaviour of certain substances in strong magnetic fields. He provided the experimental, and a good deal of the theoretical, foundation upon which James Clerk Maxwell erected classical electromagnetic field theory.

Early Career

Faraday began his scientific career as Sir Humphry Davy’s laboratory assistant. When Faraday joined Davy in 1812, Davy was in the process of revolutionizing the chemistry of the day. Davy’s ideas were influenced by an atomic theory that was also to have important consequences for Faraday’s thought. This theory, proposed in the 18th century by Ruggero Giuseppe Boscovich, argued that atoms were mathematical points surrounded by alternating fields of attractive and repulsive forces. One property of such atoms is that they can be placed under considerable strain, or tension, before the “bonds” holding them together are broken. These strains were to be central to Faraday’s ideas about electricity.

Faraday’s work under Davy came to an end in 1820. There followed a series of discoveries that astonished the scientific world. Faraday achieved his early renown as a chemist. In 1820 he produced the first known compounds of carbon and chlorine, C2Cl6 and C2Cl4. These compounds were produced by substituting chlorine for hydrogen in “olefiant gas” (ethylene), the first substitution reactions induced. In 1825, as a result of research on illuminating gases, Faraday isolated and described benzene. In the 1820s he also conducted investigations of steel alloys, helping to lay the foundations for scientific metallurgy and metallography. While completing an assignment from the Royal Society of London to improve the quality of optical glass for telescopes, he produced a glass of very high refractive index that was to lead him, in 1845, to the discovery of diamagnetism.

By the 1820s André-Marie Ampère had shown that magnetic force apparently was a circular one, producing in effect a cylinder of magnetism around a wire carrying an electric current. No such circular force had ever before been observed, and Faraday was the first to understand what it implied. If a magnetic pole could be isolated, it ought to move constantly in a circle around a current- carrying wire. Faraday’s ingenuity and laboratory skill enabled him to construct an apparatus that confirmed this conclusion. This device, which transformed electrical energy into mechanical energy, was the first electric motor.

On Aug. 29, 1831, Faraday wound a thick iron ring on one side with insulated wire that was connected to a battery. He then wound the opposite side with wire connected to a galvanometer. What he expected was that a “wave” would be produced when the battery circuit was closed and that the wave would show up as a deflection of the galvanometer in the second circuit. He closed the primary circuit and, to his delight and satisfaction, saw the galvanometer needle jump. A current had been induced in the secondary coil by one in the primary. When he opened the circuit, however, he was astonished to see the galvanometer jump in the opposite direction. Somehow, turning off the current also created an induced current in the secondary circuit, equal and opposite to the original current. This phenomenon led Faraday to propose what he called the “electrotonic” state of particles in the wire, which he considered a state of tension.

In the fall of 1831 Faraday attempted to determine just how an induced current was produced. He discovered that when a permanent magnet was moved in and out of a coil of wire a current was induced in the coil. Magnets, he knew, were surrounded by forces that could be made visible by the simple expedient of sprinkling iron filings on a card held over them. Faraday saw the “lines of force” thus revealed as lines of tension in the medium, namely air, surrounding the magnet, and he soon discovered the law determining the production of electric currents by magnets: the magnitude of the current was dependent upon the number of lines of force cut by the conductor in unit time. He immediately realized that a continuous current could be produced by rotating a copper disk between the poles of a powerful magnet and taking leads off the disk’s rim and centre. This was the first dynamo. It was also the direct ancestor of electric motors, for it was only necessary to reverse the situation, to feed an electric current to the disk, to make it rotate.

Theory of Electrochemistry

In 1832 Faraday began what promised to be a rather tedious attempt to prove that all electricities had precisely the same properties and caused precisely the same effects. The key effect was electrochemical decomposition. Voltaic and electromagnetic electricity posed no prob- lems, but static electricity did. As Faraday delved deeper into the problem, he made two startling discoveries. First, electrical force did not, as had long been supposed, act at a distance upon chemical molecules to cause them to dissociate. It was the passage of electricity through a conducting liquid medium that caused the molecules to dissociate, even when the electricity merely discharged into the air and did not pass into a “pole” or “centre of action” in a voltaic cell. Second, the amount of the decomposition was found to be related in a simple manner to the amount of electricity that passed through the solution.

These findings led Faraday to a new theory of electrochemistry. The electric force, he argued, threw the molecules of a solution into a state of tension (his electrotonic state). When the force was strong enough to distort the fields of forces that held the molecules together so as to permit the interaction of these fields with neighbouring particles, the tension was relieved by the migration of particles along the lines of tension, the different species of atoms migrating in opposite directions. The amount of electricity that passed, then, was clearly related to the chemical affinities of the substances in solution. These experiments led directly to Faraday’s two laws of electrochemistry: (1) The amount of a substance deposited on each electrode of an electrolytic cell is directly proportional to the quantity of electricity passed through the cell. (2) The quantities of different elements deposited by a given amount of electricity are in the ratio of their chemical equivalent weights.

Faraday’s work on electrochemistry provided him with an essential clue for the investigation of static electrical induction. Since the amount of electricity passed through the conducting medium of an electrolytic cell determined the amount of material deposited at the electrodes, why should not the amount of electricity induced in a nonconductor be dependent upon the material out of which it was made? In short, why should not every material have a specific inductive capacity? Every material does, and Faraday was the discoverer of this fact.

By 1839 Faraday was able to bring forth a new and general theory of electrical action. Electricity, whatever it was, caused tensions to be created in matter. When these tensions were rapidly relieved (i.e., when bodies could not take much strain before “snapping” back), then what occurred was a rapid repetition of a cyclical buildup, breakdown, and buildup of tension that, like a wave, was passed along the substance. Such substances were called conductors. In electrochemical processes the rate of buildup and breakdown of the strain was proportional to the chemical affinities of the substances involved, but again the current was not a material flow but a wave pattern of tensions and their relief. Insulators were simply materials whose particles could take an extraordinary amount of strain before they snapped. Electrostatic charge in an isolated insulator was simply a measure of this accumulated strain. Thus, all electrical action was the result of forced strains in bodies.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

皇家邮政真死板。欠资不盖戳。

1D46CDEF-125F-4115-ABDB-5DF2235FC9A1.jpeg (122.68 KB, 下载次数: 26)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-5-15 00:25
Later Life

Since the very beginning of his scientific work, Faraday had believed in what he called the unity of the forces of nature. By this he meant that all the forces of nature were but manifestations of a single universal force and ought, therefore, to be convertible into one another. In 1846 he made public some of his speculations in a lecture titled “Thoughts on Ray Vibrations.” Specifically referring to point atoms and their infinite fields of force, he suggested that the lines of electric and magnetic force associated with these atoms might, in fact, serve as the medium by which light waves were propagated.

In 1845 Faraday tackled the problem of his hypothetical electrotonic state. He passed a beam of plane-polarized light through the optical glass of high refractive index and then turned on an electromagnet so that its lines of force ran parallel to the light ray. The plane of polarization was rotated, indicating a strain in the molecules of the glass. But Faraday again noted an unexpected result. When he changed the direction of the ray of light, the rotation remained in the same direction, a fact that Faraday correctly interpreted as meaning that the strain was not in the molecules of the glass but in the magnetic lines of force. The direction of rotation of the plane of polarization depended solely upon the polarity of the lines of force; the glass served merely to detect the effect.

By 1850 Faraday had evolved a radically new view of space and force. Space was not “nothing,” the mere location of bodies and forces, but a medium capable of supporting the strains of electric and magnetic forces. The energies of the world were not localized in the particles from which these forces arose but rather were to be found in the space surrounding them. Thus was born field theory. As Maxwell later freely admitted, the basic ideas for his mathematical theory of electrical and magnetic fields came from Faraday; his contribution was to mathematize those ideas in the form of his classical field equations.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-5-15 06:01
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-5-15 12:03 编辑

查尔斯·萊尔爵士（英語：Sir Charles Lyell, 1st Baronet，FRS，1797年11月14日－1875年2月22日），英國地質學家、律師，是均變說的重要論述者。他的最有名作品是《地質學原理》（Principles of Geology）。達尔文的演化論便是受到這本書的啟發。（zh.Wikipedia.org/查爾斯·萊爾)

Scottish geologist Sir Charles Lyell was largely responsible for the general acceptance of the view that all features of the Earth’s surface are produced by physical, chemical, and biological processes through long periods of geological time. The concept was called uniformitarianism (initially set forth by James Hutton). Lyell’s achievements laid the foundations for evolutionary biology as well as for an understanding of the Earth’s development. He was knighted in 1848 and made a baronet in 1864.

New Approach to Geology

In the 1820s Lyell was rapidly developing new principles of reasoning in geology and began to plan a book which would stress that there are natural (as opposed to supernatural) explanations for all geologic phenomena, that the ordinary natural processes of today and their products do not differ in kind or magnitude from those of the past, and that the Earth must therefore be very ancient because these everyday processes work so slowly. With the ambitious young geologist Roderick Murchison, he explored districts in France and Italy where proof of his principles could be sought. From northern Italy Lyell went south alone to Sicily. Poor roads and accommodations made travel difficult, but in the region around Mt. Etna he found striking confirmation of his belief in the adequacy of natural causes to explain the features of the Earth and in the great antiquity even of such a recent feature as Etna itself.

The results of this trip, which lasted from May 1828 until February 1829, far exceeded Lyell’s expectations. Returning to London, he set to work immediately on his book, Principles of Geology, the first volume of which was published in July 1830. Lyell finished the second volume of Principles of Geology in December 1831 and the third and final volume in April 1833. His steady work was relieved by occasional social or scientific gatherings and a trip to a volcanic district in Germany.

Scientific Eminence

In 1838 Lyell’s Elements of Geology was published, which described European rocks and fossils from the most recent, Lyell’s specialty, to the oldest then known. Like Principles of Geology, this well-illustrated work was periodically enlarged and updated.

In 1841 Lyell accepted an invitation to lecture and travel for a year in North America, returning again for nine months in 1845–46 and for two short visits in the 1850s. During these travels, Lyell visited nearly every part of the United States east of the Mississippi River and much of eastern Canada, seeing almost all of the important geological “monuments” along the way, including Niagara Falls. Lyell was amazed at the comparative ease of travel, and he often praised the speed and comfort of the new railroads and steamships. Lyell wrote enthusiastic and informative books, in 1845 and 1849, about each of his two long visits to the New World.

In the 1840s Lyell became more widely known outside the scientific community. He studied the prevention of mine disasters with the English physicist Michael Faraday in 1844, served as a commissioner for the Great Exhibition in 1851–52, and in the same year helped to begin educational reform at Oxford University—he had long objected to church domination of British colleges. In the winter of 1854 he travelled to Madeira to study the origin of the island itself and its curious fauna and flora. After exhaustive restudy carried out on muleback in 1858, he proved conclusively that Mt. Etna had been built up by repeated small eruptions rather than by a cataclysmic upheaval as some geologists still insisted.

In 1859 publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species gave new impetus to Lyell’s work. Although Darwin drew heavily on Lyell’s Principles of Geology both for style and content, Lyell had never shared Darwin’s belief in evolution. But reading the Origin of Species triggered studies that culminated in publication of The Geological Evidence of the Antiquity of Man in 1863, in which Lyell tentatively accepted evolution by natural selection. Only during completion of a major revision of the Principles of Geology in 1865 did he fully adopt Darwin’s conclusions, however, adding powerful arguments of his own that won new adherents to Darwin’s theory.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

43A9DCA4-3275-4833-BA2C-2712AB49F61A.jpeg (55.17 KB, 下载次数: 37)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-6-26 01:59
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-7-3 09:33 编辑

让·路易·鲁道夫·阿加西（法語：Jean Louis Rodolphe Agassiz，1807年5月28日~1873年12月14日），19世纪瑞士裔植物学家、动物学家和地质学家，以冰川理论闻名。

1847年，阿加西移民美国，在哈佛大学任教，担任动物学和地质学教授。在这里，他领导劳伦斯科学学校，创建了比较动物学博物馆。阿加西对鱼类学分类法和地质学贡献卓著。(zh.wikipedia.org/路易·阿加西)

Swiss-born U.S. naturalist, geologist, and teacher Louis Agassiz made revolutionary contributions to the study of natural science with landmark work on glacier activity and extinct fishes. He achieved lasting fame through his innovative teaching methods, which altered the character of natural science education in the United States.

Early Career

Agassiz’s interest in ichthyology began with his study of an extensive collection of Brazilian fishes, mostly from the Amazon River, which had been collected in 1819 and 1820 by two eminent naturalists at Munich. The classification of these species was begun by one of the collectors in 1826, and when he died the collection was turned over to Agassiz. The work was completed and published in 1829 as Selecta Genera et Species Piscium. The study of fish forms became henceforth the prominent feature of his research. In 1830 he issued a prospectus of a History of the Fresh Water Fishes of Central Europe, printed in parts from 1839 to 1842.

The year 1832 proved the most significant in Agassiz’s early career because it took him first to Paris, then the centre of scientific research, and later to Neuchâtel, Switz., where he spent many years of fruitful effort. Already Agassiz had become interested in the rich stores of the extinct fishes of Europe, especially those of Glarus in Switzerland and of Monte Bolca near Verona, of which, at that time, only a few had been critically studied. As early as 1829 Agassiz planned a comprehensive and critical study of these fossils and spent much time gathering material wherever possible. His epoch-making work, Recherches sur les poissons fossiles, appeared in parts from 1833 to 1843. In it, the number of named fossil fishes was raised to more than 1,700. The great importance of this fundamental work rests on the impetus it gave to the study of extinct life itself. Turning his attention to other extinct animals found with the fishes, Agassiz published in 1838–42 two volumes on the fossil echinoderms of Switzerland, and later (1841–42) his Études critiques sur les mollusques fossiles.

From 1832 to 1846 Agassiz worked on his Nomenclator Zoologicus, a catalog with references of all the names applied to genera of animals from the beginning of scientific nomenclature, a date since fixed at Jan. 1, 1758. However, in 1836 Agassiz began a new line of studies: the movements and effects of the glaciers of Switzerland. In 1840 he published his Études sur les glaciers, in some respects his most important work. In it, Agassiz showed that at a geologically recent period Switzerland had been covered by one vast ice sheet. His final conclusion was that “great sheets of ice, resembling those now existing in Greenland, once covered all the countries in which unstratified gravel (boulder drift) is found.”

Activities in the United States

In 1846 Agassiz visited the United States for the general purpose of studying natural history and geology there but more specifically to give a course of lectures at the Lowell Institute in Boston. In 1847 he accepted a professorship of zoology at Harvard University. In the United States his chief volumes of scientific research were the following: Lake Superior (1850); Contributions to the Natural History of the United States (1857–62), in four quarto volumes, the most notable being on the embryology of turtles; and the Essay on Classification (1859), a brilliant publication, which, however, failed to grasp the fact that zoology was moving away from the doctrine of special creation toward the doctrine of evolution.

Besides these extensive contributions there appeared a multitude of short papers on natural history and especially on the fishes of the U.S. His two expeditions of most importance were, first, to Brazil in 1865 and, second, to California in 1871, the former trip involving both shores of South America. A Journey in Brazil (1868), written by Mrs. Agassiz and himself, gives an account of their experiences. His most important paper on U.S. fishes dealt with the group of viviparous surf fishes of California.

Agassiz’s method as teacher was to give contact with nature rather than information. He discouraged the use of books except in detailed research. The result of his instruction at Harvard was a complete revolution in the study of natural history in the U.S. The purpose of study was not to acquire a category of facts from others but to be able, through active contact with the natural world, to gather the needed facts. As a result of his activities, every notable teacher of natural history in the U.S. for the second half of the 19th century was a pupil either of Agassiz or of one of his students.

In the interests of better teaching and scientific enthusiasm, he organized in the summer of 1873 the Anderson School of Natural History at Penikese, an island in Buzzards Bay. This school, which had the greatest influ- ence on science teaching in America, was run solely by Agassiz. After his death it vanished.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

FEAA6165-0B61-4674-82BF-8CFA18757971.jpeg (73.05 KB, 下载次数: 30)

F382E5B3-5C2C-4F6A-B3E2-B3D2A9A040FB.jpeg (187.41 KB, 下载次数: 34)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-7-3 09:15
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-7-3 09:27 编辑

查尔斯·罗伯特·达尔文 (英語：Charles Robert Darwin，1809年2月12日－1882年4月19日）英国博物學家、地質學家和生物學家，其最著名的研究成果是天擇演化，解釋了適應的來源，並指出他认为所有物種都是从少數共同祖先演化而来的。到了19世纪30年代，达尔文的理論成為對演化機制的主要詮釋，並成為現代演化思想的基礎，在科學上可對生物多樣性進行一致且合理的解釋，是現今生物學的基石。(zh.wikipedia.org/查尔斯·达尔文)

English naturalist Charles Darwin developed the theory of evolution by natural selection, which became the foundation of modern evolutionary studies. An affable country gentleman, Darwin at first shocked religious Victorian society by suggesting that animals and humans shared a common ancestry. However, his nonreligious biology appealed to the rising class of professional scientists, and by the time of his death evolutionary imagery had spread through all of science, literature, and politics. Darwin, himself an agnostic, was accorded the ultimate British accolade of burial in Westminster Abbey, London. Darwin formulated his bold theory in private in 1837–39, after returning from a voyage around the world aboard HMS Beagle, but it was not until two decades later that he finally gave it full public expression in On the Origin of Species (1859), a book that has deeply influenced modern Western society and thought.

The Beagle Voyage

Darwin embarked on the Beagle voyage on Dec. 27, 1831. The circumnavigation of the globe would be the making of Darwin. Five years of physical hardship and mental rigour, imprisoned within a ship’s walls, offset by wide-open opportunities in the Brazilian jungles and the Andes Mountains, were to give Darwin a new seriousness. As a gentleman naturalist, he could leave the ship for extended periods, pursuing his own interests. As a result, he spent only 18 months of the voyage aboard the ship. Among the places Darwin visited on the voyage were the Cape Verde Islands, coastal regions of Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina, and the Galapagos Islands.

On the last leg of the voyage Darwin finished his 770-page diary, wrapped up 1,750 pages of notes, drew up 12 catalogs of his 5,436 skins, bones, and carcasses—and still he wondered: Was each Galapagos mockingbird a naturally produced variety? Why did ground sloths become extinct? He sailed home with problems enough to last him a lifetime.

Evolution by Natural Selection

Following the voyage, Darwin became well known through his diary’s publication as Journal of Researches into the Geology and Natural History of the Various Countries Visited by H.M.S. Beagle (1839). He also employed the best experts and published their descriptions of his specimens in his Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle (1838–43). Darwin drafted a 35-page sketch of his theory of natural selection in 1842 and expanded it in 1844, but he had no immediate intention of publishing it. In 1842, Darwin, increasingly shunning society, had moved his family to the isolated village of Downe, in Kent, at the “extreme edge of [the] world.” (It was in fact only 16 miles [26 km] from central London.)

From 1846 to 1854, Darwin added to his credibility as an expert on species by pursuing a detailed study of all known barnacles. Intrigued by their sexual differentiation, he discovered that some females had tiny degenerate males clinging to them. This sparked his interest in the evolution of diverging male and female forms from an original hermaphrodite creature. Four monographs on such an obscure group made him a world expert. No longer could he be dismissed as a speculator on biological matters.

On the Origin of Species

In the 1850s the changing social composition of science in England—typified by the rise of the freethinking biologist Thomas Henry Huxley—promised that Darwin’s work would be well-received. Huxley, the philosopher Herbert Spencer, and other outsiders were opting for a secular nature in the rationalist Westminster Review and deriding the influence of “parsondom” (the influence of the church). Darwin had himself lost the last shreds of his belief in Christianity with the tragic death of his oldest daughter, Annie, from typhoid in 1851.

In 1854 Darwin solved his last major problem, the forking of genera to produce new evolutionary branches. He used an industrial analogy familiar from the Wedgwood factories, the division of labour: competition in nature’s overcrowded marketplace would favour variants that could exploit different aspects of a niche. Species would diverge on the spot, like tradesmen in the same tenement.

In 1856 Darwin began writing a triple-volume book, tentatively called Natural Selection. Whereas in the 1830s Darwin had thought that species remained perfectly adapted until the environment changed, he now believed that every new variation was imperfect, and that perpetual struggle was the rule. He also explained the evolution of sterile worker bees in 1857. These could not be selected because they did not breed, so he opted for “family” selection (kin selection, as it is known today): the whole colony benefited from their retention.

Darwin had finished a quarter of a million words by June 18, 1858. That day he received a letter from Alfred Russel Wallace, an English socialist and specimen collector working in the Malay Archipelago, sketching a similar-looking theory. Darwin, fearing loss of priority, accepted a solution proposed by geologist Sir Charles Lyell and botanist Joseph Dalton Hooker: joint extracts from Darwin’s and Wallace’s works would be read at the Linnean Society on July 1, 1858. Darwin was away, sick, grieving for his tiny son who had died from scarlet fever, and thus he missed the first public presentation of the theory of natural selection.

Darwin hastily began an “abstract” of Natural Selection, which grew into a more accessible book, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. Suffering from a terrible bout of nausea, Darwin, now 50, was secreted away at a spa on the desolate Yorkshire moors when the book was sold to the trade on Nov. 22, 1859. He still feared the worst. The book did distress his Cambridge patrons, but they were marginal to science now. However, radical Dissenters were sympathetic, as were the rising London biologists and geologists, even if few actually adopted Darwin’s cost-benefit approach to nature. The newspapers drew the one conclusion that  Darwin had specifically  avoided: that humans  had evolved from apes,  and that Darwin was  denying mankind’s  immortality. A sensitive  Darwin, making no personal appearances,  let Huxley, by now a  good friend, manage  this part of the debate.  The pugnacious Huxley, who loved public argument as much as  Darwin loathed it, had  his own reasons for tak ing up the cause, and  did so with enthusiasm.  He wrote three reviews  of Origin of Species,  defended human evolu tion at the Oxford  meeting of the British  Association for the  Advancement of Science  in 1860 (when Bishop  Samuel Wilber force jokingly asked whether the apes were on Huxley’s grandmother’s or grandfather’s side), and published his own book on human evolution, Evidence as to Man’s Place in Nature (1863). What Huxley championed was Darwin’s evolutionary naturalism, his nonmiraculous assumptions, which pushed biological science into previously taboo areas and increased the power of Huxley’s professionals.

Huxley’s reaction, with its enthusiasm for evolution and cooler opinion of natural selection, was typical. Natural selection received little support in Darwin’s day. By contrast, evolution itself (“descent,” Darwin called it— the word evolution would only be introduced in the last, 1872, edition of the Origin) was being acknowledged from British Association platforms by 1866.

E9BD9A3F-6541-41EB-A185-62280A37B0A5.jpeg (121.38 KB, 下载次数: 32)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-7-3 09:30
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-7-3 09:37 编辑

The Patriarch in His Home Laboratory

In the 1860s Down House continued to serve as Darwin’s laboratory, where he experimented and revamped the Origin through six editions. Although quietly believing in natural selection, he answered critics by reemphasizing other causes of change—for example, the effects of continued use of an organ—and he bolstered the Lamarckian belief that such alterations through excessive use might be passed on. In Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication (1868) he marshaled the facts and explored the causes of variation in domestic breeds.

In 1867 the engineer Fleeming Jenkin argued that any single favourable variation would be swamped and lost by back-breeding within the general population. No mechanism was known for inheritance, and so in the Variation Darwin devised his hypothesis of “pangenesis” to explain the discrete inheritance of traits. He imagined that each tissue of an organism threw out tiny “gemmules,” which passed to the sex organs and permitted copies of themselves to be made in the next generation. But Darwin’s cousin Francis Galton failed to find these gemmules in rabbit blood, and the theory was dismissed.

Darwin was adept at flanking movements in order to get around his critics. He would take seemingly intractable subjects—like orchid flowers—and make them test cases for “natural selection.” Hence the book that appeared after the Origin was, to everyone’s surprise, The Various Contrivances by which British and Foreign Orchids are Fertilised by Insects (1862). He showed that the orchid’s beauty was not a piece of floral whimsy “designed” by God to please humans but honed by selection to attract insect cross-pollinators. The petals guided the bees to the nectaries, and pollen sacs were deposited exactly where they could be removed by a stigma of another flower.

But why the importance of cross-pollination? Darwin’s botanical work was always subtly related to his evolutionary mechanism. He believed that cross-pollinated plants would produce fitter offspring than self-pollinators, and he used considerable ingenuity in conducting thousands of crossings to prove the point. The results appeared in The Effects of Cross and Self Fertilization in the Vegetable Kingdom (1876). His next book, The Different Forms of Flowers on Plants of the Same Species (1877), was again the result of long-standing work into the way evolution in some species favoured different male and female forms of flowers to facilitate outbreeding.

The Private Man and the Public Debate

Through the 1860s natural selection was already being applied to the growth of society.The trend to explain the evolution of human races, morality, and civilization was capped by Darwin in his two-volume The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (1871). The book was authoritative, annotated, and heavily anecdotal in places. The two volumes were discrete, the first discussing civilization and human origins among the Old World monkeys. (Darwin’s depiction of a hairy human ancestor with pointed ears led to a spate of caricatures.) The second volume responded to critics who doubted that the iridescent humming bird’s plumage had any function—or any Darwinian explanation. Darwin argued that female birds were choosing mates for their gaudy plumage. Darwin as usual tapped his huge correspondence network of breeders, naturalists, and travelers worldwide to produce evidence for this. Such “sexual selection” happened among humans too. With primitive societies accepting diverse notions of beauty, aesthetic preferences, he believed, could account for the origin of the human races.

Darwin finished another long-standing line of work. Since studying the moody orangutans at London Zoo in 1838, Darwin had been fascinated by facial expression. As a student he had heard the attacks on the idea that people’s facial muscles were designed by God to express their unique thoughts. Now his photographically illustrated The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872) expanded the subject to include the rages and grimaces of asylum inmates, all to show the continuity of emotions and expressions between humans and animals.

The treadmill of experiment and writing gave much meaning to Darwin’s life. But as he wrapped up his final, long-term interest, publishing The Formation of Vegetable Mould, Through the Action of Worms (1881), the future looked bleak. Such an earthy subject was typical Darwin: just as he had shown that today’s ecosystems were built by infinitesimal degrees and the mighty Andes by tiny uplifts, so he ended on the monumental transformation of landscapes by the Earth’s humblest denizens.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

这些PHQ不是英国皇家邮政极限明信片，因为它是把邮票放大印为明信片，包括齿孔，皇冠和面值。由于他们的存在，英国很少人用非PHQ片来自制极限明信片。PHQ 不能参加极限邮展，也许作为明信片类别展出。谁有极限明信片？

The 'PHQ' stands for Postal Headquarters. All items published by the Post Office are given a number which is prefixed by letters. The first card issued, on 16 May 1973, was numbered PHQ1, and the numbering sequence has continued to the present day.
There are three main areas of collecting interest. Many collectors like to collect only the unused cards, but some like to obtain them with first day of issue postmarks. Others like to obtain them with special handstamps that have some connection to the stamp subject matter. Also, stamp collectors will usually put the stamp on the back of the card, but a very popular variation is for the stamp to be applied to the face of the card, so that the postcard picture, stamp and postmark are all visible on the same face. (en.wikipedia.org/PHQ card)

03E78B36-6AF7-46D0-90A1-B6BF61754F08.jpeg (142.36 KB, 下载次数: 31)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-7-17 01:37
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-7-17 01:41 编辑

法蘭西斯·高爾頓爵士，FRS（英語：Sir Francis Galton，1822年2月16日－1911年1月17日），英格蘭維多利亞時代的博学家、人類學家、優生學家、熱帶探險家、地理學家、發明家、氣象學家、統計學家、心理學家和遺傳學家，查爾斯·達爾文的表弟。(zh.wikipedia.org/法蘭西斯·高爾頓)

English explorer, anthropologist, and eugenicist Sir Francis Galton was known for his pioneering studies of human intelligence. He was knighted in 1909.

Travels and Exploration

When Galton was a young man, he traveled in southeastern Europe. From Vienna he made his way through Constanza, Constantinople, Smyrna, and Athens, and he brought back from the caves of Adelsberg (present-day Postojina, Slovenia) specimens of a blind amphibian named Proteus—the first to reach England. On his return Galton went to Trinity College, Cambridge, where he was a medical student and where, as a result of overwork, he broke down in his third year. But he recovered quickly on changing his mode of life, as he did from similar attacks later.

After leaving Cambridge without taking a degree, Galton continued his medical studies in London. But before they were completed, his father died, leaving him “a sufficient fortune to make me independent of the medical profession.” Galton was then free to indulge his craving for travel. Leisurely expeditions in 1845–46 up the Nile with friends and into the Holy Land alone were preliminaries to a carefully organized penetration into unexplored parts of southwestern Africa. After consulting the Royal Geographical Society, Galton decided to investigate a possible opening from the south and west to Lake Ngami, which lies north of the Kalahari desert some 550 miles east of Walvis Bay.

The expedition, which included two journeys, one northward, the other eastward, from the same base, proved to be difficult and not without danger. Though the explorers did not reach Lake Ngami, they gained valuable information. As a result, at the age of only 31, Galton was in 1853 elected a fellow of the Royal Geographical Society and, three years later, of the Royal Society. In 1853, too, Galton married. There were no children of the marriage. Galton wrote 9 books and some 200 papers. They deal with many diverse subjects, including the use of fingerprints for personal identification, the correlational calculus (a branch of applied statistics)—in both of which Galton was a pioneer—twins, blood transfusions, criminality, the art of travel in undeveloped countries, and meteorology. Most of Galton’s publications disclose his predilection for quantifying; an early paper, for example, dealt with a statistical test of the efficacy of prayer. Moreover, over a period of 34 years, he concerned himself with improving standards of measurement.

Advocacy of Eugenics

Although he made contributions to many fields of knowledge, eugenics remained Galton’s fundamental interest, and he devoted the latter part of his life chiefly to propagating the idea of improving the physical and mental makeup of the human species by selective parenthood. Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin, was among the first to recognize the implications for mankind of Darwin’s theory of evolution. He saw that it invalidated much of contemporary theology and that it also opened possibilities for planned human betterment. Galton coined the word eugenics to denote scientific endeavours to increase the proportion of persons with better than average genetic endowment through selective mating of marriage partners. In his Hereditary Genius (1869), in which he used the word genius to denote “an ability that was exceptionally high and at the same time inborn,” his main argument was that mental and physical features are equally inherited—a proposition that was not accepted at the time.

It is surprising that when Darwin first read this book, he wrote to the author: “You have made a convert of an opponent in one sense for I have always maintained that, excepting fools, men did not differ much in intellect, only in zeal and hardwork.”This book doubtless helped Darwin to extend his evolution theory to man. Galton, unmentioned in Origin of Species (1859), is several times quoted in Darwin’s Descent of Man (1871). Galton’s conviction that mental traits are no less inherited than are physical characteristics was strong enough to shape his personal religious philosophy. “We cannot doubt,” he wrote, “the existence of a great power ready to hand and capable of being directed with vast benefit as soon as we have learned to understand and apply it.”

Galton’s Inquiries into Human Faculty (1883) consists of some 40 articles varying in length from 2 to 30 pages, which are mostly based on scientific papers written between 1869 and 1883. The book can in a sense be regarded as a summary of the author’s views on the faculties of man. On all his topics, Galton has something original and interesting to say, and he says it with clarity, brevity, distinction, and modesty. Under the terms of his will, a eugenics chair was established at the University of London.

Reputation

In the 20th century Galton’s name has been mainly associated with eugenics. Insofar as eugenics takes primary account of inborn differences between human beings, it has come under the suspicion of those who hold that cultural (social and educational) factors heavily outweigh inborn, or biological, factors in their contribution to human differences. Eugenics is accordingly often treated as an expression of class prejudice, and Galton as a reactionary. Yet to some extent this view misrepresents his thought, for his aim was not the creation of an aristocratic elite but of a population consisting entirely of superior men and women. His ideas, like those of Darwin, were limited by a lack of an adequate theory of inheritance; the rediscovery of the work of Mendel came too late to affect Galton’s contribution in any significant way.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

A356C541-8930-4615-A967-BFBDB39060B5.jpeg (46.53 KB, 下载次数: 32)

759CF4FF-3081-477C-82F8-B56DD677D38D.jpeg (18.61 KB, 下载次数: 38)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-7-24 02:25
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-9-11 00:43 编辑

格雷戈尔·約翰·孟德尔（德語：Gregor Johann Mendel，1822年7月20日－1884年1月6日）是一位奥地利科學家，天主教圣职人员。孟德尔出生於奧地利帝國（今天的捷克共和國）的西里西亞，是現代遺傳學的創始人。儘管幾千年來農民就知道動植物的雜交可以促進某些理想的性狀，但孟德尔在1856年至1863年之間進行的豌豆植物實驗建立了許多遺傳規則，現在被稱為孟德尔定律。

孟德尔研究了豌豆的七大特徵：植物高度，豆莢的形狀及顏色，種子的形狀及顏色，以及花的位置和顏色。以種子的顏色為例，孟德尔表示當一個真實遺傳的黃豌豆種子和一個真實遺傳的綠豌豆種子雜交時，它們的後代一定是產生黃色種子，但是在下一代中，豌豆種子以1綠色對3黃色的比率重新出現。為了解釋這種現象，孟德尔針對這些特徵創造了“隱性”和“顯性”兩個術語（在前面的例子中，在第一代中消失的綠色特徵是隱性的特徵，而黃色則是顯性特徵）。孟德尔在1866年出版了他的论文，说明某种看不见的因素（也就是基因）可预测並确定生物体的性状。

孟德尔的重大研究直到20世紀初（超過三十年）才被科學家們重新被人提起。埃里克·冯·切尔马克、许霍·德弗里斯，卡尔·科伦斯和William Jasper Spillman獨立地驗證了孟德尔的幾個實驗，從而迎來了遺傳學的時代。(zh.wikipedia.org/孟德爾)

Austrian botanist, teacher, and Augustinian prelate Gregor Mendel was the first to lay the mathematical foundation of the science of genetics, in what came to be called Mendelism.

Early Career

As his father’s only son, Mendel was expected to take over the small family farm, but he chose instead to enter the Altbrünn monastery as a novitiate of the Augustinian order, where he was given the name Gregor (his birth name was Johann).

The move to the monastery took him to Brünn, the capital of Moravia, where Mendal was introduced to a diverse and intellectual community. Abbot Cyril Napp found him a substitute-teaching position at Znaim (Znojmo, Czech Rep.), where he proved very successful. However, in 1850, Mendel failed an exam—introduced through new legislation for teacher certification—and was sent to the University of Vienna for two years to benefit from a new program of scientific instruction. Mendel devoted his time at Vienna to physics and mathematics, working under Austrian physicist Christian Doppler and mathematical physicist Andreas von Ettinghausen. He also studied the anatomy and physiology of plants and the use of the microscope under botanist Franz Unger, an enthusiast for the cell theory and a supporter of the developmentalist (pre-Darwinian) view of the evolution of life.

In the summer of 1853, Mendel returned to the monastery in Brünn, and in the following year he was again given a teaching position, this time at the Brünn Realschule (secondary school), where he remained until elected abbot 14 years later. These years were his greatest in terms of success both as teacher and as consummate experimentalist.

Experimental Period

In 1854, Abbot Cyril Napp permitted Mendel to plan a major experimental program in hybridization at the monastery. The aim of this program was to trace the transmission of hereditary characters in successive generations of hybrid progeny. Previous authorities had observed that progeny of fertile hybrids tended to revert to the originating species, and they had therefore concluded that hybridization could not be a mechanism used by nature to multiply species—though in exceptional cases some fertile hybrids did appear not to revert (the so-called “constant hybrids”). On the other hand, plant and animal breeders had long shown that crossbreeding could indeed produce a multitude of new forms. The latter point was of particular interest to landowners, including the abbot of the monastery, who was concerned about the monastery’s future profits from the wool of its Merino sheep, owing to competing wool being supplied from Australia.

Mendel chose to conduct his studies with the edible pea (Pisum sativum) because of the numerous distinct varieties, the ease of culture and control of pollination, and the high proportion of successful seed germinations. From 1854 to 1856 he tested 34 varieties for constancy of their traits. In order to trace the transmission of characters, he chose seven traits that were expressed in a distinctive manner, such as plant height (short or tall) and seed colour (green or yellow). He referred to these alternatives as contrasted characters, or character-pairs. He crossed varieties that differed in one trait—for instance, tall crossed with short. The first generation of hybrids (F1 ) displayed the character of one variety but not that of the other. In Mendel’s terms, one character was dominant and the other recessive.

In the numerous progeny that he raised from these hybrids (the second generation, F2), however, the recessive character reappeared, and the proportion of offspring bearing the dominant to offspring bearing the recessive was very close to a 3 to 1 ratio. Study of the descendants (F3) of the dominant group showed that one-third of them were true- breeding and two-thirds were of hybrid constitution. The 3:1 ratio could hence be rewritten as 1:2:1, meaning that 50 percent of the F2 generation were true-breeding and 50 percent were still hybrid. This was Mendel’s major discovery, and it was unlikely to have been made by his predecessors, since they did not grow statistically significant populations, nor did they follow the individual characters separately to establish their statistical relations.

Mendel’s approach to experimentation came from his training in physics and mathematics, especially combinatorial mathematics. The latter served him ideally to represent his result. If A represents the dominant characteristic and a the recessive, then the 1:2:1 ratio recalls the terms in the expansion of the binomial equation: (A + a)2 = A2 + 2Aa + a2 

Mendel realized further that he could test his expectation that the seven traits are transmitted independently of one another. Crosses involving first two and then three of his seven traits yielded categories of offspring in proportions following the terms produced from combining two binomial equations, indicating that their transmission was independent of one another. Mendel’s successors have called this conclusion the law of independent assortment.

Theoretical Interpretation

Mendel went on to relate his results to the cell theory of fertilization, according to which a new organism is generated from the fusion of two cells. In order for pure breeding forms of both the dominant and the recessive type to be brought into the hybrid, there had to be some temporary accommodation of the two differing characters in the hybrid as well as a separation process in the formation of the pollen cells and the egg cells. In other words, the hybrid must form germ cells bearing the potential to yield either the one characteristic or the other. This has since been described as the law of segregation, or the doctrine of the purity of the germ cells. Since one pollen cell fuses with one egg cell, all possible combinations of the differing pollen and egg cells would yield just the results suggested by Mendel’s combinatorial theory.

Mendel first presented his results in two separate lectures in 1865 to the Natural Science Society in Brünn. His paper “Experiments on Plant Hybrids” was published in the society’s journal, Verhandlungen des naturforschenden Vereines in Brünn, the following year. It attracted little attention, although many libraries received it and reprints were sent out. The tendency of those who read it was to conclude that Mendel had simply demonstrated more accurately what was already widely assumed—namely, that hybrid progeny revert to their originating forms. They overlooked the potential for variability and the evolutionary implications that his demonstration of the recombination of traits made possible. Mendel appears to have made no effort to publicize his work, and it is not known how many reprints of his paper he distributed.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

CF7265E2-2F6C-49F6-BB9B-942494AFE6C5.jpeg (115.01 KB, 下载次数: 31)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-9-11 00:39
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-9-11 00:44 编辑

Rediscovery

In 1900, Dutch botanist and geneticist Hugo de Vries, German botanist and geneticist Carl Erich Correns, and Austrian botanist Erich Tschermak von Seysenegg independently reported results of hybridization experiments similar to Mendel’s, though each later claimed not to have known of Mendel’s work while doing their own experiments. However, both de Vries and Correns had read Mendel earlier—Correns even made detailed notes on the subject—but had forgotten. De Vries had a diversity of results in 1899, but it was not until he reread Mendel in 1900 that he was able to select and organize his data into a rational system. Tschermak had not read Mendel before obtaining his results, and his first account of his data offers an interpretation in terms of hereditary potency. He described the 3:1 ratio as an “unequal valancy” (Wertigkeit). In subsequent papers he incorporated the Mendelian theory of segregation and the purity of the germ cells into his text.

In Great Britain, biologist William Bateson became the leading proponent of Mendel’s theory. Around him gathered an enthusiastic band of followers. However, Darwinian evolution was assumed to be based chiefly on the selection of small, blending variations, whereas Mendel worked with clearly nonblending variations. Bateson soon found that championing Mendel aroused opposition from Darwinians. He and his supporters were called Mendelians, and their work was considered irrelevant to evolution. It took some three decades before the Mendelian theory was sufficiently developed to find its rightful place in evolutionary theory.

The distinction between a characteristic and its determinant was not consistently made by Mendel or by his successors, the early Mendelians. In 1909, Danish botanist and geneticist Wilhelm Johannsen clarified this point and named the determinants genes. Four years later, American zoologist and geneticist Thomas Hunt Morgan located the genes on the chromosomes, and the popular picture of them as beads on a string emerged. This discovery had implications for Mendel’s claim of an independent transmission of traits, for genes close together on the same chromosome are not transmitted independently. Today the gene is defined in several ways, depending upon the nature of the investigation. Genetic material can be synthesized, manipulated, and hybridized with genetic material from other species, but to fully understand its functions in the whole organism, an understanding of Mendelian inheritance is necessary. As the architect of genetic As the architect of genetic experimental and statistical analysis, Mendel remains the acknowledged father of genetics.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

今年是孟德尔出生二百年記念但只有德國和南韩有發行了邮票。

8D5918F2-B46F-4B99-B6E7-1635CA60B3C3.jpeg (161.73 KB, 下载次数: 31)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-9-11 00:39
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-9-11 00:41 编辑

孟德尔在1856年至1863年之間進行的豌豆植物實驗建立了遺傳學的孟德爾定律。

豌豆（學名：Pisum sativum）为豆科豌豆属一年生或二年生攀缘草本植物，是重要的粮食和蔬菜，别称胡豆、麦豆、寒豆、小寒豆、淮豆、麻豆、青小豆、青斑豆、留豆、金豆、回回豆、麦豌豆、雪豆、毕豆、麻累、国豆、馬豆等。(zh.wikipedia.org/豌豆)

56AC43D4-03A6-4276-998F-49B49964F597.jpeg (119.06 KB, 下载次数: 30)

FF63C249-3C33-41D1-811D-6B7A427A5465.jpeg (126.01 KB, 下载次数: 29)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-9-18 01:10
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-9-18 01:18 编辑

路易·巴斯德（法語：Louis Pasteur，1822年12月27日－1895年9月28日），法国微生物学家、化学家，微生物学的奠基人之一。他以借生源说否定自然发生说（自生说）、倡导疾病细菌学说（胚种学说），以及发明预防接种方法以及巴氏杀菌法而闻名，為第一個創造狂犬病和炭疽病疫苗的科學家。他和费迪南德·科恩以及罗伯特·科赫一起开创了细菌学，被认为是微生物学的奠基者之一，常被稱为“微生物學之父”。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/路易·巴斯德)

French chemist and microbiologist Louis Pasteur made some of the most varied and valuable discoveries in the history of science and industry. It was he who proved that microorganisms cause fermentation and disease; he who pioneered the use of vaccines for rabies, anthrax, and chicken cholera; he who saved the beer, wine, and silk industries of France and other countries; he who performed important pioneer work in stereochemistry; and he who originated the process known as pasteurization.

Early Career

Pasteur made his first important contribution to science on May 22, 1848, when he presented before the Paris Academy of Sciences a paper reporting a remarkable discovery—that certain chemical compounds were capable of splitting into a “right” component and a “left” component, one component being the mirror image of the other. His discoveries arose out of a crystallographic investigation of tartaric acid, an acid formed in grape fermentation that is widely used commercially, and racemic acid—a new, hitherto unknown acid that had been discovered in certain industrial processes in the Alsace region. Both acids not only had identical chemical compositions but also had the same structure; yet they showed marked differences in properties. Pasteur found that, when separated, the two types of crystals rotated plane polarized light to the same degree but in opposite directions (one to the right, or clockwise, and the other to the left, or counterclockwise). One of the two crystal forms of racemic acid proved to be identical with the tartaric acid of fermentation.

As Pasteur showed further, one component of the racemic acid (that identical with the tartaric acid from fermentation) could be utilized for nutrition by microorganisms, whereas the other, which is now termed its optical antipode, was not assimilable by living organisms. On the basis of these experiments, Pasteur elaborated his theory of molecular asymmetry, showing that the biological properties of chemical substances depend not only on the nature of the atoms constituting their molecules but also on the manner in which these atoms are arranged in space.

Research on Fermentation

In 1854 Pasteur became dean of the new science faculty at the University of Lille, where he initiated a highly modern educational concept: by instituting evening classes for the many young workmen of the industrial city, conducting his regular students around large factories in the area, and organizing supervised practical courses, he demonstrated the relationship that he believed should exist between theory and practice, between university and industry. At Lille, after receiving a query from an industrialist on the production of alcohol from grain and beet sugar, Pasteur began his studies on fermentation.

From studying the fermentation of alcohol he went on to the problem of lactic fermentation, showing yeast to be an organism capable of reproducing itself, even in artificial media, without free oxygen—a concept that became known as the Pasteur effect. He later announced that fermentation was the result of the activity of minute organisms and that when fermentation failed, either the necessary organism was absent or was unable to grow properly. Pasteur showed that milk could be soured by injecting a number of organisms from buttermilk or beer but could be kept unchanged if such organisms were excluded.

Spontaneous Generation and Pasteurization

As a logical sequel to Pasteur’s work on fermentation, he began research on spontaneous generation (the concept that bacterial life arose spontaneously), a question which at that time divided scientists into two opposing camps. Pasteur’s recognition of the fact that both lactic and alcohol fermentations were hastened by exposure to air led him to wonder whether his invisible organisms were always present in the atmosphere or whether they were spontaneously generated. By means of simple and precise experiments, including the filtration of air and the exposure of unfermented liquids to the air of the high Alps, he proved that food decomposes when placed in contact with germs present in the air, which cause its putrefaction, and that it does not undergo transformation or putrefy in such a way as to spontaneously generate new organisms within itself.

After laying the theoretical groundwork, Pasteur proceeded to apply his findings to the study of vinegar and wine, two commodities of great importance in the economy of France; his pasteurization process, the destruction of harmful germs by heat, made it possible to produce, preserve, and transport these products without their undergoing deterioration.

Research on Silkworms and Brewing

In 1865 Pasteur undertook a government mission to investigate the diseases of the silkworm, which were about to put an end to the production of silk at a time when it comprised a major section of France’s economy. To carry out the investigation, he moved to the south of France, the centre of silkworm breeding.Three years later he announced that he had isolated the bacilli of two distinct diseases and had found methods of preventing contagion and of detecting diseased stock.

In 1870 he devoted himself to the problem of beer. Following an investigation conducted both in France and among the brewers in London, he devised, as he had done for vinegar and wine, a procedure for manufacturing beer that would prevent its deterioration with time. British exporters, whose ships had to sail entirely around the African continent, were thus able to send British beer as far as India without fear of its deteriorating.

07D1A7E6-148B-49B8-B48B-9543A2EDB1A8.jpeg (143.73 KB, 下载次数: 29)

F2B6975F-3EA8-407B-869B-F2831727E045.jpeg (106.95 KB, 下载次数: 27)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-9-18 01:11
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-9-18 01:20 编辑

Research on Vaccines

By 1881 Pasteur had perfected a technique for reducing the virulence of various disease-producing microorganisms, and he had succeeded in vaccinating a herd of sheep against the disease known as anthrax. Likewise, he was able to protect fowl from chicken cholera, for he had observed that once animals stricken with certain diseases had recovered they were later immune to a fresh attack. Thus, by isolating the germ of the disease and by cultivating an attenuated, or weakened, form of the germ and inoculating fowl with the culture, he could immunize the animals against the malady. In this he was following the example of the English physician Edward Jenner, who used cowpox to vaccinate against the closely related but more virulent disease smallpox.

On April 27, 1882, Pasteur was elected a member of the Académie Française, at which point he undertook research that proved to be the most spectacular of all—the preventive treatment of rabies. After experimenting with inoculations of saliva from infected animals, he came to the conclusion that the virus was also present in the nerve centres, and he demonstrated that a portion of the medulla oblongata of a rabid dog, when injected into the body of a healthy animal, produced symptoms of rabies. By further work on the dried tissues of infected animals and the effect of time and temperature on these tissues, he was able to obtain a weakened form of the virus that could be used for inoculation.

Having detected the rabies virus by its effects on the nervous system and attenuated its virulence, he applied his procedure to man; on July 6, 1885, he saved the life of a nine-year-old boy, Joseph Meister, who had been bitten by a rabid dog. The experiment was an outstanding success, opening the road to protection from a terrible disease.

全文可在 www.arvindguptatoys.com/arvindgupta/hundred-scientists.pdf 下载。

3D3F14E2-68C8-4CCC-990B-0A629CB1CA9D.jpeg (110.92 KB, 下载次数: 27)

7F7795C2-F6B3-4B40-9099-C50580F9587C.jpeg (130.51 KB, 下载次数: 25)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-9-18 01:12
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-9-18 01:21 编辑

今年巴黎六月郵展發行了兩枚郵票，又是三十年代的郵票圖案。極限片将于下星期日上传。

A2E9608C-B6C8-44F9-A700-67C3C631305D.jpeg (170.82 KB, 下载次数: 35)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-9-25 00:30
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-9-25 00:33 编辑

1867年-1888年巴斯德任高等师范学校生理化学实验室主任。路易·巴斯德于1881年著手研究狂犬病，1885年以減毒的方式（the method for attenuatio of virulent microorganisms）研製出減毒狂犬病疫苗，巴斯德的名聲引來大西洋彼岸的求助，當時美國新澤西幾名男童遭到感染狂犬病的犬隻攻擊，性命垂危。這起新聞引起美國民眾的重視，自發集資協助這幾名男童跨越大西洋至巴黎，尋求巴斯德的救助，而巴斯德也不負眾望，利用他研究出的狂犬病疫苗，在同年7月6日治療一受狂犬咬傷的9歲兒童。(zh.wikipedia.org/路易·巴斯德)

阿尔伯特·埃德费尔特 (Albert Edelfelt) 的这幅著名画作中，路易·巴斯德 (Louis Pasteur) 在观察一只狂犬病兔子的脊髓，它悬浮在干燥钾盐晶体上方。这是获得狂犬病疫苗的过程。埃德费尔特是路易·巴斯德的好朋友，这幅肖像画于 1885 年 4 月中旬开始，埃德费尔特从一开始就考虑在他的工作环境中代表巴斯德。巴斯德用一个更大的瓶子代替了他手里拿着的一个小瓶子，里面装着一块从狂犬病兔子身上取出的脊髓。代表巴斯德的画作在 1886 年的沙龙上展出。这幅创新的肖像很快在媒体上被转载，因为捕捉了科學家全神贯注于他们的工作。

今年巴黎六月郵展發行的兩枚郵票是根据三十年代的郵票圖案。在阿尔伯特·埃德费尔特 (Albert Edelfelt) 的这幅著名画作中，路易·巴斯德在实验室工作, 巴斯德的实验室在巴黎。巴黎邮戳是正確的。

1E4EB2DE-6739-449C-BD19-94715D4D3C84.jpeg (112.31 KB, 下载次数: 25)

B6B34F17-2CE3-4233-9F64-BE675619B10F.jpeg (105.92 KB, 下载次数: 24)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-9-25 00:30
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2022-9-25 00:33 编辑

路易斯·爱德华·富尼埃 (Louis Édouard Fournier) 的这幅著名画作中，路易·巴斯德 (Louis Pasteur) 在实验室工作, 巴斯德的实验室在巴黎。巴黎邮戳是正確的。

CF5A1386-6473-470D-B710-DF969A483494.jpeg (114.29 KB, 下载次数: 26)

E75D8A6A-8BD3-439E-8F5A-300938004F9C.jpeg (107.3 KB, 下载次数: 24)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2022-9-25 00:31
1994年，Daryl Kibble 展出“极限科学” 得到大镀金。后来他与 Daniel Olsen 的大镀金展品合并，但并没有得到預期的金獎 (原因是相关的極限規則直到十多年後才修訂)。因此，十多年前他向中国出售了许多早期極限展品。放弃极限后，他获得了专题的金奖。

对于科学方法是否可以应用在研究早期極限邮政史,他是猜对了。然而，直到我在 2020 年开始这样做, 之前的研究并不是由任何受过科学训练的人士在进行。我欢迎其他科学家加入我的研究行列。

這是《极限前驱品家族起源》(on the origins of maximum card precursor families by means of concordance selection) 115 张幻灯片之一。將於明年前发布在 youtube 上。

2E2C01B1-B735-40B9-AC38-A8FD18AC8219.jpeg (164.34 KB, 下载次数: 21)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-10 01:33
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2023-9-10 01:40 编辑

敬请观看极限视频《科学先驱》在 https://youtu.be/dYrUKxflHHo

本视频介绍 34位被列入大英百科全书教育出版社出版的《有史以来最有影响力的100位科学家》的科学家。

两个例子说明科学与信仰之间的区别。

关于第一枚极限片诞生故事的传统说法如下：一位旅行埃及的遊客，為了給在法國的朋友捎個音訊，在一個偶然的機會下，買了枚金字塔風景明信片，同時將金字塔郵票貼在图案面上，寄了出去，写了法文 Timbre côté vue或 TCV在明信片的地址那面, 告诉郵務員郵資已付，表明邮票貼在明信片的图案面上, 请盖邮戳在邮票上。於是就无意形成了第一枚金字塔极限明信片。相信这个故事就是信了自然發生教。在显微镜发明之前，很多人相信自然發生，認為現今的生物體是在無機物中自然產生的，此理論目前不被科學界所接受。

我不相信没有真凭实据的胡說八道, 我相信极限可以科学化，极限是实验科学，极限是数据数学。新发现简单地总结如下：第一代前驱品为TVA (Timbre côté vue et adresse 郵票貼在图案和地址同一面) 。不是无意形成。第二代前驱品是TCV (Timbre côté vue 郵票貼在图案面上) 不是TCA (Timbre côté adresse 郵票貼在地址面上)。不是无意形成。详情请见我的文章和视频。如果您有替代假设，请展示您的基于证据的理论。

第二個例子是日本政府将辐岛核污水排入太平洋。你相信政治家的(日本)鬼(子)话还是你想看到科学家和专家检查的数据？我很生气因为我喜欢食海鲜！

1B3A2B45-9BC0-4C62-A6B0-48232257C3A6.jpeg (137.58 KB, 下载次数: 22)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-11 05:49
阿斯克勒庇厄斯（希腊语：Ἀσκληπιός，拉丁語：Asclepius），是古希腊神话中的医神，在古罗马神话中被称为埃斯库拉庇乌斯（拉丁语：Aesculapius），他是太阳神阿波罗之子，形象為手持蛇杖。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/阿斯克勒庇俄斯)

希波克拉底（古希臘文：Ἱπποκράτης，前460年－前370年），為古希臘伯里克利時代之醫師，約生於公元前460年，後世人普遍認為其為醫學史上傑出人物之一。在其所身處之上古時代，醫學並不發達，然而他卻能將醫學發展成為專業學科，使之與巫術及哲學分離，並創立了以之為名的醫學學派，對古希臘之醫學發展貢獻良多，故今人多尊稱之為「醫學之父」。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/希波克拉底)

E1D284B8-74E5-4801-B62A-C806B8322938.jpeg (180.73 KB, 下载次数: 20)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-11 05:50
亚里士多德（希臘語：Αριστοτέλης，Aristotélēs，前384年－前322年3月7日），古希腊哲学家，柏拉圖的學生、亚历山大大帝的老師。他的著作牽涉許多學科，包括了物理學、形而上學、詩歌（包括戲劇）、音乐、生物學、經濟學、動物學、邏輯學、政治、政府、以及倫理學。和柏拉圖、蘇格拉底（柏拉圖的老師）一起被譽為西方哲學的奠基者。亞里士多德的著作是西方哲學的第一個廣泛系統，包含道德、美學、邏輯和科學、政治和形而上学。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/亚里士多德)

8C48CECD-693B-4833-B0FD-03BD2464039B.jpeg (181.11 KB, 下载次数: 15)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-12 21:55
列奥纳多·达·芬奇（意大利語：Leonardo da Vinci；儒略历1452年4月15日－1519年5月2日)，又譯达文西，全名李奧納多·迪·瑟皮耶罗·达·芬奇（Leonardo di ser Piero da Vinci，意为「文西城皮耶羅先生之子──李奧納多」），是意大利文藝復興時期的一个博學者：在繪畫、音樂、建築、數學、幾何學、解剖學、生理學、動物學、植物學、天文學、氣象學、地質學、地理學、物理學、光學、力學、發明、土木工程等領域都有顯著的成就。这使他成为文艺复兴时期人文主义的代表人物，也使得他成為文藝復興時期典型的藝術家，也是歷史上最著名的畫家之一，與米開朗基羅和拉斐尔並稱文艺复兴三杰。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/列奥纳多·达·芬奇)

6DD47BE5-D5A9-4C82-85E5-EBFDC2A26362.jpeg (197.03 KB, 下载次数: 16)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-12 21:57
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2023-9-12 21:58 编辑

安德雷亚斯·维萨里（拉丁語：Andreas Vesalius，荷蘭語：Andries van Wesel；1514年12月31日於布鲁塞尔－1564年10月15日於扎金索斯）是一名文藝復興時期的解剖学家、医生，他编写的《人体的构造》（拉丁語：De humani corporis fabrica）是人体解剖学的权威著作之一。維薩里被认为是近代人体解剖学的创始人。
在帕多瓦大學博士學位毕业后，他留在帕多瓦教授外科和解剖学。同时，他还被邀请到博洛尼亚大学和比萨大学做演讲。演讲的对象都学习过盖伦的理论——一般都是通过讲授者聘请外科医生对动物的解剖来进行说明。没有人试图去验证一下盖伦的理论：它们被认为是无懈可击的。但维萨里做的与众不同。他使用解剖工具亲自演示操作，而学生则围在桌子周围观察学习。面对面的亲身体验式教学被认为是唯一可靠的教学方式，也是对中世纪实践的一个重大突破。
1541年，维萨里在博洛尼亚发现盖伦所有的研究结果都不是源于人体而是动物的解剖：因为古代罗马人体解剖是被禁止的，所以盖伦选用了巴巴利猕猴来代替，还坚称两者在解剖学上是相近的。于是，维萨里对盖伦的文章做了校正，并开始撰写自己的著作。在维萨里发现之前，医学界从没有注意到这一点，并且盖伦的著作一直是研究人类解剖学的基础。尽管如此，仍有人坚持采信盖伦的论点，并且嫉恨维萨里取得了这样瞩目的成果。
在文藝復興時期，很多醫生把屍體解剖，找出人生病的真正原因（因當時的教會認為人生病的原因是神懲罰人的罪，但人們受人文主義（humanism）影響，開始質疑其信仰及思想）。而维萨里則在1543年寫的《人體的構造》（De humani corporis fabrica）。這本書詳細地介紹和研究解剖學，更附有他親手繪畫、有關人體骨骼和神經的插圖。這也是他被稱為“解剖學之父”的原因之一。
1543年，维萨里邀请约翰内斯·奥坡瑞努斯帮助他印刷七卷本的《人体的构造》一书，这本关于人类解剖学的划时代巨著邀请了提香的弟子让·范·卡尔卡做插画。几周后，维萨里又为学生重新出版了一本节录，《安德里亚·维萨里-人体的构造-目录梗概》。
尽管维萨里不是第一个进行实际解剖的人，但是他的作品的价值仍是毫无疑义的——高度详细和精细的版画，即使是现在仍然被认为是经典的。而当《构造》一书出版时，维萨里只有30岁。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/安德雷亚斯·维萨里)

FC24D8B4-E9BF-4F17-ADAB-AF0FA67E7FB5.jpeg (42.79 KB, 下载次数: 19)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-12 22:00
在1491-92年的冬季学期，哥白尼以Nicolaus Nicolai de Thuronia的名字和兄弟安德鲁一同被克拉科夫大学所录取（也就是如今的亞捷隆大學）。哥白尼就读的是艺术系，时间从1491年秋天到大致1495年的夏天或秋天。当时正是克拉科夫大学的天文学和数学学院如日中天的时候，这里的学习经历为他将来在数学方面所取得的成绩奠定了基础。按照后来Jan Brożek的一种可靠说法，哥白尼成为了阿尔伯特·布鲁楚斯基（Albert Brudzewski）的学生，后者在当时（1491年）是一名亚里士多德哲学教授，但是他在大学校外私下里教授天文学；哥白尼就此熟悉了布鲁楚斯基广泛阅读的评论文章，参加了许多讲座。

哥白尼在克拉科夫的学习经历帮他奠定了数学天文学方面的坚实基础，校方教授的课程包括数学、几何学、几何光学、宇宙结构学、天文学的理论和计算等，使他掌握了亚里士多德有关哲学和自然科学的著作《形而上学》（De coelo, Metaphysics），这些都激发了他的学习兴趣，并实现对人文文化的精深把握。在克拉科夫求学的过程中，哥白尼通过参加大学讲座以及独立阅读著作来拓展自己的知识，诸如古希腊数学家欧几里德和阿拉伯天文学家哈里·阿本拉吉（英语：Haly Abenragel）的著作，阿方索星表（英语：Alfonsine Tables），德国数学家、天文学家雷格蒙塔努斯（约翰·缪勒）的《方位册》（Tabulae directionum），等等。在这期间的阅读资料，其中还标注有他最早的科学笔记，现在部分保存在瑞典乌普萨拉大学。在克拉科夫，哥白尼开始搜集大量的天文学方面的藏书，后在17世纪50年代的大洪水时代，被瑞典当作战利品运往本国，现在瑞典乌普萨拉大学图书馆收藏。

哥白尼在克拉科夫的四年学习生活为他重要才能的发展发挥了重要作用，并促使他在天文学的两大流行体系亚里士多德的同心球面学说和托勒密的偏心圆和本轮理论进行逻辑比较分析，对之进行扬弃之后，构建出哥白尼自己对于宇宙结构的理论的第一步。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/尼古拉·哥白尼)

克拉科夫大學院（波蘭語：Collegium Maius）的哥白尼纪念碑。克拉科夫大學院是亞捷隆大學最古老的建築，其歷史可以追溯至14世紀。雅盖隆大学图书馆建于1364年，现有藏书650万部，是波兰最大的图书馆之一。藏有大量中世纪手稿，其中包括哥白尼《天体运行论》的原稿。(zh.m.wikipedia.org/克拉科夫大學院)&(zh.m.wikipedia.org/亞捷隆大學)

D3C177E9-E5E1-4028-950C-1D012C604B2E.jpeg (187.29 KB, 下载次数: 20)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-12 22:02
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2023-9-12 22:03 编辑

伽利略·伽利莱（Galileo Galilei, 1564年2月15日－1642年1月8日)，義大利物理學家、數學家、天文學家及哲學家，科學革命中的重要人物。其成就包括改進望遠鏡和其所帶來的天文觀測，以及支持哥白尼的日心说。伽利略做实验证明，感受到引力的物体并不是呈等速運動，而是呈加速度運動；物體只要不受到外力的作用，就會保持其原來的靜止狀態或勻速運動狀態不變。他又發表惯性原理阐明，未感受到外力作用的物体会保持不变其原来的静止状态或匀速运动状态。伽利略被譽為“現代觀測天文學之父”、“現代物理學之父”、“科學之父”及“現代科學之父”。

史蒂芬·霍金說，“自然科學的誕生要歸功於伽利略。”(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/伽利略·伽利莱)

864DF711-2A72-4B3B-B116-B6C9469D49F1.jpeg (37.81 KB, 下载次数: 27)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-12 22:05
伽利略·伽利莱（Galileo Galilei, 1564年2月15日－1642年1月8日)，義大利物理學家、數學家、天文學家及哲學家，科學革命中的重要人物。其成就包括改進望遠鏡和其所帶來的天文觀測，以及支持哥白尼的日心说。伽利略做实验证明，感受到引力的物体并不是呈等速運動，而是呈加速度運動；物體只要不受到外力的作用，就會保持其原來的靜止狀態或勻速運動狀態不變。他又發表惯性原理阐明，未感受到外力作用的物体会保持不变其原来的静止状态或匀速运动状态。伽利略被譽為“現代觀測天文學之父”、“現代物理學之父”、“科學之父”及“現代科學之父”。

史蒂芬·霍金說，“自然科學的誕生要歸功於伽利略。”(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/伽利略·伽利莱)

6949FA18-1B84-417A-9537-718F9EE9AFA3.jpeg (169.52 KB, 下载次数: 29)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-15 16:01
安東尼‧菲利普斯·范‧雷文霍克（荷蘭語：Antonie Philips van Leeuwenhoek；1632年10月24日~1723年8月26日）是一位荷蘭貿易商與科學家，有光學顯微鏡與微生物學之父的稱號。最為著名的成就之一，是改進了顯微鏡以及微生物學的建立。
他經由手工自製的顯微鏡，首先觀察並描述單細胞生物，他當時將這些生物稱為「animalcules」。此外，他也是最早紀錄觀察肌纖維、細菌、精蟲、微血管中血流的科學家。雷文霍克觀察自己的精液，在顯微鏡觀察下從中發現精細胞，他自認這是他生涯中的重大發現，並觀察兩棲類、軟體動物、鳥類、魚類與哺乳動物的精細胞，獲致一個新的結論，受精就是在精細胞穿進卵中而發生的。(zh.wikipedia.org/安東尼·范·列文虎克)

039C6164-3D6F-40FC-9A34-5B10557A8421.jpeg (167.32 KB, 下载次数: 29)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-15 16:04
罗伯特·波义耳（英語：Robert Boyle，1627年1月25日－1691年12月30日），又译波意耳，爱尔兰自然哲学家，炼金术师，在化学和物理学研究上都有杰出贡献。虽然他的化学研究仍然带有炼金术色彩，他的《怀疑派的化学家》一书仍然被视作化学史上的里程碑。

1657年他在罗伯特·胡克的辅助下对奥托·格里克发明的气泵进行改进。1659年制成了“波义耳机器”和“风力发动机”。接下来他用这一装置对气体性质进行了研究，并于1660年发表对这一设备的研究成果。这一论文遭到以弗朗西斯·莱恩为代表的科学家的反对，为了反驳异议，波义耳阐明了在温度一定的条件下气体的压力与体积成反比的这一性质。法国物理学家马略特得到了同样的结果，但是一直到1676年才发表。于是在英语国家，这一定律被称为波义耳定律，而在欧洲大陆则被称为马略特定律。

1661年波义耳发表了《怀疑派的化学家》，在这部著作中波义耳批判了一直存在的四元素说，认为在科学研究中不应该将组成物质的物质都称为元素，而应该采取类似海尔蒙特的观点，认为不能互相转变和不能还原成更简单的东西为元素，他说：“我说的元素...是指某种原始的、简单的、一点也没有掺杂的物体。元素不能用任何其他物体造成，也不能彼此相互造成。元素是直接合成所谓完全混合物的成份，也是完全混合物最终分解成的要素。”而元素的微粒的不同聚合体导致了性质的不同。由于波义耳在实验与理论两方面都对化学发展有重要贡献，他的工作为近代化学奠定了初步基础，故被认为是近代化学的奠基人。(zh.wikipedia.org/罗伯特·波义耳)

A51E8121-BB6E-4EDA-8BD9-0EBAC6C7A570.jpeg (190.75 KB, 下载次数: 24)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-16 05:03
安托万-洛朗·德·拉瓦锡（法語：Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier，1743年8月26日－1794年5月8日），法国貴族，著名化学家、生物学家，被後世尊稱為“近代化學之父l。他使化学从定性转为定量，給出了氧與氫的命名，並且預測了硅的存在。他幫助建立了公制。拉瓦锡提出了「元素」的定義，按照這定義，於1789年發表第一個現代化學元素列表，列出33種元素，其中包括光與熱和一些當時被認為是元素的化合物。拉瓦锡的貢獻促使18世紀的化學更加物理及數學化。他提出规范的化学命名法，撰写了第一部真正現代化学教科书《化學基本論述》（Traité élémentaire de Chimie）。他倡导并改进定量分析方法并用其验证了质量守恒定律。他創立氧化说以解释燃烧等实验现象，指出动物的呼吸实质上是缓慢氧化。这些划时代贡献使得他成为历史上最伟大的化学家之一。拉瓦锡不幸在法国大革命中被送上断头台而死。(zh.wikipedia.org/安托万-洛朗·德·拉瓦锡)

AC6B8F18-CCD8-4FCB-ABF9-29AEDCD8502D.jpeg (192.11 KB, 下载次数: 25)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-16 05:06
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2023-9-16 05:07 编辑

约瑟夫·路易·盖-吕萨克（法語：Joseph Louis Gay-Lussac，1778年12月6日－1850年5月10日），法国化学家和物理学家，以研究氣體而聞名。1802年盖-吕萨克发现了气体在恒压、升温时的线性膨胀的定律（查理-盖-吕萨克定律）。在法國巴黎大学附近有一条街道是以他命名的，在他的出生地有一个广场以他命名。盖-吕萨克葬于著名的巴黎拉雪茲神父公墓（Cimetière du Père-Lachaise）。(zh.wikipedia.org/约瑟夫·路易·盖-吕萨克)

阿梅代奥·阿伏伽德罗（Amedeo Avogadro，1776年－1856年），意大利化学家，生于都灵。全名Lorenzo Romano Amedeo Carlo Avogadro di Quaregua。1811年发表了阿伏伽德罗假說，也就是今日的阿伏伽德罗定律，并提出分子概念及原子、分子区别等重要化学问题。著名的阿伏伽德罗常數（NA=6.02214129±0.00000027×1023，一般计算时常取6.02×1023或6.022×1023为近似值）以他的姓氏命名。(zh.wikipedia.org/阿梅代奥·阿伏伽德罗)

5A47E4B3-D1EE-4CAD-9D10-B19FB6FF470B.jpeg (184.66 KB, 下载次数: 25)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-17 01:21
愛德華·詹納（英文：Edward Jenner，1749年5月17日－1823年1月26日），FRS，亦譯作愛德華·金納或琴納，是一名英國醫生，生於英國告羅士打郡伯克利牧區一個牧師家庭，以研究及推廣牛痘疫苗，防止天花而聞名，被稱為疫苗之父。并且为后人的研究打开了通道，促使巴斯德、科赫等人针对其他疾病寻求治疗和免疫的方法。(zh.wikipedia.org/愛德華·詹納)

D5B65C59-829B-47C6-9FF2-84527E103131.jpeg (185.47 KB, 下载次数: 33)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-17 01:23
安德烈-馬里·安培（法語：André-Marie Ampère，FRS，1775年1月20日－1836年6月10日) 是法国物理学家、数学家，经典电磁学的创始人之一。为了纪念他的贡献，国际单位制中电流的单位“安培”以他的姓氏命名。

1820年九月，丹麦物理学家奥斯特发现电流的磁效应。于是，安培开始着手建立描述电磁关系的物理理论与数学方程。为了进行定量研究，安培设计了一个检流计，可通过指针的偏转检测电流的方向并测量电流的大小。1822年，安培发表了一篇论文，对实验现象进行定量总结，发现两根平行载流导线以各自产生的磁场对另一根导线产生作用力。1826年，安培提出载流导线中的电流与其产生的磁场之间的关系，即安培定律。此后，安培的代表作《关于电动力学现象之数学理论的回忆录，独一无二的经历》出版，“电动力学”一词自此产生。(zh.wikipedia.org/安德烈-馬里·安培)

AE2E917F-4AA7-4C81-BF9D-3E11230FB38F.jpeg (170.91 KB, 下载次数: 26)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-17 01:24
米高·法拉第（英語：Michael Faraday，1791年9月22日－1867年8月25日），英國物理学家，在電磁學及電化學領域做出許多重要貢獻，其中主要的貢獻為電磁感應、抗磁性、電解。

法拉第是一位優秀的實驗家。他詳細地研究在載流導線四周的磁場，想出了磁場線的點子，因此建立了電磁場的概念。法拉第觀察到磁場會影響光線的傳播，他找出了兩者之間的關係。他發現了電磁感應的原理、抗磁性、法拉第電解定律。他發明了一種電磁旋轉機器，這就是今天電動機的雛型。由於法拉第的努力，電磁現象開始出現於具有實際用途的科技發展。

法拉第在化學上也頗有建樹，他發現了苯，研究氯晶籠化合物，發明了本生燈的早期形式及氧化數，同時也推廣了陽極、陰極、電極及離子等術語。他最終當上了第一位也是最重要的大英皇家科學研究所的富勒化學教授。

為了紀念法拉第，在國際單位制裏，電容的單位是法拉。(zh.wikipedia.org/麥可·法拉第)

95A7ED94-D9ED-420E-87F4-423FB44551A8.jpeg (166.9 KB, 下载次数: 28)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-18 08:05
弗里德里希·威廉·海因里希·亚历山大·冯·洪堡（德语：Friedrich Wilhelm Heinrich Alexander von Humboldt，1769年9月14日－1859年5月6日），德国自然科学家、自然地理学家，近代气候学、植物地理学、地球物理学的创始人之一；涉猎科目很广，特别是生物学与地质学。教育家、柏林大學創始人威廉·馮·洪堡是其兄。他被誉为现代地理学的金字塔和现代地理学之父。还是英国皇家学会外籍会员。

晚年所写的5卷《宇宙》（德語：Kosmos，原著用法文写成）是他描述地球自然地理的著作。其对地理学和生物学有巨大贡献。如他认为自然界为一巨大的整体，各种自然现象相互联系，并依其内部力量不断运动发展；亦常从直接观察的事实出发，运用比较法，揭示自然现象之间的因果关系。同时，他开创了许多地理学界的重要概念，如等温线、等压线、地形剖面图、海拔温度梯度、洋流、植被的水平与垂直分布、气候带分布、温度垂直递减率、大陆东西岸温度差异、大陆性与海洋气候、地形对气候形成的作用等，并探讨气候同动植物的水平分异和垂直分异的关系；此外，他也发现地磁强度从极地向赤道递减的规律，火山分布与地下裂隙的关系等。(zh.wikipedia.org/亚历山大·冯·洪堡)

3BDB8F9C-EE73-4537-8162-7E2F6B7F053F.jpeg (163.49 KB, 下载次数: 28)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-18 08:09
约翰·詹姆斯·奥杜邦（John James Audubon，1785年4月26日－1851年1月27日），美国画家、博物学家，法裔美國人。奥杜邦一生留下了无数的画作，他的作品不仅是科学研究的重要资料，也是不可多得的艺术杰作，他先后出版了《美洲鸟类》和《美洲的四足动物》两本画谱。其中的《美洲鸟类》曾被誉为19世纪最伟大和最具影响力的著作。

奥杜邦的作品对后世野生动物绘画产生了深刻的影响，同时，在普通公众中，奥杜邦的作品也有着很大的影响力。除了绘画作品，奥杜邦在他的日记和随笔中流露出的保护自然、保护野生动物、尊重生命的理念，对整个社会产生了非常深远的影响，在英语世界，奥杜邦的名字就是环境保护和野生动物保护的象征。

在奥杜邦逝世之后，美国出现了很多以他名字命名的博物馆、动物园和科研机构，在北美，以奥杜邦名字命名的奥杜邦学会始终致力于野生动物保护和环境保护，是美国最具影响力的社会团体之一。(zh.wikipedia.org/约翰·詹姆斯·奥杜邦)

88D16E8E-F21F-40A0-90E3-D8F8488232BB.jpeg (188.11 KB, 下载次数: 32)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-19 06:20
查尔斯·罗伯特·达尔文 (英語：Charles Robert Darwin，1809年2月12日－1882年4月19日）英国博物學家、地質學家和生物學家，其最著名的研究成果是天擇演化，解釋了適應的來源，並指出他认为所有物種都是从少數共同祖先演化而来的。到了19世纪30年代，达尔文的理論成為對演化機制的主要詮釋，並成為現代演化思想的基礎，在科學上可對生物多樣性進行一致且合理的解釋，是現今生物學的基石。(zh.wikipedia.org/查尔斯·达尔文)

72E24E8F-D026-4FC5-B074-DDE4A86049E6.jpeg (175.39 KB, 下载次数: 31)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-19 06:22
格雷戈尔·約翰·孟德尔（德語：Gregor Johann Mendel，1822年7月20日－1884年1月6日）是一位奥地利科學家，天主教圣职人员。孟德尔出生於奧地利帝國（今天的捷克共和國）的西里西亞，是現代遺傳學的創始人。儘管幾千年來農民就知道動植物的雜交可以促進某些理想的性狀，但孟德尔在1856年至1863年之間進行的豌豆植物實驗建立了許多遺傳規則，現在被稱為孟德尔定律。

孟德尔研究了豌豆的七大特徵：植物高度，豆莢的形狀及顏色，種子的形狀及顏色，以及花的位置和顏色。以種子的顏色為例，孟德尔表示當一個真實遺傳的黃豌豆種子和一個真實遺傳的綠豌豆種子雜交時，它們的後代一定是產生黃色種子，但是在下一代中，豌豆種子以1綠色對3黃色的比率重新出現。為了解釋這種現象，孟德尔針對這些特徵創造了“隱性”和“顯性”兩個術語（在前面的例子中，在第一代中消失的綠色特徵是隱性的特徵，而黃色則是顯性特徵）。孟德尔在1866年出版了他的论文，说明某种看不见的因素（也就是基因）可预测並确定生物体的性状。

孟德尔的重大研究直到20世紀初（超過三十年）才被科學家們重新被人提起。埃里克·冯·切尔马克、许霍·德弗里斯，卡尔·科伦斯和William Jasper Spillman獨立地驗證了孟德尔的幾個實驗，從而迎來了遺傳學的時代。(zh.wikipedia.org/孟德爾)

E569E216-2078-41DF-95DE-8E3676C44FE3.jpeg (169.72 KB, 下载次数: 29)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-21 07:49
路易·巴斯德（法語：Louis Pasteur，1822年12月27日－1895年9月28日），法国微生物学家、化学家，微生物学的奠基人之一。他以借生源说否定自然发生说（自生说）、倡导疾病细菌学说（胚种学说），以及发明预防接种方法以及巴氏杀菌法而闻名，為第一個創造狂犬病和炭疽病疫苗的科學家。他和费迪南德·科恩以及罗伯特·科赫一起开创了细菌学，被认为是微生物学的奠基者之一，常被稱为“微生物學之父”。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/路易·巴斯德)

B343F67C-5552-4701-93AE-08923FCAC3FD.jpeg (158.77 KB, 下载次数: 26)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-22 12:06
约瑟夫·李斯特（英語：Joseph Lister, 1827年4月5日～1912年2月10日），英国外科医生、皇家學會会长（1895年－1900年），外科手术消毒技术的发明和推广者，誉为“现代外科学之父”。在李斯特的年代，医学界普遍缺乏消毒意识，使得当时外科手术的成功率不高，无法普遍实行。李斯特经过观察发现，皮肤完好的骨折病人一般不易发生感染，便提出设想，即感染是因为外部因素造成的。1865年，李斯特首先提出缺乏消毒是手术后发生感染的主要原因。1864年4月7日，法国微生物学家路易·巴斯德发现微生物的存在，为李斯特的设想提供了理论上的依据。1867年，李斯特又将消毒手段应用到输血和输液中，降低了败血症的发病率。这一系列措施立即降低了手术术后感染的发病率，大大提高了手术成功率，术后死亡率自45%下降到15%，使得外科手术成为了一种有效、安全的治疗手段。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/约瑟夫·李斯特)

A96542A7-5429-493A-885C-D4B245282BDB.jpeg (135.65 KB, 下载次数: 32)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-23 01:09
罗伯特·科赫（德语： Robert Koch，1843年12月11日~1910年5月27日），德國醫師兼微生物學家，為細菌學始祖之一，與路易·巴斯德、费迪南德·科恩共享盛名。1905年，因結核病的研究獲得諾貝爾生理學或醫學獎。科赫因發現炭疽桿菌、結核桿菌和霍亂弧菌而出名，發展出一套用以判斷疾病病原體的依據—柯霍氏法则。以他命名的羅伯·柯霍獎是德國醫學最高獎。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/罗伯特·科赫)

5D55E701-BB5E-4077-90CD-AF196CCB9456.jpeg (174.83 KB, 下载次数: 29)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-24 04:46
西格蒙德·弗洛伊德（德語：Sigmund Freud，1856年5月6日~1939年9月23日），奥地利心理學家、精神分析學家、哲學家，精神分析学的創始人，二十世纪最有影響力的思想家之一。他著有《夢的解析》、《性學三論》、《圖騰與禁忌》等，提出了“潛意識”、“自我”、“本我”、“超我”、“伊底帕斯情结”、“欲力”、“心理防衛機制”等概念，被世人譽為「精神分析之父」。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/西格蒙德·弗洛伊德)

54085DCD-A59A-49D4-9583-8AAA8FD9A98C.jpeg (176.11 KB, 下载次数: 36)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-25 01:18
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2023-9-25 01:29 编辑

皮埃尔·居里（法語：Pierre Curie，1859年5月15日~1906年4月19日），法國物理学家、化学家，曾經由於發現放射性元素鐳而獲得諾貝爾物理學獎。1906年4月19日，他為了趕路而嘗試橫跨多菲内街，卻沒注意到奔馳而來的馬車，使得馬伕在視線不良的雨天來不及反應，再加上路滑造成馬車失控，於是在馬車車禍中喪命。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/皮埃尔·居里)
玛丽·斯克沃多夫斯卡·居里（1867年11月7日～1934年7月4日），原名瑪麗亞·薩洛梅婭·斯克沃多夫斯卡（Maria Salomea Skłodowska），通称玛丽（法語：Marie），波兰裔法国籍物理学家、化学家。她是放射性研究的先驱者，是首位获得诺贝尔奖的女性，获得两次诺贝尔奖（获得物理学奖及化学奖）的第一人，亦是目前唯一一位獲得二種不同科學诺贝尔奖的女性（另一位獲得此殊榮的是诺贝尔化学奖与和平奖的男性双得主莱纳斯·鲍林）。她是巴黎大学第一位女教授。1995年，她与丈夫皮埃尔·居里一起移葬先贤祠，成为第一位凭自身成就入葬先贤祠的女性。她的成就包括开创了放射性理论，放射性的英文Radioactivity是她造的词[2]，她发明了分离放射性同位素的技术，以及发现两种新元素釙（Po）和镭（Ra）。在她的指导下，人们第一次将放射性同位素用于治疗肿瘤。她在巴黎和华沙各创办了一座居里研究所，这两个研究所至今仍是重要的医学研究中心。（zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/玛丽· 居里)

E133871B-D90F-4FCB-B17E-D9BC868C926D.jpeg (187.75 KB, 下载次数: 35)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-26 04:16
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2023-9-26 04:23 编辑

歐内斯特·拉塞福 (英語：Ernest Rutherford, 1871年8月30日~1937年10月19日），世界知名的原子核物理學之父。學術界公認他為繼法拉第之後最偉大的實驗物理學家。
拉塞福首先提出放射性半衰期的概念，證實放射性涉及從一個元素到另一個元素的遷變。他又將放射性物質按照貫穿能力分類為α射線與β射線，並且證實前者就是氦離子。因為「对元素蜕变以及放射化学的研究」，他榮獲1908年諾貝爾化學獎。

拉塞福領導團隊成功地證實在原子的中心有個原子核，創建了拉塞福模型。他最先成功地在氮與α粒子的核反應裏將原子分裂，他又在同實驗裏發現了質子，並且為質子命名。第104號元素為紀念他而命名为“鑪”。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/歐内斯特·拉塞福)

同頁的埃尔温·薛定諤（德語：Erwin Schrödinger；1887年8月12日～1961年1月4日），請等待。

8B103E16-3ED0-4AC4-9759-1091C751F626.jpeg (177.71 KB, 下载次数: 40)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-26 04:27
马克斯·普朗克（德語：Max Planck，1858年4月23日~1947年10月4日），德国物理学家，量子力学的创始人。以发现能量量子獲得1918年度的诺贝尔物理学奖（1919年頒發)。以之為名的普朗克常数於2019年被用於重新定義基本單位，此外還有以之為名的科學獎座、機構和學會。（zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/马克斯·普朗克)

26D8FC32-8FF0-4B77-BEF5-AD82629FC4DB.jpeg (173.37 KB, 下载次数: 36)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-26 04:31
阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦（德語：Albert Einstein 1879年3月14日~1955年4月18日），是出生于德国、拥有瑞士和美国国籍的猶太裔理論物理學家，他创立了現代物理學的兩大支柱的相对论及量子力學，也是質能等價公式（E = mc2）的發現者。他在科學哲學領域頗具影響力。因為“對理論物理的貢獻，特別是發現了光電效應的原理”，他榮獲1921年度的諾貝爾物理學獎（1922年頒發）。這一發現為量子理論的建立踏出了關鍵性的一步。(zh.wikipedia/wiki/阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦)

8DD3B646-7DE9-4403-9ACB-87A14F0536FB.jpeg (165.39 KB, 下载次数: 39)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-27 11:41
埃尔温·薛定諤（德語：Erwin Schrödinger；1887年8月12日～1961年1月4日）, 量子力学奠基人之一。1926年提出薛定谔方程，一種描述描述微观粒子的行为和状态演化的基本方程之一，微觀粒子（例如電子、原子核等）行為的波動方程，为量子力学奠定了坚实的基础。提出薛定谔猫思想實驗，试图证明量子力学在宏观条件下的不完备性，探讨量子力学中的测量和超position的概念。1933年，因為“发现了在原子理论裏很有用的新形式”，薛定諤和英国物理学家保罗·狄拉克共同获得了诺贝尔物理学奖，以表彰他们发现了薛定谔方程和狄拉克方程。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/埃尔温·薛定諤)

102F462E-6A4C-402A-9318-440F21039536.jpeg (177.71 KB, 下载次数: 41)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-27 11:47
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2023-9-27 11:52 编辑

恩里科·费米（Enrico Fermi；1901年9月29日~1954年11月28日）对量子力学、核物理、粒子物理以及统计力学都做出了杰出贡献，曼哈顿计划期间领导制造出世界首个核子反应堆（芝加哥1号堆），也是原子弹的设计师和缔造者之一，被誉为“原子能之父”。费米拥有数项核能相关专利，并在1938年因研究由中子轰击产生的感生放射以及发现超铀元素而获得了诺贝尔物理学奖。 (zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/恩里科·费米)

罗伯特·奥本海默（Robert Oppenheimer, 1904年4月22日~1967年2月18日）第二次世界大战期間領導洛斯阿拉莫斯實驗室，其參與的曼哈頓計劃最終研發出用於轟炸廣島與長崎的首批核武器，因此也被稱為「原子彈之父」。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/罗伯特·奥本海默)

EA1274EE-050D-4A9D-84B1-C262602C6109.jpeg (177.94 KB, 下载次数: 38)

作者: ngsunyu 时间: 2023-9-30 00:22
本帖最后由 ngsunyu 于 2023-9-30 00:26 编辑

詹姆斯·杜威·沃森（英語：James Dewey Watson，1928年4月6日—），美國分子生物學家，20世紀分子生物學的牽頭人之一。與同僚佛朗西斯·克里克因為共同發現DNA的雙螺旋結構，而與莫里斯·威爾金斯獲得1962年諾貝爾生理學或醫學獎。(zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/詹姆斯·杜威·沃森）

弗朗西斯·克里克（英語：Francis Crick，1916年6月8日~2004年7月28日），英国生物学家、物理学家及神经科学家。他最重要的成就是1953年在剑桥大学卡文迪许实验室与詹姆斯·沃森共同发现了脱氧核糖核酸（DNA）的双螺旋结构，二人也因此与莫里斯·威尔金斯共同获得了1962年诺贝尔生理及医学奖，獲獎原因是「發現核酸的分子結構及其對生物中信息傳遞的重要性」。（zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/弗朗西斯·克里克)

FB49E21F-1186-4C09-ABF7-52E28FD4C63A.jpeg (165.93 KB, 下载次数: 31)

欢迎光临极限集邮网 (http://chinamaxicard.com/)