| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Matt" |
| Date: |
03 Jul 2003 07:45:42 PM |
| Object: |
Question about science history |
What cities come to mind when you think of important places in the history
of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of discoveries were made?
lots of Sci. Labs? Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
Preference: focus on the world of Physics, and on North America and Europe.
Thanks in advance.
.
|
|
| User: "Maleki" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
04 Jul 2003 08:45:25 PM |
|
|
"Matt" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
<W64Na.4703$GF2.1930115@twister.nyc.rr.com>:
What cities come to mind when you think of important places in the history
of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of discoveries were made?
lots of Sci. Labs? Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
Preference: focus on the world of Physics, and on North America and Europe.
Thanks in advance.
For what purpose? Visiting?
--
khar hamun khareh pAlunesh avaz shodeh.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
04 Jul 2003 11:44:31 PM |
|
|
For what purpose? Visiting?
I am in search of a potential site for an architectural proposal that is
related to a few fields of science. For now, I will just call the proposed
project a physics laboratory and visitors center, influenced by the sites
history.
Visiting the site will eventually be a requirement of my research, so it
would be to my benefit if I factor in the practicality of such a visit now
in the preliminary stage of my search.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
05 Jul 2003 12:18:49 PM |
|
|
If I understand you correctly, you are planning to design a building
for a purpose you cannot (or will not) explain to us clearly, based
on a history you do not know.
Since this is only in the very beginning stage of the project, the details
of the building are not yet set in stone (ie: a lab for 40 scientists
working on a particle accelerator). the only part of the project with a
clear focus on this point is the visitors center. the V.C. will be a place
for people to go and learn about the possibility that there may be more to
the universe than we even know about (such as the possibility of 4th, 5th,
5th, etc dimensions). The hope is to give visitors of this space a similar
experience of enlightenment that the narrator/main character experienced in
the book "Flatland" by Abbot. The precedent for 'turning a book into a
building' was set by G. Terragni in the 1930's with his proposed design for
"The Danteum" which was a project based on the Divine Comedy by Dante.
How are we to determine what the most important place is? Should
the sheer number of individuals count, or should they be weighted
towards influence? or originality? or percentage of the population,
either of the place or of scientists at the time? Should we focus
on people who worked there or were born there? Are some time
periods more important than others? Should we count educators?
Sheer numbers are not the only factor, weighted towards influence sounds
better. The time period is not important, and can include all the known
history of human civilization. Educators can also be taken into account. A
place with lots of universities or development labs would be greatly
considered. I would take, for example a proportion of #events/discoveries to
#population/time of geographical existence
Although I am not an architect, I cannot help but think there must
be better ways to go about this. Perhaps if you identified a theme
or themes that interested you, others could be more helpful, but
at this point, your request is too vague for me to know what to
suggest.
I think i have now given a bit of the theme of the project above, if that
helps at all
Thanks to all for your time and help.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Katherine Tredwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
07 Jul 2003 10:00:01 AM |
|
|
Ah, I understand much better now.
Copenhagen and Pisa are two of the first places to spring to mind;
they have already been mentioned on this thread, so I shall just
add my vote. I think I am missing some posts, so I apologize in
advance if I repeat too many suggestions, but here are a few:
Athens: Not the birthplace of science, but certainly a center for
studying nature for centuries. At one time it boasted several
major schools: the Academy, the Lyceum, the Stoa Poilike, and the
Epicurean gardens.
Paris: In the west, it was the place to go for physics in the
later Middle Ages, and probably contributed to Galileo's work.
Goettingen: Like Copenhagen, a major center for physics in the
early 20th century, and very productive of both ideas and people.
Nuremberg: Maybe a bit further from your interests, since it is
associated with astronomy rather than physics per se, but one of
my favorites. Regiomontanus moved there in the 15th century and
helped turn it into a leading contributor to the mathematical
sciences. It had a flourishing instrument trade and one of the
best scientific printers of the day, Petreius, whose publications
included Copernicus.
I hope you get a few suggestions for North American sites, but
so far they do not seem to be forthcoming. Please keep us
updated, as this project sounds interesting. I am most curious
to find out which city makes the cut.
Katherine Tredwell
.
|
|
|
| User: "Matt" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
07 Jul 2003 06:14:46 PM |
|
|
I have posed this question to others and not many North American locations
were named. The only one that I can really look into with some hope is Los
Alamos.
Copenhagen seems like a good starting place. Pisa as well, and its a place
that is already familiar to me.
I though of Greece, myself, but I feel that some of its other accomplishment
(politics, military, philosophy) overshadow its rich scientific history, and
thus people unfamiliar with my project might not get the connection.
Nuremberg is another interesting suggestion, but as you say, may be a bit
off of my path, and astronomy is a path that I am not able to take with this
project (for external reasons out of my control).
On my own, I have though of a few other possibilities: Stockholm (its
relationship with the Nobel Prize), sites in Switzerland (Einstein pass thru
here, and, if I am correct, is home to CERN labs). Would these be
considered valid within the outlines of my original question?
Thanks to all who have taken the time to respond thus far.
"Katherine Tredwell" <ktredwell@ou.edu> wrote in message
news:a3e43bd8.0307070700.3af79e9@posting.google.com...
Ah, I understand much better now.
Copenhagen and Pisa are two of the first places to spring to mind;
they have already been mentioned on this thread, so I shall just
add my vote. I think I am missing some posts, so I apologize in
advance if I repeat too many suggestions, but here are a few:
Athens: Not the birthplace of science, but certainly a center for
studying nature for centuries. At one time it boasted several
major schools: the Academy, the Lyceum, the Stoa Poilike, and the
Epicurean gardens.
Paris: In the west, it was the place to go for physics in the
later Middle Ages, and probably contributed to Galileo's work.
Goettingen: Like Copenhagen, a major center for physics in the
early 20th century, and very productive of both ideas and people.
Nuremberg: Maybe a bit further from your interests, since it is
associated with astronomy rather than physics per se, but one of
my favorites. Regiomontanus moved there in the 15th century and
helped turn it into a leading contributor to the mathematical
sciences. It had a flourishing instrument trade and one of the
best scientific printers of the day, Petreius, whose publications
included Copernicus.
I hope you get a few suggestions for North American sites, but
so far they do not seem to be forthcoming. Please keep us
updated, as this project sounds interesting. I am most curious
to find out which city makes the cut.
Katherine Tredwell
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Ehrlich" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
08 Jul 2003 10:25:02 AM |
|
|
--------------060601060406050502090604
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
US sites: Baltimore (Michaelson-Morley experiment), Handball court at
U. Chicago, Dinosaur Natl. Monument, Bell Labs, Cambridge Mass, Cal
Tech and environs, Univ. Illinois(Champaign Urbana(!)),
Lamont-Dougherty Geophysical Observatory (New York), JPL, Vicksburg
Miss. (Corps of Engirneers Res. Station), Madison WI--applied bio
research,...
Matt wrote:
I have posed this question to others and not many North American locations
were named. The only one that I can really look into with some hope is Los
Alamos.
Copenhagen seems like a good starting place. Pisa as well, and its a place
that is already familiar to me.
I though of Greece, myself, but I feel that some of its other accomplishment
(politics, military, philosophy) overshadow its rich scientific history, and
thus people unfamiliar with my project might not get the connection.
Nuremberg is another interesting suggestion, but as you say, may be a bit
off of my path, and astronomy is a path that I am not able to take with this
project (for external reasons out of my control).
On my own, I have though of a few other possibilities: Stockholm (its
relationship with the Nobel Prize), sites in Switzerland (Einstein pass thru
here, and, if I am correct, is home to CERN labs). Would these be
considered valid within the outlines of my original question?
Thanks to all who have taken the time to respond thus far.
"Katherine Tredwell" <ktredwell@ou.edu> wrote in message
news:a3e43bd8.0307070700.3af79e9@posting.google.com...
Ah, I understand much better now.
Copenhagen and Pisa are two of the first places to spring to mind;
they have already been mentioned on this thread, so I shall just
add my vote. I think I am missing some posts, so I apologize in
advance if I repeat too many suggestions, but here are a few:
Athens: Not the birthplace of science, but certainly a center for
studying nature for centuries. At one time it boasted several
major schools: the Academy, the Lyceum, the Stoa Poilike, and the
Epicurean gardens.
Paris: In the west, it was the place to go for physics in the
later Middle Ages, and probably contributed to Galileo's work.
Goettingen: Like Copenhagen, a major center for physics in the
early 20th century, and very productive of both ideas and people.
Nuremberg: Maybe a bit further from your interests, since it is
associated with astronomy rather than physics per se, but one of
my favorites. Regiomontanus moved there in the 15th century and
helped turn it into a leading contributor to the mathematical
sciences. It had a flourishing instrument trade and one of the
best scientific printers of the day, Petreius, whose publications
included Copernicus.
I hope you get a few suggestions for North American sites, but
so far they do not seem to be forthcoming. Please keep us
updated, as this project sounds interesting. I am most curious
to find out which city makes the cut.
Katherine Tredwell
--------------060601060406050502090604
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
US sites: Baltimore (Michaelson-Morley experiment), Handball court at U.
Chicago, Dinosaur Natl. Monument, Bell Labs, Cambridge Mass, Cal Tech
and environs, Univ. Illinois(Champaign Urbana(!)), Lamont-Dougherty Geophysical
Observatory (New York), JPL, Vicksburg Miss. (Corps of Engirneers Res. Station),
Madison WI--applied bio research,...<br>
<br>
Matt wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="midG9nOa.6869$351.3606940@twister.nyc.rr.com">
<pre wrap="">I have posed this question to others and not many North American locations
were named. The only one that I can really look into with some hope is Los
Alamos.
Copenhagen seems like a good starting place. Pisa as well, and its a place
that is already familiar to me.
I though of Greece, myself, but I feel that some of its other accomplishment
(politics, military, philosophy) overshadow its rich scientific history, and
thus people unfamiliar with my project might not get the connection.
Nuremberg is another interesting suggestion, but as you say, may be a bit
off of my path, and astronomy is a path that I am not able to take with this
project (for external reasons out of my control).
On my own, I have though of a few other possibilities: Stockholm (its
relationship with the Nobel Prize), sites in Switzerland (Einstein pass thru
here, and, if I am correct, is home to CERN labs). Would these be
considered valid within the outlines of my original question?
Thanks to all who have taken the time to respond thus far.
"Katherine Tredwell" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:ktredwell@ou.edu"><ktredwell@ou.edu></a> wrote in message
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="news:a3e43bd8.0307070700.3af79e9@posting.google.com">news:a3e43bd8.0307070700.3af79e9@posting.google.com</a>...
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Ah, I understand much better now.
Copenhagen and Pisa are two of the first places to spring to mind;
they have already been mentioned on this thread, so I shall just
add my vote. I think I am missing some posts, so I apologize in
advance if I repeat too many suggestions, but here are a few:
Athens: Not the birthplace of science, but certainly a center for
studying nature for centuries. At one time it boasted several
major schools: the Academy, the Lyceum, the Stoa Poilike, and the
Epicurean gardens.
Paris: In the west, it was the place to go for physics in the
later Middle Ages, and probably contributed to Galileo's work.
Goettingen: Like Copenhagen, a major center for physics in the
early 20th century, and very productive of both ideas and people.
Nuremberg: Maybe a bit further from your interests, since it is
associated with astronomy rather than physics per se, but one of
my favorites. Regiomontanus moved there in the 15th century and
helped turn it into a leading contributor to the mathematical
sciences. It had a flourishing instrument trade and one of the
best scientific printers of the day, Petreius, whose publications
included Copernicus.
I hope you get a few suggestions for North American sites, but
so far they do not seem to be forthcoming. Please keep us
updated, as this project sounds interesting. I am most curious
to find out which city makes the cut.
Katherine Tredwell
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>
--------------060601060406050502090604--
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Laurel Amberdine" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
07 Jul 2003 11:46:10 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 19:52:03 -0400, pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> wrote:
Matt wrote:
I have posed this question to others and not
many North American locations were named.
Chicago
http://www.geocities.com/Vienna/8748/fermi.html
That was my idea too, but being that I'm obviously biased I didn't feel
right suggesting it. :)
-Laurel
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
07 Jul 2003 10:47:56 AM |
|
|
Katherine Tredwell wrote:
Athens: Not the birthplace of science, but certainly a center for
studying nature for centuries. At one time it boasted several
major schools: the Academy, the Lyceum, the Stoa Poilike, and the
Epicurean gardens.
The birth place of Greek science (such as it was) was Ionia. There was
invented something that was not science as we know it, but the first
attempt to explain and understand things in a naturalistic fashion. The
first step to science is getting rid of the gods and other supernatural
entities.
See: http://www.rit.edu/~flwstv/presocratic.html
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dan Drake" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
07 Jul 2003 04:20:07 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 5 Jul 2003 19:11:54 UTC, Robert Ehrlich <bobehrlich@comcast.net>
wrote:
Walk in the footsteps of Galileo. Walk in the footsteps of Einstein.
Go to Copenhagen.
OK, I give up. I've tried to figure out how Florence, Pisa, Bern, Berlin,
and Princeton add up to Copenhagen. What's the key? Or is it just a list
of places, with "Copenhagen" rather than "Bohr" just for misdirection?
Good places to go to, anyway.
--
Dan Drake
dd@dandrake.com
http://www.dandrake.com
Outer Planets update: Uranus, Neptune, Pluto, the check
in the mail, the weapons of mass destruction.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Daniel Weston" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
05 Jul 2003 01:53:53 PM |
|
|
The issue is not where the scientists are born. The issue is, where do
they end up? By far the greater percentage end up in America and
Britain. There they have freedom, are free of religious bigotry, are
revered, and are paid better. No longer is the race to the strong or
the swift, but to the intelligent.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Coater" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
07 Jul 2003 06:51:25 PM |
|
|
So, Maleki,
I think we're all aware that significant scientific advances were achieved
long before Europeans discovered America. I didn't see where Matt was trying
to belittle anyone. He's just trying to confine his search to be within his
reach.
That being said, I'd like to know what's your problem with Americans, and
what is this instinctive hatred you have for Israel (or should I say Jews)?
Where is it written that America must please Maleki?
Do you have valid reasons to hate two nations to such a degree?
(Yes, I'm aware of the Shah, etc.)
Regards,
LS
"Maleki" <maleki_m_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:93xp3f8cy7hj$.1bptsmxvgec5f.dlg@40tude.net...
"Matt" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
<W64Na.4703$GF2.1930115@twister.nyc.rr.com>:
What cities come to mind when you think of important places in the
history
of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of discoveries were
made?
lots of Sci. Labs? Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
Preference: focus on the world of Physics, and on North America and
Europe.
Thanks in advance.
For what purpose? Visiting?
--
khar hamun khareh pAlunesh avaz shodeh.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "tadchem" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
05 Jul 2003 05:21:52 PM |
|
|
"Matt" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:W64Na.4703$GF2.1930115@twister.nyc.rr.com...
What cities come to mind when you think of important places in the history
of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of discoveries were
made?
lots of Sci. Labs? Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
Preference: focus on the world of Physics, and on North America and
Europe.
Any such list of places would *have* to include Pisa, Italy.
I consider the rule of empiricism to be the most profound and distinguishing
feature of physical science, and Galileo is its author.
Galileo almost single-handedly established the value of empiricism with his
analytical observations of the swinging of pendulum, which led to his
revolutionary paradigm of gravitation and his first demonstration that
logical theory *MUST* be consistent with experimental data.
His *quantitative* description of gravitation was reportedly inspired by
watching the swinging of a lamp in the cathedral of Pisa. Although some
claim that his famous demonstration involving dropping balls off the Tower
of Pisa, is apocryphal, it is plausible and widely believed, making it
noteworthy for the history of physics.
Galileo was also in Padua when he learned of the existence of an invention
called the "telescope," proceeded to make the first of several HUNDRED by
hand, and made the astronomical observations (that the moon was covered with
mountains and was NOT a "perfect sphere," and that the wandering star called
Jupiter was really a planet orbiting the sun with several moons of its own)
that most strongly validated the Copernican theory and discounted the
widespread theological belief (a belief based upon religious authority
rather than experimental evidence) in a geocentric universe.
Tom Davidson
Brighton, CO
.
|
|
|
| User: "Donald G. Shead" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
05 Jul 2003 06:54:44 PM |
|
|
"tadchem" <tadchemNOSPAM@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:4cINa.82561$Io.7455648@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
"Matt" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:W64Na.4703$GF2.1930115@twister.nyc.rr.com...
What cities come to mind when you think of important places in the
history
of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of discoveries were
made?
lots of Sci. Labs? Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
Preference: focus on the world of Physics, and on North America and
Europe.
Any such list of places would *have* to include Pisa, Italy.
I consider the rule of empiricism to be the most profound and
distinguishing
feature of physical science, and Galileo is its author.
Galileo almost single-handedly established the value of empiricism with
his
analytical observations of the swinging of pendulum, which led to his
revolutionary paradigm of gravitation and his first demonstration that
logical theory *MUST* be consistent with experimental data.
His *quantitative* description of gravitation was reportedly inspired by
watching the swinging of a lamp in the cathedral of Pisa. Although some
claim that his famous demonstration involving dropping balls off the Tower
of Pisa, is apocryphal, it is plausible and widely believed, making it
noteworthy for the history of physics.
Galileo was also in Padua when he learned of the existence of an invention
called the "telescope," proceeded to make the first of several HUNDRED by
hand, and made the astronomical observations (that the moon was covered
with
mountains and was NOT a "perfect sphere," and that the wandering star
called
Jupiter was really a planet orbiting the sun with several moons of its
own)
that most strongly validated the Copernican theory and discounted the
widespread theological belief (a belief based upon religious authority
rather than experimental evidence) in a geocentric universe.
Tom Davidson
Brighton, CO
When I was a bridge designer I told my immediate supervisor one day that I
didn't know the theory very well, and "empirically" 'relied on experience or
observation alone often without due regard for system and theory'.
He didn't laugh and said there's something to be said for that too(:-)
Although there was some jealousy, most of my fellow workers appeared to have
considerable respect for my ways, and were very cooperative and helpful.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
06 Jul 2003 08:42:31 AM |
|
|
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
When I was a bridge designer I told my immediate supervisor one day that I
didn't know the theory very well, and "empirically" 'relied on experience or
observation alone often without due regard for system and theory'.
He didn't laugh and said there's something to be said for that too(:-)
Although there was some jealousy, most of my fellow workers appeared to have
considerable respect for my ways, and were very cooperative and helpful.
Which bridge(s) did you design Shead? What location?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Donald G. Shead" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
06 Jul 2003 03:54:11 PM |
|
|
"Double-A" <double-a@hush.com> wrote in message
news:79094630.0307061016.4dc99b4b@posting.google.com...
Sam Wormley <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:<3F082744.E51AAE7C@mchsi.com>...
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
When I was a bridge designer I told my immediate supervisor one day
that I
didn't know the theory very well, and "empirically" 'relied on
experience or
observation alone often without due regard for system and theory'.
He didn't laugh and said there's something to be said for that too(:-)
Although there was some jealousy, most of my fellow workers appeared
to have
considerable respect for my ways, and were very cooperative and
helpful.
Which bridge(s) did you design Shead? What location?
Tacoma Narrows???
Double-A
Empirical methods involve a certain amount of trial and error; I guess I
could have been a little more conservative with that one(;^) At least left
some holes to let the wind blow free through it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Ghost In The Machine" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
06 Jul 2003 06:49:11 PM |
|
|
In sci.physics, Sam Wormley
<swormley1@mchsi.com>
wrote
on Sun, 06 Jul 2003 13:42:31 GMT
<3F082744.E51AAE7C@mchsi.com>:
"Donald G. Shead" wrote:
When I was a bridge designer I told my immediate
supervisor one day that I didn't know the theory
very well, and "empirically" 'relied on experience
or observation alone often without due regard for
system and theory'.
He didn't laugh and said there's something to be
said for that too(:-)
Although there was some jealousy, most of my fellow
workers appeared to have considerable respect for my
ways, and were very cooperative and helpful.
Which bridge(s) did you design Shead? What location?
All the ones you drive over on your commute to work,
of course. :-)
--
#191, -- insert random paranoia here
It's still legal to go .sigless.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
05 Jul 2003 09:11:42 PM |
|
|
In article <4cINa.82561$Io.7455648@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
tadchem <tadchemNOSPAM@earthlink.net> wrote:
"Matt" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:W64Na.4703$GF2.1930115@twister.nyc.rr.com...
What cities come to mind when you think of important places in the history
of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of discoveries were
made?
lots of Sci. Labs? Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
Preference: focus on the world of Physics, and on North America and
Europe.
Any such list of places would *have* to include Pisa, Italy.
I consider the rule of empiricism to be the most profound and distinguishing
feature of physical science, and Galileo is its author.
Galileo almost single-handedly established the value of empiricism with his
analytical observations of the swinging of pendulum, which led to his
revolutionary paradigm of gravitation and his first demonstration that
logical theory *MUST* be consistent with experimental data.
Aristotle's inductive-deductive method was to take your first principles
from observations of nature and try to formalize them into a deductive
system which you should then compare again to observation. Many thinkers
since then called themselves Aristotelians, but rather than following
Aristotle's method, they short-circuited it by simply taking Aristotle's
principles as their own rather than determining their own principles from
the data available to them, much of which was had not been available to
Aristotle.
The practice of science has evolved since ancient Greece, but Aristotle
did a lot to get it going.
--
"Is that plutonium on your gums?"
"Shut up and kiss me!"
-- Marge and Homer Simpson
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Ollerton" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
14 Jul 2003 09:33:55 AM |
|
|
"Matt" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:W64Na.4703$GF2.1930115@twister.nyc.rr.com...
What cities come to mind when you think of important places in the history
of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of discoveries were
made?
lots of Sci. Labs? Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
The Goddard Exhibit at Roswell, NM Museum. It shows his workshop and Lab
where he made a lot of his rockets. The remarkable thing I found about it
is that it looks like any other machine shop of the period (early 20th
Century)
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
15 Jul 2003 03:11:10 AM |
|
|
In article <vh5fpf12ermqb8@corp.supernews.com>,
"Jim Ollerton" <jimolle@nts-online.net> wrote:
"Matt" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:W64Na.4703$GF2.1930115@twister.nyc.rr.com...
What cities come to mind when you think of important places in the
history
of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of discoveries were
made?
lots of Sci. Labs? Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
The Goddard Exhibit at Roswell, NM Museum. It shows his workshop and Lab
where he made a lot of his rockets. The remarkable thing I found about it
is that it looks like any other machine shop of the period (early 20th
Century)
Do you get to play (or watch people play)?
/BAH
Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
15 Jul 2003 08:43:55 AM |
|
|
Jim Ollerton wrote:
The Goddard Exhibit at Roswell, NM Museum. It shows his workshop and Lab
where he made a lot of his rockets. The remarkable thing I found about it
is that it looks like any other machine shop of the period (early 20th
Century)
Goddard was into building rockets. He was not into rocket science. That
was for von Braun and company.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim Ollerton" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
15 Jul 2003 04:42:06 PM |
|
|
Goddard was into building rockets. He was not into rocket science. That
was for von Braun and company.
Bob Kolker
I don't see the difference how is buliding rockets to test theories not
science?
.
|
|
|
| User: "tadchem" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
15 Jul 2003 06:49:56 PM |
|
|
"Jim Ollerton" <jimolle@nts-online.net> wrote in message
news:vh8t85ev5ehc8a@corp.supernews.com...
Goddard was into building rockets. He was not into rocket science. That
was for von Braun and company.
Bob Kolker
I don't see the difference how is buliding rockets to test theories not
science?
I understand that Goddard had no theories to test. He was *engineering*
liquid-fueled rockets with the idea that they would prove more reliable than
the millennia-old solid-fueled rockets. He built ballistic rockets
(point-and-shoot) with virtually no control, which is partly why he was
hounded out of Massachusetts. Like most engineers, the more he learned the
larger his projects got, with no real quantum leaps in design after the
initial concept of using liquid fuels.
Tom Davidson
Brighton, CO
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert J. Kolker" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
15 Jul 2003 06:36:45 PM |
|
|
Jim Ollerton wrote:
Goddard was into building rockets. He was not into rocket science. That
was for von Braun and company.
Bob Kolker
I don't see the difference how is buliding rockets to test theories not
science?
Goddard's work was more practical than theoretical. Particularly in the
area of guidance, stability and control. Goddard never really got a
large rocket to fly in a stable aimable manner. Goddard showed ( to
people like von Braun) that liquid fuel was feasible. But a practical
rocket that could carry a considerable payload was way out of Goddard's
reach. If Goddard had gotten the kind of military support that von Braun
received, perhaps Goddard too, could have made powerful war rockets. The
only military contracts that Goddard received was for making JATO and
RATO boosters for military airplanes.
Any way, Goddard blazed the trail and von Braun made a paved road out of
it. I am glad to see Goddard getting his just due. When one travels into
Worcester Mass, there are signs on all major highways proclaiming
Worcester as the birthplace of modern rocketry, which it is.
Bob Kolker
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Arfur Dogfrey" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
06 Jul 2003 01:49:45 AM |
|
|
"Matt" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message news:<W64Na.4703$GF2.1930115@twister.nyc.rr.com>...
What cities come to mind when you think of important places in the history
of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of discoveries were made?
lots of Sci. Labs? Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
Preference: focus on the world of Physics, and on North America and Europe.
Thanks in advance.
Hint: There is a single city that 4 (four) of the elements on the periodic
chart are named after. That's the city I think of and for that reason.
Arf!
Arfur
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "pete" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
04 Jul 2003 12:26:28 AM |
|
|
Matt wrote:
What cities come to mind when you think of important
places in the history of science?
ex: places where lots of scientist were born? lots of
discoveries were made? lots of Sci. Labs?
Home to an existing institution dedicated to science?
Preference: focus on the world of Physics,
and on North America and Europe.
First city that comes to mind, is Alexandria, Egypt.
http://www.history.rochester.edu/steam/hero/
--
pete
.
|
|
|
| User: "hanson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
05 Jul 2003 10:26:04 AM |
|
|
"Maleki" <maleki_m_@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1d7s91nj67d44.t5vbfvu8bx6e$.dlg@40tude.net...
pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> wrote in
<3F051004.1B1C@mindspring.com>:
Matt wrote:
The guy doesn't know what he wants.
Must be one of those American dickheads.
Maleki
Yo, Mehram!
Easy, Mehram, easy.
I was in your neighborhood last week. Setting up things.
Try to be on the right side, Mehram, or the hammer
will be coming down on your own head and *****.
z'ya,
hanson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt" |
|
| Title: Re: Question about science history |
04 Jul 2003 11:33:00 PM |
|
|
It is not in the geographical area he delimits. Also he
might mean the still existent ones, not places long changed
and gone.
It can be places that have "long changed and gone." That is not an issue for
me. The geographical issue that i brought up is important, however, as the
specific information on these locations that i will eventually require have
proven to be more accessible and more abundant if limited to the locations
that i mentioned. Alexandria, however, may be an exception to the rule, due
to its high profile, so i will keep it in mind.
The guy doesn't know what he wants. He talks of science but
places geographical boundaries to it as well.
I don't see an issue with that. Statistically, throughout known history,
there must be, for whatever reason, geographical locations with significant
ties to the world of Science (perhaps more to the point, of Physics). For
example, if i was looking for places related to cinema, i would look towards
LA. If i was looking for a place with a rich history on fine wine, i would
look into the Lorie Valley region of France.
Must be one of those American dickheads.
One of many in the world, yes.
nafase folAni behesh khordeh.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
