![]() History of science and its rational reconstructions. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. Experiments, models, paper tools: Cultures of organic chemistry in the nineteenth century. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 993–1009. History and philosophy of science through models: Some challenges in the case of ‘the atom’. Historical case studies: Teaching the nature of science in context. The advancement of science and its burdens. American Journal of Physics, 37, 968–982. Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences, 1, 211–290. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley. A history of atomic models from the discovery of the electron to the beginnings of quantum mechanics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Howson (Ed.), Method and appraisal in the physical sciences: The critical background to modern science, 1800–1905 (pp. British Journal for the History of Science, 20, 241–276.įrické, M. Thomson and the ‘discovery of the electron’. Corpuscles, electrons, and cathode rays: J. An introduction to the meaning and structure of physics (short edition). An introduction to the meaning and structure of physics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Ĭooper, L. Review symposium of the scientist’s atom. The scientist’s atom and the philosopher’s stone: How science succeeded and philosophy failed to gain knowledge of atoms. Science & Education, 7, 69–84.Ĭhalmers, A. Retracing the ancient steps to atomic theory. Science education and philosophy of science: Congruence or contradiction? International Journal of Science Education, 13, 227–241.Ĭha, D. Philosophical Magazine, 26(Series 6), 1–25.īrock, W. On the constitution of atoms and molecules. Chemical principles: The quest for insight (4th ed.). New York: Freeman.Ītkins, P., & Jones, L. Chemical principles: The quest for insight (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Ītkins, P., & Jones, L. Representing electrons: A biographical approach to theoretical entities. New York: Oxford University Press.Īrabatzis, T. Particles and waves: Historical essays in the philosophy of science. It is concluded that understanding of atomic structure is a never-ending quest that requires imagination, creativity, and innovative techniques in the laboratory. These difficulties were resolved by Pauli’s exclusion principle and the wave mechanical model of the atom. Despite its success, the Bohr–Sommerfeld model went no further than the alkali metals, which led scientists to look for other models. Once again, textbooks published in two different cultures and languages were found to be very similar. A study designed to evaluate the presentation of the Bohr–Sommerfeld model in general chemistry textbooks (published in Italy and the USA) revealed that very few presented this model satisfactorily. Sommerfeld postulated elliptical orbits that provided greater stability to the atoms, leading to the Bohr–Sommerfeld model. Due to the difficulties faced by Bohr’s model, A. The similarities of the textbooks published in four countries with different cultures and languages suggest that these textbooks have an underlying common thread, namely, the dominant empiricist epistemology. Exactly the same HPS-based criteria were also used to evaluate textbooks published in Turkey, Venezuela, and Korea (general physics). Bohr in general chemistry textbooks (published in the USA) revealed that most textbooks lack a historical perspective (although historical models are being presented) and provide a simplistic view of scientific models and how these change with no reference to the difficulties and controversies involved. Another study designed to evaluate the presentation of the atomic models of J. A study designed to evaluate the presentation of Dalton’s atomic theory in general chemistry textbooks (published in the USA) revealed that most textbooks stated that the atomic vision of Democritus was based on hypothetical questions (thought experiments), whereas Dalton based his theory on reproducible experimental results. On the contrary, Rocke (Email to author dated October 30, 2013, reproduced with permission 2013) considers that Dalton’s atomism is a successful theory. Dordrecht: Springer 2009) claims that Dalton’s theory had no testable content. Chalmers ( The scientist’s atom and the philosopher’s stone: How science succeeded and philosophy failed to gain knowledge of atoms. Dalton in developing the atomic theory is controversial among historians and philosophers of science. Understanding the role of early Greek philosophers (e.g., Democritus) and J.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |