|Abstract||In this issue, we carry an article which we invited Prof. Marvin Minsky to write about his invention of the confocal scanning microscope. This is not a question of recognizing priority for a scientific insight or discovery. It is much more a question of raising the problem of how it can be possible that such an immensely important idea can go unrecognized for such a very long period. It may possibly be the case that after more research we find that yet another person discovered the same idea. That does not matter. The fact is that Minsky invented such a microscope identical with the concept later developed extensively by Egger and Davidovits at Yale and by Shepherd and Wilson in Oxford and Brakenhoff and colleagues in Amsterdam etc. The circumstances are also remarkable in that Minsky only published his invention as a patent. Yet he not only built a microscope and made it work and it was the kind of prototype of which we would be proud but he showed it to a number of people who went away impressed but nevertheless failed to adopt the concept.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
David Steinberg (2002). Can Moral Worthiness Be Seen Using a Microscope? American Journal of Bioethics 2 (1):49 – 50.
Ann Elizabeth Fowler La Berge (2004). Debate as Scientific Practice in Nineteenth-Century Paris: The Controversy Over the Microscope. Perspectives on Science 12 (4).
Douglas Allchin (1999). Do We See Through a Social Microscope?: Credibility as a Vicarious Selector. Philosophy of Science 66 (3):298.
Margaret Atherton (1998). The Invisible World: Early Modern Philosophy and the Invention of the Microscope Catherine Wilson Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995, X + 280 Pp., $39.50. [REVIEW] Dialogue 37 (03):650-.
Brian S. Baigrie (1998). Catherine Wilson's the Invisible World: Early Modern Philosophy and the Invention of the Microscope. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (2):165 – 174.
Alan Chalmers (2003). The Theory-Dependence of the Use of Instruments in Science. Philosophy of Science 70 (3):493-509.
Christopher P. Toumey (2008). Reading Feynman Into Nanotechnology. Techné 12 (3):133-168.
Christopher Mole, Corey Kubatzky, Jan Plate, Rawdon Waller, Marilee Dobbs & Marc Nardone (2007). Faces and Brains: The Limitations of Brain Scanning in Cognitive Science. Philosophical Psychology 20 (2):197 – 207.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads64 ( #14,310 of 549,014 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,272 of 549,014 )
How can I increase my downloads?