Physicists in Conflict by Neil A. Porter Review by: Val Dusek Isis, Vol. 92, No. 2 (Jun., 2001), pp. 369-370 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of The History of Science Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3080647 . Accessed: 02/01/2015 18:54 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. . The University of Chicago Press and The History of Science Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Isis. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 132.177.228.65 on Fri, 2 Jan 2015 18:54:08 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BOOK REVIEWS-ISIS, 92: 2 (2001) suggest, therefore, a picture of a national style not much absorbed in pure science. The volume concludes with an over two-hundred -page section of short biographies (with references ) of the most notable Dutch scientists and bibliographical guides to van Berkel's survey and the historiography of the field. The index refers to proper names only. Whatever one might think about the debate over national styles, the arguments in this volume serve well for presenting a great deal of information , both new and well known, which makes this an important reference work. Moreover , taking the views of its authors into account will be the sine qua non of historical work on Dutch science in the near future; the volume can also serve as a good starting place for any historian interested in approaches to science in a nation. Perhaps it can be said that in the best tradition of Dutch scholarship, the editors have produced a work of thoroughness, usefulness, and tolerant argumentativeness. HAROLD J. COOK Neil A. Porter. Physicists in Conflict. xvi + 275 pp., illus., figs., bibl., index. Bristol, England: Institute of Physics Publishing, 1998. $49, ?30. This book, meant for students and the general reader, examines both internal and external conflicts in physics. Neil Porter first presents primarily classic cases of the conflict between physics and religion (Hypatia, Roger Bacon, Giordano Bruno, Galileo, Kepler) and between physics and politics (Henry Tizard and F. A. Lindemann on strategic bombing, Robert Oppenheimer and Edward Teller on the A-bomb and security). He also discusses internal conflicts such as the dispute between Ludwig Boltzmann and the positivists concerning atomic theory; the question of delusory "N-rays"; Albert Einstein's disagreement with Niels Bohr on quantum mechanics ; the steady-state theory versus the big bang in cosmology; multiple, as opposed to plural , particle formation; and magnetic monopoles. The case studies are very clearly written and make use of relatively recent sources. Porter's accounts of the Galileo affair and of the steadystate /big bang controversy are particularly fairminded and balanced, avoiding, in the former, the usual polarization of "science versus religion " and, in the latter, big bang triumphalism. The last two disputes fall within Porter's own field of research, and historians of science will be especially interested in his chapter on multiple versus plural particle formation, as here Porter draws on his own conversations with the participants in the debate. Unfortunately, given that such material is unavailable to others, Porter does not date or document his conversations or personal contacts, though he does reference original articles. In his presentation of the monopole story Porter goes too far in avoiding details and provides only a tantalizingly brief sketch. Porter's discussion of positivism versus atomic realism depends too heavily on Steven Weinberg's slanted account of the evils of positivism and of philosophy in general for physics. Some consideration of the areas in which positivistic or instrumental approaches proved valuable -for example, ancient astronomy and quantum theory-would be welcome. Occasional misleading phrasings produce misinformation. The bibliographical notes imply that no works of Petrus Perigrinus are now extant . Porter's casual observation that the Nazis and the German physicists opposed relativity because Einstein was Jewish fails to acknowledge the internal conflict between German theoretical physicists and the "Aryan physics" fanatics and Nazi politicians on this issue and the triumph of the former because of weapons development during the war. Porter's conceptual framework for his discussions of conflict in physics is neither as clear nor as well organized as the case studies. In the first and last chapters he outlines a number of miscellaneous considerations concerning conflict, including a few references to concepts from game theory, such as those of Thomas Schelling. One wishes he had developed this theme further, as it might help illuminate investigations into conflicts between schools of research. Porter underestimates the frequency of fraud and bluffing in sciences outside physics-in biomedical and IQ research, for example. He claims, citing Erwin Schrodinger, that physicists do philosophy only when they have stopped doing research, but he does not note that Schr6dinger was doing philosophy just before he created wave mechanics. Nor does he mention that Einstein studied David Hume, Ernst Mach, and others just before formulating his theory of special relativity. (Porter does remark on Mach's influence on Einstein's general theory-thus contradicting his own thesis about philosophy.) Despite these criticisms, Porter's work is a very clear, accessible, and quite accurate survey of a number of fascinating debates within physics . It should be very useful for students and the interested general reader. It is unfortunate, however , that the book is not available in a less ex

This content downloaded from 132.177.228.65 on Fri, 2 Jan 2015 18:54:08 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions BOOK REVIEWS-ISIS, 92: 2 (2001) pensive format that would make it available to a and artificial models (ecorches) in classrooms much wider readership. and their appearance in finished works of art; VAL DUSEK animated skeletons or partially dissected bodies that appear quite alive, depicted in this way so as to counter the natural revulsion to images of Deanna Petherbridge; Ludmuilla Jordanova. this sort; and the use of classical sculptures as The Quick and the Dead: Artists and Anatomy. examples of ideal proporons. A wonderful exPreface by Susan Ferleger Brades. 120 pp., ilample here was "Smugglerus the flayed calus ., bibls., index. Berkeley: University of Cali-daver of a hanged criminal forced into the pose fornia Press, 1998. $24.95 (paper). of the Dying Gladiator and cast in plaster and for ia , . . ( er). then drawn by generations of students at the Although scholars in history of science tend to Royal Academy School in London. As an unprivilege the written word and those in art hisexpected but welcome addition to the basic tory tend to privilege fine art, some in both fields story, Petherbridge has included several works are beginning to take into account a wide range from the 1990s in which artists use historical of material objects. The Quick and the Dead is conventions in decidedly contemporary ways. a fine example of the cross-disciplinary, more Finally, scholars seeking more information encompassing works now being produced. By about the ideas presented in The Quick and the bringing together images of the body created for Dead will want to read Mimi Cazort, Monique scientific purposes with similar images created Kornell, and K. B. Roberts, The Ingenious Mafor artistic purposes, this volume enriches our chine of Nature: Four Centuries ofArt andAnatunderstanding of both artistic and anatomical omy (Ottowa: National Gallery of Canada, traditions. It also reminds us that professions that 1996). today are distinct from one another once had DEBORAH JEAN WARNER much in common. Appropriately, then, this illustrated history starts with the Renaissance, when artists and Say Gregory Kohlstedt; Michael M. Sokal; anatomists alike sought to understand the human Bruce V. Lewenstein. he Establishment ofcibody , both inside and out, and often worked toence in America: 150 Years of the American Asgether in art schools and around dissecting tationfor the Advancement of Science. Forebles . By delineating the organs, muscles, and word by Stephen Jay Gould. Introduction by bones of actual cadavers, these men "made a Keith Benn and Jane Maienschein. xvi + huge contribution to the newly emerging 'sci236 pp., illus., apps., index. New Brunswick ences' of body knowledge" (p. 9). But however N.J./London: Rutgers University Press 1999. truthful to nature they hoped to be, they produced a variety of anatomical images-drawDespite the wording of its main title, this book ings, paintings, engravings, collages, and sculpdocuments the story not of "the establishment of tures-that clearly reflect dominant artistic and science in America" but of an organization escultural conventions of their time. Thus, for intablished by American scientists at Philadelphia stance, even when shown with her viscera exin 1848, the American Association for the Adposed to full view, a woman would be posed vancement of Science (AAAS). The story of the modestly. association is told here in three chronological The Quick and the Dead was written in consections, each written by a historian eminently junction with a National Touring Exhibition of qualified by his or her long-standing interest in the same name, organized by the Howard Galthe association and past studies of the topic. lery in London and shown at three venues in EnIn a discussion entitled "Creating a Forum for gland during the year 1997-1998. Deanna PethScience," Sally Kohlstedt surveys the associaerbridge , Professor of Drawing at the Royal tion's first half-century. Fired by the rising naCollege of Art in London, curated the show and tionalism of the mid-nineteenth century, Amerwrote the basic text. Ludmilla Jordanova, Proican scientists set out to learn from the European fessor in the School of World Art Studies and model of scientific organizations and eventually Museology at the University of East Anglia, consurpass it. In its first fifty years the association tributed a supplementary essay. Of the 172 anrelied largely on its annual meetings to define atomical objects and images in the show, 93 are what a scientist should be, subject his work to illustrated in the book, in full color where apthe criticism of his peers, disseminate it by readpropriate . The contents are arranged thematically ing and publishing papers, and convey it to the and include such topics as the use of skeletons public through the press, which covered the 370 This content downloaded from 132.177.228.65 on Fri, 2 Jan 2015 18:54:08 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions