Chapter 16Chapter 16

The Scientific RevolutionThe Scientific Revolution

Background of the RevolutionBackground of the Revolution

Middle Ages - not a period of scientific ignoranceMiddle Ages - not a period of scientific ignorance

drawback to scientific research in Middle Ages:drawback to scientific research in Middle Ages:– Reliance on a small # of ancient authorities (Aristotle, Claudius Galen)Reliance on a small # of ancient authorities (Aristotle, Claudius Galen)– preferred logical analysis (theorization) to systematic observationpreferred logical analysis (theorization) to systematic observation

Renaissance humanists’ mastery of Greek unlocked new Renaissance humanists’ mastery of Greek unlocked new knowledge of Galen, Ptolemy, Archimedes, & Platoknowledge of Galen, Ptolemy, Archimedes, & Plato– showed that these unquestioned authorities of the Middle Ages were showed that these unquestioned authorities of the Middle Ages were

contradicted in their own timescontradicted in their own times– led to exploration in those opposing theoriesled to exploration in those opposing theories

Renaissance artists also had an impact on scientific studyRenaissance artists also had an impact on scientific study– Accurate renderings of nature & human anatomy established new Accurate renderings of nature & human anatomy established new

standards for study of natural phenomenastandards for study of natural phenomena– Artists were usually practicing mathematicians as wellArtists were usually practicing mathematicians as well– Mathematics was seen as the key to understanding nature (The Mathematics was seen as the key to understanding nature (The

Golden Mean)Golden Mean)

A Revolution in Astronomy & MechanicsA Revolution in Astronomy & MechanicsCosmological view of late Middle Ages was a combination of Cosmological view of late Middle Ages was a combination of Ptolemy, Aristotle & Christian theologyPtolemy, Aristotle & Christian theologyResult was Ptolemaic or Result was Ptolemaic or geocentricgeocentric cosmology (p.451) cosmology (p.451)This conception of the universe did not satisfy professional This conception of the universe did not satisfy professional astronomers of the 16astronomers of the 16thth century century

Nicholas CopernicusNicholas Copernicus (1473-1543) (1473-1543)Accomplished mathematician and astronomerAccomplished mathematician and astronomer1506-30: worked on manuscript 1506-30: worked on manuscript On the Revolution of the On the Revolution of the Heavenly SpheresHeavenly Spheres, not published until 1543, not published until 1543not great observational astronomer, but proved through data not great observational astronomer, but proved through data that Ptolemy’s system was incorrectthat Ptolemy’s system was incorrectproposed a heliocentric universe, where the earth orbited the proposed a heliocentric universe, where the earth orbited the sunsunProtestant reformers, including Martin Luther, denounced Protestant reformers, including Martin Luther, denounced Copernicus & his theories Copernicus & his theories

Tycho BraheTycho Brahe (1546-1601) (1546-1601)

Copernicus did not have a great impact immediately, but Copernicus did not have a great impact immediately, but doubts about Ptolemy were growingdoubts about Ptolemy were growing

a Danish nobleman, Brahe spent 20 years compiling data from a Danish nobleman, Brahe spent 20 years compiling data from his private observatories in his castlehis private observatories in his castle

Found enough information to discredit the geocentric model, Found enough information to discredit the geocentric model, but not enough to accept the Copernican concept of a moving but not enough to accept the Copernican concept of a moving earthearth

While living in Prague as imperial mathematician, took on an While living in Prague as imperial mathematician, took on an assistant named Johannes Keplerassistant named Johannes Kepler

Johannes KeplerJohannes Kepler (1571-1630) (1571-1630)

pushed by parents to become a Lutheran ministerpushed by parents to become a Lutheran minister

real interests in mathematics & astronomyreal interests in mathematics & astronomy

theorized that the universe was constructed on the basis of theorized that the universe was constructed on the basis of geometric figuresgeometric figures

Brilliant mathematician & astronomer, after Brahe’s death, Brilliant mathematician & astronomer, after Brahe’s death, succeeded him as royal mathematician for Rudolf II in Praguesucceeded him as royal mathematician for Rudolf II in Prague

developed three laws of planetary motiondeveloped three laws of planetary motion– orbits around the sun were elliptical w/ sun at focus not centerorbits around the sun were elliptical w/ sun at focus not center– speed of a planet is greater near the sun & less farther awayspeed of a planet is greater near the sun & less farther away– planets w/ larger orbits revolve at slower velocity than those w/ planets w/ larger orbits revolve at slower velocity than those w/

smaller orbitssmaller orbits

his laws disproved circular orbits, crystalline spheres, & the his laws disproved circular orbits, crystalline spheres, & the Ptolemaic systemPtolemaic system

Galileo GalileiGalileo Galilei (1564-1642) (1564-1642)

teacher of mathematics in Pisateacher of mathematics in Pisa

11stst European to observe the heavens by telescope (built himself) European to observe the heavens by telescope (built himself)– showed that heavenly bodies were composed of matter similar to showed that heavenly bodies were composed of matter similar to

earth instead of ethereal, unchanging materialearth instead of ethereal, unchanging material

Publicly seen as a champion & hero of science, came under fire Publicly seen as a champion & hero of science, came under fire from the churchfrom the church

1610 - 1610 - The Starry MessengerThe Starry Messenger, revealed him as a supporter of , revealed him as a supporter of Copernicus’ heliocentric system, brought before the InquisitionCopernicus’ heliocentric system, brought before the Inquisition

1632 – 1632 – Dialogue on the Two Chief SystemsDialogue on the Two Chief Systems, brought before Inq. , brought before Inq.

1633 – forced to recant his statements about the Copernican system, 1633 – forced to recant his statements about the Copernican system, placed on house arrest, placed on house arrest, – studied mechanics in at his estate & tackled problems of motionstudied mechanics in at his estate & tackled problems of motion– if uniform force applied to an object, it moves at accelerated speed, not if uniform force applied to an object, it moves at accelerated speed, not

constant speedconstant speed– introduced concept of inertia, object in motion stays in motion unless introduced concept of inertia, object in motion stays in motion unless

acted upon by another forceacted upon by another force

Isaac NewtonIsaac Newton (1642-1727) (1642-1727)invented calculus, investigated composition of light, & tackled concept of invented calculus, investigated composition of light, & tackled concept of gravitygravityPrincipiaPrincipia – considered “hinge point of modern scientific thought” – considered “hinge point of modern scientific thought”– every object stays at rest or uniform motion in straight line until deflected every object stays at rest or uniform motion in straight line until deflected

by a forceby a force– rate of change of motion proportional to force acting upon itrate of change of motion proportional to force acting upon it– for every action there is an equal and opposite reactionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction– Universal Law of GravitationUniversal Law of Gravitation

every object in the universe is attracted to every other object with a force every object in the universe is attracted to every other object with a force (gravity) directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely (gravity) directly proportional to the product of their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distances between themproportional to the square of the distances between them

– His “world machine” was the basis for scientific thought in the West until His “world machine” was the basis for scientific thought in the West until Einstein’s work with relativity in the 20Einstein’s work with relativity in the 20thth century century

Advances in Medicine & ChemistryAdvances in Medicine & ChemistryParacelsusParacelsus (1493-1541) (1493-1541)

name means “greater than Celsus,” an ancient physicianname means “greater than Celsus,” an ancient physician

seen by some as the father of modern medicineseen by some as the father of modern medicine

vain, quick-tempered, not easy to get along withvain, quick-tempered, not easy to get along with

hoped to replace the old system of Aristotle w/ new chemical philosophyhoped to replace the old system of Aristotle w/ new chemical philosophy– macrocosmic-microcosmic principle – the human being was a small replica of macrocosmic-microcosmic principle – the human being was a small replica of

the larger worldthe larger world– argued disease was result of chemical imbalances localized in specific organsargued disease was result of chemical imbalances localized in specific organs– believed in the ancient Germanic principle “like cures like”believed in the ancient Germanic principle “like cures like”

seen as a “homicide physician” in his own time, looked at more favorably in seen as a “homicide physician” in his own time, looked at more favorably in later generationslater generations

Andreas VesaliusAndreas Vesalius (1514-1564) (1514-1564)1543 - wrote 1543 - wrote On the Fabric of the Human BodyOn the Fabric of the Human Body

dissected cadavers in lecture to illustrate what he was discussingdissected cadavers in lecture to illustrate what he was discussing– disproved many of Claudius Galen’s errors, like the liver being origin of the disproved many of Claudius Galen’s errors, like the liver being origin of the

blood vessels blood vessels – still clung to the Galenic idea that two different types of blood flowed through still clung to the Galenic idea that two different types of blood flowed through

veins & arteriesveins & arteries

William HarveyWilliam Harvey (1578-1657) (1578-1657)1628 – published 1628 – published On the Motion of the Heart and BloodOn the Motion of the Heart and BloodAlthough questions had been raised about Galen’s theories, no breaks Although questions had been raised about Galen’s theories, no breaks from his system had arisenfrom his system had arisenthrough observation, Harvey provedthrough observation, Harvey proved– heart was the origin of blood not the liverheart was the origin of blood not the liver– same blood flows in arteries & veinssame blood flows in arteries & veins– blood makes a complete circuit as it passes through the bodyblood makes a complete circuit as it passes through the body

1660s - achieved general recognition w/ discovery of capillaries 1660s - achieved general recognition w/ discovery of capillaries explained how blood got from arteries to veinsexplained how blood got from arteries to veins

ChemistryChemistryscience of Chemistry arose in the 17science of Chemistry arose in the 17thth & 18 & 18thth centuries centuriesRobert Boyle (1627-91) one of first to conduct controlled experimentsRobert Boyle (1627-91) one of first to conduct controlled experiments– work with gasses led to Boyles Law (volume of a gas inversely work with gasses led to Boyles Law (volume of a gas inversely

proportional to pressure exerted on it)proportional to pressure exerted on it)– proposed that matter is composed of “little particles of all shapes & proposed that matter is composed of “little particles of all shapes &

sizes” (later known as chemical elements)sizes” (later known as chemical elements)– Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794) invented a system of naming the Antoine Lavoisier (1743-1794) invented a system of naming the

chemical elements, regarded as father of modern chemistrychemical elements, regarded as father of modern chemistry

Women in the Origins of Modern ScienceWomen in the Origins of Modern ScienceMargaret CavendishMargaret Cavendish (1623-73) (1623-73)

aristocrat, participant in many crucial scientific debatesaristocrat, participant in many crucial scientific debatesgood example of French & English women involved in observational good example of French & English women involved in observational science, women often gravitated towards astronomy & entomologyscience, women often gravitated towards astronomy & entomologybetween 1650 & 1710, 1 of 7 astronomers in Germany were womenbetween 1650 & 1710, 1 of 7 astronomers in Germany were women

Maria MerianMaria Merian (1647-1717) (1647-1717)Worked in her father’s workshop, learned art of illustration (aided in Worked in her father’s workshop, learned art of illustration (aided in observational sketches of plants & insects)observational sketches of plants & insects)1699 – traveled to Dutch colony of Surinam in S. America to study plant 1699 – traveled to Dutch colony of Surinam in S. America to study plant & insect life& insect life– led to her major scientific work, led to her major scientific work, Metamorphosis of the Insects of SurinamMetamorphosis of the Insects of Surinam

Maria WinkelmannMaria Winkelmann (1670-1720) (1670-1720)Most famous female German astronomerMost famous female German astronomerEducated by her father & uncle, taught astronomy by her husband & Educated by her father & uncle, taught astronomy by her husband & became his assistantbecame his assistantAfter her husband died in 1710, applied for assistant astronomer at the After her husband died in 1710, applied for assistant astronomer at the Berlin Academy, but was rejected Berlin Academy, but was rejected – because “mouths would gape” if a woman was hiredbecause “mouths would gape” if a woman was hired

Descartes, Rationalism, & New View of HumankindDescartes, Rationalism, & New View of HumankindRene DescartesRene Descartes (1596-1650) (1596-1650)

called the “Father of Modern Philosophy”, developed called the “Father of Modern Philosophy”, developed rationalismrationalismhis prime concern was to establish a criteria for defining realityhis prime concern was to establish a criteria for defining realitypublished works published works The Discourse on the MethodThe Discourse on the Method (1637) & his (1637) & his MeditationsMeditations (1641) contain a step-by-step account of how he (1641) contain a step-by-step account of how he arrived at his conclusionsarrived at his conclusions– 1st essential in the search for truth: refuse to believe anything 1st essential in the search for truth: refuse to believe anything

that could not be undoubtedly proved to be truethat could not be undoubtedly proved to be true– basis of certainty from which he could build was: that he existedbasis of certainty from which he could build was: that he existed– very act of doubt proved he was a thinking being; summed up in very act of doubt proved he was a thinking being; summed up in

his second Meditation: his second Meditation: Congito ergo sumCongito ergo sum (I think therefore, I am.) (I think therefore, I am.)from that point Descartes was guided by the principle: whatever from that point Descartes was guided by the principle: whatever can be clearly perceived must existcan be clearly perceived must exist– knew that perceptions could be misleading as to exact natureknew that perceptions could be misleading as to exact nature– perceptions only validate the simple existence of objects in questionperceptions only validate the simple existence of objects in question

concluded that God existed because as imperfect beings, we concluded that God existed because as imperfect beings, we could not have imagined a perfect being unless it was based on could not have imagined a perfect being unless it was based on realityreality

The Scientific MethodThe Scientific MethodFrancis BaconFrancis Bacon (1561-1626) (1561-1626)

lawyer & lord chancellor of Englandlawyer & lord chancellor of Englandlittle scientific knowledge, rejected Copernicus, Kepler & little scientific knowledge, rejected Copernicus, Kepler & misunderstood Galileomisunderstood Galileodeveloped a correct scientific method, built on inductive principlesdeveloped a correct scientific method, built on inductive principles– urged scientists to proceed from particular to generalurged scientists to proceed from particular to general– through organized experiments & systematic observation through organized experiments & systematic observation

correct generalizations could be developed (empiricism)correct generalizations could be developed (empiricism)

Descartes believed that one could start with self-evident truths Descartes believed that one could start with self-evident truths and deduce more complex conclusionsand deduce more complex conclusionsHis emphasis on deduction and mathematical order His emphasis on deduction and mathematical order complimented Bacon’s stress on induction and experimentationcomplimented Bacon’s stress on induction and experimentationNewton combined rationalist & empiricism to develop the Newton combined rationalist & empiricism to develop the scientific methodscientific method– begins with systematic observations & experiments, used to begins with systematic observations & experiments, used to

arrive at general conclusions; arrive at general conclusions; – new deductions taken from general conclusions could then be new deductions taken from general conclusions could then be

tested and verified by experimentstested and verified by experiments

Science & ReligionScience & ReligionGalileo’s struggle w/ the church came from the fact that he did not Galileo’s struggle w/ the church came from the fact that he did not see why the church tried to determine the nature of physical reality see why the church tried to determine the nature of physical reality from scripturefrom scripture

the Church supported the Ptolemaic cosmology because it fit w/ the Church supported the Ptolemaic cosmology because it fit w/ philosophical views of realityphilosophical views of reality

this conflict & rejection of Darwin’s theories in 19this conflict & rejection of Darwin’s theories in 19 thth century forever century forever created a division between the scientific & religious communitiescreated a division between the scientific & religious communities

Benedict de SpinozaBenedict de Spinoza (1632-77) (1632-77)

raised in Amsterdam, excommunicated from Amsterdam synagogue raised in Amsterdam, excommunicated from Amsterdam synagogue for rejection of tenets of Judaism at 24for rejection of tenets of Judaism at 24– ostracized in both Jewish and Christian communities for his beliefsostracized in both Jewish and Christian communities for his beliefs

rejected Descartes’s ideas about an infinite God and a finite universerejected Descartes’s ideas about an infinite God and a finite universe– God is in everything so how can an infinite being “be” a collection of God is in everything so how can an infinite being “be” a collection of

finite objects?finite objects?

wrote wrote Ethics Demonstrated in the Geometric MannerEthics Demonstrated in the Geometric Manner (p.468) to (p.468) to explain his position, not published until after his deathexplain his position, not published until after his death

Blaise PascalBlaise Pascal (1623-1662) (1623-1662)

French scientist that sought to keep religion and science French scientist that sought to keep religion and science unitedunited

Accomplished scientist & brilliant mathematicianAccomplished scientist & brilliant mathematician– practical - built an adding machinepractical - built an adding machine– abstract – worked a great deal theorizing on abstract – worked a great deal theorizing on

probability & chanceprobability & chance

wrote wrote Pensees (Thoughts)Pensees (Thoughts) but died before it was but died before it was completedcompleted– Tried to convert rationalists to Christianity by appealing to their Tried to convert rationalists to Christianity by appealing to their

reason and emotionreason and emotion

Man is but a reed, the weakest in nature; but he is a thinking Man is but a reed, the weakest in nature; but he is a thinking reed.reed.

– Had answer for skeptics: Had answer for skeptics:

God is a reasonable bet; it is worthwhile to assume God exists. God is a reasonable bet; it is worthwhile to assume God exists. If he does, then we win all; If he does not, we lose nothing.If he does, then we win all; If he does not, we lose nothing.