西奥多·理查兹和同位素的发现

IF 1.8 3区化学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE

Foundations of Chemistry Pub Date : 2022-10-06 DOI:10.1007/s10698-022-09449-4

K. Brad Wray

{"title":"西奥多·理查兹和同位素的发现","authors":"K. Brad Wray","doi":"10.1007/s10698-022-09449-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>I challenge Gareth Eaton’s recent claim that Theodore Richards should be counted among the discoverers of isotopes. In evaluating Eaton’s claim, I draw on two influential theories of scientific discovery, one developed by Thomas Kuhn, and one developed by Augustine Brannigan. I argue that though Richards’ experimental work contributed to the discovery, his work does not warrant attributing the discovery to him. Richards’ reluctance to acknowledge isotopes is well document. Further, the fact that he made no claim to having made the discovery also undermines Eaton’s argument.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":568,"journal":{"name":"Foundations of Chemistry","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Theodore Richards and the discovery of isotopes\",\"authors\":\"K. Brad Wray\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10698-022-09449-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>I challenge Gareth Eaton’s recent claim that Theodore Richards should be counted among the discoverers of isotopes. In evaluating Eaton’s claim, I draw on two influential theories of scientific discovery, one developed by Thomas Kuhn, and one developed by Augustine Brannigan. I argue that though Richards’ experimental work contributed to the discovery, his work does not warrant attributing the discovery to him. Richards’ reluctance to acknowledge isotopes is well document. Further, the fact that he made no claim to having made the discovery also undermines Eaton’s argument.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":568,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Foundations of Chemistry\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Foundations of Chemistry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"92\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10698-022-09449-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foundations of Chemistry","FirstCategoryId":"92","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10698-022-09449-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

摘要

我对加雷斯·伊顿(Gareth Eaton)最近声称西奥多·理查兹(Theodore Richards)应该被列为同位素发现者的说法提出质疑。在评价伊顿的说法时，我借鉴了两个有影响力的科学发现理论，一个是由托马斯·库恩提出的，另一个是由奥古斯丁·布兰尼根提出的。我认为，虽然理查兹的实验工作促成了这一发现，但他的工作并不能保证将这一发现归功于他。理查兹不愿承认同位素的事实是有据可查的。此外，他没有声称自己发现了这一发现，这一事实也削弱了伊顿的论点。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Theodore Richards and the discovery of isotopes

I challenge Gareth Eaton’s recent claim that Theodore Richards should be counted among the discoverers of isotopes. In evaluating Eaton’s claim, I draw on two influential theories of scientific discovery, one developed by Thomas Kuhn, and one developed by Augustine Brannigan. I argue that though Richards’ experimental work contributed to the discovery, his work does not warrant attributing the discovery to him. Richards’ reluctance to acknowledge isotopes is well document. Further, the fact that he made no claim to having made the discovery also undermines Eaton’s argument.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Foundations of Chemistry HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-

自引率

22.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： Foundations of Chemistry is an international journal which seeks to provide an interdisciplinary forum where chemists, biochemists, philosophers, historians, educators and sociologists with an interest in foundational issues can discuss conceptual and fundamental issues which relate to the `central science'' of chemistry. Such issues include the autonomous role of chemistry between physics and biology and the question of the reduction of chemistry to quantum mechanics. The journal will publish peer-reviewed academic articles on a wide range of subdisciplines, among others: chemical models, chemical language, metaphors, and theoretical terms; chemical evolution and artificial self-replication; industrial application, environmental concern, and the social and ethical aspects of chemistry''s professionalism; the nature of modeling and the role of instrumentation in chemistry; institutional studies and the nature of explanation in the chemical sciences; theoretical chemistry, molecular structure and chaos; the issue of realism; molecular biology, bio-inorganic chemistry; historical studies on ancient chemistry, medieval chemistry and alchemy; philosophical and historical articles; and material of a didactic nature relating to all topics in the chemical sciences. Foundations of Chemistry plans to feature special issues devoted to particular themes, and will contain book reviews and discussion notes. Audience: chemists, biochemists, philosophers, historians, chemical educators, sociologists, and other scientists with an interest in the foundational issues of science.