{"title":"诊断分歧:正电子的鉴定1931-1934","authors":"Ana-Maria Creţu","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsb.2019.10.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This paper bridges a historiographical gap in accounts of the prediction and discovery of the positron by combining three ingredients. First, the prediction and discovery of the positron are situated in the broader context of a period of ‘crystallisation’ of a research tradition. Second, the prediction and discovery of the positron are discussed in the context of the ‘authentication’ of the particle. Third, the attitude of the relevant scientists to both prediction and discovery are conceptualised in terms of the idea of ‘perspectives’. It will be argued that by examining the prediction and discovery of the positron in the context of authentication within a period of crystallisation, we can better understand disagreements regarding the positron between relevant scientists (Dirac, Bohr, and Pauli) in the period 1931–34.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54442,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics","volume":"70 ","pages":"Pages 28-38"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.shpsb.2019.10.001","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnosing disagreements: The authentication of the positron 1931–1934\",\"authors\":\"Ana-Maria Creţu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.shpsb.2019.10.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>This paper bridges a historiographical gap in accounts of the prediction and discovery of the positron by combining three ingredients. First, the prediction and discovery of the positron are situated in the broader context of a period of ‘crystallisation’ of a research tradition. Second, the prediction and discovery of the positron are discussed in the context of the ‘authentication’ of the particle. Third, the attitude of the relevant scientists to both prediction and discovery are conceptualised in terms of the idea of ‘perspectives’. It will be argued that by examining the prediction and discovery of the positron in the context of authentication within a period of crystallisation, we can better understand disagreements regarding the positron between relevant scientists (Dirac, Bohr, and Pauli) in the period 1931–34.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics\",\"volume\":\"70 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 28-38\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.shpsb.2019.10.001\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355219818301709\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1355219818301709","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
Diagnosing disagreements: The authentication of the positron 1931–1934
This paper bridges a historiographical gap in accounts of the prediction and discovery of the positron by combining three ingredients. First, the prediction and discovery of the positron are situated in the broader context of a period of ‘crystallisation’ of a research tradition. Second, the prediction and discovery of the positron are discussed in the context of the ‘authentication’ of the particle. Third, the attitude of the relevant scientists to both prediction and discovery are conceptualised in terms of the idea of ‘perspectives’. It will be argued that by examining the prediction and discovery of the positron in the context of authentication within a period of crystallisation, we can better understand disagreements regarding the positron between relevant scientists (Dirac, Bohr, and Pauli) in the period 1931–34.
期刊介绍:
Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics is devoted to all aspects of the history and philosophy of modern physics broadly understood, including physical aspects of astronomy, chemistry and other non-biological sciences. The primary focus is on physics from the mid/late-nineteenth century to the present, the period of emergence of the kind of theoretical physics that has come to dominate the exact sciences in the twentieth century. The journal is internationally oriented with contributions from a wide range of perspectives. In addition to purely historical or philosophical papers, the editors particularly encourage papers that combine these two disciplines.
The editors are also keen to publish papers of interest to physicists, as well as specialists in history and philosophy of physics.