DOCSLIB.ORG

Causality, Realism and the Two Strands of Boltzmann's Legacy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Causality, Realism and the Two Strands of Boltzmann's Legacy Causality, Realism and the Two Strands of Boltzmann’s Legacy (1896-1936) by Michael Stöltzner Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades im Fach Philosophie an der Universität Bielefeld Bielefeld, Mai 2003 2 Preface The ideas presented here have a relatively long history. It reaches back to the year 1995 when I had finished my master thesis in mathematical physics and became interested in the philosophy of science. In those days, the Vienna Circle had become a great opportunity for me to simultaneously learn philosophy of science and start genuine research work. Here was a philosophy that started with the criticism of the philosophy I knew reasonably well from my earlier studies, by referring to the physics I knew or could quickly understand after working through old textbooks. Quite at the beginning of my reading and writing I bought Karl von Meyenn’s nice collection about the Forman debate. I was stunned. Frank’s book on causality from which I learned quite a lot, to Forman’s mind, contained “largely blather”. There was Hans Reichenbach who despite all scientific world-view (not: weltanschauung) rapidly “confessed” to irrationalism and camouflaged existentialism as Logical Empiricism. I decided to write an essay review which listed all the misunderstandings of Logical Empiricists I had found. For various reasons the review never made it into print until I understood that this was a fortunate outcome. Criticizing Forman by spotting misunderstandings of still widely unknown figures, among them Frank and von Mises, would have been an original contribution, but not an interesting one. The debates about Forman had already been fought in the 1980s. Everyone knew that one could do better now! Since 1971 history of science has undergone a rapid development not the least as regards it methodological abilities. Among them is the perspective of local traditions which has shown its relevance for the Vienna Circle. I mainly owe it to my partner Veronika Hofer that my interest for and insight into the history of science proper has developed over the years. The most important discovery for the present book was the personality of Franz Serafin Exner and his unpublished manuscript Vom Chaos zur Gegenwart (1923). Exner provides the missing historical link between the older generation of Mach and Boltzmann and the younger generation of Schrödinger, Frank and von Mises. It was through his synthesis of Mach’s empiricism, Boltzmann’s indeterminism, and Fechner’s relative frequency interpretation of probability, that Vienna Indeterminism becomes at all a coherent tradition. The first outline of the project was presented in June 1997 in a talk at the University of Trieste. It became more pointed in a paper I contributed to a Synthese volume on Boltzmann and in a talk given at Florence in 1999. But it only reached it final phase when I went to the University of Bielefeld in 2001. That the already existing bits and pieces finally came together in this book owes much to Martin Carrier’s effective insistence to complete it as my belated Ph.D. thesis. His very detailed criticism of earlier drafts has significantly contributed to focusing the book’s main thrust. I am also greatly indebted to Maria Carla Galavotti, Michael Heidelberger, Eckehart Köhler, Friedrich Stadler, and Thomas Uebel, for so 3 many hints and encouragement over the years. Their influence is looming at large in the discussions on probability and the history of the Vienna Circle. In connection with those papers on which chapters of the present book are based, I owe many thanks to John Blackmore, Erwin Hiebert, Paolo Parrini, Merrilee and the late Wes Salmon, and Roger Stuewer for their criticism and suggestions. In the final phase of the project, Don Howard, David Rowe, and Erhard Scholz have made very helpful comments on single chapters. Among the others whom I owe thanks for constructive comments during various presentations are Mitchell Ash, Herta and the late Kurt Blaukopf, Jeremy Butterfield, Nadine DeCourtenay, Henk deRegt, Gregor Schiemann, Matthias Schramm, Peter Weingart, and Paul Weingartner. All my long educational zigzag paths would have been impossible without the almost unconditional support of my parents and grandparents all of whom were still alive when I turned from physics back into philosophy. Sadly, three of them did not live to see the book completed. Bibliographical Notes Chapters 3, 4, 5, and 8 partly draw on material already published before. (Stöltzner, 1999, 2000a, 2002b, 2003a) I also owe thanks to various archives. The Institute Vienna Circle has allowed me to study the papers of Schlick and Neurath. For the permission to quote I thank Anne Kox and the Wiener Kreis Stichting. The Österreichische Zentralbibliothek für Physik has most effectively supplied copies from the Schrödinger letters and other material. I thank them for the permission to quote from letters of Schrödinger. On translations As the book is historically oriented, I put the German texts first. Different translations of different authors often destroy terminological continuities, possible allusions, implicit assent or dissent. Thus I have often intervened into translations, occasionally even into those published during an author’s life time. Several translations have reduced the italics present in the German original. Even though at places this yielded more italics than corresponds to contemporary style, I have reintroduced italics everywhere except for the proper names. If not indicated otherwise, translations are mine. 4 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................8 1. THE FORMAN THESES: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT ..........25 1.1. Forman’s Thesis and Its Extension............................................................................................ 26 1.1.1. Milieu’s Traits .............................................................................................................................................. 27 1.1.2. Ideological Adaptations........................................................................................................................ 29 1.1.2.1. Ideology and Rationality ................................................................................................................... 29 1.1.2.2. Spenglerism ............................................................................................................................................. 32 1.1.2.3. Craving for Crisis.................................................................................................................................. 33 1.1.3. Dispensing with Causality .................................................................................................................. 37 1.2. Reactions on the Forman Thesis .................................................................................................. 41 1.3. Further Forman Theses: Anschaulichkeit and Individualität......................... 47 2. QUANTUM COUNTERFACTUALS AND QUANTUM DIALOGUES: ON THE CLEFT BETWEEN RATIONAL RECONSTRUCTION AND HISTORICAL CONTINGENCY........51 2.1 Cushing’s Alternative History and the Issue of Underdetermination ....... 53 2.1.1. Copenhagen and Contingency ................................................................................................................ 54 2.1.2. A Counterfactual History and Its Extrapolation............................................................................. 61 2.2. Beller: On Dialogues and Revolutions .................................................................................... 68 2.2.1. Dialogical Emergence Versus Rhetorical Consolidation........................................................... 68 2.2.2. On Dialogues and Dialogism................................................................................................................... 71 3. THE FIRST PHASE: MACH, BOLTZMANN, PLANCK ...........80 3.1. Mach on Economy, Monism, and Causality...................................................................... 85 3.2 Action Principles, Uniqueness, and Stability ..................................................................... 91 3.3 Boltzmann on Causality and Probability .............................................................................. 95 3.4. Theory Reduction, Pictures, and Ontology........................................................................ 98 3.5 Mathematical Atomism and Constructivism ................................................................... 104 3.6. How Machian Was the Early Planck?.................................................................................. 106 3.7 The Planck-Mach Controversy ..................................................................................................... 112 3.8. Formal Principles and Planck’s Realisms......................................................................... 118 5 3.9. Mechanics, Mechanicism, and Culture................................................................................ 122 4. EXNER’S SYNTHESIS .................................................................................126 4.1 The Inaugural Address and Its Context (1908) ............................................................. 128 4.2 Preconditions of an Indeterminist World-View ............................................................ 131 4.3 Exner and His Circle..............................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Von Mises' Frequentist Approach to Probability
    Section on Statistical Education – JSM 2008 Von Mises’ Frequentist Approach to Probability Milo Schield1 and Thomas V. V. Burnham2 1 Augsburg College, Minneapolis, MN 2 Cognitive Systems, San Antonio, TX Abstract Richard Von Mises (1883-1953), the originator of the birthday problem, viewed statistics and probability theory as a science that deals with and is based on real objects rather than as a branch of mathematics that simply postulates relationships from which conclusions are derived. In this context, he formulated a strict Frequentist approach to probability. This approach is limited to observations where there are sufficient reasons to project future stability – to believe that the relative frequency of the observed attributes would tend to a fixed limit if the observations were continued indefinitely by sampling from a collective. This approach is reviewed. Some suggestions are made for statistical education. 1. Richard von Mises Richard von Mises (1883-1953) may not be well-known by statistical educators even though in 1939 he first proposed a problem that is today widely-known as the birthday problem.1 There are several reasons for this lack of recognition. First, he was educated in engineering and worked in that area for his first 30 years. Second, he published primarily in German. Third, his works in statistics focused more on theoretical foundations. Finally, his inductive approach to deriving the basic operations of probability is very different from the postulate-and-derive approach normally taught in introductory statistics. See Frank (1954) and Studies in Mathematics and Mechanics (1954) for a review of von Mises’ works. This paper is based on his two English-language books on probability: Probability, Statistics and Truth (1936) and Mathematical Theory of Probability and Statistics (1964).
    [Show full text]
  • Theory and Reality
    an introduction to the philosophy of science ........................................................... SCIENCE AND ITS CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS A SERIES EDITED BY DAVID L. HULL THEORY AND REALITY ........................................................... Peter Godfrey-Smith is associate professor of philosophy and of his­ tory and philosophy of science at Stanford University. He is the author PETER GODFREY-SMITH of Complexity and the Function ofMind in Nature. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637 The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London © 2003 by The University of Chicago All rights reserved. Published 2003 Printed in the United States of America 12 II 100908 45 ISBN: 0-226-30062-5 (cloth) ISBN: 0-226-30063-3 (paper) Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Godfrey-Smith, Peter. Theory and reality: an introduction to the philosophy of science I Peter Godfrey-Smith. p. cm. - (Science and its conceptual foundations) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-226-30062-5 (alk. paper) - ISBN 0-226-30063-3 (pbk. : alk. The University of Chicago Press / Chicago and London paper) I. Science-Philosophy. I. Title. II. Series. QI75 .G596 2003 501-dc2I 2002155305 @ The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of the American National Standard for Information Sciences-Perma­ nence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992. 56 Chapter Three Later (especially in chapter 14) I will return to these problems. But in the next chapter we will look at a philosophy that gets a good part of its motivation from the frustrations discussed in this chapter. Further Reading 4...................................................................................... Once again, Hempel's Aspects ofScientific Explanation (1965) is a key source, con­ Popper: Conjecture and Refutation taining a long (and exhausting) chapter on confirmation.
    [Show full text]
  • Philosophical Rhetoric in Early Quantum Mechanics, 1925-1927
    b1043_Chapter-2.4.qxd 1/27/2011 7:30 PM Page 319 b1043 Quantum Mechanics and Weimar Culture FA 319 Philosophical Rhetoric in Early Quantum Mechanics 1925–27: High Principles, Cultural Values and Professional Anxieties Alexei Kojevnikov* ‘I look on most general reasoning in science as [an] opportunistic (success- or unsuccessful) relationship between conceptions more or less defined by other conception[s] and helping us to overlook [danicism for “survey”] things.’ Niels Bohr (1919)1 This paper considers the role played by philosophical conceptions in the process of the development of quantum mechanics, 1925–1927, and analyses stances taken by key participants on four main issues of the controversy (Anschaulichkeit, quantum discontinuity, the wave-particle dilemma and causality). Social and cultural values and anxieties at the time of general crisis, as identified by Paul Forman, strongly affected the language of the debate. At the same time, individual philosophical positions presented as strongly-held principles were in fact flexible and sometimes reversible to almost their opposites. One can understand the dynamics of rhetorical shifts and changing strategies, if one considers interpretational debates as a way * Department of History, University of British Columbia, 1873 East Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada V6T 1Z1; [email protected]. The following abbreviations are used: AHQP, Archive for History of Quantum Physics, NBA, Copenhagen; AP, Annalen der Physik; HSPS, Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences; NBA, Niels Bohr Archive, Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen; NW, Die Naturwissenschaften; PWB, Wolfgang Pauli, Wissenschaftlicher Briefwechsel mit Bohr, Einstein, Heisenberg a.o., Band I: 1919–1929, ed. A. Hermann, K.V.
    [Show full text]
  • CERN Inaugurates LHC Cyrogenics
    FACES AND PLACES SYMPOSIUM CERN inaugurates LHC cyrogenics Inauguration and ribbon-cutting ceremony of LHC cryogenics by CERN officials: from left, Giorgio Passardi, leader of cryogenics for experiments group; Philippe Lebrun, head of the accelerator Members of the CERN cryogenic groups in front of the Globe of technology department; Giorgio Brianti, founder of the LHC Science and Innovation, where the symposium took place. (Globe project; Lyn Evans, LHC project leader and Laurent Tavian, leader conception T Buchi, Charpente Concept and H Dessimoz, Group H.) of the cryogenics for accelerators group. The beginning of June saw the start of a coils operating at 1.9 K. Besides enhancing Tennessee. Although the commissioning new phase at the LHC project, with the the performance of the niobium-titanium work is far from finished, the cyrogenics inauguration of LHC cryogenics. This was superconductor, this temperature regime groups at CERN felt that after 10 years of marked with a symposium in the Globe makes use of the excellent heat-transfer construction it was now a good time to of Science and Innovation attended by properties of helium in its superfluid state. celebrate, organizing the Symposium for the 178 representatives of the research The design for the LHC cryogenics had to Inauguration of LHC Cryogenics that took institutes involved and industrial partners. incorporate both newly ordered and reused place on 31 May-1 June at CERN's Globe of It also coincided with the stable low- refrigeration plant from LEP operating Science and Innovation. After an inaugural temperature operation of the cryogenic plant at 4.5 K – together with a second stage address by CERN’s director-general, for sector 7–8, the first sector to be cooled operating at 1.9 K – in a system that could Robert Aymar, the programme included down (CERN Courier May 2007 p5).
    [Show full text]
  • The Interpretation of Probability: Still an Open Issue? 1
    philosophies Article The Interpretation of Probability: Still an Open Issue? 1 Maria Carla Galavotti Department of Philosophy and Communication, University of Bologna, Via Zamboni 38, 40126 Bologna, Italy; [email protected] Received: 19 July 2017; Accepted: 19 August 2017; Published: 29 August 2017 Abstract: Probability as understood today, namely as a quantitative notion expressible by means of a function ranging in the interval between 0–1, took shape in the mid-17th century, and presents both a mathematical and a philosophical aspect. Of these two sides, the second is by far the most controversial, and fuels a heated debate, still ongoing. After a short historical sketch of the birth and developments of probability, its major interpretations are outlined, by referring to the work of their most prominent representatives. The final section addresses the question of whether any of such interpretations can presently be considered predominant, which is answered in the negative. Keywords: probability; classical theory; frequentism; logicism; subjectivism; propensity 1. A Long Story Made Short Probability, taken as a quantitative notion whose value ranges in the interval between 0 and 1, emerged around the middle of the 17th century thanks to the work of two leading French mathematicians: Blaise Pascal and Pierre Fermat. According to a well-known anecdote: “a problem about games of chance proposed to an austere Jansenist by a man of the world was the origin of the calculus of probabilities”2. The ‘man of the world’ was the French gentleman Chevalier de Méré, a conspicuous figure at the court of Louis XIV, who asked Pascal—the ‘austere Jansenist’—the solution to some questions regarding gambling, such as how many dice tosses are needed to have a fair chance to obtain a double-six, or how the players should divide the stakes if a game is interrupted.
    [Show full text]
  • Development Plan 2021–2023
    Approved by the general assembly of 12/13/2019. OeAW Development Plan 2021–2023 Glossary AI Artificial Intelligence BMBWF Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft und Forschung (Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research) CLARIN Common Language Resources and Technology Infrastructure DARIAH Digital Research Infrastructure for the Arts and Humanities DH Digital Humanities ESQ Erwin Schrödinger Center for Quantum Science & Technology ESS Earth System Sciences Research Program FWF Fonds zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung (Austrian Science Fund) FTI Forschung, Technologie und Innovation (Research, Technology and Innovation) GSK Geistes-, Sozial- und Kulturwissenschaften (Humanities, Social Sciences and Cultural Studies) GUEP Entwurf des Gesamtösterreichischen Universitätsentwicklungsplans 2022–2027 in der Fassung vom 01.08.2019 (draft Austrian University Development Plan 2022–2027 as of 08/01/2019) HI Rom Historisches Institut beim Österreichischen Kulturforum in Rom (Historical Institute of the Austrian Cultural Forum, Rome) HPDA High Performance Data Analysis IP Intellectual Property IPR Intellectual Property Rights JESH Joint Excellence in Science and Humanities funding program at the OeAW NFTE Nationalstiftung für Forschung, Technologie und Entwicklung (National Foundation for Research, Technology and Development) PA Performance agreement between the OeAW and the BMBWF SDG Sustainable Development Goals STEM Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Page 2 of 30 OeAW Development Plan 2021–2023 Table of Contents
    [Show full text]
  • Hans Thirring, on the Formal Analogy Between the Basic Electromagnetic Equations and Einstein’S Gravity Equations in first Approximation
    Gen Relativ Gravit (2012) 44:3217–3224 DOI 10.1007/s10714-012-1450-4 GOLDEN OLDIE EDITORIAL Editorial note to: Hans Thirring, On the formal analogy between the basic electromagnetic equations and Einstein’s gravity equations in first approximation Herbert Pfister Published online: 26 October 2012 © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012 Keywords Gravitomagnetism · Frame dragging · Lense–Thirring effect · Experimental relativity · Golden Oldie 1 Technical comments on the Thirring paper The paper contains some inconsistencies and errors, and an undefined quantity, which, however, does not invalidate the final equations for gravitomagnetism. Since in a realistic rotating body (angular velocity ω) there arise centrifugal stresses of order ω2, it is inconsistent to incorporate the velocities v of the field-generating body up to second order but to treat this body as incoherent matter (dust). The same incon- sistency appeared in Thirring’s model of a rotating mass shell [1], which therefore did not correctly solve the Einstein equations (in the shell). For this case the inconsistency was observed and corrected by Lanczos [2]. In the present paper the inconsistency has no severe consequences because the second order terms in v anyhow are quite unimportant. An error in Thirring’s paper appears in the integration volume dV0 which has to be substituted by dV = dV0/(dx4/ds). The same error appeared in Thirring’s paper [1] on the rotating mass shell, was there observed by M. Laue and W. Pauli, and corrected by Thirring in [3]. But, as with the inconsistency with the incoherent The republication of the original paper can be found in this issue following the editorial note and online via doi:10.1007/s10714-012-1451-3.
    [Show full text]
  • Einstein and the Development of Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Science
    Einstein and the Development of Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Science Don Howard University of Notre Dame Introduction What is Albert Einstein’s place in the history of twentieth-century philosophy of science? Were one to consult the histories produced at mid-century from within the Vienna Circle and allied movements (e.g., von Mises 1938, 1939, Kraft 1950, Reichenbach 1951), then one would find, for the most part, two points of emphasis. First, Einstein was rightly remembered as the developer of the special and general theories of relativity, theories which, through their challenge to both scientific and philosophical orthodoxy made vivid the need for a new kind of empiricism (Schlick 1921) whereby one could defend the empirical integrity of the theory of relativity against challenges coming mainly from the defenders of Kant.1 Second, the special and general theories of relativity were wrongly cited as straightforwardly validating central tenets of the logical empiricist program, such as verificationism, and Einstein was wrongly represented as having, himself, explicitly endorsed those same philosophical principles. As we now know, logical empiricism was not the monolithic philosophical movement it was once taken to have been. Those associated with the movement disagreed deeply about fundamental issues concerning the structure and interpretation of scientific theories, as in the protocol sentence debate, and about the overall aims of the movement, as in the debate between the left and right wings of the Vienna Circle over the role of politics in science and philosophy.2 Along with such differences went subtle differences in the assessment of Einstein’s legacy to logical empiricism.
    [Show full text]
  • Philipp Frank at Harvard University: His Work and His Influence
    Philipp Frank at Harvard University: His Work and His Influence The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Holton, Gerald. 2006. Phillip Frank at Harvard: His Work and his Influence. Synthese 153 (2): 297-311. doi.org/10.1007/ s11229-005-5471-3 Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:37837879 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA 10/12/04 Lecture at Philipp Frank Conferences in Prague & Vienna, Sept-Oct. ‘04 Philipp Frank at Harvard: His Work and his Influence by Gerald Holton My pleasant task today is to bring to life Philipp Frank’s work and influence during his last three decades, when he found a refuge and a position in America. In what follows, I hope I may call him Philipp--having been first a graduate student in one of his courses at Harvard, then his teaching assistant sharing his offices, then for many years his colleague and friend in the same Physics Department, and finally, doing research on his archival holdings kept at Harvard. I also should not hide my large personal debt to him, for without his recommendation in the 1950s to the Albert Einstein Estate, I would not have received its warm welcome and its permission, as the first one to do historical research in the treasure trove of unpublished letters and manuscripts, thus starting me on a major part of my career in the history of science.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 the Biography of a Trafficking Material
    Trafficking Materials and Maria Rentetzi Gendered Experimental Practices Chapter 1 The Biography of a Trafficking Material In 1904, an article titled "Radium and Radioactivity" appeared in Century 1 Magazine, a monthly popular magazine published from 1881 to 1930. The article presents Marie Curie's personal account of the discovery of radium and radioactivity. In the article, Curie discusses in depth her arduous attempts to study the radiation of the compounds of uranium and that of known chemical elements, hoping to discover more which are endowed with atomic radioactivity. She revels that it was the chemists who supplied her with the materials she needed. "As I desired to make a very thorough investigation, I had resource to different chemists, who put at my disposal specimens—in some cases the only ones in existence—containing very rare elements." Her next step was to examine different minerals, especially the oxide of uranium 2 ore (pitchblende). To her great surprise, this specimen was found to be four times more active than oxide of uranium itself. The explanation was more than obvious. "The ore must contain a substance more radioactive than uranium and thorium, and this substance must necessarily be a chemical element as yet unknown."1 Her attempts to isolate the new element would lead Marie and Pierre Curie, who joined her research shortly after, to the discovery of both polonium and radium, to the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1903, and to a second Nobel Prize in 1911, this time in chemistry. This chapter attempts to present a cultural
    [Show full text]
  • Chronological List of Correspondence, 1895–1920
    CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF CORRESPONDENCE, 1895–1920 In this chronological list of correspondence, the volume and document numbers follow each name. Documents abstracted in the calendars are listed in the Alphabetical List of Texts in this volume. 1895 13 or 20 Mar To Mileva Maric;;, 1, 45 29 Apr To Rosa Winteler, 1, 46 Summer To Caesar Koch, 1, 6 18 May To Rosa Winteler, 1, 47 28 Jul To Julia Niggli, 1, 48 Aug To Rosa Winteler, 5: Vol. 1, 48a 1896 early Aug To Mileva Maric;;, 1, 50 6? Aug To Julia Niggli, 1, 51 21 Apr To Marie Winteler, with a 10? Aug To Mileva Maric;;, 1, 52 postscript by Pauline Einstein, after 10 Aug–before 10 Sep 1,18 From Mileva Maric;;, 1, 53 7 Sep To the Department of Education, 10 Sep To Mileva Maric;;, 1, 54 Canton of Aargau, 1, 20 11 Sep To Julia Niggli, 1, 55 4–25 Nov From Marie Winteler, 1, 29 11 Sep To Pauline Winteler, 1, 56 30 Nov From Marie Winteler, 1, 30 28? Sep To Mileva Maric;;, 1, 57 10 Oct To Mileva Maric;;, 1, 58 1897 19 Oct To the Swiss Federal Council, 1, 60 May? To Pauline Winteler, 1, 34 1900 21 May To Pauline Winteler, 5: Vol. 1, 34a 7 Jun To Pauline Winteler, 1, 35 ? From Mileva Maric;;, 1, 61 after 20 Oct From Mileva Maric;;, 1, 36 28 Feb To the Swiss Department of Foreign Affairs, 1, 62 1898 26 Jun To the Zurich City Council, 1, 65 29? Jul To Mileva Maric;;, 1, 68 ? To Maja Einstein, 1, 38 1 Aug To Mileva Maric;;, 1, 69 2 Jan To Mileva Maric;; [envelope only], 1 6 Aug To Mileva Maric;;, 1, 70 13 Jan To Maja Einstein, 8: Vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Progress Report
    Progress Report 2008–2009 We owe special thanks to the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) for its financial support for numerous projects of the research facilities of the Austrian Academy of Sciences All rights reserved Copyright © 2009 by Austrian Academy of Sciences Layout: Art Quarterly Publishing House Werbe- und PR-Agentur GmbH. Printed and bound: Wograndl 3 Table of contents Preface . 5 RESEARCH FACILITIES OF THE SECTION FOR MATHEMATICS AND NATURAL SCIENCES Biology and Medicine CeMM – Research Center for Molecular Medicine GmbH . 11 Breath Research Institute . 14 GMI – Gregor Mendel Institute of Molecular Plant Biology . 18 IMBA – Institute of Molecular Biotechnology GmbH . 22 Institute for Biomedical Aging Research . 26 Institute for Biophysics and Nanosystems Research . 30 Konrad Lorenz Institute for Ethology . 34 Earth Sciences Institute for Geographic Information Science . 37 Center for Geosciences . 40 Commission for the Palaeontological and Stratigraphical Research of Austria . 42 Commission for Geophysical Research . 45 Commission for Quaternary Research . 48 Commission for Basic Research on Mineral Raw Materials . 51 Mathematics, Simulation and Metrology Institute for Integrated Sensor Systems . 55 Acoustics Research Institute . 58 Johann Radon Institute for Computational and Applied Mathematics . 61 Commission for Scientific Visualization . 65 Physics and Materials Sciences Erich Schmid Institute of Materials Science . 68 Institute of High Energy Physics . 71 Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information . 74 Stefan Meyer Institute for Subatomic Physic. 77 Environmental Research Institute for Limnology . 80 Institute of Technology Assessment . 83 Commission for Interdisciplinary Ecological Studies . 86 Space Research Space Research Institute . 89 Commission for Astronomy . 92 Interdepartmental Research Tasks Commission for Scientific Co-operation with the Austrian Federal Ministry of Defence and Sports .
    [Show full text]