DOCSLIB.ORG

Origins and Founding of the Institute

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Origins and Founding of the Institute 1 “under my protection and name….” – Origins and Founding of the Institute Today there are entire disciplines that simply no longer fit within the bounds of the colleges and universities, either because they require such extensive machinery and instrumentation that no university department can afford them, or because they concern problems that are too advanced for students and can only be tackled by junior scholars.1 So wrote the Berlin theologian and director of the Royal Library, Adolf Har- nack, in a 1909 memorandum that would serve as the founding document for the Kaiser Wilhelm Society (Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft, KWG) and hence for the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physical Chemistry and Electrochemistry (Kaise r- Wilhelm-Institut für physikalische Chemie und Elektrochemie, KWI), one of the first institutes established by the society. The creation of these organizations was the culmination of interwoven chains of events stretching back well into the 19th century and closely tied to the rise of Germany, and Berlin in particular, as an international center for scholarly research. Three institutional innovations con- tributed substantially to this rise to academic prominence.2 The first was the founding in Berlin in 1810 of the Friedrich Wilhelm University (Friedrich-Wil- helms-Universität, Berlin University), one of the first establishments to promote the ideal of the unity of research and teaching, which would become a hallmark of the modern research university. Then in 1887, the Imperial Institute of Physics and Technology (Physikalisch-Technische Reichsanstalt, PTR) began operations in Berlin-Charlottenburg. The first large research institute to stand outside the uni- versity system, the Imperial Institute of Physics and Technology, resulted from a close collaboration between the state, industry and science, aimed at establishing an institute that could meet the demands of modern, large-scale scientific research. Finally, came the founding of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society for the Promotion of the Sciences in 1911 – the last in this series of institutional innovations that, though initiated in Berlin, would affect the scientific landscape well beyond the borders of Germany. The Kaiser Wilhelm Society was established to supplement the efforts of the universities and technical colleges in the natural sciences and engineering, in part as a response to rising international competition, particularly from the United States, whose rapid scientific growth had already begun to call German leadership in these fields into question. 1Harnack,Denkschrift, p. 82. 2Laitko,Innovationen. 1 “under my protection and name….” Fig. 1.1. The Imperial Institute of Physics and Technology in Berlin-Charlottenburg. The founders of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society built upon the successes of the Imperial Institute of Physics and Technology. Researchers in other scientific dis- ciplines, chemistry in particular, sought to emulate the model it provided of an institute for “big science,” in the modern sense, dedicated exclusively to physics and metrology.3 The Berlin chemist, Emil Fischer, who had founded a laboratory for quantitative research in chemistry based on precision methods just before the turn of the century, became the spokesperson for the effort to create an Imperial Institute of Chemistry analogous to the Institute of Physics and Technology. Ini- tial attempts to establish such an institute through government means foundered on issues of state finances. In response, leading representatives of academic and industrial chemistry established in 1905 an independent planning committee to promote the prospective institute, which then developed into an Imperial Institute of Chemistry Association some three years later.4 The association aimed princi- pally to collect the funds necessary for the construction and maintenance of the proposed institute through donations and membership dues, and thereby circum- vent dependence upon state financing, although association members remained dedicated, on principle, to state support for the new institute. A memorandum on the need for an Imperial Institute of Chemistry composed by Emil Fischer in 3Cf.Cahan,Institute. 4Cf.Johnson,Chemists. 2 1 “under my protection and name….” collaboration with the renowned physical chemists Wilhelm Ostwald and Walther Nernst provided the immediate impetus and the occasion for the formation of the Association. In the memo, Fischer, Nernst and Ostwald laid particular weight upon the promotion of physical chemistry, arguing that it should constitute the “scientific backbone” and the central division of the new institute. All this occurred against the backdrop of a rapid boom in classical, organic syn- thetic chemistry during the last third of the 19th century in Germany, which formed the basis for the production of ever more complex synthetic dyes and supported the associated large chemical concerns, but which left behind such sub-disciplines as inorganic chemistry and the young and aspiring fields of biochemistry, physiolog- ical chemistry and physical chemistry. Institutional support for physical chemistry was particularly meager. The field initially crystallized around only a handful of organizational structures in Germany: Wilhelm Ostwald’s institute in Leipzig, the associated research school and the newly established Journal of Physical Chem- istry (Zeitschrift für physikalische Chemie).5 The founding of Ostwald’s Institute at Leipzig University in 1887 was not part of a great wave of new institutes for phys- ical chemistry. At the beginning of the 20th century there remained only a few, relatively small institutes and some subaltern posts dedicated to the field, although these could provide excellent research facilities, as was the case for Walther Nernst in Göttingen and for Fritz Haber in Karlsruhe. The shortfall in Berlin was partic- ularly striking; only the extraordinarius professors Hans Landoldt and Hans Jahn represented the field, which hardly sufficed for the promotion of the capital city to a peak research position.6 This lack of institutional support appeared an ever more acute problem in that physical chemistry was no longer a liminal field, but was increasingly recog- nized as a fundamental discipline within chemistry. Physical chemists wanted to address basic concepts common to all of chemistry, such as chemical binding and chemical reactions, which touched upon the underlying physical bases of chem- ical structure. The resulting, increasingly multi-faceted new branch of chemistry could not be neatly inserted into the German ordinary professoriate, which was still marked by stubborn disciplinary boundaries and the almost overwhelming dominance of organic chemistry. Hence, there was an enormous demand for new institutes of physical chemistry, and not only for small, specialized institutes that could make up for the existing deficit but also for a central institute, preferably housed in Berlin, the imperial capital, that could help guide the development of the field. With respect to its size, facilities and modernity the Chemical Institute of the Berlin University erected in 1900 for Emil Fischer presented an excellent model for such a flagship institute7 – assuming, of course, one overlooked its focus on organic chemistry. 5Girnus,Grundzüge. 6Bartelt,Berlin. 7Reinhardt,Ze nt ra le . 3 1 “under my protection and name….” Although the chemical industry offered “substantial donations” to support the proposed institute, and representatives of the Prussian state expressed no doubts concerning the significance of such an undertaking, the lack of government funds continued to block progress, and the state set aside discussion of the matter early in 1909.8 But soon thereafter a new opportunity to promote the project arose in connection with the grand designs of the preeminent director of academic affairs in the Prussian Ministry of Culture, Friedrich Althoff. As the new cen- tury opened, Althoff had formulated a plan to develop the remaining crown lands in the former demesne of Dahlem into “a German Oxford.” In Althoff’s vision, the Berlin suburb would host not only annexes of the Berlin University but also new research institutes and extensive scientific collections.9 However, Althoff died in 1908, without having made significant progress toward realizing his plans. Nev- ertheless, shortly after Althoff’s death, Kaiser Wilhelm II commissioned Althoff’s long-time associate Friedrich Schmidt (after 1920 Schmidt-Ott) to compile a report on “Althoff’s plans for Dahlem.” Less than a year later, as the Prussian bureaucracy began to ponder an appropriate royal gift for the centennial of the Berlin Univer- sity, Schmidt-Ott sent Althoff’s plans to the Chief of the Civil Cabinet, Rudolf von Valentini, who then forwarded them to the theologian and Director of the Royal Library, Adolf von Harnack, along with his own request for a report on the plans. As part of his report, Harnack was supposed to evaluate the present scientific standing of Germany and to develop from his assessment a proposal for a fitting centenary gift from the Kaiser. Harnack completed his report, a “Memorandum concerning the founding of a Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for scientific research,” in the autumn of 1909. In his memorandum, Harnack relied not only upon Althoff’s plans but also upon the recommendations of scientists such as Emil Fischer, Walther Nernst and August Wassermann, weaving these together with a dire warning concerning the plight of German science and the concomitant dangers to state and business interests: …German scholarship
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Die Nationalsozialistische Rezeption Julius Robert Mayers: Alwin Mittasch Und Das Konzept Der Auslösung
    Die nationalsozialistische Rezeption Julius Robert Mayers: Alwin Mittasch und das Konzept der Auslösung M aria Osietzki, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Fakultät für Geschichtswissenschaft, W irtschafts- und Technikgeschichte, Universitätsstr. 150, 4630 Bochum 1 Im Jahre 1942 erschien eine vom Reichsforschungsrat in Auftrag gegebene "Gedenkpublikation zur 100. W iederkehr der Entdeckung des Energieerhal­ tungssatzes".1 In ihr kamen Vertreter unterschiedlicher Disziplinen zu W ort, für die der Energieerhaltungssatz von Relevanz war. Im Stil schloß sich die Gedenkschrift weitgehend an die üblicherweise zur Identitätsstiftung der W issenschaft beitragenden Heroisierungen von W issenschaftlern und den zur Aufwertung der eigenen Disziplin bestimmten Rekonstruktionen ihrer Leistun­ gen an. Die meisten Beiträge lagen in einer Linie mit der Rezeptionsgeschichte Mayers vor 1933 und nach 1945. Stellenweise wiesen sie allerdings Passagen auf, die man als bewußte Verbeugung vor den Ambitionen der Nationalsozia­ listen oder als unbewußte Anpassung an ihre Denkweisen interpretieren kann. Im Unterschied dazu stand eine Publikation in der Gedenkschrift für einen Rezeptionsstrang M ayers, der als typisch nationalsozialistisch zu kennzeichnen ist. Er stammt von dem Chemiker Alwin M ittasch (1869-1953), dem erfolgrei­ chen Katalyseforscher und langjährigem Laboratoriumsleiter bei der BASF, der sich im Ruhestand mit philosophischen Fragen befaßte. Er stieß dabei auf eine kurze Schrift von Mayer aus dem Jahre 1876, in der dieser skizzenhaft das Konzept der Auslösung entwickelt hatte.2 Die Faszination, die M ittasch für die­ ses Konzept empfand, bestand in dessen Ergänzung des Energieerhaltungs­ satzes, der auf dem Prinzip "causa aequat effectum" basierte, während die Auslösung vom Grundsatz "kleine Ursache große W irkung" ausging. In dieser dualen Kausalitätsvorstellung sah M ittasch eine Brücke zwischen M aterie und Geist sowie zwischen Leib und Seele.
    [Show full text]
  • Ein Bisher Unbekanntes Zeitzeugnis
    N. T. M. 16 (2008) 103–115 0036-6978/08/010103–13 OUND DOI 10.1007/S00048-007-0277-7 © 2008 BIRKHÄUSER VERLAG, BASEL F & OST /L UNDSTÜCK Ein bisher unbekanntes Zeitzeugnis. F Otto Warburgs Tagebuchnotizen von Februar–April 1945 Kärin Nickelsen Warburg’s diary notes February–April 1945 Personal notes in the form of a diary, written by the German cell biologist Otto Warburg in the weeks before the collapse of Germany’s Third Reich (Feb.-April 1945), were found at the end of one of his labo- ratory notebooks, which are preserved in the Archives of the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities. These notes are unique in form and content: there seem to be no other surviving diary notes of this type. Written from a very personal perspective, they provide a detailed account of how Warburg experienced local events in this decisive and turbulent period. Furthermore, they clearly demonstrate Warburg’s embittered attitude towards some of his long-standing collaborators, whom he suspected of having denounced him to the Nazi authorities. In this paper, Warburg’s notes are fully transcribed and integrated into the historical context. Keywords: Otto Warburg, Kaiser-Wilhelm-Society, National Socialism, diary notes Schlüsselwörter: Otto Warburg, Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft, Nationalsozialismus, Tagebuchnotizen | downloaded: 29.9.2021 Otto Warburg (1883–1970) ist in der Wissenschaftsgeschichte vor allem bekannt für seine bahnbrechenden Arbeiten zur Zellatmung, für die ihm 1931 der Nobelpreis verliehen wurde.1 In anderen Kontexten wiederum ist er bekannt als einer der ganz wenigen Wissenschaftler jüdischer Abstam- mung, die während der gesamten Zeit des Nationalsozialismus in Amt und Würden blieben: Nicht nur wurde Warburg nicht deportiert, er blieb bis 1945 Direktor des Kaiser-Wilhelm-Instituts (KWI) für Zellphysiologie in Berlin-Dahlem.2 Unter anderem stand er eigenen Angaben zufolge bis 1937 unter dem persönlichen Schutz von Friedrich Glum, damals Generaldirektor der Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft (Werner 1991: 284).
    [Show full text]
  • George De Hevesy in America
    Journal of Nuclear Medicine, published on July 13, 2019 as doi:10.2967/jnumed.119.233254 George de Hevesy in America George de Hevesy was a Hungarian radiochemist who was awarded the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1943 for the discovery of the radiotracer principle (1). As the radiotracer principle is the foundation of all diagnostic and therapeutic nuclear medicine procedures, Hevesy is widely considered the father of nuclear medicine (1). Although it is well-known that he spent time at a number of European institutions, it is not widely known that he also spent six weeks at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY, in the fall of 1930 as that year’s Baker Lecturer in the Department of Chemistry (2-6). “[T]he Baker Lecturer gave two formal presentations per week, to a large and diverse audience and provided an informal seminar weekly for students and faculty members interested in the subject. The lecturer had an office in Baker Laboratory and was available to faculty and students for further discussion.” (7) There is also evidence that, “…Hevesy visited Harvard [University, Cambridge, MA] as a Baker Lecturer at Cornell in 1930…” (8). Neither of the authors of this Note/Letter was aware of Hevesy’s association with Cornell University despite our longstanding ties to Cornell until one of us (WCK) noticed the association in Hevesy’s biographical page on the official Nobel website (6). WCK obtained both his undergraduate degree and medical degree from Cornell in Ithaca and New York City, respectively, and spent his career in nuclear medicine. JRO did his nuclear medicine training at Columbia University and has subsequently been a faculty member of Weill Cornell Medical College for the last eleven years (with a brief tenure at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (affiliated with Cornell)), and is now the program director of the Nuclear Medicine residency and Chief of the Molecular Imaging and Therapeutics Section.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Research in the Max Planck Society Science Policy in the Federal Republic of Germany, 1945–1970
    Chapter 5 Basic Research in the Max Planck Society Science Policy in the Federal Republic of Germany, 1945–1970 Carola Sachse ላሌ The Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science (MPG, Max- Planck-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften) is commonly consid- ered a stronghold of basic research in the German research landscape. When it was reestablished in 1948 in the Western zones of occupation, the society adopted the defi ning part of its predecessor’s name, the Kaiser Wilhelm So- ciety for the Advancement of Science (KWG, Kaiser-Wilhelm-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der Wissenschaften), which had been founded in 1911. In contrast to its organizational counterpart, the Fraunhofer Society for the Ad- vancement of Applied Research (Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung), whose distinctive purpose has been incorporated into its name since its foundation in 1949 (Trischler and vom Bruch 1999), the MPG did not include the term “basic research” in its full name, nor does the term appear in any of its statutes of the last one hundred years. The offi - cial documents of the MPG instead refer to “scientifi c research” in the broad German sense of wissenschaftliche Forschung and combine it in varying formu- lations with the terms “freedom” and “independence.”1 Both of these terms are cornerstones in what became known as Harnack- Prinzip (Harnack principle). Named after Adolf von Harnack, the initiator and fi rst and longtime serving president of the KWG, this principle included two main aspects: fi rst, institutes should be founded only if a man was avail- able (women were not considered) for the post of managing director “who has This open access library edition is supported by the University of Bonn.
    [Show full text]
  • CARL BOSCH and HIS MUSEUM Fathi Habashi, Laval University
    Bull. Hist. Chem., VOLUME 35, Number 2 (2010) 111 CARL BOSCH AND HIS MUSEUM Fathi Habashi, Laval University Carl Bosch (1874-1940) (Fig. 1) was for the development of the catalysts. born in Cologne, studied metallurgy Further problems which had to be and mechanical engineering at the Tech- solved were the construction of safe nische Hochschule in Berlin (1894-96), high-pressurized reactors and a cheap then chemistry at Leipzig University, way of producing and cleaning the graduating in 1898. In 1899 he entered gases necessary for the synthesis of the employ of the Badische Anilin- und ammonia. Step by step Bosch went Sodafabrik in Ludwigshafen (Fig. 2) on to using increasingly larger manu- and participated in the development facturing units. In order to solve the of the then new industry of synthetic growing problems posed by materials indigo. and related safety problems, BASF set up the chemical industry’s first When in 1908 the Badische ac- Materials Testing Laboratory in 1912 quired the process of high-pressure to identify and control problems in synthesis of ammonia, which had been materials for instrumentation and developed by Fritz Haber (1868-1934) process engineering. at the Technische Hochschule in Karl- sruhe, Bosch was given the task of The plant in Oppau for the pro- developing this process on an industrial duction of ammonia and nitrogen Figure 1. Carl Bosch (1874-1940) scale. This involved the construction of fertilizers was opened in 1913. Bosch plant and apparatus which would stand up wanted fertilizers to be tested thorough- to working at high gas pressure and high-reaction tem- ly, so that customers were to be given proper instructions peratures.
    [Show full text]
  • Milestones and Personalities in Science and Technology
    History of Science Stories and anecdotes about famous – and not-so-famous – milestones and personalities in science and technology BUILDING BETTER SCIENCE AGILENT AND YOU For teaching purpose only December 19, 2016 © Agilent Technologies, Inc. 2016 1 Agilent Technologies is committed to the educational community and is willing to provide access to company-owned material contained herein. This slide set is created by Agilent Technologies. The usage of the slides is limited to teaching purpose only. These materials and the information contained herein are accepted “as is” and Agilent makes no representations or warranties of any kind with respect to the materials and disclaims any responsibility for them as may be used or reproduced by you. Agilent will not be liable for any damages resulting from or in connection with your use, copying or disclosure of the materials contained herein. You agree to indemnify and hold Agilent harmless for any claims incurred by Agilent as a result of your use or reproduction of these materials. In case pictures, sketches or drawings should be used for any other purpose please contact Agilent Technologies a priori. For teaching purpose only December 19, 2016 © Agilent Technologies, Inc. 2016 2 Table of Contents The Father of Modern Chemistry The Man Who Discovered Vitamin C Tags: Antoine-Laurent de Lavoisier, chemical nomenclature Tags: Albert Szent-Györgyi, L-ascorbic acid He Discovered an Entire Area of the Periodic Table The Discovery of Insulin Tags: Sir William Ramsay, noble gas Tags: Frederick Banting,
    [Show full text]
  • 4. Marie Curie, Ethics and Research
    CATHERINE MILNE 4. MARIE CURIE, ETHICS AND RESEARCH INTRODUCTION Recently Chemistry and Engineering News (Bard, Prestwich, Wight, Heller, & Zimmerman, 2010) carried a series of commentaries on the culture of academic research in chemistry with a focus on the role of funding in research. Initially, Alan Bard decried how decisions about tenure seem more and more to focus on grant getting rather than consideration of the applicant’s accomplishments generated because of access to this funding. Bard argued further that often this funding was based, not on the quality of the proposed research but on a researcher’s ability to “hype their research” and damming truth in the process (Bard et al., 2010, p. 27). According to him, there was a disturbing trend in universities for researchers to be encouraged, almost expected, to generate patents and from there, even to be involved in initiating “start up” companies. Other researchers responded. Glen Prestwich and Charles Wight (Bard et al., 2010) argue that if researchers were able to present a clear connection between “taxpayer dollars” and funded research, the public would realize the value that science delivers. Prestwich and Wight argue further that a new cadre of researchers is involved in identifying real world problems, translating basic research into applications, and creating products as well as publications. Moving from basic research to applications that address real world problems is called translational research, and Prestwich and Wight see this research as a positive development in chemistry. Adam Heller (Bard et al., 2010) weighs in claiming that the pursuit of “patent-protected, people-serving products” was not “a sad sign of our times but a reawakening of the proud history of academic chemistry and chemical engineering” (p.
    [Show full text]
  • Enriching the Earth: Fritz Haber, Carl Bosch, and the Transformation of World Food Production. by Vaclav Smil. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004
    Book Reviews / 383 nessing water power to produce scythes for farmers, spindles for textile mills, and cotton thread. Small emphasizes that these were not the activities of ab- sentee investors but of local men and women who mixed manufacturing with agriculture. Beauty and Convenience focuses on a farming community that has received scant attention from historians, but Small makes a convincing case that the way in which the farmers of Sutton fashioned and re-fashioned their houses and landscape reveals their full participation in the historic transformations of their era. Kenneth Hafertepe Baylor University Enriching the Earth: Fritz Haber, Carl Bosch, and the Transformation of World Food Production. By Vaclav Smil. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2004. 360 pp., $19.95, paperback, ISBN 0-262-69313-5. What is the most important technological invention in the twentieth century? Vaclav Smil makes the cogent argument that it is the discovery and industrial- ization of ammonia synthesis by Fritz Haber and Carl Bosch. Without indus- trial N-fixation, as much as two-fifths of the world’s population would starve for want of available protein in their diet, and major advances in high-pressure industrial processes would have been delayed. Likewise, the Haber-Bosch process facilitated world munitions production; encouraged agricultural ex- pansion onto marginal lands, leading to greater greenhouse emissions and soil degradation; and (because of inherent inefficiencies in nitrogen recovery by plants) has led to an unbalanced enrichment of natural ecosystems by nitrogen. It is an odd book given the title. History and society would be unalterably different without Haber and Bosch, but these protagonists do not appear un- til chapters four and five, respectively; then their lives are described in the most perfunctory manner.
    [Show full text]
  • Great Moments in Science and Technology English, Spanish, French: 103 X 15 Min
    SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY MEDICINE DOCUMENTARY 15 MIN. VERSIONS Great Moments in Science and Technology English, Spanish, French: 103 x 15 min. Arabic: 89 x 15 min. The viewer gains an insight into both the scientific and the socio-political background to an Portuguese: 33 x 15 min. invention or discovery. Pioneers of science are portrayed, and the nature of their research and its further development through to the present are reconstructed. RIGHTS Not available worldwide. Computer animations are used to make certain processes easier to understand and to show Please contact your regional how various systems function. Re-enacted scenes illustrate the conditions under which the distribution partner. scientists worked and the approach they took. Particularly impressive are the historical film sequences, some of which date back to the early days of cinematography. ORDER NUMBER 24 4110 | 01 – 103 01 Wilhelm C. Röntgen: X-rays 30 Louis Pasteur, Robert Koch: English, Spanish, French 02 The Lumière Brothers: Bacteriology Cinematography 31 Edward Jenner, Paul Ehrlich, 24 4110 | 01 – 89 03 Otto Lilienthal: The Glider Emil von Behring: Vaccination Arabic 04 Werner von Siemens: 32 Alexander Fleming, Howard Florey, The Electric Dynamo Ernst Chain: Penicillin 24 4110 | 01 – 32, 47 05 Nikolaus August Otto: 33 Horace Wells, William Morton, Portuguese The Four-stroke Engine John Warren: Anaesthesia 06 Louis Daguerre: The Camera 34 Joseph Lister, Ignaz Semmelweis: 07 Karl Friedrich Drais: The Bicycle Antisepsis 08 Heinrich Hertz: Electromagnetic Waves 35 Ramón y Cajal: Neuron Theory 09 The Wright brothers: The Aeroplane 36 Frederick Banting, Charles Best, 10 Thomas Alva Edison: The Light Bulb John Macleod, James Collip: Insulin 11 Johann Philipp Reis, 37 Karl Landsteiner: Alexander Graham Bell: The Telephone The AB0 Blood Group System 12 Samuel F.
    [Show full text]
  • THEODORE WILLIAM RICHARDS January 31, 1868-April 2, 1928
    NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES T H E O D O R E W I L L I A M R ICHARDS 1868—1928 A Biographical Memoir by JAMES BRYANT CONANT Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Academy of Sciences. Biographical Memoir COPYRIGHT 1974 NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES WASHINGTON D.C. THEODORE WILLIAM RICHARDS January 31, 1868-April 2, 1928 BY JAMES BRYANT CONANT HEODORE WILLIAM RICHARDS was a precocious son of distin- Tguished parents. He was born in Philadelphia on January 31, 1868, the third son and fifth child of William Trost Richards and Anna Matlack Richards, who had been married on June 30, 1856. As strict members of the Society of Friends, the Matlack family looked askance at a young man who earned his living painting pictures. Anna was "read out of meeting." The Quaker marriage ceremony took place in the house of a friend. The first months of the honeymoon were devoted to the com- position and illustration of a manuscript volume of poems for the lady who had first brought the young couple together. A mutual interest in Browning and Tennyson had started an acquaintanceship which rapidly became a romance. An old friend and fellow artist of Philadelphia reminiscing long after W. T. Richards had established his reputation as a landscape painter said, "He amazed me by getting married and resigning his position as designer [in a local firm manufacturing gas fixtures] in order to devote himself entirely to his art.
    [Show full text]
  • From Physical Chemistry to Chemical Physics, 1913-1941
    International Workshop on the History of Chemistry 2015 Tokyo From Physical Chemistry to Chemical Physics, 1913-1941 Jeremiah James Ludwig-Maximillian University, Munich, Germany There has never been one unique name for the intersection of chemistry and physics. Nor has it ever been defined by a single, stable set of methods. Nevertheless, it is possible and arguably rewarding to distinguish changes in the constellation of terms and techniques that have defined the intersection over the years. I will speak today about one such change, the advent and ascendancy of chemical physics in the interwar period. When the young Friedrich Wilhelm Ostwald first began to formulate his campaign for “physical chemistry” in 1877, he used the term almost interchangeably with two others, “general chemistry” and “theoretical chemistry.” According to his vision of what would soon become a new chemical discipline, physical chemistry would investigate and formulate the general principles that underlie all chemical reactions and phenomena. The primary strategy that he and his allies used to generate these principles was to formulate mathematical “laws” or “rules” generalizing the results of numerous experiments, often performed using measuring apparatus borrowed from physics. Their main fields of inquiry were thermochemistry and solution theory, and they avoided and often openly maligned speculations regarding structures or mechanisms that might underlie the macroscopic regularities embodied in their laws.1 In the first decades of the 20th-century, the modern atomic theory was firmly established, and with only a slight delay, the methods of 19th-century physical chemistry lost a considerable proportion of their audience. Theories relying upon atomistic thinking began to reshape the disciplinary intersections of chemistry and physics, and by the end of the 1930s, cutting-edge research into the general principles of chemistry looked quite different than it had at the turn of the century.
    [Show full text]
  • Conference Report of the 47Th Jahrestreffen Deutscher
    CHEMCATCHEM CONFERENCE REPORTS DOI: 10.1002/cctc.201402266 German Catalysis on an International Scale in Weimar Juliane Titus,[a] Stefan Kaluza,[b] and Roland Marschall*[c] Dedicated to the memory of Professor Helmut Knçzinger. To Weimar and Beyond In Remembrance of Helmut Knçzinger Over the years, the Annual Meeting of the German Catalysis This year’s conference started with a minute’s silence to honor Society (GeCatS), which traditionally takes place in Weimar, has Prof. Helmut Knçzinger, who died on January 12th, 2014 at the become a constant in the conference calendar of every age of 78. He was a leading scientist in the in situ characteriza- German catalysis researcher. This year’s meeting (March 12th– tion of heterogeneous catalysts. Amongst other roles, he 14th) covered a huge range of catalysis, including recent re- served as chairman of the DECHEMA catalysis section and par- search topics such as thermal, bio-, and photocatalysis. The ticipated in the DECHEMA catalysis working committee. In latter was even put into practice, with the sunshine catalyzing 1998, he was awarded the Alwin Mittasch Medal for his out- scientific discussion and collaborative initiatives in the adjacent standing scientific work. His memory and the resonance of his Weimarhalle park! scientific contributions will remain with us. This year’s conference was not only record-breaking with re- spect to the high temperatures but the scientific program Highlights in Catalysis itself. 582 participants joined this year’s conference (in compar- ison to 519 the year before), in which 38 oral presentations, in- The scientific program began with a plenary lecture by Prof.
    [Show full text]