HistoryNEWSLETTER Physics A FORUM OF THE AMERICAN PHYSICALof SOCIETY • VOLUME XII • No.5 IMAGES FROM Weart honored with Pais Award pencer R. Weart has been awarded the S2015 Abraham Pais Prize for the His- THE 2014 tory of Physics, “for foundational contribu- tions to the intellectual progress, institution- APRIL MEETING al underpinnings, and public impact of the history of physics, from nuclear physics to IN SAVANNAH, condensed matter to climate change.”

GEORGIA Weart has exerted a profound influence on Christian Bibas the history of physics. Shaping the field for Spencer Weart more than four decades, his outstanding scholarly achievements have opened new perspectives within the history of physics as well as new disciplinary areas of research. The path-breaking analysis presented in Physics circa 1900 (co- authored with Paul Forman and John L. Heilbron, 1971) remains central to historians’ assessment of the physics discipline.

His foundational studies in nuclear history, Scientists in Power (1979) and Nuclear Fear: A History of Images (1988, and its fol- low on The Rise of Nuclear Fear, 2012), have tracked the ramifi- cations of the discovery of nuclear fission, defining frameworks within which other historians have long continued to work. As co-author of Out of the Crystal Maze: Chapters from the History of Solid State Physics (1992), Weart gave key impulses to a new historiography that has since expanded manifold.

His broad reach across the physical and into the environmental sciences is on view in his book The Discovery of Global Warming (2003, expanded edition 2008, now translated into five languages). The clarity, precision, and dispassionate presentation so character- In This Issue istic of Weart’s scholarly work have enabled it to exert a profound influence in multiple domains: on science education, on the dis- Spencer Weart awarded 2015 Abraham Pais Prize 1 cussion of contemporary policy issues, and on the general public’s perception of physics. FHP events planned for the March and April Meetings 2 Weart has contributed importantly to defining expectations for the 2014 April Meeting Session Reports 2 web-based presentation of intellectually rigorous scholarship, as • The Many Worlds of Leo Szilard 4 his own website on the history of climate change research dis- plays. Weart’s achievements stand out, moreover, in the context • Gaining Inspiration from Galileo, Einstein and Oppenheimer 5 of developing the unique and crucial AIP Center for History of • Pais Prize session in honor of Davis Cassidy 5 Physics, along with the Niels Bohr Library. Under his thirty-five year leadership, these facilities have not only encouraged, but New Books of Note 6 also in many instances made possible, a broad range of scholarly research and its public presentation across the entire spectrum of the history of physics. Weart has helped lead major projects

Continued on page 2 Weart received a BA in physics from Cornell University in 1963 and a PhD in physics and astrophysics from the University of Col- Weart honored with Pais Award orado, Boulder in 1968. He did postdoctoral work at the Califor- documenting the development of astronomy, geophysics, lasers, nia Institute of Technology, supported as a Fellow of the Mount condensed matter, and high-energy physics that have served a host Wilson and Palomar Observatories. He then undertook graduate of other researchers. training in history at the University of California, Berkeley. From 1974 to 2009 Weart directed the Center for History of Physics of Along with his role as a researcher and mediator, Weart has had a the American Institute of Physics and its Niels Bohr Library, insti- significant impact, finally, through mentoring a cohort of younger tutions dedicated to preserving and making known the history of historians. physics, astronomy, geophysics, and allied fields.

Upcoming FHP events at the 2015 APS March and April Meetings APS Meeting, March 2-6 San Antonio, TX

• Inspirational Approaches to Teaching Physics/History of Physics Co-sponsored by FHP and FED Monday, March 2, 2015 • 11:15 a.m. - 2:15 p.m. Session Co-chairs: Catherine Westfall and Randall Knight

Experts in physics and history of physics education will share ideas on inspir- ing students about physics and history of physics.

“The Use of Theater and the Performing Arts in Science Education and the Gigantic boots located at the entrance of Teaching of History,” Brian Schwartz, Brooklyn College and the Graduate North Shore Mall in San Antonio, TX. Center, CUNY

“Bruno, Galileo, Einstein: The Value of Myths in Physics,” Alberto A. Martinez, University of Texas, Austin

“Teaching Physics to Future Presidents,” Bob Jacobson, University of The Forum on History of Physics of California, Berkeley the American Physical Society pub- lishes this Newsletter biannually at “Composing Science: Integrating Scientific Inquiry and Writing Instruction,” http://www.aps.org/units/fhp/newslet- S. Leslie Atkins, California State University, Chico ters/index.cfm. Each 3-year volume consists of six issues. “How Things Work: Teaching Physics in the Context of Everyday Objects,” The articles in this issue represent Louis Bloomfield, University of Virginia the views of their authors and are not necessarily those of the Forum or APS. • Pais Prize Session: Physics at the Intersection of History, Technology, Editor and Society Robert P. Crease Co-sponsored by FHP and FPS Department of Philosophy Wednesday, March 4, 2015 • 8:00 a.m. - 11: 00 a.m. Stony Brook University Session Chair: Catherine Westfall Stony Brook, NY 11794 [email protected] This session will investigate the relationship physics has maintained with (631) 632-7570 society over the last century and a half, particularly in relation to technologi- cal change. Book Review Editor Michael Riordan [email protected] “Understanding the Impacts of Global Warming: A History,” Spencer Weart, American Institute of Physics

Continued on page 3 2 Volume XII, No. 5 • Fall 2014 • History of Physics Newsletter Upcoming Events at the 2015 APS March and April Meetings Continued from page 2 “Burnt by the Sun: Jack Kilby and the ‘70s Solar Boom,” APS Meeting, April 11-14 Cyrus Mody, Rice University Baltimore, MD “Optimistic Dangers: Views of Radium Therapy During • Three Perspectives on the Supercollider the American Radium Craze,” Aimee Slaughter, Los Organized by Michael Riordan Alamos Historical Society Monday, April 13 • 10:45 a.m. - 12:33 p.m. Session Chair: Michael Riordan “To Rule the Waves: Cable Telegraphy and the Making of ‘Maxwell’s Equations’,” Bruce Hunt, University of “The Disappearing Fourth Wall: John Marburger, Science Texas at Austin Policy, and the SSC,” Robert P. Crease, Stony Brook University “The Social Appropriation of Quantum Language and Imagery,” Robert P. Crease, Stony Brook University “DOE Perspectives on the Supercollider,” James Decker, Garman, Sullivan & Associates, LLC

• Why Peer Review? “The Demise of the Superconducting Super Collider, Organized by Daniel Ucko, Stony Brook University, 1989–1993,” Michael Riordan, University of California, Physical Review Letters Santa Cruz Thursday, March 5, 2015 • 8:00 a.m. -11:00 a.m. Session Chair: Robert P. Crease • APS and Public Engagement in Historical Perspective How has peer review developed in scientific publishing, Organized by Joseph Martin what is its value, and are there alternatives? Tuesday, April 14 • 10:45 a.m. - 12:33 p.m. Session Chair: Joseph Martin “There Is No ‘I’ in Referee: Why Referees Should Be Anonymous,” Daniel Ucko, Stony Brook University, The history of the American Physical Society in the sec- Physical Review Letters ond half of the twentieth century, with particular empha- sis on the Society’s role in politics and public outreach. “Validity, Not Dissemination,” Samindranath Mitra, Physical Review Letters “The American Physical Society and the Ethics of Cold War Science,” Sarah Bridger, Cal Poly History “Peer-review: An IOP Publishing Perspective,” Tim Department Smith, IOP Publishing “APS Efforts to Defend Human Rights,” Edward “Inside Nature,” Andrea Taroni, Nature Physics Gerjuoy, University of Pittsburgh

“The Evolution of the APS Forum on Physics and • A Staged Reading of the Play Background, by Society,” David Hafemeister, Cal Poly Physics Lauren Gunderson Department Sponsored by FHP Grand Hyatt San Antonio • Public Lecture Wednesday, March 4, 2015, 8:00 p.m. - 9:30 p.m. Cosponsored by FHP and GGR: Saturday, April 11, 2015 • 7:30 p.m. - 8:06 p.m. “Einstein’s Legacy: Studying Gravity in War and Peace,” David Kaiser, MIT

• A Staged Reading of the Play Transcendence: Relativity and Its Discontents, by Robert Marc Friedman Sponsored by FHP Hilton Baltimore Inner Harbor Sunday, April 12, 2015, 8:00 p.m. - 9:30 p.m. Volume XII, No. 5 • Fall 2014 • History of Physics Newsletter 3 The Many Worlds of Leo Szilard: Physicist, Biologist, and Peacemaker by William Lanouette

At the April 2014 APS meeting in Savan- Alamos as a consultant for the first of many nah, a panel honored two notable anniver- summers in 1950-52, before moving from saries: the 50th of Leo Szilard’s death, and the Physics Department at the University the 75th of the Einstein/Szilard letter to of Chicago in December 1952 to the new President Franklin D. Roosevelt that led to IBM Watson Scientific Laboratory at Co- America’s development and use of atomic lumbia University, at a cocktail party at the bombs during World War II. “The Many home of Mildred and ‘Murph’ Goldberger, Worlds of Leo Szilard” convened two sci- Edward Teller told me of the high regard in entists who knew him with his biographer which he held Leo Szilard. He said, ‘You for talks rich in both professional and per- know the way I use Freddie De Hoffman sonal details. for calculations at Los Alamos, that is how Leo uses me.’ Leo Szilard’s ingenuity and The session was hosted by MIT physicist inventiveness outclassed those of Edward Daniel Kleppner, who said Szilard was Teller.” “one of the most remarkable minds of his generation in the 20th century, and a unique Szilard in Budapest about 1914 In biology, too, Szilard outclassed his col- personality in physics. He changed the leagues. Biologist Francois Jacob called course of history for the United States and Szilard an “intellectual bumblebee” for most people do not know very much about Garwin also praised Szilard’s “several … the many novel ideas he shared, including him.” The panel would rectify that, he said. fundamental contributions to nuclear phys- one that earned Jacob and others the No- ics, to the neutron chain reaction and to nu- bel Prize. Harvard Biologist Matthew Me- William Lanouette, author of Genius in the clear reactors, and also to electromagnetic selson recalled how impatient Szilard was Shadows: A Biography of Leo Szilard, the pumping of liquid metals.” Szilard co- to learn biology, and to bypass the cycle of Man Behind the Bomb (Skyhorse Publish- designed an electromagnetic refrigerator submitting papers for peer review simply ing, 2013), said that although best known pump with Einstein in the 1920s. In 1939, convened the authors to brainstorm over for being the first to conceive and patent the he co-designed the first nuclear reactor dinner. To do this he created a “Midwest- nuclear chain reaction in the 1930s, Szilard with Enrico Fermi. And in the early 1940s ern Phage Group with monthly meetings had other amazing insights in physics and Szilard thought up and named the nuclear that included Alfred Hershey, Joshua Led- “breeder” reactor – which was cooled using biology, and devised inventive ways to erberg, Salvador Luria, James Watson, and his Einstein/Szilard electromagnetic pump. control the A-bomb he helped create. others.” (All four were later Nobel laure- “I met Leo Szilard, from 1947 to 1952 at ates.) Meselson pointed out that Szilard’s In physics, Szilard applied entropy to data work with the chemostat has generated in a seminal 1929 paper that laid the basis the University of Chicago,” Garwin re- more than 500 citations in the Proceedings for “information theory.” As physicist Rich- called, “where I saw him in the faculty of the National Academy of Sciences. ard Garwin noted, “Szilard’s path-breaking seminar run by Bill Libby, in his lab with Aaron Novick, eventually at dinners, and but initially little-noticed 1929 paper, “On Also of note is that in the famous 1959 the Decrease of Entropy in a Thermody- later, on occasion, in New York or Geneva. “PAJAMO” paper on negative gene control namic System by the Intervention of Intel- I visited Leo in his laboratory at the In- – nicknamed for Arthur Pardee, François ligent Beings’’ spawned much subsequent stitute for Radiobiology and Biophysics, research. It connected what we now call which occupied a new building where I had Jacob, and Jacques Monod – the authors a bit of information with a quantity k ln 2 my office from 1950. There Leo showed noted, “We are much indebted to Professor of entropy, and showed that the process of me the ‘chemostat’, an ingenious and pow- Leo Szilard for illuminating discussions acquiring, exploiting, and resetting this in- erful tool he had invented and developed during this work.” Jacob, Monod, and formation in a one-molecule engine must with Aaron Novick. I recall Leo’s telling André Lwoff won the 1965 Nobel Prize in dissipate at least kT ln 2 of energy at tem- me that they had had concern that poly- Medicine for this idea, and when receiving ethylene, insulator of high-performance perature T. His 1925 paper, “On the Exten- the award in Stockholm Monod said: “This coaxial cables developed during the war, sion of Phenomenological Thermodynam- is precisely the thesis that Leo Szilard, ics to Fluctuation Phenomena,’’ [based on might live forever, immune to degradation by microbes Apparently, though, they had while passing through Paris, happened to his 1922 doctoral thesis] showed that fluc- propose to us during a seminar… I saw tuations were consistent with and predicted ‘trained’ microbes to subsist on polyeth- that our preliminary observations con- from equilibrium thermodynamics and did ylene – had directed the evolution of mi- firmed Szilard’s penetrating intuition, and not depend on atomistic theories. His work crobes by manipulating their environment on physics and technology, demonstrated in the chemostat.” when he had finished his presentation, my an astonishing range of interest, ingenuity, Garwin said that “After I had been to Los foresight, and practical sense.” Continued on page 5 4 Volume XII, No. 5 • Fall 2014 • History of Physics Newsletter Gaining inspiration from Galileo, Einstein

Albert Einstein and Oppenheimer and Szilard by Catherine Westfall recreate drafting the famous This stimulating, well-attended session 1939 letter started with a talk by Galileo scholar Paolo Palmieri from the University of Pittsburgh. From him we learned how Galileo inspired a wholly new way to investigate nature. Before Galileo, inquiries into the natu- ral world were neither experimental nor quantitative. doubts about negative gene control had was dropped on Hiroshima Szilard had tried been removed.”An intellectual bumblebee to stop it. He rallied scientists to lobby for Galileo changed that. He insisted that inves- indeed! “civilian control” of atomic energy in 1945, tigations should be experimental and that attended the first Pugwash Conference on reasoning should be guided by mathematics. “Theoretically I am supposed to divide my Science and World Affairs in 1957 and In the process he showed that a new sort of time between finding what life is and trying influenced many to follow, gaining Soviet mathematical physics could be built upon to preserve it by saving the world,” Szilard Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s personal principles arising from experiment, which wrote physicist Niels Bohr in 1950. “At assent to a Moscow-Washington “Hot Line” allowed insights to blossom from uncertain present the world seems to be beyond sav- during a private meeting in New York City foundations. ing, and that leaves me more time free for in 1960. And he founded the first politi- biology.” In fact, Szilard never abandoned cal action committee for arms control in The second speaker was physicist Gerd hope for saving the world by controlling the Washington in 1962, The Council for a Kortemeyer from Michigan State University spread of nuclear weapons, and Meselson Livable World, which thrives today. who described a course he and I co-taught emphasized that even before the A-bomb that took Michigan State undergraduates to Munich, Bern, Berlin, Zurich, Copenhagen, and Göttingen to “walk in the footsteps of Einstein” and learn about the development Journeys in the History of Physics: of quantum mechanics and relativity. The 2014 Pais Prize Session In addition to showing pictures of happy students touring, discussing, hiking, and by David C. Cassidy role playing in gorgeous European locales, Kortemeyer explained how historians and he 2014 recipient of the Abraham In his presentation on “Physics, History and physicists can work collaboratively and TPais Prize for History of Physics was Biography,” Cassidy discussed his journey productively to teach students to the great David C. Cassidy. Joining Cassidy in the across the frontiers separating each of advantage to both disciplines. The key strat- Pais Prize session, chaired by Catherine these fields. Cassidy crossed into history egy is to take every opportunity to engage Westfall, were two of Cassidy’s colleagues while a graduate student in physics and, students in their own learning – through who have played significant roles in his with Daniel Siegel’s advice and guidance, individual study plans, group work, creative career. They were Daniel M. Siegel, his completed his dissertation on “Werner exercises, and shrewd use of scenery while dissertation advisor at the University of Heisenberg and the Crisis in Quantum constantly providing interdisciplinary infor- Wisconsin-Madison, and Brian Schwartz Theory, 1920-1925.” Cassidy noted that mation, perspectives and challenges. The who, in recent years, encouraged and history is not only about what happened in final speaker was physicist Cameron Reed facilitated his development of the play the past but also about why it happened and from Alma College who explained how Farm Hall. what it means. Because of this, history pro- the appreciation and teaching of physics vides a richer understanding of the content can be enriched by historical exploration. Continued on page 7 Continued on page 7 Volume XII, No. 5 • Fall 2014 • History of Physics Newsletter 5 New Books of Note The Invention of Mikhail Lomonosov: A Russian National Myth

By Steven Usitalo, The Invention of Mikhail Lomonosov: A Russian National Myth, Academic Studies Press, (2013) 298 pages.

Reviewed by Vladimir D. Shiltsev “Between Peter I and Catherine II, he was Accelerator Physics Center, Fermilab the only indigenous champion of enlight- enment. He founded our first university: better to say, he was our first university;” ussian polymath Mikhail Vasil- the Moscow university was named after evich Lomonosov (1711-1765) Lomonosov in 1940. A decade later, Joseph Ris rightfully called the “Father of Stalin refused a proposal to rename Moscow Russian science” for his tireless promo- State University after himself: “The central tion of Enlightenment, many outstanding university in the country can bear only one contributions to natural sciences, and the name – Lomonosov’s”. foundation of Moscow University. For Russian scientists, Lomonosov was of Highly praised in Russia but curiously special value and advertence. Dmitri Men- unsung in the West, he deserves a good deleyev (1834-1906), inventor of the Peri- English biography – hopefully of the type of odic Table of elements, wrote in his widely Robert Massie’s writings on two other dom- popular textbook Principles of Chemistry inant Enlighteners of that time, Peter the “in 1742-1744, i.e., 20 years prior to [Rog- Great and Catherine the Great. The future er] Boscovich, Lomonosov expressed his biographer of Lomonosov will have plenty views on the atomic structure of the matter of storytelling material, as the life story and his ideas are similar to those accepted of the Russian genius had arguably had by most modern chemists and physicists.” more events, turns and developments than Sergei Vavilov (1891-1951), codiscoverer of the combined biographies of several great the Vavilov-Cherenkov effect (Nobel Prize scientific minds of that turbulent century. in Physics, 1958), a historian of science and the President of the USSR Academy His humble roots, youthful religious dis- of Sciences, dedicated a series of articles sent and return to Orthodoxy, escape from before his death in 1764 the Empress Cath- on Lomonosov’s scientific legacy, singling his father’s home in search of scientific erine the Great visited the ailing scientist out his works in optics and discovery of the education, serious punishments meted out at his laboratory in St. Petersburg, where atmosphere of Venus. by unforgiving and harsh Russian authori- she viewed his mosaic art and “observed ties, outstanding academic training from physics instruments that he had invented as To my knowledge, Usitalo’s study is only preeminent German nature philosophers well as several experiments in physics and the second book in English fully dedicated (intertwined with vagabondage, and wing- chemistry.” to Lomonosov as a nature philosopher dings and debauches with fellow students), (there are many more on his legacy in the illustrious scientific and administrative Such august attention to Lomonosov con- humanities, history and linguistics). The career after his return to the St. Petersburg tinued after his death in the form of the previous one was a translation of Russia’s Academy of Sciences, projective and path- monarchical protection of his memory; Lomonosov: Chemist, Courtier, Physicist, breaking works in physics, chemistry and in 1792, for instance, Catherine commis- Poet (J. E. Thai, E. J. Webster, trans., Princ- astronomy, arduous efforts to transform the sioned sculptor Fedot Shubin to create a eton U. Press, Princeton, NJ, 1952) written Academy and educational system of still bust of Lomonosov which was installed by Russian chemist Boris Menshutkin, backward Russia, a poetic and linguistic at the Empress Palace among the busts of son of Mendeleyev’s collaborator Nikolai genius, courtier maneuvers with top powers ancient heroes. Menshutkin. and Empresses, a short period of oblivion after the death followed by fast appreciation In the 1820’s, Catherine the Great grand- Besides that book, a more or less compre- of his outstanding value to the country–all sons, Emperors Alexander I and Nicolas hensive scientific biography of Lomonosov of this has made Lomonosov so appealing to I, ordered the design and erection of the could be found in extended texts (dedicated Russians that for more than two centuries he first monument to Lomonosov in his native chapters in books) by Alexander Vucinich has been considered Russia’s first scientific Arkhangelsk. Alexander Pushkin, the great- in Science in Russian Culture: A History to genius and the founder of Russian science. est Russian poet and key transformational 1860 (Stanford University Press, Stanford , figure not only of the national culture but CA, 1963), Henry M. Leicester in Mikhail National adoration and worship of Lomono- – as some believe – of the Russian national Vasil’evich Lomonosov on the Corpuscular sov were equally supported by both Russian character as well,wrote that “Lomonosov Theory (Harvard U. Press, Cambridge, MA rulers and key cultural figures. Shortly was a great man.” Pushkin continued, 1970), and Valentin Boss in Newton and Continued on page 7 6 Volume XII, No. 5 • Fall 2014 • History of Physics Newsletter mass increase, and invariance properties. Pais Prize Session The second stage, the Einsteinian phase, Continued from page 5 involved a recasting of the theoretical Gaining inspiration Continued from page 5 framework of prerelativistic electrody- of physics, along with a fuller appreciation Reed employed a number of anecdotes, namics, which led to the inclusion of time of the role of physics and physicists in our some tragic, some inspiring, spanning dilation, the mass-energy relation and broader culture and society. Cassidy did in time from Kepler to the wartime continuing competition with results from not at first intend to write a biography of development of the atomic bomb. the protorelativistic phase, all concluding Heisenberg, but it soon became the logical Reed convincingly concluded that in the triumph of Einstein’s special theory next step Although scientific biography has even great physicists are subject to the of relativity by the early 1930s. its limitations as a historical tool, Cassidy usual whims of human nature and the learned from the classics of literary biog- sometimes cruel circumstances of their raphy that scientific biography must put Siegel argued further that a proper appre- times. Many students attended this ses- the science and the life at the center of the ciation of the role of the protorelativistic sion and every talk inspired thoughtful scientific and cultural life of the subject’s phase in the relativity revolution provides questions and comments. students with a more concrete approach to era. Only in that way can it illuminate why See the related photo on page 9 things happened as they did, and how we understanding relativistic effects. It also might learn from those who confronted provides historians with a new perspective important issues and decisions in the past on the roles of continuity and gradualism in as we confront the difficult issues of our seemingly discontinuous scientific changes. New Books own time. Finally it demonstrates the significance of Continued from page 6 the broader scientific community in even the most individual accomplishments. Russia: The Early Influence, 1698-1796 Crossing, most recently, from science his- (Harvard U. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1972). tory into the arts with the help of Brian Usitalo, as the latter three scholars, is a Schwartz, Cassidy discovered that, as he Brian Schwartz provided an interest- historian by training and an Associate Pro- imagined his characters coming alive on ing “Insider’s History of Some of the fessor of History and the Department Chair stage, he gained valuable new insights Significant Changes inthe APS from the for History, Sociology, Political Science and Geography at the Northern State University. into their motivations and behavior at the 1960s to Today.” Schwartz joined the APS in the 1960s, a period of heated discussions One can commend his thoroughness, time dawn of the nuclear age. Daniel M. Siegel spent in Russian archives and his commit- about the role of physics in society fueled directed the audience’s attention “Toward ment to be guided by scientific criteria and a Rethinking of the Relativity Revolution,” by the role of science in the unpopular search for objective and verifiable knowl- based upon his forthcoming book Sneaking Vietnam War and the severe overproduc- edge, subject to analysis and generalization. up on Einstein: The Relativity Revolution, tion and unemployment of physics PhDs. What was lost in that attempt is “read- Step by Step. At that time the APS governance and meet- ability” – the book looks more like a kind of extended PhD thesis, with annoyingly Siegel’s proposed rethinking would have a ing structure offered no means to address numerous distractions (references, foot- profound effect on how we understand the these and related issues, including educa- notes, etc). relativity revolution and how we teach the tion, diversity, communications, interna- Indeed, “erudite and skillfully argued,” this special theory of relativity. In contrast with tional issues, and government policies. book is not an easy, smoothly guided read- the traditional view of that revolution as a ing at all, as many pages are dominated by Schwartz was one of the original petitioners sudden, discontinuous transition precipi- footnotes which contain a lot of information tated by Einstein’s relativity paper of 1905, for structural change. This led to the forum of great interest for a dedicated Lomonosov Siegel argued that, historically, key aspects structure, including the Forum (initially or Russian history scholar. of special relativity theory should be seen proposed as a Division) on Physics and The main message of the Usitalo’s book is rather as undergoing a gradual transi- Society (1969) as well as the Committee on the Status of Women in Physics (1972), the laid out in the Introduction: “... Lomono- tion through two stages extending over a sov’s fame has far surpassed any realistic Panel on Public Affairs (1975), and many 50-year period from the early 1880s to the association with the known details of his early 1930–much, he suggested, like a two- other APS committees and forums. biography; Lomonosov’s monument is the stage rocket. mythology.... Lomonosov is... of interest The Forum on the History of Physics was primarily as a symbolic figure, until recently an extraordinarily resilient one, who over The first stage, up to 1905, which Siegel founded in 1981, also initially as a division. To his surprise, Schwartz was elected to the course of two centuries came to fulfill called the protorelativistic phase, involved the tangible intellectual and emotional initial treatments of length contraction, Continued on page 9 Continued on page 8 Volume XII, No. 5 • Fall 2014 • History of Physics Newsletter 7 Leibniz’s claim to priority in calculus (see, For example, more than 15 pages are dedi- New Books e.g., The Calculus Wars: Newton, Leibniz, cated to a short essay, “Lomonosov as Continued from page 7 and the Greatest Mathematical Clash of All a Physicist,” written in 1855 by Nikolai Time by Jason Socrates Bardi, Basic Books, Liubimov (1830-1897) and dwelling on requirement that Russian pride demanded 2007), or Franklin’s “kite story.” Lomonosov’s weaknesses as a mathema- in a national myth.” tician. Less than a quarter of a page is The author also claims that Lomonosov’s dedicated to Pyotr Kapitza’s more positive Over the following five chapters, however, reputation as a natural philosopher grew review on the same subject. Very little is most of the proofs are judgmental: numer- exponentially in years following his death said about Liubimov’s credentials (he was ous facts of Lomonosov’s biography and as a result of an expanding political need not at the forefront of modern science, and development of his fame come with two for Russia to have its own scientific hero. not fully aware of the molecular, kinetic types of epithets – those facts which fit the The facts do not support this. If one uses theory of gases), and Usitalo does not men- overall concept are combined with phrases Google’s software Ngram Viewer, for tion Kapitza’s evaluation of Liubimov’s like “carefully reasoned,” “authoritative” instance, to find the frequency of appear- essay as “...untalented rehash of several of (book, work, scholar), “convincing,” “com- ances of Lomonosov name as a fraction of Lomonosov’s works”. pelling,” and similar types of positives, the sum total of words published in Rus- while when discussion comes to something sian language books since 1750 (see such It is a shame that the broader English- that supports an opposite point of view, the a plot, e.g. in “Lomonosov and the Dawn speaking scientific community is exposed author widely uses phrases such as “exag- of Russian Science”, Physics Today, Feb. to interpretations and evaluations of Lo- gerated claims,” “dubious interpretations,” 2012), it is clear that Lomonosov’s value in monosov’s works while the works them- “speculative,” “politically biased,” etc. the eyes of Russians remained practically selves are not widely available in English. unchanged. Peaks in his popularity in the Translations of only 14 of his papers on Usitalo claims that Lomonosov’s myth 1860s and in the 1950s coincide with infor- corpuscular theory appeared in Leicester’s originates with his own outstanding “self- mation campaigns launched in the USSR to monograph cited above. More availability fashioning” that can be only excused by that popularize science and technology and to of Lomonosov’s works would help to con- fact that many of Lomonosov’s contempo- pay tribute to Russia’s scientific heritage, vey his scientific significance to the inter- rary greats did the same. but overall these bursts left unaffected Lomonosov’s generally very high level of national scientific community. Indeed, Lomonosov was known for his popularity as “The First Russian scientist.” Overall, I believe that Usitalo’s book ferocious ambitions and fostered his image might be a useful resource for scholars, in order to recruit support or to advance The author also fails to convey Lomono- in the history of science as a comprehen- his projects, but it was mostly done in his sov’s scientific accomplishments. Less sive compendium of facts, but doubt that private letters to powerful supporters such than 20 references of the voluminous 440 as the Counts Vorontsov and Shuvalov. That bibliography items are written by natural it will be appealing to the general public. I in fact was much more purpose-oriented science scholars and the lengthier discus- can recommend reading and perhaps even and innocent compared to, say, Newton’s sions are given to those who are critical of purchasing this book to historically orient- personal interference into the work of Lomonosov’s achievements rather than to ed colleagues in natural sciences, with the the “independent committee” to refute those who appreciated them. warning that the conceptual canvas of this study should be taken with a grain of salt.

Forum on History of Physics | American Physical Society, One Physics Ellipse, College Park, MD 20740

OFFICERS & COMMITTEES 4/2014 – 4/2015 Newsletter Editor 2015 Pais Prize Selection Committee Robert Crease Chair: Cathryn Carson Peter Pesic Forum Officers Suman Seth David Cassidy Chair: Brian Schwartz Program Committee Patrick McCray Clayton Gearhart Chair-Elect: Catherine Westfall Co-Chair: Catherine Westfall Vice Chair: Robert Crease Co-Chair: Robert Crease Nominating Committee, 2014-2015 Past Chair: Don Howard Deirdre M. Shoemaker Chair: Don Howard Secretary-Treasurer: Cameron Reed Diana Buchwald Ruth Howes Karen A. Rader Brian Schwartz Forum Councilor Alberto Martinez Dan Kleppner Hamilton Carter APS representative, Ronald Mickens Other Executive Board Members At Large Ex-officio Joseph Martin Paul Halpern Peter Pesic (for PiP) Fellowship Committee Diana K. Buchwald Richard Staley Greg Good (for AIP) Chair: Robert Crease Allan Franklin Alberto Martinez Suman Seth Diana Buchwald (duplicate), for EPP Adrienne Kolb Walter Loveland (Director CHP) Gregory Good Paul Cadden-Zemansky

8 Volume XII, No. 5 • Fall 2014 • History of Physics Newsletter PAIS PRIZE SESSION: Daniel M. Siegel, David C. Cassidy, and Brian Schwartz

Continued from page 7 APS governance in 1972. In 1987 Harry Schwartz recounted his experiences dur- this time as the organizer of well-received Lustig appointed Schwartz APS Education ing those years as director of the APS conferences on Copenhagen and Dr. Officer and consultant to MIT on edu- Centennial celebrated in 1999, the con- Atomic, cosponsored by APS, and as the cation initiatives. This began a 20-year troversial move of APS headquarters producer of science-based plays at APS employment with the APS, during which from New York to College Park, and the meetings and in the New York area. he ultimately became Associate Executive establishment of APS News. Since 2005 Officer. Schwartz has again taken an active role,

GAINING INSPIRATION: Summer Abroad participants at Albert Einstein’s summer house in Caputh, 2008. Catherine Westfall is in the yellow shirt up front to the left, Gerd Kortemeyer is in a brown shirt about third row on the right.

Volume XII, No. 5 • Fall 2014 • History of Physics Newsletter 9