Shadwell and the Virtuosi

PMLA ◽  
1929 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 472-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claude Lloyd

On may 30, 1667, Samuel Pepys attended a meeting of the Royal Society at Arundell House where he found “much company, indeed very much company, in expectation of the Duchesse of Newcastle, who had been desired to be invited to the Society; and was, after much debate, pro and con., it seems many being against it; and we do believe,” he observes, “the town will be full of ballads of it.” Thomas Sprat, in his history of the Society published the same year, after pointing out to “Wits and Railleurs” that experimental science will afford them new material for their “wit” and fancy, declares:I acknowledge that we ought to have a great dread of their power: I confess I believe that New Philosophy need not (as Caesar) fear the pale, or the melancholy, as much as the humorous, and the merry: For they perhaps by making it ridiculous, becaus it is new, and becaus they themselves are unwilling to take pains about it, may do it more injury than all the arguments of our severe and frowning and dogmatical Adversaries.

1914 ◽  
Vol 7 (110) ◽  
pp. 299-300
Author(s):  
C.G. Knott

John Napier's Logarithmorum Canonis Mirifici Descriptio was published in 1614 ; and it is proposed to celebrate the tercentenary of this great event in the history of mathematics by a Congress, to be held in Edinburgh on Friday, 24th July, 1914, and following days.The Celebration is being held under the auspices of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, on whose invitation a General Committee has been formed, representing the Royal Society of London, the Royal Astronomical Society, the Town Council of Edinburgh, the Faculty of Actuaries, the Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow, the Universities of St. Andrews, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and Edinburgh, the University College of Dundee, and many other bodies and institutions of educational importance.The President and Council of the Royal Society of Edinburgh have now the honour of giving a general invitation to mathematicians and others interested in this coming Celebration.


2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-357
Author(s):  
Jessica Wolfe

This article provides a two-part study of Thomas Hobbes’ De Mirabilibus Pecci, a Latin poem composed very early in his career. Part one examines the poem as a product of Hobbes’ participation in the recreational literary culture of Caroline England, in particular analysing the influence of mock-epic and burlesque traditions that would continue to shape Hobbes’ writings but also studying how the poem offers compelling evidence for his early preoccupation with the laws of motion, with geological processes such as the creation and erosion of stone formations, and with the philosophy of Lucretius. Part two recounts the extraordinary history of the poem’s reception in the last decades of the seventeenth century. The poem’s familiarity among Hobbes’ allies and adversaries alike helped to cement his reputation as a master of scoffing and drollery, as an opponent of the experimental science practiced by the Royal Society, and as a freethinker or atheist.


A relatively greater emphasis by the Royal Society during its initial year upon the collection and validation of factual knowledge rather than upon the establishment of theories was reported in 1667 by Thomas Sprat in his History of the Royal Society (1). There is some question whether Sprat’s book represents a consensus of the Royal Society or is merely an expression of private opinion, especially with regard to the origins of the Society (2). Sprat’s description of the practice of the Society does, however, agree well with the treatment given in the pages of the Philosophical Transactions to a controversy which arose over conflicting reports of a comet’s position and over the nature of its path through the heavens. According to Sprat, the Royal Society had three tasks. First, there was a preliminary collection of data. Second, there was the resolving of matter of fact, with reliance on the authority of numbers (3), by which Sprat meant the number of observers who confirmed a particular observation. Third, there was the task of conjecturing on causes, a task in which Sprat noted that the members of the Royal Society were perhaps overly cautious:


Undoubtedly the most epoch-making book in the history of science is Isaac Newton’s Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica , published in 1687, which established the principles of mathematical physics and modern astronomy in a way familiar to all students of natural philosophy. On the title page appear two names, that of Newton as the author and, with at least equal prominence, that of Pepys— ‘Imprimatur S. Pepys, Reg. Soc. Praeses . For Samuel Pepys was elected President of the Royal Society in 1684 and was in office in July, 1686, when the Imprimatur was officially subscribed to the manuscript. If he had no other claims to distinction his name would have been perpetuated by this prominent association with a worldfamous book. As Sir Joshua Reynolds said that he would go down to posterity on the hem of Mrs Siddons’ garment, so Pepys might have said that he would go down to posterity on the title page of Newton’s Principia .


2020 ◽  
Vol 86 (2) ◽  
pp. 91-92
Author(s):  
Mario Ceroni Galloso

En la actualidad, en todos los países, se observa que algunas personas inducen el uso de todo tipo de sustancias y preparados con tal de prevenir o tratarse del COVID-19 y en su desesperación algunos consumen e incluso se inyectan sustancias químicas peligrosas, lo cual es sumamente preocupante. Siendo el mercado informal de nuestro país algo normal, la venta de diversos productos químicos por las redes sociales se ha vuelto cotidiano. Aparte de las medicinas, muchas de ellas adulteradas -que sin recetas médicas se compran por la Internet- hay tres compuestos peligrosos que se venden sin control por personas no autorizadas y sin pericia en el manejo de sustancias peligrosas y además los manipulan temerariamente, ellos son: clorito de sodio, dióxido de cloro y ácido clorhídrico. El dióxido de cloro es un gas amarillo rojizo que fue descubierto por Sir Humphrey Davy en 1814 y se comercializa desde los años 20 del siglo pasado como desinfectante. Se trata de un oxidante muy fuerte, muy reactivo e inestable que incluso puede explotar. Si bien es soluble en agua se descompone por fotólisis, generando especies como el radical hipoclorito, ácido cloroso y ácido clórico que luego se descomponen. Se conoce que reacciona violentamente con mercurio, fósforo, azufre, entre otras sustancias, lo cual es un peligro porque podría originar fuego y explosión. El dióxido de cloro es una sustancia corrosiva cuya inhalación causa tos, dolor de garganta, dificultad respiratoria, entre otros daños. En contacto con la piel causa desde enrojecimiento hasta quemaduras cutáneas graves. Para preparar el dióxido de cloro el personal capacitado y autorizado lo obtiene al reaccionar clorito de sodio con ácido clorhídrico para su uso como desinfectante. El clorito fue observado primero por N.A.E. Millon en 1843, pero fue investigado mucho más por G. Bruni y G.R Levi en la primera y segunda década del siglo pasado. Este compuesto tiene riesgo de incendio y explosión. Su inhalación causa dolor de garganta y tos y en contacto con la piel causa enrojecimiento y dolor. Al ser una sustancia fuertemente oxidante reacciona violentamente con muchos reductores, en especial combustibles. Como uno de los usos del dióxido de cloro es en el tratamiento de agua, la EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) ha establecido niveles máximos de presencia de clorito en agua potable de 1 mg/L y para el dióxido de cloro de 0,8 mg/L. Asimismo, los trabajadores que usan este compuesto como desinfectante saben que el límite de exposición ocupacional al dióxido de cloro para una jornada de 8 horas diarias, 40 horas por semana, es de 0,1 partes por millón (0,3 miligramos por metro cúbico [mg/m³]). Toda sustancia de uso médico debe pasar por un control de calidad. Un mercado informal de insumos no garantiza la calidad de los mismos en cuanto a su pureza o presencia de contaminantes. Como el clorito de sodio lo venden como desinfectante, se desconoce su pureza y nadie sabe cuáles son sus contaminantes. Asimismo, siendo el ácido clorhídrico una sustancia sujeta a registro, control y fiscalización algunas personas, de manera ilegal, en el Perú la venden desconociéndose además su calidad. Los usos supuestamente médicos del dióxido de cloro y su venta se iniciaron en Estados Unidos en el 2006, donde sin ningún sustento clínico algunos de los vendedores indicaban que curaba la malaria, luego incorporaron el autismo, ébola, gripe H1N1, cáncer, etcétera. Tras un tiempo, su venta se trasladó a Europa y a otros continentes. Ahora, en tiempo de pandemia, sus promotores dicen, sin prueba alguna, que cura el COVID-19. Una revisión crítica en las publicaciones relacionadas con el dióxido de cloro indica que muchos son estudios químicos, biológicos y toxicológicos; la mayoría son estudios preclínicos. Como se sabe, para que una sustancia sea aprobada con fines medicinales se debe cumplir con los estudios clínicos de las fases I, II y III, tras lo cual se derivan a instituciones como la FDA, que tras exhaustiva revisión la aprueban o desaprueban. A la fecha no existe ningún documento que acredite que haya pasado estas fases el dióxido de cloro. En vista de ello, y de los peligros de intoxicación que ocasiona este compuesto, ningún organismo de salud ha aprobado el uso del dióxido de cloro con fines médicos; es más, vetan su uso y alertan a la población de los problemas de salud causados por este compuesto. Cuando la histeria social induce a las personas a consumir sustancias muy peligrosas para la salud es bueno recordar que en el año 1667 se publicó el libro History of the Royal Society encargado a Thomas Sprat y supervisado por R. Boyle y J. Wilkins, que en un párrafo señala “la actividad científica consiste en recoger los hechos de la naturaleza, absteniéndose de recoger teorías generales que se “anticipen” a ellos, huyendo de los sistemas dogmáticos generales, de la retórica, las sutilezas dialécticas y la fantasía, buscando a cambio la aplicación útil”. Sabias palabras que siglos después recobran importancia en tiempos de coronavirus.


There is no puzzle more tantalizing than the fragments of a forgotten A life. Richard Waller (1660?—1715), linguist, artist, and amateur scientist, offers multiple challenges. A member of the Royal Society from 1681 and its Secretary from 1687-1709, 1710-1714, under the presidencies of Samuel Pepys and Sir Isaac Newton, Waller was a man of considerable standing during an important era in the history of science. His associates included Robert Hooke, Edmond Halley, James Pettiver, and Sir Hans Sloane. He conducted correspondence with some of the leading scientific figures and personalities abroad, such as van Leeuwenhoek, Malpighi, and Cotton Mather. History, however, has turned Waller into a footnote in the biographies of his more illustrious, or notorious, contemporaries.


THE mathematical abilities of Christopher Wren, whom Oughtred praised in his Clavis,md Newton numbered with Wallis and Huygens among the outstanding geometers of the age, have been admired by all subsequent historians of mathematics; but it has always been difficult to find examples of what Wren actually did. The fullest and most laudatory account of Wren as a scientist was written by Thomas Sprat in his History of the Royal Society (1667) but even Sprat—at a time when W ren’s work as an architect was barely begun—listed no instance of his idol’s achievement in mathematics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document