This is peacay's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following peacay's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
peacay
Recent Activity
Von Humboldt is about my favourite under-appreciated scientist from history. I think 99% of people (who know the name at all) know of the Humboldt Current and that's it. But, as you intimate, dude was pretty amazing.
1933 and I see no hats!? That's odd.
Well done and best of the season to you! Re: puzzlement about paucity of commentary, I guess I'd only suggest that you be relaxed about it. It's best not to put that metric uppermost in your reflections and besides, there's a range of (possible) explanations I suspect. It *is*, as you say, a specialised affair and that will dissuade 90% of the population from having a say; likewise, I wonder if some people aren't simply intimidated by the erudition and parade of esoteric knowledge. As a survey of bibliophilic nooks and tropes, I could understand a person deciding that this is an educational site (it is, of course, to an extent at least) which might add further weight to the choice of silence versus (what might be perceived as) arguing or challenging (or appearing dumb in front of) an authority. Those are just some thoughts and by no means is that meant as an exhaustive list of possibilities. I have had the same puzzled thoughts myself over the years and although our situations are different (not entirely, but almost so), I long ago decided that comments or lack of them are not a useful guide to measuring satisfaction or success or the whatnot. So please, keep doing what you're doing. I have no doubt that the silent majority is thankful!
1 reply
"Despite his protests at other scientists copying his ideas, it appears that Hooke was not above plagiarism himself, as the writer Brian J. Ford has pointed out. At the top of Scheme VIII, a plate depicting ice crystals drawn from life, Hooke depicts a group of snowflakes [shown below]. Ford claims that these images were not in fact drawn by Hooke, but copied from a book by the Danish scientist Thomas Bartholin (1616-1680), entitled De Nivis usu Medico Observationes Variae, published four years earlier in 1661. These images were the first illustrations of snowflakes which appeared to present them in magnified form. However, as most of these images bear little resemblance to ice crystals in nature, they appear to be stylised caricatures or artistic impressions of what snowflakes might actually look like under magnification. As Ford observes, despite Hooke’s complaint that contemporaries frequently misappropriated his work, his silent adoption of Bartholin’s snowflakes in Micrographia suggests how unstable the concept of intellectual property was in the early modern world as well as the variety of second-hand materials that contributed to the authority of an‚ objective scientific investigation." [Univ. of Reading librarian, 2008] Sorry: search on a few words from that spiel for the source pdf link (for some reason I can't actually extract the link from the google results page). I'm not saying I agree or disagree; merely that I'd come across it before. ps. I love the snowflake--fort design idea, but alas, the 'correlation and causation' maxim always gets in the way of a good theory.