Physics in Perspective 

About: Physics in Perspective is an academic journal published by Birkhäuser. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Einstein & History of physics. It has an ISSN identifier of 1422-6944. Over the lifetime, 366 publications have been published receiving 2216 citations. The journal is also known as: Phys. Persp..

Reconsidering a scientific revolution: The case of Einstein versus Lorentz

Abstract: The relationship between Albert Einstein's special theory of relativity and Hendrik A. Lorentz's ether theory is best understood in terms of competing interpretations of Lorentz invariance. In the 1890s, Lorentz proved and exploited the Lorentz invariance of Maxwell's equations, the laws governing electromagnetic fields in the ether, with what he called the theorem of corresponding states. To account for the negative results of attempts to detect the earth's motion through the ether, Lorentz, in effect, had to assume that the laws governing the matter interacting with the fields are Lorentz invariant as well. This additional assumption can be seen as a generalization of the well-known contraction hypothesis. In Lorentz's theory, it remained an unexplained coincidence that both the laws governing fields and the laws governing matter should be Lorentz invariant. In special relativity, by contrast, the Lorentz invariance of all physical laws directly reflects the Minkowski space-time structure posited by the theory. One can use this observation to produce a common-cause argument to show that the relativistic interpretation of Lorentz invariance is preferable to Lorentz's interpretation.

C. V. Raman and the Discovery of the Raman Effect

Abstract: In 1928 the Indian physicist C V Raman (1888-1970) discovered the effect named after him virtually simultaneously with the Russian physicists G S Landsberg (1890-1957) and L I Mandelstam (1879-1944) I first provide a biographical sketch of Raman through his years in Calcutta (1907-1932) and Bangalore (after 1932) I then discuss his scientific work in acoustics, astronomy, and optics up to 1928, including his views on Albert Einstein's light-quantum hypothesis and on Arthur Holly Compton's discovery of the Compton effect, with particular reference to Compton's debate on it with William Duane in Toronto in 1924, which Raman witnessed I then examine Raman's discovery of the Raman effect and its reception among physicists Finally, I suggest reasons why Landsberg and Mandelstam did not share the Nobel Prize in Physics for 1930 with Raman

Planck, the Quantum, and the Historians

Abstract: In late 1900, the German theoretical physicist Max Planck derived an expression for the spectrum of black-body radiation. That derivation was the first step in the introduction of quantum concepts into physics. But how did Planck think about his result in the early years of the twentieth century? Did he assume that his derivation was consistent with the continuous energies inherent in Maxwellian electrodynamics and Newtonian mechanics? Or did he see the beginnings, however tentative and uncertain, of the quantum revolution to come? Historians of physics have debated this question for over twenty years. In this article, I review that debate and, at the same time, present Planck's achievement in its historical context.

The theory of the rise of sap in trees: some historical and conceptual remarks

Abstract: The ability of trees to suck water from roots to leaves, sometimes to heights of over a hundred meters, is remarkable given the absence of any mechanical pump. In this study I deal with a number of issues, of both a historical and conceptual nature, in the orthodox Cohesion-Tension (CT) theory of the ascent of sap in trees. The theory relies chiefly on the exceptional cohesive and adhesive properties of water, the structural properties of trees, and the role of evaporation (“transpiration”) from leaves. But it is not the whole story. Plant scientists have been aware since the inception of the theory in the late 19th century that further processes are at work in order to “prime” the trees, the main such process – growth itself – being so obvious to them that it is often omitted from the story. Other factors depend largely on the type of tree, and are not always fully understood. For physicists, in particular, it may be helpful to see the fuller picture, which is what I attempt to provide in nontechnical terms.

The Origins of the Field Concept in Physics

Abstract: The term, “field,” made its first appearance in physics as a technical term in the mid-nineteenth century. But the notion of what later came to be called a field had been a long time in gestation. Early discussions of magnetism and of the cause of the ocean tides had long ago suggested the idea of a “zone of influence” surrounding certain bodies. Johannes Kepler's mathematical rendering of the orbital motion of Mars encouraged him to formulate what he called “a true theory of gravity” involving the notion of attraction. Isaac Newton went on to construct an eminently effective dynamics, with attraction as its primary example of force. Was his a field theory? Historians of science disagree. Much depends on whether a theory consistent with the notion of action at a distance ought qualify as a “field” theory. Roger Boscovich and Immanuel Kant later took the Newtonian concept of attraction in new directions. It was left to Michael Faraday to propose the “physical existence” of lines of force and to James Clerk Maxwell to add as criterion the presence of energy as the ontological basis for a full-blown “field theory” of electromagnetic phenomena.