History Modern view: a history of science?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the historical context of modern physics theories, particularly relativity and quantum mechanics, and their influence on cultural developments in the early 20th century. The role of scientific theory-making is emphasized as being primarily self-driven, relying on experimental insights and mathematical logic rather than being significantly influenced by contemporary artistic or cultural movements. However, there are notable instances where artistic expressions draw inspiration from scientific advancements, such as the Enlightenment's embrace of reason through Newton's work and the emergence of Impressionism, which was influenced by neurological insights into vision. The conversation cautions against making superficial connections between science and art while acknowledging their occasional resonance. Recommendations for literature on this subject are sought to further explore these themes.
mandril
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone:
Im doing a research on the history of "modern" physics theories (namely relativity and quantum) trying to understand its role in a more general historic proceses that gave raise to a whole explostion of cultural development (from psicology, to cinema, with artistic vangards and political changes, philosophical questions and terrible wars in between) in the first decades of the XX century.
It would be of great help if someone could recommend good books on this subject.
Thanks
 
Science news on Phys.org
Alan Sokal. Look him up.
 
Don't fall into the trap of making shallow analogies and false connections.

In the main, science as a discipline&community is self-driven; scientific theory-making is based on insights gained from experiments and the "internal" logic of mathematical expressions.
It is not, to any significant extent, inspired by, dependent upon or developed from contemporary artistic expressions or cultural phenomena.
 
Last edited:
arildno said:
Don't fall into the trap of making shallow analogies and false connections.

In the main, science as a discipline&community is self-driven; scientific theory-making is based on insights gained from experiments and the "internal" logic of mathematical expressions.
It is not, to any significant extent, inspired by, dependent upon or developed from contemporary artistic expressions or cultural phenomena.


Nor are they developed from or influenced by it. Yet it is remarkable how often they "chime".
 
Well, as I see it, many new artistic expressions DO get their inspiration from breakthroughs in science/ dissemination of scientific knowledge to the general public.
For example, 18th century Enlightenment is unthinkable without the massive success "pure reason" in the person of Isaac Newton had already made.
If Man, by reason alone, could figure out and predict the motion of the heavenly bodies, why should one continue to accept that rational speculation ought to remain bound by religious doctrine on other areas of experience?

Another case in point is "impressionism", a painting tradition that as far as I know got its impetus from insights gained from the neorology of sight.
 
Last edited:
Historian seeks recognition for first English king https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9d07w50e15o Somewhere I have a list of Anglo-Saxon, Wessex and English kings. Well there is nothing new there. Parts of Britain experienced tribal rivalries/conflicts as well as invasions by the Romans, Vikings/Norsemen, Angles, Saxons and Jutes, then Normans, and various monarchs/emperors declared war on other monarchs/emperors. Seems that behavior has not ceased.
Back
Top