Search

Scientific and/or technical breakthroughs require the exploration of novel ideas and technologies. Yet, it has not been studied quantitatively how national institutional contexts either facilitate or stifle organizational support for exploration. Available qualitative evidence suggests that institutional contexts that exert weak control over universities and research organizations strengthen their capabilities to achieve scientific breakthroughs, while contexts with strong control constrain them. The paper is based on an analysis of the population of Nobel laureates in Physics, Chemistry and Physiology or Medicine. We examine to what extent existing qualitative findings for the biomedical sciences, which are partly based on Nobel laureates in Physiology or Medicine, can be substantiated both quantitatively and across the three Nobel Prize fields of science. We find that for most of the 20th century and the early 21st century, countries with weak institutional control (United Kingdom, United States) have outperformed those exerting strong control (France, Germany). These results are further corroborated when controlled by population sizes and by GDP per capita. In addition, these results hold not only for the biomedical sciences, but also for Physics and Chemistry. Furthermore, countries with weak institutional control have attracted many future Nobel laureates from countries with strong environments. In this regard, the United States appears to be a particularly attractive setting for conducting innovative research, and thus has been a magnet for young and promising scientists. However, future laureates working in institutional environments exerting weak control are not faster in accomplishing their prize-winning work compared to those laureates working in more restrictive institutional settings., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

"Chemistry of Concepts" and "Historical Sense". On Philosophical Concept Formation. The question concerning concepts and their relations to objects and words has had a long and controversial history. Recently, it is challenged by an anew turn towards objects and an emphasized object-oriented ontology. The article argues that one reason for this is the reduction of concepts towards pure rational constructions and offers arguments for alternative understandings. In this context, the article proposes a re-reading of Nietzsche's particular approach and shows that Nietzsche's thought is decisively shaped by the sciences of his time, especially physiology and chemistry. Before the background of the recent increase in research interest on Nietzsche and the sciences the article examines place and function of the sciences related to the genealogy and justification of concepts. Opposing a strong naturalist reading it makes a plea for understanding Nietzsche's epistemological critique concerning concepts systematically as a triple one: philological, physiological, and historical., (© 2015 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim.)

This paper explores the history of the isolation and industrial production of aluminium in France, from the work of Henri Sainte-Claire Deville in the 1850s to the latter part of the twentieth century, focusing on the relationships between academic research and industrial exploitation. In particular, it identifies a culture and organisation of research and development, "learning-by-doing," that emerged in the French aluminium industry following the establishment of the first electrolytic production facilities in the late 1880s by Paul Héroult, who, along with the American Charles Hall, patented the electrolytic method of producing the metal. This French method of R&D was a product both of a scientific culture that saw a continuity between scientific research and industrial application, and of a state policy that, unlike in Germany or the United States, was late to recognise the importance of fostering, on a large scale, the relations between academic chemistry and industry. It was only after World War II that the French state came fully to recognise the importance of underpinning industry with scientific research. And it was only from the 1960s, in the face of intensifying global competition, the risks of pollution, and the cost of energy, that the major aluminium firm Pechiney et Cie was able to replace a culture of "learning-by-doing" by one that integrated fundamental science with the production process.

This paper's primary goal is to compare the personalities, values, and influence of August Wilhelm Hofmann and Emil Fischer as exemplars and acknowledged leaders of successive generations of the German chemical profession and as scientists sharing a 19th-century liberal, internationalist outlook from the German wars of unification in the 1860s to Fischer's death in 1919 in the aftermath of German defeat in World War I. The paper will consider the influence of Hofmann and Fischer on the shaping of national scientific institutions in Germany, from founding of the German Chemical Society in 1867 to the first institutes of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society founded in 1911, their academic leadership in other areas including the shaping of a successful academic-industrial symbiosis in organic chemistry, and finally their response to war as a force disruptive of scientific internationalism. All of these developments posed serious dilemmas, exacerbated by emerging strains of nationalism and anti-Semitism in German society. Whereas Hofmann's lifework came to a relatively successful end in 1892, Fischer was not so fortunate, as the war brought him heavy responsibilities and terrible personal losses, but with no German victory and no peace of reconciliation--a bleak end for Fischer and the 19th-century liberal ideals that had inspired him.

This paper explores diverse conceptions of the physicality and tangibility of elements and principles in early modern chymistry. By tracing the development of natural philosophical and corpuscular ideas about material elements and principles among several physicans and chymists, including Thomas Erastus, Andreas Libavius, Daniel Sennert, and Anton Günther Billich, this article locates a learned tradition that developed predominantly in Germany, and which directly challenged a common understanding of matter held by major Paracelsians as well as authors from the French textbook tradition. Likewise, conceptions of incorporeal elements or principles are shown to have developed from the ideas of Paracelsus and Petrus Severinus, whereas authors in the learned tradition emphasised a particular interpretation of Aristotle. The article concludes by suggesting that chymical interpretations of material composition had an important influence throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and that this provides further evidence that the so-called "compositional revolution" in chemistry was well underway prior to the eighteenth century.

Patterns of collaboration and co-authorship in chemical science from the 1920s to the 1960s are examined with an eye to frequency of co-authorship and differences in allocation of credit during a period of increasing team research and specialization within chemical research groups. Three research leaders in the cross-disciplinary and cutting edge field of X-ray crystallography and molecular structure are the focus of this historical study within a framework of sociological literature on different collaborative patterns followed by eminent scientists. The examples of Michael Polanyi in Berlin and Manchester, Linus Pauling in Pasadena, and Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin in Oxford demonstrate the need to de-centre historical narrative from the heroic 'he' or 'she' to the collaborative 'they.' These cases demonstrate, too, the roles of disciplinary apprenticeships, local conditions, and individual personalities for historical explanation that transcends universal generalizations about scientific practice, material culture, and sociological trends.

This essay examines Herman Boerhaave's work with the instrument maker, Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit, on integrating the thermometer into the practice of eighteenth-century chemistry. Boerhaave utilized the thermometer to generate empirical evidence for the existence and actions of his instrument, "fire," by incorporating the instrument into pedagogical demonstrations, chemical research on heat, and, finally, the performing of operations. I examine how the use of the thermometer altered the chemists' traditional approach to heat, based on skilled sense perception and experiential judgment, and suggest that the threat to traditional practice posed by the instrument explains some of the resistance to it among some chemists in the mid-eighteenth century.

This chapter focuses upon the relation between textual and social practices that influenced the formation of a communal approach to acquiring chemical knowledge in the early seventeenth century. It also describes the utilitarian purpose of a humanist-inspired program of chemical learning that blended practices of textual/linguistic expertise and artisanal know-how. Humanism, made pragmatic, sought to define the principles for "making things well." In the design of Andreas Libavius (ca. 1555-1616), interpretive intuitions resulting from practiced reading of ancient and medieval texts combined with a knowledge of workshop language to build consensus about chymia's tools, procedures, and materials and to define its principia artificialia.

Histories of eighteenth-century chemistry often assert that the works of the German chemist Georg Ernst Stahl (1659-1734), especially his ideas about phlogiston, were largely unknown to French chemists until the 1740s. A careful analysis of Stahl's writings and the publications of the Royal Academy of Sciences in Paris shows that academy chemists were well informed about, and even integrated, Stahl's chemical theories, experiments, and methods beginning in the 1710s, and that Stahl kept abreast of the work by his colleagues at the Paris Academy. It also reveals the frequency and significance of the communication between French and German chemical communities in the first half of the eighteenth century.

Using the cases of three Russian chemistry textbooks from the 1860s--authored by Freidrich Beilstein, A. M. Butlerov, and D. I. Mendeleev--this essay analyzes their contemporary translation into German and the implications of their divergent histories for scholars' understanding of the processes of credit accrual and the choices of languages of science.

The institutional revolution has become a major landmark of late-nineteenth century science, marking the rapid construction of large, institutional laboratories which transformed scientific training and practice. Although it has served historians of physics well, the institutional revolution has proved much more contentious in the case of chemistry. I use published sources, mainly written by chemists and largely focused on laboratories built in German-speaking lands between about 1865 and 1900, to show that chemical laboratory design was inextricably linked to productive practice, large-scale pedagogy and disciplinary management. I argue that effective management of the novel risks inherent in teaching and doing organic synthesis was significant in driving and shaping the construction of late-nineteenth century institutional chemical laboratories, and that these laboratories were essential to the disciplinary development of chemistry. Seen in this way, the laboratory necessarily becomes part of the material culture of late-nineteenth century chemistry, and I show how this view leads not only to a revision of what is usually known as the laboratory revolution in chemistry but also to a new interpretation of the institutional revolution in physics., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The early days of ether chemistry can be divided into two periods: before and after Williamson serendipitous discovery (1851) of a new and efficient way to produce ethers using ethyl iodide and potassium salts. In the early part of the 19th century however, before Williamson, the direct reaction between the "spirit of wine" (ethanol) and acids was the only method of generating the elusive "ethers". This brief report looks at the pharmacists-chemists involved in the quest to produce phosphoric acid ether in the pre-Williamson period (Boudet, Boullay, Lassaigne, Pelouze), paving the way for Voegeli's synthesis of triethyl phosphate (TEP) in 1848.

In this article, I argue that chemical lectures at universities played a crucial role in the establishment of chemistry as a well-defined science in Germany around 1800. In particular, lecture demonstrations served to secure the facticity of facts. This was important, because the concept of the chemical fact was at the centre of the prevailing epistemology, which itself partly reflected the social order of chemistry as a science in Germany, and partly served to foster it. In the dialectic constellation of research and teaching, professor-chemists took the lead in the social and epistemological definition of chemistry.

Williamson serendipitously discovered (1851) a new and efficient way to produce ethers using ethyl iodide and potassium salts and in doing so elucidated the molecular mechanism behind ether formation. Before Williamson, the direct reaction between alcohol and acids was the only method of generating the elusive "ethers". This tedious and low yield approach eventually led to Voegeli's synthesis of the first organophosphate ever, triethyl phosphate (TEP) in 1848. Based on the landmark work of Williamson, however, over the next thirty years or so numerous chemists managed to produce TEP and tetraethyl pyrophosphate (TEPP) using synthetic pathways of increasingly higher yield. With the "wood spirit" (methyl-alcohol) easily available attempts were also made during the same period to synthesize methyl ester analogues (TMP and TMPP). The synthesis of TMP was reported 1887 by Hall in a paper dealing with vanadium esters; he acknowledges his inability to synthesize methyl vanadate and states that "methyl phosphate had not been described" and goes on to briefly mention the synthesis of methyl phosphate by the Wiliamson method. Hall was however mistaken; the synthesis of TMP had previously been reported by Weger in 1883 and achieved even earlier by Lossen. Tetramethyl pyrophosphate (TMPP) was only recently (1949) synthesized by Toy. This report attempts to identify the pharmacists and chemists involved in the quest for phosphoric and pyrophosphoric acid methyl esters.

This article establishes the career of Theodoricus Gravius (fl. 1600-1661), a German refugee who worked in Great Linford as a laboratory assistant and scribe to the cleric and practitioner of astrological medicine, Richard Napier (1559-1634). Gravius was the first transmitter to England of the texts of the mystic Jacob Böhme, and although he settled in England, he undertook subsequent foreign visits to attempt the recovery of his property and to learn more about chymical matters. He also visited the Oxonian George Hakewill (1578-1649), and is responsible for scribing one of the manuscripts of the revisions to Hakewill's celebrated Apologie or Declaration Concerning the Power and Providence of God (1635).

Walter Krösche was the Ph.D. student of Carl Mannich, with whom the latter published the school forming paper where the first 'Mannich reaction' has been described. For the first time biographic details and photos of Krösche are published here in a short biographic sketch.

The synthesis of the first organophosphate cholinesterase inhibitor (tetraethyl pyrophosphate, TEPP) is often credited to the French organic chemist Philippe de Clermont, working in the laboratories of Adolphe Wurtz in Paris. The two de Clermont's publications dealing with TEPP clearly state however that the first synthesis of TEPP was achieved by another student of Wurtz, named Moschnine. While de Clermont is well known, nobody really knows who Moschnine was. This brief communication attempts to give an overview about the life and achievements of the Russian chemist Wladimir Petrovich Moshnin from Moscow.

The success of the "second importation" of science to Russia during the Great Reforms of the 1860s is illustrated by examining the extended postdoctoral study of chemists in Heidelberg. While there, they adapted the Russian intelligentsia institution of the "circle," or kruzhok, to cope with their alienation from the German culture they were confronting. Upon their return to Russia, they felt the lack of the communicative network they had established while abroad and reimported the kruzhok to serve as a central model for the formation of the Russian Chemical Society in 1868.

Atypical career of a chemist in Germany around 1800 consisted of being trained as an apothecary, followed by an occupation as a professor at a university or another institution of higher education. These conditions deeply influenced the concept and the practice of chemistry as a science. Johann Friedrich August Göttling is an intriguing example for merging education and daily duties of teaching with the self-image of a scientific chemist. He linked chemical teaching, work, and research by using different hybrid media, such as the Almanach oder Taschenbuch für Scheidekünstler und Apotheker, a stove specifically designed for the narrow student's room, portable laboratories, a pharmaceutical boarding school and textbooks. This allowed him to practice three different forms of chemistry as a science. A "socio-epistemological diagram" of German chemistry around 1800 shows that these forms neatly corresponded to the then predominant three-level epistemology. In particular, the concept of a chemical fact served to link pharmaceutical practice with teaching practice, while granting only the chemistry done by professors the status of a science.

The 1939 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry and later President of the Max Planck Society Adolf Butenandt has been increasingly exposed to criticism in recent years. One far-reaching accusation against him is his postulated participation in the human experiments executed by the SS-physician Josef Mengele in the Auschwitz concentration camp. It concerns a project initiated by anthropologist Otmar von Verschuer in 1943. For this, Verschu-ER Obtained blood samples from his assistant Mengele in the Auschwitz concentration camp. When methodological problems occurred in the project Butenandt helped Verschuer. According to the reconstruction of geneticist Benno Müller-Hill the research project included lethal human experiments: Mengele had selectively infected concentration camp detainees with tuberculosis to observe their racially conditioned resistibility against that disease, he claims. This reconstruction, however, contradicts other sources. Therefore an alternative reconstruction is offered here. According to that, the project represented a large-scale attempt of serological race diagnosis in man. Human experiments are not plausible for this project. Yet it is clearly connected to race biological research and implementation.

The German debate about Lavoisier's chemistry started late, was confined to the theory of combustion, mainly focused on two experiments and was closed relatively soon. The perspective from academic teaching allows a better understanding of these features. There was a far-reaching correspondence between the usual practice of academic chemistry teachers and the epistemic criteria taken to be relevant during the debate about Lavoisier's chemistry. A case study based on textbooks written or used at the University of Jena between 1790 and 1800 allows drawing conclusions about why and how academic chemists succeeded in integrating what was seen as the "chemical revolution" without revolutionising their own practice. If the debate had any profound impact on German chemistry at all, it was the consolidation of the rupture between academic teachers and their apothecary colleagues.

The chemist and physicist K. W. G. Kastner is almost unknown today, even though during his lifetime he was among the most respected of German physical scientists. Only the fact that Justus Liebig studied and did his doctorate with him seems to be of (small enough) interest today. Kastner's life and career are shown to be extremely worth analyzing since, like Liebig himself, he succeeded in making his way from being a pharmacist to becoming a university professor. He published numerous textbooks as well as journals, he had a great number of students and he was a popular lecturer. In striking contrast to this are the negative statements of his student Liebig about Romantic Natural Philosophy and about Kastner himself, despite his being of crucial importance for Liebig's career as a teacher and mentor. These critical statements, for which a variety of explanations are known, markedly prejudiced Kastner's reputation for posterity.

Liebig's 1831 paper that describes a new apparatus for the analysis of organic compounds and the results of several analyses using the apparatus is a justly famous contribution to the evolution of modern chemistry. In this paper, I look at the three separate components of Liebig's combustion apparatus that collect the water, carbon dioxide and nitrogen released by the combustion of six alkaloids. Gravimetric data included in the paper reveal that very accurate results could be obtained for water by absorption in a calcium chloride tube, and even better results for carbon dioxide resulted from use of the Kaliapparat. Volumetric measurement of nitrogen gave very poor results despite Liebig's efforts to improve it. Inaccuracies in nitrogen measurement made consistent construction of accurate molecular formulae for nitrogenous substances impossible, and only fortuitous decisions intended to bring molecular formulae into agreement with measured combining weights gave formulae in agreement with modern ones, as in the case for quinine.

The factors that contributed to Liebig's success in founding a research school at Giessen have been well known since the publication of Jack Morrell's seminal paper in 1972. Here the familiar Liebig-Giessen story is re-centred in a local geographical and historical context. Historical and political factors played a role in calling Liebig to Giessen and in ousting the existing chair holder, Zimmerman. Working in partnership with the government, Liebig's developed pharmacy teaching as part of the state's plan of modernization. Liebig's success necessarily led to the expansion of the laboratory after 1833. Comparisons with Buff's and Hundeshagen's attempts to do for physics and forestry what Liebig achieved in chemistry show that the encouragement of private enterprise was a key feature of the Hessen-Darmstadt government's strategy for the modernisation of the university.

This paper examines Georg Ernst Stahl's first book, the Zymotechnia Fundamentalis, in the context of contemporary natural philosophy and the author's career. I argue that the Zymotechnia was a mechanical theory of fermentation written consciously against the influential "fermentational program" of Joan Baptista van Helmont and especially Thomas Willis, Stahl's theory of fermentation introduced his first conception of phlogiston, which was in part a corpuscular transformation of the Paracelsian sulphur principle. Meanwhile some assumptions underlying this theory, such as the composition of matter, the absolute passivity of matter and the "passions" of sulphur, reveal the combined scholastic and mechanistic character of Stahl's natural philosophy. In the conclusion I show that Stahl's theory of fermentation undermined the old fermentational program and paved the way for his dualist vitalism.

Justus Liebig's book Die organische Chemic in ihrer Anwendung auf Agricultur und Physiologie aroused strong opposition from scientists who felt that they were being attacked. A polarization arose particularly between Hugo von Mohl (1805-1872) and Matthias Jacob Schleiden (1805-1881) on one side, and Justus von Liebig (1803-1873) and his followers on the other side. The debate did not have the character of a purely scientific controversy, however, because social aspects also played a role. Alexander von Humboldt (1769-1859), who held the esteem of both parties, was able to intervene successfully to mediate this conflict. His task appeared at first difficult, but it turned out that both groups had a common enemy, the representatives and followers of the 'Romantic philosophy of nature'. Humboldt, who self-deprecatingly called himself a 'fossil', was forced to recognize that many of his friends and acquaintances, who stood nearer to, or even belonged among the founders of Naturphilosophie, for example, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling (1775-1854) and Johann Bernhard Wilbrand (1779-1846), were also under attack. Although he had earlier been inspired by the concerns and ideas of Schelling's Naturphilosophie, he now distanced himself from them in order to mediate between modern, experimental scientists.

A number of examples of what Jöns Jacob Berzelius was later (1835) to call catalysis, have been known from antiquity. One of the most prominent of these, dating from the early eighteenth century, was the action of platinum black on hydrogen observed in 1823 by Johann Wolfgang Döbereiner (1780-1849), Professor of Chemistry and Technology at the Universität Jena (1810-1849), who is regarded as the discoverer of platinum catalysis. His startling discovery led to his invention of the widely used pneumatic gas lighter (Döbereinersches Feuerzeug) and was cited by Berzelius in his formulation of the concept of catalysis.

The paper traces the entrance of German women into the chemistry profession from the 1890s to 1925, examining how they first overcame social and cultural conservatism to obtain access to opportunities for a chemical education during the later Kaiserreich, then began to seek academic and industrial careers and to establish a professional organization in the face of resistance from the established Verein Deutscher Chemiker. The paper examines the effect of World War I and the advent of the Weimar Republic in completing the process whereby German women achieved a small but significant role in the profession of chemistry, in science as well as industry. Finally, it discusses the considerable limitations on women's full and equal participation that still remained by 1925.

During the nineteenth century French chemistry was marked by an outstanding number of Alsatian chemists whose scientific contributions cannot be ignored. Especially following the Franco-Prussian War, their regional origin was given a particular importance as a means of affirming their singularity on the French scientific scene. However, some questions may be raised: can we distinguish the Alsatians from other French chemists before 1870? Were they a homogeneous group sharing a common origin? The aim of this article therefore, is, to show that by their theoretical options within chemistry, their personal and professional relationships, as well as by their participation in various common initiatives, they organized themselves both formally and informally within the Parisian scientific community. Amongst these forms of organization the research school of Charles Adolphe Wurtz (1817-84) emerges as the nucleus of what we may envisage as a network of Alsatian chemists working in Paris, in the second half of the nineteenth century.

The cultural history of alcoholic fermentation goes back to very early periods of human being. But only in the 19th century the nature of the biological production of alcohol was discovered. In that time chemistry and botany had a different, complementary view to alcoholic fermentation. While the positions of chemists are well-known and much discussed in the historiography of science the contribution of botanists to fermentation research is almost entirely forgotten nowadays. The work of the mycologist Oscar Brefeld, who studied yeast fermentation from 1873 to 1876, illustrates the special botanical view to the ontogenetical side of alcoholic fermentation, to morphlogical and physiological differences between growing and dying, fermenting and fermented yeast cells, and to the energetic and ecological role of fermentation as well as its universality in vegetable kingdom.