J_:I.^ TW PATH of SCIENCE The Helix of History rrr^ I □le PATH of CIENCE v^v ,-./^ By C. E. KENNETH MEES, D.Sc, F.R.S. Vice President in charge of Research Eastman Kodak Company Rochester, New York with the co-operation of JOHN R. BAKER, M.A., D.PhiL, D.Sc. Lecturer in Zoology in the University of Oxford, England New York: JOHN WILEY & SONS, Inc. London: CHAPMAN & HALL, Limited Copyright, 1946 BY Charles Edward Kenneth Mees All Rights Reserved This book or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission oj the publisher. SECOND PRINTING, MARCH, 1947 PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA "The present should retain its true proportion— a moment between an infinite past and a hurrying future." Time and Chance, Joan Evans London, 1943 PREFACE In 1943 I was invited to accept the Hitchcock professorship at the University of California. Tlie Hitchcock professor is expected to give a course of public lectures, and the subject selected was the development of science and its relation to the history of society. These lectures have been expanded into this book with the purpose of presenting the development of modern science against the background of history. There is not room for a complete history of science in a book of this type, but Chapters V, \^I, and VII are intended to give an account of the gro^vth of ideas in the three major sciences so that the reader can understand how the ideas of modern science have developed. My thanks are due to many friends for criticism and assist- ance and especially to Dr. John R. Baker, w^io w^rote Chapter VII, The Growth of Biological Ideas, and w^hose criticism of the w^hole manuscript as it progressed has been most valuable. Although the book is largely historical. Dr. Baker and I are not professional historians of science. Dr. Baker is an investigator in pure science, and I am a director of industrial scientific research. It is hoped that our active participation in the advance of science and technology has given us a view- point that compensates for the lack of historical training. C. E. K. Mees Rochester, N. Y. 1946 CONTENTS Chapter I. The Interpretation of History 1 Theories used for the interpretation of history- unique events, cycles of civilization, and the idea of progress. Chapter II. The Helix of History 17 A resume of the prehistoric and early history of man, pointing out that its structure, and especially that of the history of Egypt, corresponds well with Petrie's theory of the Revolutions of Civilization. The cycles of his- tory, however, show a progressive increase in natural knowledge so that the whole structure can be likened to a helix, in which the vertical component represents the growth of scientific knowledge, which increased rapidly after the sixteenth century and then became the domi- nant factor in the history of civilization. Chapter III. The Method of Science 42 The epistemology of science, the methods used by scientific men in observing, recording, and correlating facts, the development of theories and scientific laws. Chapter IV. The Development of the Scientific Method 65 The early growth of science, beginning with its devel- opment among the Greeks, the collapse in the Middle Ages, and the rebirth in the Renaissance. The founda- tion of the scientific societies at the end of the seven- teenth century. xi xii CONTENTS Chapter V. The Growth of Physical Ideas 88 Chapter VI. The Growth of Chemical Ideas 119 Chapter VII. The Growth of Biological Ideas 144 (Written by Dr. John R. Baker) Resume of the ideas of science and the methods by which these ideas have been evolved. A brief account of science intended to give a picture of the whole to an educated man. Chapter VIII. The Production of Scientific Knowledge 173 The present organization for scientific research and the developments in that organization likely to occur in the near future. Chapter IX. Applied Science and Industrial Research 202 Organization of industrial scientific research and the application of science to industry. Chapter X. The Path of Science 225 The relation of science to society and the proposals made for the application of science to the study of sociology and politics. Resume of the path of science as a whole in its relation to human society. Index 237 Chapter I THE INTERPRETATION OF HISTORY Ever since men have ^viitten down their thoughts for the benefit of their successors, they have tried to peer into the future to form some idea of the events to come. For this purpose, they have reHed upon auguries and upon observa- tions of the stars; but the only method that is now generally accepted is based on consideration of the past and expectation that the future will follow the trends of the past, especially the recent past. Sometimes the conditions of human life continue un- changed for long periods. Excavation of the cities of the past, as well as their recorded history, shows us that often life continued in those cities for generation after generation \vith little change in the w^ay of living and even little change in the material things— the tools and weapons used by the people. During such periods of stability, the records show a general belief that the stability would continue, that human civilization is essentially a static system. As the Preacher writes, 'The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun." * In attempting to look into the future by the use of our records of the past, we are trying to discern in history some general principles that we may expect to govern the order of events. F. A. von Hayek considers it a contradiction in terms to demand that history should become a theoretical science and believes that the demand arises from the study of the social sciences by those trained in the natural sciences who * Ecclesiastes 1:9. 2 THE PATH GF SCIENCE attempt to create a new science of society to satisfy their own ideals. Von Hayek considers that the events of history are "unique" and that "the creation and dissolution of the Roman Empire or the Crusades, the French Revolution or the Gro^vth of Modern Industry are unique complexes of events which have helped to contribute the particular cir- cumstances in which we live and whose explanation is there- fore of great interest." * However, while we may accept the view that the facts of human history are unordered in detail, it is not impossible that taken on a broad scale they may show some order. There is nothing obviously false in assuming that human history passes through cycles during ^vhich there is a change in some factor in a definite direction. It would be possible, for in- stance, for the length of human life to vary either progres- sively or periodically as time continued. As far as the author knows, there is no evidence for such a phenomenon; but if the facts suggested it, there is no fundamental reason for re- jecting it. H. G. Wells, indeed, holds that we are justified in considering history as a whole to be a science. f He says, "History is no exception amongst the sciences; as the gaps fill in, the outline simplifies; as the outlook broadens, the clustering multitude of details dissolve into general laws." The nature of these laws is evidently of the first importance, since upon them will depend the future that w^e may expect and, therefore, any action that we may take to modify that future. No pattern that we can detect in history can pos- sibly foretell the future in detail; the past contains no maps of the things to come. Nevertheless, history does fall into patterns "as the outlook broadens," and these patterns may be valuable for our guidance. The views that men have held of the patterns of history have had the greatest influence upon the ^vhole thought of * F. A. von Hayek, "Scientism and the Study of Society, II," Eco- nomica, N.S., 10, 34 (1943). f H. G. Wells, Introduction to The Outline of History, London, George Newnes, Ltd., 1920. THE INTERPRETATION OF HISTORY 3 man. They have, indeed, been among those "ideas" that have dominated the imagination and directed the actions of mankind. After the destruction of the ancient world that preceded the classical period— the world of Babylonia and Egypt, Crete and the Hittite Empire, the world that was at its height of prosperity in the fifteenth century before Christ- there was a great period of darkness, in which the Hellenes who had invaded western Asia Minor and Greece were slowly advancing from their barbarian culture, much apparently as the Saxons advanced slowly after they had destroyed the Roman culture that they had found in Britain. In both cases, the destruction of the old culture was extraordinarily com- plete. In England, the very ditches had been abandoned, so that when the cultivation of the fields was resumed, new lines of drainage had to be established, a change that requires cen- turies. In Greece, the art of writing appears to have been lost, and the earliest writers of the reviving civilization bor- rowed their alphabet from Semitic sources. This, however, had its advantao^es. The Greeks started with a "clean slate." As Bacon reminds us, they had no knowledge of antiquity, and it is interesting to reflect that the classical Greeks spent no time learning foreign languages. They were, in fact, almost the only people of antiquity who did not devote them- selves to that occupation, which today is considered such a necessary discipline. The Babylonian youth had to learn Sumerian, in which his classical books were written, and the Roman regarded a knowledge of Greek as essential. But the Greeks had no venerated classics, no holy books, no dead lan- guages to master, no authorities to check their free specu- lation. Since the Greeks had no knowledge of any long period of history, they had little material from ^vhich to get an idea of a pattern in history. They recognized that man had pro- gressed from a state of barbarism, and they ascribed his progress to the invention and assistance of the gods. At the same time, they held to the old legend of a past golden age, a period of well-being and innocence from which man had 4 THE PATH OF SCIENCE fallen, and thus they developed a theory of the rise and fall of culture and civilization. In Plato's writings we find the vie^v expressed that the world had been created as a perfect world, but that it was not immortal and had in it the seeds of decay, so that in time it would degenerate completely and would be destroyed if the Creator did not intervene and start the cycle again. The first stage of such a cycle would be the golden age of legend, and the period in which the Greeks found themselves they considered to be one of gradual decay and degeneration. This view was in accordance w^ith the whole attitude of the Greeks tow^ard life, an attitude of skepti- cism and of pessimism. To a Greek philosopher, man was a small figure in a great and turbulent universe, struggling against the will of the pitiless gods who held his fate in their hands and played with it for amusement; so that finally the lesson was laid down tiiat a man must do all that he can and that then, having failed, he must be prepared to suffer all that he can suffer. This philosophy was expressed not only by the philosophers themselves but it was stated even more clearly by the tragic poets who had so great an influence on Greek thought and who have retained that influence in the thought of men to this day. Plato's theory of world cycles became the orthodox theory of history among the Greeks and passed from them to the Romans. According to some of the follows ers of Pythagoras, each cycle repeated to the minutest particular the course and events of the preceding cycle. This theory w^as adopted by the Stoics and is referred to by Marcus Aurelius in his Medi- tations. He says that the "rational soul" contemplates the grand revolutions of nature and the destruction and renewal of the universe. So uniform is the course of history that a man of forty years may know all the past and all the future. There w^as a moment in Greek history w^hen the Greek scholars stood on the edge of the discovery- of the method of experimental science. For that moment they saw the possi- bility of a different idea of history, and the Epicureans re- jected the doctrine of a golden age and a subsequent degen- THE INTERPRETATION OF HISTORY 5 eration and believed instead that the earliest condition of men had been that of animals and that civilization had been developed by the exercise of human intelligence. Expression of this school is found in the work of Lucretius, the Roman poet who restated the philosophical ideas of Epicurus in Latin hexameters. But the pessimism of the Greeks was too fundamental for this view to be maintained, and Lucretius himself expresses his skepticism of the value of civilization. When Prometheus stole the fire from heaven and Icarus adopted wings, they paid for their daring the penalty that they owed to the gods whom they had challenged. The Greeks were resigned, in fact, to a fixed order of the uni- verse, and any idea of progress toward perfection would have been a violation of that fixed order. The organization of Europe under the Romans did noth- ing to make men feel that a definite progress in the conditions of mankind was possible. Those conditions, indeed, were bad, at best. The economic foundation of the Roman Em- pire was unsound. Its government was a totalitarian tyranny. It is not without significance that the historical doctrines of German National Socialism are akin to those of Marcus Aurelius. With the rise of Christianity, an entirely ne^v idea of human history was introduced— the idea that life on earth was on the verge of ceasing. For St. Augustine, as for any believer of that time, the course of history would be satis- factorily complete if the world came to an end in his own lifetime. The Christian church had started as a group of disciples waiting for the return of their leader, and for the early church the orthodox theory was that the Second Com- ing might be expected at any time. Moreover, the basis of the Christian religion was the idea of the individual's fall from grace and his redemption from sin by the sacrifice of the god. History, then, was the history of a degenerate world, some of which might finally be redeemed and, with that re- demption, obliterated by absorption into the godhead. 6 THE PATH OF SCIENCE The great change in these ideas came at the beginning of the seventeenth century and was expressed most clearly in the work of Francis Bacon. The part that Bacon played in the growth of science will be discussed later. We are at present concerned only with the effect that he produced upon the thought of his time. Bacon was not a scientist or an experimenter; he was a theorist and planner. He laid down an ambitious program for a great renovation of knowledge based upon his view that the secrets of nature could be determined by experiment and that the value of scientific knowledge lay in its utility. Thus the proper end of human knowledo^e was the amelioration of the conditions of human life. For this purpose Bacon saw that organized scientific research— the study of the learning of the past and the de- velopment of new learning by direct observation and ex- periment—must result in the most important advances. He pointed out that three great inventions unknown to the ancients— printing, gunpowder, and the compass— "have changed the appearance and state of the whole world; first in literature, then in warfare, and lastly in navigation; and innumerable changes have been thence derived, so that no empire, sect, or star appears to have exercised a gieater power or influence on human affairs than these mechanical dis- coveries." * With Bacon and with the increase in scientific discovery that followed, the idea of progress became the dominant theory of history. This was supported by the philosophy of Rene Descartes, who insisted on the invariability of the laws of nature and the supremacy of reason, which, carried to a logical conclusion, excluded the doctrine of providence, the basic belief of the Christian philosophers. The development of the idea of progress through the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries is of interest primarily to a student of philosophy.f It was embodied in Immanuel Kant's philosophy and in the * Francis Bacon, Novum Organum, 129. ■j- For an excellent discussion of the subject, see J, B. Bury, The Idea of Progress, New York, The Macmillan Co., 1932. THE INTERPRETATION OF HISTORY 7 positivism of Auguste Comte. It was perhaps a result of Comte's work that the idea of progress became so completely accepted by the people of the nineteenth century, and it is, of course, the basis of Herbert Spencer's philosophy, em- bodied in his First Principles^ published in 1862. Belief in progress was greatly reinforced by the rapid development of science and technology and by the manifest improvement in the conditions of life. Nevertheless, the cyclic theory of history, held by the Greeks, has not been abandoned in modern times. The theories of Plato and Polybius, that the history of states must repeat itself, were worked out in detail by Vico in the eighteenth century and used as a fundamental theory of his- tory by Brooks Adams in his Law of Civilization and Decay. Adams bases his interpretation on psychology, seeing in fear and greed the two great motives for human action. These two motives, he thought, alternate through the course of his- tory, so that we have first a stage in which fear predominates and civilization is organized on a military and imaginative basis. In this stage, there is an accumulation of wealth, and society is centralized. This centralized society then transfers its central motive from fear and the military state to greed and the economic state. The productive power of this state collapses as a result of the greed of the individuals in a capi- talistic society, and the military phase of expansion recurs. Brooks Adams takes a deeply pessimistic view of human history and, indeed, of human nature. According to him, men have been almost invariably scoundrels inspired by fear or by greed. Such a view of the motives that have moved men in the past and of the characters of those who could be moved almost entirely by such motives is sufficient to refute the entire argument. In the absence of any specific informa- tion to the contrary, the best assumption as to the nature of men in the past is that it was the same as that of men in the present. Nevertheless, it is true that nations pass through successive stages of integration and disintegration. States have been built up by conquest and assimilation, and then, 8 THE PATH OF SCIENCE with the gi'owth of wealth and leisure, they have been the prey of external aggressors. The aggressors have flourished and have in turn relapsed into weakness and perished. Thus the history of individual nations shows a cyclic rhythm. Another cyclic theory of history has been developed by Oswald Spengier in his famous book, The Decline of the West. Spengier presents history as a succession of cultures, each of which follows a definite coinse of development through a sequence of phases. He holds that each culture has its own peculiarities but that the course of development through the phases is the same for all. Thus each culture has its beginning, its development based essentially on rural life. It then blossoms into full strength, with the urban population taking control of the thought of the nation until, finally, there comes a decay, particularly of religion and of inward life, and a collapse of the culture as a whole. A necessary part of Spengler's argument is that the same phases are distinguishable in all cultures. He treats the Renaissance as a revolt against the Gothic, the exhaustion of the early phase of modern culture. Similar revolts occurred in Egypt at the close of the Old Kingdom Avith the development of the feudal system and in Greece at the close of the archaic period, though, surely, the corresponding period in Greek culture should be that at which the Hellenistic displaced the Hel- lenic. Spengier carries these analogies to the individuals of the phases. He considers Napoleon a parallel to Alexander. An excellent analysis of Spengler's -^v ork has been made by Colling^vood, who points out that Spengier carries this theory to an extreme; every phase and every detail reappears in each cycle.* Since obviously this is not true of history, the cycles cannot be identical. Rather, they must be homologous —in each cycle the events and personalities must correspond structurally to events and personalities of the past. The task of the historian is, therefore, parallel to that of the compara- tive anatomist; he inust depict the correspondence of the * R. G. Collingwood, "Oswald Spengier and the Theory of Historical Cycles," Antiquity, I, 311 (1927). THE INTERPRETATION OF HISTORY 9 events in two cycles ^vhile realizing their differentiation aris- ing from the differences between the cycles. It is useless merely to mention likenesses in history— to compare Alex- ander with Caesar or Buddha with Christ. Nevertheless, these likenesses must be recognized at the same time that their differences are realized. Collingvvood compares Spengler's cyclic theory with the doctrines of Plato, Polybius, and Vico, and points out that Spengler apparently did not know of the work of Sir Flinders Petrie, ^\hich is discussed later. Probably the popularity of Spengler's book arises from his claim to foretell the future. According to Spengler, the present era is that of the collapse of a civilization— a plutocracy disguised by demagogism and no^v^ called "democracy"— corresponding to that of the second century B.C. in Rome, when the Roman republic was col- lapsing and the civilization of the ancient world as a ^vhole was moving to^vard the tyranny of the Roman Empire and the darkness that followed it. This idea of Spengler's seems to lie at the root of much of the totalitarian philosophy. But Spengler's claim to foretell the future is, as CoUingwood points out, baseless. Even if the general pattern is repeated in cycles, there is no evidence that those cycles resemble each other closely enough or are sufficiently uniform in length or intensity to enable us to predict anything except that there will continue to be cycles. The tremendous events of the last ten years, during w^hich some of the most active and capable nations have challenged the ideals on which western civilization was founded and plunged into world-wide war to enforce their challenge, have produced doubts in the minds of many thinkers as to the validity of the idea of progress. Some years ago, Mr. Philip Cabot wrote to a friend: The period covered by my father's life, and most of my own, was one in which wise men in Western Europe and in America looked forward to the future with confidence and hope. Of course, their world was menaced by the dangers which have always distressed mankind— war, pesti- 10 THE PATH OF SCIENCE lence and famine. But to these the race has become inured, and the hope of this period appeared to be based on reason- able foresight. Their troubles were mostly in the present; their future seemed remarkably secure. Now the outlook has changed. We still have our pres- ent troubles, and to them has been added grave anxiety about the future, an anxiety which is most marked among thoughtful men. For there is reason to doubt whether we shall be able to hand on to our children unimpaired the great social structure which we received from our fore- fathers. At the time that Cabot wrote this, he was not thinking directly of the great threat that was developing in Central Europe and that in 1939 broke on the world in a tempest of fire and steel. Instead, as he said in his commencement ad- dress to Juniata College on June 1, 1936,* he felt that the danglers that threaten us are internal and arise from the loss of the fundamental agreements upon which the life of our society is based. Social disintegration appeared to him to be foreshadowed in the weakening of family life, the breakdown of social conventions, and especially the decay of religion. These changes arise from the fluidity and increase of wealth and from the great mobility of the population, so that scarcely any families live in the old homestead and few live many years in the same place. People no longer feel that they belong to a definite group, and without such a feeling so- cieties are unlikely to persist. It is by no means the first time in the history of the world that rapid changes have occurred, both in relation to the material control that man has over his environment and also in relation to the economic and social structure of society. Frequently these changes, accompanied by great mass move- ments of peoples, have resulted in the destruction of cities and the erection of new empires on the ashes of the old. Between the fourteenth and the twelfth centuries b.c, such a ereat chano^e occurred and it resulted in the destruction of the oldest stable empires of which we have any record. The * Philip Cabot, Addresses 1935-1941, Cambridge, Mass., 1942. THE INTERPRETATION OF HISTORY 11 origin of that change we do not know. It was quite possibly the culmination of climatic changes occurring in the great plains of Eastern Europe and Western Asia. In the course of it, Crete lost her control of the northern Mediterranean and finally vanished from the list of the empires. The Achaean Greek civilization that Crete had founded disap- peared in its turn. The Hittite Empire, attacked in the north, pressed through to the south, came into conflict with the new power of Assyria, and was destroyed. Assyria con- quered Babylonia and expanded its new empire, which was eventually to overrun Egypt itself. In the fifth century a.d., a similar rapid change in the organization of world power and, consequently, in the eco- nomic and social life of the civilized world took place. The Gothic invasion of Italy after the division of the empire between Rome and Constantinople terminated the domina- tion of the western world by Rome. In the fifteenth century, again, centralized monarchies took the place of the feudal system, and that system that had ruled the world for a thousand years deliquesced and changed be- fore the eyes of men. And then Northern Europe largely abandoned its traditional religion and established a new church, carrying with it altogether new and different social relations. But the progress made in the material aspects of civiliza- tion in the three hundred years that have elapsed since the birth of Newton is as great as that made from the neolithic period to the time of his birth. A man of Newton's day who left London or Paris and by some Time Machine found himself in ancient Rome, Athens, or Thebes would have missed few of the conveniences and amenities of life to which he had been accustoined. In some respects, indeed, he might have found himself better off. The water supply and the drainage system of ancient Rome were better than those of Elizabethan London. The buildings of Thebes or Athens or Rome were greatly superior to those of London or Paris in the seventeenth century. The mind of man, the intellectual 12 THE PATH OF SCIENCE atmosphere, was much the same. The absence of Christian- ity and especially the extent of slavery would make the social world rather different to our voyager, but for his bodily com- fort he would find that he had lost little in returning to the ancient world. But if the man of today should go back to the world in which Newton was born, he might not find him- self mentally in a remote world, but physically he would be astonished and shocked. The clothing would strike him as primitive; the houses, as crude and uncomfortable. Few would care to live in Wolsey's palace at Hampton Court, and Wolsey was a man who loved luxury. The sights and the smells, the dirt and the vermin of the cities of that time would be most offensive to him. The inconveniences of travel, the unpaved streets, the absence of sanitation, and the appalling disease would make him realize how great a change has come over the ^\ orld. He would soon, of course, become accustomed to the conditions, just as men today be- come accustomed to primitive conditions when they en- counter them. But ho^v inconvenient to be without matches, without any satisfactory water system, and, for those ^vho are inveterate readers, to have a very limited supply of books and no satisfactory system of artificial light! These comforts and conveniences, ^vhich are today nor- mally taken for granted, have been achieved by the work of the technologists and scientists of the last three hundred years. Moreover, even the industrial revolution of the nine- teenth century probably produced less change in the life of man than has occurred during the first third of the twentieth century. Many writers on sociology have commented on the recent changes in social conditions and in human relations as being psychological and sociological phenomena; and among these are a number of the most distinguished philos- ophers and thinkers of the present time. A. N. Whitehead, discussing the present as a turning point in the sociological conceptions of western civilization, concludes that through- out the w^hole of the western world "something has come to an end." THE INTERPRETATION OF HISTORY 13 In Russia there has been a revolution, because some- thing has come to an end. In Asia Minor the Turks are recreating novel forms of social life, because something has come to an end. In the larger nations of Western Europe, Italy, Spain, France, Germany, England, there is a turmoil ( an end.* turmoil of reconstruction, because something has come to But men do not look back ^\ hen they come to the parting of the ways; they look forward. And the cause of these "revo- lutions," these "ferments," these "turmoils" is applied science and the promise that men can see in it. C. A. Beard in his introduction to Bury's Idea of Progress {loc. cit., page 6) points out that the basis of modern civilization is technology, which indicates the methods by which the conquest of nature can be effected. Technology involves not only the existing machines and processes but still more a philosophy and a method linked, as it were, to the methods and spirit of science. Moreover, technology is world-wide and universal, available to all nations and affecting all classes. Thus tech- nology is at once the source and the justification for the idea of progiess. Mankind has not merely advanced from primi- tive culture; it has developed a working method for a con- tinuation of that advance. There is no reason to believe that the present civilization ^vill run its cycle and relapse into barbarism; there are no limits to the possibilities of scien- tific discovery and its application to the wants of man. The solution of a scientific problem does not close a chapter; it opens new problems. Moreover, advances in one field of science make possible advances in another. The solution of a physical problem throws light upon chemistry and that, in its turn, on physiology or on medicine. Until man has no more curiosity and no more ^vants, his quest for kno^vledge will persist and the application of that knowledge will con- tinue. W^hat distinguishes the present change in sociological con- * A. N. Whitehead, "The Study of the Past— Its Uses and Its Dangers," Harvard Business Review, XI, No. 4, 436 (1933). 14 THE PATH OF SCIENCE ditions from those that have gone before is the rate at which the change is occurring. Earlier changes in the social struc- ture, such as those that occurred at the end of the Roman Empire, were extremely slow in comparison with the changes that we have seen in our own lifetimes. At the present time, the rate of change is greater than any in the previous ex- perience of man, and it appears to be still accelerating. The rate is, indeed, so great that it is often said that the world is passing through a social revolution. On this point, one may agree with Cabot that the word "revolution" is too strong. Revolution suggests an explosion, and such an explosion may occur; indeed, the German and Japanese attacks might be considered explosions. But apart from these aggressive ac- tions, which are not necessarily due to the social changes, what is occurring is not social revolution but social evolution at a very rapid pace. An important contribution to the study of the situation was made by the late Lord Stamp in his book The Science of Social Adjustment, the first chapter of which is entitled "The Impact of Science upon Society." * Stainp points out that the specific phenomenon that we have to investigate is what occurs at the point of impact, where the new discoveries and inventions affect our social life, and here the rate of change is of primary importance. In his book he discusses as an economist such matters as the obsolescence of machinery, the displacement of labor, the changes in industry and in the population. Many of the most important changes produced by science are not generally recognized as such. Everybody realizes that the introduction of the railroad train, the automobile, and the airplane have changed social conditions; but by far the most important factors in the changes that are occurring in society arise from the prolongation of human life. Not a generation ago, life expectation at birth was forty years; today it is sixty. This produces a change in the distribution * Sir Josiah Stamp, The Science of Social Adjustment, London, Mac- millan and Co., 1937. THE INTERPRETATION OF HISTORY 15 of age among the population— a decrease in the percentage of children and an increase in the numbers of the older— that must have a profound effect upon the organization of so- ciety. The problems of India that arise from its political situation, grave as those are, are by no means the most im- portant for the future of the country. As A. V. Hill has pointed out in his report on his visit to India on behalf of the Royal Society, the great problem in India is the ex- traordinarily rapid increase in the population owing to the improvement in medical and sanitary conditions, far behind those of the western world as they still are. The society of India, with its many complications of custom and religion, was adapted to a large birth rate and an appalling death rate. Even a sliofht reduction in the death rate has been sufficient to upset the balance. The growth of science, which made it possible to conceive the idea of progress and which is the source of many im- provements in the conditions of human life, has become so rapid that the changes that it produces threaten the very foundations of society. Today we have to face the necessity for a complete re-orientation of our attitude tow^ard social conditions. We can no longer expect the organization of society to remain stable. We must expect it to be changing continually, and we must plan our political and economic control not to perpetuate any existing state of affairs but to meet the changes that will come in such a way that they will give us the maximum benefit and the minimum distress. In this book we shall discuss the structure of society from the historical point of view, especially its relation to the development of scientific knowledge and the methods that have been and can be used for the production of scientific knowledge. While the relation between the progress of scientific dis- covery and the structure of society is of the utmost interest and importance to those who desire to understand it or, still more, to control the changes that are occurring, there is a cleavage betw^een those who follow the discipline of history 16 THE PATH OF SCIENCE and of the humanities and those who are eagerly pursuing the quest for scientific knowledge. Humanistic learning is the learning of the ancients; it is a study of the accumulated thought of mankind so far as it has been transmitted to us. Scientific knowledge, on the other hand, is a development arising from the observation of facts and their classification into patterns. The separation of these two types of learning has always been unfortunate; at present it is serious, and it may, indeed, be disastrous. As Sarton says, "The most omi- nous conflict of our time is the difference of opinion, of out- look, between men of letters, historians, philosophers, the so-called humanists, on the one side, and scientists on the other." * The administrators and organizers of society have been trained chiefly in the humanities and are largely igno- rant not only of the facts of science but of the scientific method. The scientists, on the other hand, are absorbed in their own problems and too often have little time to spare for the study of history, even the history of science. It is essential that a reconciliation bet^veen the two branches of learning should be effected and that the present dichotomy of our cultural and educational systems should be resolved. The humanists must understand what the scientists have done in the past, are doing now, and may do in the future; while the scientists must see their work in the light of history and in relation to the effects that its application to social conditions will produce. Now let us turn to the pageant of history and endeavor to see some design in its structure that may reconcile in one general pattern the different conceptions of history that we have discussed. * George Sarton, The History of Science and the New Huinanisyn, p. 54, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1937. All quotations from this author are rej^rinted by permission of the publishers. Chapter II THE HELIX OF HISTORY History involves the study of human progress. The record of that progress is to be found on the earth itself— a frag- mentary record of giaves and building stones, of broken tools and potsherds— which can be interpreted to give the story of the ascent of man. But the greater part of history as it is written by historians is the history of written documents. Indeed, many historians maintain that only w^ritten docu- ments can supply trustworthy history and that evidence from other sources is not really history but should be dealt wdth as a separate science, the science of archaeology. The result is that the historian often fails to give the reader a perspective of human history as a whole because he finds it necessary to devote practically all his space to discussions of the ^vTitten evidence and the rewording of the ^vritings of his prede- cessors. As Gordon Childe points out in his essay on the writing of history, this is particularly unfortunate if we are endeavoring to follow the development of science and tech- nology through the ages.* Even those scientific discoveries which are necessarily committed to writing— mathematical calculations and formulae, for instance— have generally been neglected by students who, as Childe says, ''were by training inclined to prefer historical and mythological literature and w^ere, in any case, hardly competent to appreciate the true inwardness of the problems the ancient scribes were trying to overcome." Most of our information on the technology of the ancients is necessarily derived from the material objects discovered by * Gordon Childe, "The History of Civilization," Antiquity, XV, I (1941). 17 18 THE PATH OF SCIENCE excavation, and only too often that information is fragmen- tary and obviously insufficient. The known instrumental equipment of the Egyptians seems scarcely sufficient for the great engineering works which they undertook. Was Galileo or his immediate predecessor really the first to combine two lenses to make a telescope? While we should certainly not accept the existence of such instruments in much earlier times without adequate evidence, we should as certainly not regard their existence as impossible. Again, in the absence of definite records, historians tend to overrate the isolation of countries and cultures in early times. It is true that in the early part of a cycle of culture, as in Greece in the eighth century B.C., contact with other coun- tries was largely lost. Six hundred years earlier, however, communications between Egypt, Babylonia, and Asia Minor were so good that there was something approximating a postal service, and because of its convenience correspondents in all these countries used a common language— Babylonian written in the cuneiform script. The visit of a Pharaoh of the Old Kingdom to Crete, imagined by Miss Grant in her novel, while unlikely, is certainly not impossible.* To get a true view of the pattern of history, it is necessary to broaden our outlook as much as possible and to cover not only the whole of recorded history but also the prehistory of the archaeologist. As Childe says: 'Tor the prehistorian, the colonization of the Mediterranean basin by the Phoenicians and the Greeks is but the continuation of the Minoans' pio- neering efforts. To the historian, the empires of Assyria, Babylon, Persia, and Macedon must appear fulfillments of the ambitions of Sargon of Agade, Ur-Nammu, and Ham- murabi." When we attempt to contemplate history broadly, to com- pare the events of one period with those of another, there is a strong tendency to distortion arising from the point of view. It is almost as if the difficulty were one of perspective. Sup- * Joan Grant, Winged Pharaoh, New York, Harper and Brothers, 1938. THE HELIX OF HISTORY 19 pose, for instance, the scale of the years is marked along a wall. If you stand in front of the middle of the scale, some distance away, the equal periods of time will be represented by equal distances and by equal angular deviations of view. But if, instead, you stand at the end of the scale and look down it lengthwise, the portions of the scale that are near you will seem very much longer than those that are distant; and near events will seem much more important than the more remote ones. The time scale of human progress is certainly not linear. Technical progress grows more rapid as time goes on, and perhaps the best chronological scale for the his- tory of science and technology would be one in which the divisions of the scale were proportional to the logarithms of their distance from the present time. Another example of this distortion is that it is impossible for us to understand the effect on human history of the events that are occurring around us.* Our judgment of the im- portance of the events of the time is very likely to be different from the judgment of history. There comes to mind Anatole France's story of the procurator of Judea, who was visited in retirement by a friend who had known him in Syria. Their conversation strayed on to the events that had oc- curred when Pontius Pilate had been in office in Jerusalem, and his friend asked him if he remembered a certain Jesus whom he had delivered to crucifixion. Pilate's answer will forever remain the most perfect example of the ironical climax: *'Jesus?" he murmured, "Jesus of Nazareth? I can't call him to mind." History is full of incidents which were ignored by contem- poraries but which proved to be of the greatest importance. In 1453, Constantinople was taken by the Turks. The blow was felt throughout Christendom; a European congress was called at Regensburg to promote a crusade, but nobody would come. The organization of Europe had broken down, ex- hausted with war and quarrels. A contemporary writer said: * Cf. H. B. Phillips, "On the Nature of Progress," American Scientist; 33, 253 (1945). 20 THE PATH OF SCIENCE "Where is the mortal man who can bring England into ac- cord with France? Let a great host set forth, and its internal enmities will destroy its organization. Behold, a true picture of Christendom." * Few would have been found who real- ized that the final fall of the Byzantine Empire was far less important than the work of Johannes Gutenberg, who for the first time was printing books from movable type. At the time when Isaac Newton was preparing the Principia for publication, in 1686 and 1687, the British people were engaged in a bitter struggle with the king, arising from the fact that the king was a Catholic, while the people as a whole had become Protestants and after years of struggle had a very great fear and hatred of the Roman Catholic church. The feeling was so bitter that the struggle ended in the expulsion of the king, whose place on the throne was taken by his Dutch son-in-law, William, and his daughter, Mary. It may easily be imagined that in a political crisis of this magnitude few people saw that the work of a professor at Cambridge was of far greater significance for the future of England and of the world. Again in 1831, England ^vas seething with dis- content. Even the old Duke of Wellington, the victor of Waterloo, was threatened by the mob. The Reform Bill had been defeated in the House of Commons and a dissolu- tion of Parliament was necessary. In these circumstances, probably no one recognized that the work of Michael Fara- day, who in that year discovered the principles of electro- magnetic induction, was to change the face of the earth. There is no absolute standard for the judgment of history. One individual will be interested in history as a record of administration; another, as a record of the art of human wel- fare; another will view history in relation to economics; a medical man has written two very interesting books on the medical aspects of the history of well-known individuals; in this study we are considering the progress of civilization through the ages. * Boulting, "Aeneas Sylvius," quoted by J. W. Thompson, The Middle Ages, p. 205, New York. Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1931. THE HELIX OF HISTORY 21 Sarton says: "If we wish to explain the progress of man- kind, then ^ve must focus our attention on the development of science and its applications." This view is emphasized by Sarton in his definitions of science and the theorem and corollary he derived from it.* They are: Definition: Science is systematized positive knowledge, or what has been taken as such at different ages and in different places. Theorem: The acquisition and systematization of posi- tive knowledge are the only human activities w^hich are truly cumulative and progressive. Corollary: The history of science is the only history which can illustrate the progress of mankind. In fact, progiess has no definite and unquestionable meaning in other fields than the field of science. Sarton points out that we should not be dazzled by the shibboleth of progress, for there are other features of human life which are at least as precious as scientific activities though they are unprogressive; and he instances charity and the love of beauty. Nevertheless, the scientific activity of man is the only one which is obviously and undoubtedly cumulative and progressive.f As we have seen, the very idea of progress is modern, an idea that derived from the scientific revolution of the seventeenth century and the industrial revolution that followed it. The justification for selecting scientific knowledge as essen- tially different from the artistic attainments or the philo- sophical attainments of man is that scientific knowledge builds on itself. An artist is essentially born. It is true that he acquires a certain amount of technical skill when trained by a master and is influenced by his predecessors, but funda- mentally the level of his art is his own, and for that reason the best art of the early periods compares well with art of the later periods. * George Sarton, The Study of the History of Science, p. 5, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1936. f George Sarton, History of Science and the New Humanism, p. 10, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1937. 22 THE PATH OF SCIENCE What is true of sculpture and architecture is true also of literature. Literature takes different forms in different periods. W^e may be inclined to value, for instance, the lyric poetry of the recent era. But would we place it above the epic poetry of the classical age or the religious poems of the great period of high civilization which preceded the classical age— from which we have such writing as the Book of Job or Akhnaton's Hymn to the Sun? The science of the Renais- sance, however, started where classical science ended, and classical science was largely based on Egyptian and Baby- lonian science. Through the ages, while the other activities of man showed no definite progression but merely a growth for a time and then a decline, the level of scientific knowl- edge steadily increased. As Sarton says: * When one reads the history of science one has the ex- hilarating feeling of climbing a big mountain. The history of art gives one an altogether different iinpression. It is not at all like the ascension of a mountain, always upward whichever the direction of one's path; it is rather like a leisurely journey across a hilly country. One cliinbs up to the top of this hill or that, then down into another valley, perhaps a deeper one than any other, then up the next hill, and so forth and so on. An erratic succession of climaxes and anticlimaxes the amplitude of which cannot be pre- dicted. Let us consider, then, the progress of mankind as illus- trated by the history of science or, as I should prefer to say, the history of science and technology, the record of natural knowledge and of invention. We may divide the history of mankind into gieat periods, each of which is conditioned by a major invention; and it is possible to carry out this division in many ways, accord- ins: to the controllingr inventions that we select. The follow- ins: classification seems to form a convenient framework for our discussion: * Ibid., p. 11. THE HELIX OF HISTORY 23 1. The invention of tools and weapons. 2. The discovery of agriculture. 3. The invention of writing. 4. The invention of printing. By the first of these inventions man evolved from the animal. Agriculture introduced community life, and from it evolved a structure of society. With ^vriting came the pro- duction of records and the transmission, imperfect at first, of knowledge. With the invention of printing, the spreading of knowledge from the writing of one man to become the common heritage of mankind was so enormously facilitated that printing produced a revolutionary change in the rate of progress. Our record of man opens W'ith the fragments of tools and pots, the tools long before the pots. The tools were made from wood, bone, or flint. The wood has vanished, and few of the early bone tools remain, but the flint tools form a gieat record— almost the only record we have for the first 40,000 years of the 50,000 during which man has made and used tools. Those first 40,000 years are covered by the paleolithic period; the neolithic period starts at about 10,000 b.c; and the historical period some time after 5000 b.c* This earliest record we know— that of the flint w^eapons and tools made by prehistoric and neolithic man— can be deciphered by the changes and improvements in the tools and by the improve- ment in the technique by which the tools w^ere made. Flint is found wherever there are chalk deposits, as there are in many parts of Western Europe. The great nodules of flint are found in cavities in the chalk rock and can easily be obtained by anybody who digs a hole in the ground. There are some places w4iere there are layers of flint that form flint mines, and around these places the ancient men w^orked so many flints that the whole ground is covered with masses of flakes. If a lump of flint is struck with a sharp * For a modification of this chronology and a discussion of prehistoric chronology, see G. E. Daniel, The Three Ages, London, Cambridge University Press, 1943. 24 THE PATH OF SCIENCE blow concentrated at a point, it breaks in such a way that a sort of cap can be Hfted off, exposing underneath a double cone. If the blow is dealt on the margin of the block, a flake comes off showing a swelling near the point of impact. This method of working flints is known as "knapping." Because of the durability of flint and the very long period during which flint tools were made, enormous numbers have been found both of the primitive hand axes and scrapers and of the later, more specialized, tools. In the paleolithic period, improvement in the flint tools was very slow indeed. After a time, however, the craftsmen learned to make finer and more delicate tools— pointed awls for making holes in skins, by which the skins could be fastened together with sinews— and weapons, spearpoints and, later, arrow points. Then the art of knapping improved as a result of the discovery that small flakes could be detached accurately by pressure, so that the coarse serrations could be subdivided and a much finer edge obtained, and then the flints were polished and a smooth edge obtained by grinding. At this time, other arts developed, and the whole cultural period is distinguished from the paleolithic period by call- ing it "neolithic." Our knowledge of the history of that vast period of man's activity depends upon the study of the progress of flint work. It is quite probable that different stages in the art of work- ing flint did not occur contemporaneously in different coun- tries, so that in one part of the world man may have been making paleolithic instruments, while in another part the flint craftsmen had learned the neolithic art. Generally, however, the occurrence of closely similar flint implements in different places is held to indicate that the cultures were contemporaneous. Flinders Petrie, for instance, considers that the identity of flints from the Fayum of Egypt with Solutrean flints from Western Europe indicates that the be- ginning of his sequence dating was contemporaneous with the Solutrean paleolithic period. THE HELIX OF HISTORY 25 At some period between 10,000 and 5000 B.C., we find that the people of the new stone age were appearing in Egypt and Mesopotamia with their improved tools and also ^vith other inventions— pottery and agriculture. Besides tools and weapons, primitive man needed cooking utensils and still more, perhaps, he needed jars in which he could carry and keep water. Baskets were made very early. Stone jars also were made, but they required much labor when made by primitive tools. It was not a great step, though it was a very important invention, to think of daubing the baskets with mud and making them more or less w^aterproof. Probably the discovery that the mud became much more waterproof if it were baked in the fire was made accidentally. There were plenty of open hearths in which a mud-daubed basket might be left. At any rate, the earliest pots seem to have had the mud-smeared basket as their ancestor. Later pots could be made without the basketwork by baking the mud itself, molded to shape, but those earliest pots still bear the marks of their origin in the tracings of basketlike lines with w^hich they are decorated. And at that point, art entered the everyday world. The pots could be decorated with mud of different colors and with designs of intricate fancy. These patterns and working methods were so stable that by means of them the cultures of the neolithic and early bronze ages can be classified. We see the steady improvement in the skill and fancy with which the pots were formed, so that instead of depending upon the classification of the flint tools, we can introduce approximate datings for given periods from the potsherds with which every ancient city is necessarily covered, pots being what they are and children what they have always been. A good example of the use of pottery in constructing a time scale for material revealed by excavation is given by Petrie in his dating of the remains of prehistoric Egypt. In this work, he selected a thousand graves with at least five forms of pottery in each. Then a card slip was used for each grave with the content specified, and every occurrence of a 26 THE PATH OF SCIENCE type of pottery was examined and compared with the other examples. This process of comparison resuked in bringing the thousand graves into a connected order in time, each grave as a general rule containing some of the pottery of the graves near it in the order but not containing pots of those that were more distant in the order. The whole series of graves could be divided into fifty parts, and these were num- bered arbitrarily from 30 to 80 in order to leave space for later discoveries of graves that might not fit into the sequence and that might have to be placed before or after those that had been examined. In this way, a definite sequence dating could be made for the graves and, therefore, for the pottery and other material found in the graves, ending ^vith the graves of the historical dynasties for which chronological dates were kno^vn. The same method has been applied to the dating of the different levels of excavation in Mesopo- tamia and Syria. Indeed, our knowledge of prehistoric Meso- potamia is almost entirely dependent on dating by means of pottery. At this stage in the history of civilization, when men had the good tools of the neolithic age and pots hardened in the fire, a new factor of fundamental importance appeared— the second of the great inventions of mankind. Agiiculture was probably discovered by the women, who gathered the seeds of plants while their men hunted animals. One day they must have realized that seeds could be sown artificially and that, if they waited long enough, seeds pro- duced a crop. With the coming of agriculture came real civilization. Men ceased to be nomads. They settled in villages; and those villages were naturally along the river valleys, where there was mud, in which the seeds could be planted, and water, necessary for plant growth. There, in the villages or, rather, in the to^vns into which the villages had grown, came the third great invention— writ- ing. And with writing, the period of prehistory ends and history commences. Man began to write five or six thousand years ago. Those who study the river valleys of Mesopotamia THE HELIX OF HISTORY 27 claim that writing had its origin there, but it certainly origi- nated independently in Eg)'pt, and the Egyptologists are by no means willing to concede the claims of their archaeological rivals. In oiu' study of history after the invention of writing, we are less dependent on material relics and can use the records. However, we are still interested in tracing the history of civilization in terms of its arts and crafts, in the tools, weapons, and ornaments that ancient man produced and left behind him, although we have available generally from the early periods only that small fraction of the production which "^vas buried in the graves. Having summarized the progress of man through the pre- historic period until the invention of the written record, let us endeavor to look at the history of civilization as a whole and consider the nature of the phenomena it displays, in the same way that we should consider any other group of natural phenomena. Any contemplation of the pattern of history gives at once an impression of cyclic change— of the rise, flo^vering, and fall of local civilizations of peoples and of empires. Many empires have risen to power and fallen again in the last 5000 years. Some had a very brief triumph, like that of Attila the Him or Alaric the Goth or, much more recently, of the Swedish Empire, which for a short time ruled all northeast- ern Europe. Others lasted much longer, the maximum dura- tion being the 3000 years which the Eg) ptian system endured. Indeed, when Tve contemplate Egyptian history we get the impression of cyclic rise and fall within the life of that coun- try, suggesting that this cyclic structure is not connected ^vith the individual nation, race, or empire but with the period of time, and that the long duration of the Egyptian system enables us to discern within that duration several cycles. Thus, from the prehistoric beginnings of Egypt, we find a rapid advance in architecture and sculpture to the time of the pyramid builders in the Fourth Dynasty, corresponding approximately to 3000 b.c. The artistic level of the architec- 28 THE PATH OF SCIENCE ture and sculpture o£ the Fourth Dynasty is considered by many students to be equal to any that has been reached by man, and the engineering work of the men who built the pyramids shows an enormous development in technical skill which was not exceeded for thousands of years. After the great flowering of the Old Kingdom, as it is called, the level of culture in Egypt slowly decayed. There was a period of decadence, of bad and weak government, with the introduc- tion of a feudal period, in which the land was governed, and too often misgoverned, by local barons. It was the first re- corded period of depression, and it was recognized as such by the writers of that time. Then, about 2100 B.C., the Middle Kingdom of Egypt rose in all its glory, producing not only a great renaissance of art but also the building, as Herodotus tells us, of the most prodigious palace ever erected by man- that great building which Herodotus says was greater than all the temples of Greece put together. Then again came darkness, this time from the invasion of the Hyksos, who seized the throne of Egypt. Again a king from the south restored the power of the Egyptians and founded the great Eighteenth Dynasty, which ended in a blaze of glory in 1350 B.C. Part of its treasure was buried in the grave of Tutankhamen. Then the long degeneration of Egypt started and continued until, with the invasions of the Assyrians and of the Persians, Egypt fell, never to rise again. Thus, within the recorded history of Egypt, there are three great cycles, their maxima corresponding approximately to 3000 B.C., 2000 B.C., and 1500 b.c; and following each of these maxima there was a period of depression and decay. In 1911, Sir Flinders Petrie wrote a little book that he entitled The Revolutions of Civilization.* In this book he uses his great knowledge of ancient history and, especially, of the history of Egypt to develop a general interpretation of history. He says: * W. M. Flinders Petrie, The Revolutions of Civilization, Harper's, 1911, reprinted by Peter Smith, New York, 1941. THE HELIX OF HISTORY 29 Can we extract a meaning from all the ceaseless turmoil and striving, and success and failure, of these thousands of years? Can we see any regular structure behind it all? Can we learn any general principles that may formulate the past, or be projected on the mists of the future? . . . Hitherto the comparatively brief outlook of Western his- tory has given us only the great age of classical civilization before modern times. We have been in the position of a child that remembers only a single summer before that which he enjoys. To such an one the cold, dark, miserable winter that has intervened seems a needless and inexplic- able interruption of a happier order— of a summer which should never cease. Only a few years ago a writer of repute deplored the mysterious fall of the Roman Empire, which in his view ought to have been always prosperous, and never have fallen to the barbarians. He was the child who could not understand the Tvinter. From what we now know, it is evident, even on the most superficial view% that civilization is an intermittent phenomenon. Thus throughout history Petrie finds that cycles of civili- zation have succeeded each other. In each cycle, the phases are marked by similar characteristics which may be detected by studying the products of the period. Each cycle has its period of preparation, shown essentially in art as archaism; then a period of maturity; and, finally, a period of decline and decadence, to be follow^ed by the archaic period of the next cycle. Petrie uses the simile of summer and winter for the growth and fall of civilization and points out that this analogy of the Great Year w^as familiar to the ancients. Petrie uses as the most valuable index of the cyclic change the de- velopment of sculpture, largely because it is more permanent than other products of handicraft. He points out, however, that sculpture "is only one, and not the most important, of the many subjects that might be compared throughout the various ages." [But] "it is available over so long a period in so many countries." He adds to sculpture in his survey some discussion of painting, music, mechanics, wealth, and even political developments. It is remarkable that he lays little stress on the development of technology. 30 THE PATH OF SCIENCE In the last ten thousand years, covering the neoHthic and historic periods, Petrie finds evidence of eight cycles, of which the first two were found in prehistoric Egypt; then four, covering the whole dynastic period of Egypt; and, last, the classic and western European cycles. Each cycle starts with an archaic period characterized particularly by the careful working of detail without treating it as an integral part of the whole. The rise from archaism to inaturity is almost always rapid, and, after a period of inaturity, decline sets in, characterized by a tendency to stiffness and conventionality and a slow worsening and degradation of the style. The most familiar cycle is, of course, that of the classical period. We have the archaic Greek statues of the sixth cen- tury B.C., followed by the great classical period of maturity in the late fifth and fourth centuries, and then the transfor- mation into the Hellenistic period, followed by the long decay through Roinan times. To some extent, perhaps, this cycle is complicated by a revival in the Roman period, accom- panied by a copying of the Greek classical works by the Roman sculptors. If the classical period alone w-ere known to us, we should dismiss the whole matter as being peculiar to the historical events of that period; and this is generally done by historians trained primarily in classical history. But the Egyptian evi- dence for the existence of parallel cycles in sculpture is over- whelming. The same type of cycle can be traced, for in- stance, in Petrie's fourth period— that of the pyramid build- ers—in the rise of the archaic sculpture, the freedom of the sculpture and architecture of the Fourth Dynasty, the slow decline through the Fifth and Sixth Dynasties, and the col- lapse of the sculpture as the feudal system displaced the cen- tralized government of the Old Kingdom. A new archaic sculpture then came into evidence, rising to the maturity of Petrie's fifth period in the Twelfth Dynasty, and then deteri- orated, disappearing with the invasion of the Hyksos. The sixth period cycle is that of tlie Ne^v Kingdom, ^vhere the period of decline was very prolonged and ^\ as marked by the THE HELIX OF HISTORY 31 great temple gioup built by the Ramesside rulers. To see the difference between the artistic levels in maturity and in the decline, one has only to compare Hatshepsut's temple at Deir el Bahri with the great hall at Karnak built three hun- dred years later. To determine the duration of these periods, Petrie selects the best-defined position in each cycle of the development of art as the close of the archaic age in sculpture. This is best defined, of course, because of the rapid improvement that is generally noted at this stage; and, by means of it, there is possible some appreciation of the period between the '^vaves of art in successive cycles. Petrie believes that the average period is about thirteen hundred years. It must be remem- bered, however, that Petrie's early chronology is not accepted by other scholars and that it is generally agreed that his dates before 1600 b.c. need correction. If we use the chronology generally accepted now, Petrie's chart gives five complete periods in four thousand years, an average of eight hundred years per cycle.* By making judgments for subjects other than sculpture, Petrie found that painting and literature tended to reach their climax later than sculpture. He draws a chart in which the different periods are shown as if they w^ere on the surface of a cylinder, each period ending, of course, at the date at which the next period began. In this chart, the points that he has marked for sculpture, painting, literature, mechanics, and wealth tend to diverge, each of them coming later as the cycles progress. If this chart is redrawn with the early chronology changed to accord with that accepted by J. H. Breasted and other modern scholars— 3000 b.c. as the beorin- o ning of the Third Dynasty and 1800 B.C. as the end of the T^velfth Dynasty— it becomes that sho^vn in Figure 1. Inter- polating the new dates derived from those selected by Petrie for the end of the archaic style in sculpture in each cycle, we get the zigzag line shown. It is no longer possible to draw a * But the modified chart shown in Figure 2, p. 34, gives a duration of five hundred years per cycle. 32 THE PATH OF SCIENCE o O O o a o o o O O o o o o in O in o in o o rO to ej CVl — — in ■av- 'o ^ \l m CD o o o o ir> o lO rO QJ a o C/3 r— I u U a, O U S-i o w p o o o in >o O o o 0 a- aw- THE HELIX OF HISTORY 33 Straight line for sculpture, and the cycles clearly differ in length, the early ones lasting only about five hundred years, while the classical and medieval cycles last sixteen hundred and fifty and fifteen hundred years, respectively. The long cycles can very probably be corrected by con- sideration of the historical facts. The classical cycle in Greece did not start in 1200 B.C.; at any rate, it did not start at any level corresponding to that existing in Egypt in 1200 B.C. If we put the beginning of the Greek classical cycle at 800 B.C., and its end at 200 B.C., with the defeat of Macedon by Rome, we get a cycle of normal length, which can be followed by a Roman cycle of six hundred and fifty years, starting with the destruction of Carthage and ending with the fall of Rome. The course of art in the Roman cycle is naturally affected by the persistence of Greek architecture and statuary. Similarly, we can accept a discontinuity be- t^veen the Roman and the medieval cycles and give the latter its beginning in a.d. 1000 and its end in a.d. 1700, a length of seven hundred years. If we accept these modifications of Petrie's later cycles, we get the chart shown in Figure 2. In an article in Antiquity, Collingwood discusses Petrie's book and questions the value of his standards of artistic achievement.* He points out that what Petrie calls decadent another critic of art might consider beautiful. For example, he holds that the Byzantine grave stele of Bellicia (Figure 3), which Petrie classifies as occurring in the period of degrada- tion between the classical and medieval periods, sho^vs vigor of drawing and an "unearthly" beauty, and he considers that it is unfair to compare its beauty ^vith that of a classical stele, since it cannot be compared either as superior or inferior but only different; that is, Collingwood claims that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder," and that there are no fixed stand- ards by which art at different times can be compared. He says, in fact, that not only are there no dark ages except in the sense in which every age is dark, and that there are ages * R. G. Collingwood, "The Theory of Historical Cycles and Prog- ress," Antiquity, II, 435 (1927). 34 THE PATH OF SCIENCE o o O O o o o O in o in O lO ro CM CM Q. a o ^o '6 CO CD CD o o o o o o If) <> If) lO to rj •73 U u o u CM O o O o o o o o o O o o o o o in O Irt o in o ir> Kl lO cvj n a THE HELIX OF HISTORY 35 that individual historians dishke and misunderstand, but there are also no decadences. Thus Colling^vood argues that the cyclical view of history is a function of the limitation of historical knowledge. History appears to consist of discon- nected episodes, but, if we had more knowledge, we should mm V/RCO mx ins Figure 3. The Stele of Bellicia. (From Petrie's The Revolutions of Civilization, published by Peter Smith, New York, 1941.) see that the episodes were connected; and he feels that Petrie sees the structure of history as imposed by the historian view- ing the scene and not inherent in the facts. This view does not seem to accord ^vith the real situation. Petrie's cycles are not based on the view of beauty adopted by the onlooker; they are based largely on a technical matter, the skill sho^vn in execution. A critic misfht endorse the scribblings of a child or the primitive work of a Negro in the forest as representing a degree of beauty which entitled them to be considered excellent art, but there is no doubt that the 36 THE PATH OF SCIENCE ability of the child or of the primitive Negro to reproduce line and form is low. In the same way, the ability of artists to dra^v or of sculptors to design and carve or of architects to design and build has varied at different periods. Their technical skill is not constant. The artist who drew the stele of Bellicia may have drawn it in that form because he thought it was beautiful, but it is absurd to imagine that that artist was the equal in technical skill of the artist who carved the Attic tombstones of the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. It is very easy in a country like Eg)pt, where the standards of judgments did not vary, to observe the variation in the tech- nical ability of the painters, sculptors, and architects. The carvings in the tombs show mastery over the subject, w^hich increased as the cycle progressed, and then the style became limited and stiff and conventional as decadence set in. This is not a change in objective; the objects represented are the same. It is a change in skill, in the mastery of the art. In the decadent stage it is not uncommon to find that the artists copied the designs of an earlier period because they recog- nized that they had not the ability to originate designs of the same quality as those which they were copying. If, then, we accept Petrie's view of the existence of these cultural cycles, let us follow his discussion of their origin. After considering the effects of changes of climate, which have often produced migrations of peoples, Petrie considers that the rise of a new civilization is conditioned by the im- migration of a different people; that is to say, it arises from a mixture of two different stocks. The effective mixture can- not take place all at once. When a new stock migrates into a country, usually in a military invasion, there is an appre- ciable barrier between the two races. But such barriers always give way in time ^vhen the t^vo races are in contact, and in seven or eight centuries the two races are completely blended. Petrie concludes, therefore, that the cycle is started by the invasion of a new stock, which introduces an archaic period superimposed on the decadent style of the previous cycle, and then, as the new stock blends with the old, artistic THE HELIX OF HISTORY 37 and social development increases until the maximum is reached. For most of the cycles discussed by Petrie, the migration of a new stock appears to be a historical fact. The dynastic people of Egypt, for instance, initiated Petrie's fourth cycle, in which the peak \\a.s reached in the Fourth Dynasty; people from the south, that of the Twelfth Dynasty; the Hyksos invasion and the people of Thebes represent the new blood for the New Kingdom cycle; the Doric invasion of Greece initiated the classical cycle; and the influx of peoples into the Roman Empire, the medieval cycle. The origin of cycles is discussed in a very interesting article by O. G. S. Crawford.* Starting ^vith Petrie's idea that the development of a new phase of civilization depends upon the crossing of two stocks having their ow^n cultures, Crawford pursues a biological analogy, comparing Petrie's different stocks with different varieties of animals and concluding with a generalization that each phase of civilization has a life of its own and may be regarded as if it were a species composed of living creatures. Thus the life of each phase corresponds to the life of a species as a whole; the units composing the phases at any moment of history correspond to the individ- uals composing the species; and a phase, therefore, is born and passes through maturity to decline and extinction, just as does an individual. The idea is not new. Crawford quotes Sir Arthur Keith, ^vho says: "The resemblance between the body physiological and the body politic is more than an analogy; it is a reality." f Just as a multicellular organism evolves from a single cell, so the cultural community has evolved from free-roving in- dividuals or small groups, this occurring, as has already been pointed out, wdth the introduction of agriculture, -when the nomads settled at one point and founded commimities. This very operation can be observed occurring today, -^vhen the * O. G. S. Crawford, "Historical Cycles," Antiquity, V, 5 (1931). fSir Arthur Keith, Concerning Man's Origin, New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1928. 38 THE PATH OF SCIENCE Bedouin of the desert have settled down into communities in Trans-Jordan as cukivators of the soil. And it is interesting to notice that the fact that the cultivators are of the same tribes as the Bedouin does not preserve them from raiding by the nomads. With the integration of the individual into a cultural coinmunity, subdivision of function develops, just as the single cells develop special functions in the multicel- lular organisms. Crawford concludes that, looking at the process as a whole, we can see that life evolves in a spiral. It begins with a single cell. After many ages of development, an organism is evolved that finally becomes a huinan being. Human beings may be considered to be, in turn, the units of organized nations that will evolve until they, in turn, become the units or individuals of yet another society, this last being, perhaps, the world state from which those races and social systems that cannot be incorporated will eventually die out. The idea of a society as an organism is to be found, of course, in Spencer's synthetic philosophy; and the ideas that Craw- ford discusses are dealt with formally in J. Needham's Herbert Spencer Lecture.^ Leaving these wider specidations, we may ask: What is the value of this cyclic theory to a student of history? When we study a comparatively brief period of ancient history, it is im- possible to understand its relation to any general scheme of ^vorld history. But if we accept the idea that civilization moves in cycles, we can place any brief period in relation to the events that preceded and followed it. As Petrie says, the interpretation of the later Roman Empire is quite different according to whether one assuines that the fall of Rome was a unique phenomenon or whether one feels that the fall of Rome was really one manifestation of the long decadence of the classical cycle, to be follo^ved eventually by the archaic period of the Middle Ages and the revival of the western cycle. When discussing Roman law in Aspects of Social Be- * J. Needham, "Integrative Levels," p. 233, Time, the Refreshing River, London, George Allen and Unwin, 1943. THE HELIX OF HISTORY 39 havior,* Frank finds it necessary to argue against the assump- tion that Roman la^v had behind it nothing but a develop- ment from a most primitive cuUure and reminds his readers that the human race had existed many thousands of years be- fore the reign of Romukis. He complains of some evolution- ists, who write "as though Homer had just bid good-bye to a grandfather A\ho hung by a tail from a Thracian oak tree." f The cyclic theory is of valu.e, ho^vever, not only as a guide to the thinking of the historian but also as a suggestion to the modern philosopher. In an essay on modernism, Raymond Dexter Havens expresses his uneasiness at the trend of art. J He finds himself unhappy in a ^vorld in which Picasso is one of the most esteemed of living artists, Schonberg and Hinde- muth are representatives of music, and James Joyce and E. E. Cuminings are leaders of literature, though he finally braces hiinself to accept his fate and to see ^vhat he can make of God in these "modern" methods of expression. But this type of art is not really modern; there are many examples of it in the past. If Picasso and many of his followers had painted in the sixth century, we shoidd have classified the \vo\k very simply as decadent. Epstein's sculpture would have been in its natural home in Greece during the Byzantine period or, for that matter, in Thebes in the ninth century B.C. Art is not moving do^vn^vards permanently; it is merely moving through the decadent stages of its cycle. And just as the archaic and classical periods followed the decadent Egyptian work of the ninth century B.C. and architecture in Europe developed from that of the sixth century to its glorious maxi- mum in the early Gothic of the twelfth, so there ^\'ill again be artists who can depict natural objects and writers who can explain what they mean. * Tenney Frank, Aspects of Social Behavior, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1932. -j- This shows the danger of a classicist using scientific analogies. Monkeys with prehensile tails are unknown in the Eastern Hemisphere! X Raymond Dexter Havens, The Burden of Incertitude, Rochester, University of Rochester, 1944. 40 THE PATH OF SCIENCE In spite of the repetition of the rise and fall of art, of lit- erature, and even of civilization as a whole, mankind has made progress through recorded history. Cities and empires have risen, and cities and empires have fallen. Artists, en- gineers, and philosophers have lived and worked, died and been forgotten, but none the less, some systematic secular change has occurred. If the circle has come its full round, the pattern of history is a spiral, not a ring, for the start of a new cycle of civilization is never identical with that of the last; and, on the average, each cycle starts from a point a little above that of the preceding cycle, so that the successive turns of the spiral are not coplanar, and the pattern may be more accurately depicted as a helix.* All through the paleo- lithic period, little change occurred. Nevertheless, there came a time when the production of the flint tools improved, and we recognize that this phase lies above that of the pre- ceding phase, a change recognized by the term "neolithic" instead of "paleolithic." Then somewhat more rapid prog- ress is made; and in one or two more turns of the helix we reach the point where agi'iculture is discovered, where the villages and towns come into being, and then where writing is invented. And now successive turns rise more rapidly from each other, and we see that it is necessary to consider the meaning of this vertical component of our diagram. Since time is represented by the angular co-ordinate, the vertical component must be the level of achievement, dif- ferent according to the field of accomplishment selected- sculpture, architecture, engineering skill, literature, and so forth. This is the level of civilization as a whole and not that of any single component. In many fields, there is little or no secular improvement— in the art of sculpture, for in- stance—and there must, therefore, be some factor in the ver- tical component of the helix that has steadily increased and * The frontispiece is an attempt to realize this graphically. It is a photograph of a helix of wire. The lower coils are close together, and, as they rise, they are distorted and even overlap, but finally the vertical component increases rapidly. THE HELIX OF HISTORY 41 now determines the progress of civilization as a whole. This component can only be that of progress in the field in which, according to Sarton, it has definite and unquestionable meaning, that of "systematized, positive knowledge," that is. Science. Through the ages we see an increase in man's understand- ing of nature and his control of natural forces. Astronomy started as astrology, but this involved the observation of the positions of the heavenly bodies and thus led to the astronom- ical determination of time and the establishment of a calen- dar. Moreover, fiom obser\ ations of the stars it was possible to form an idea of world geography; and this made possible the development of navigation away from the coasts. Prac- tical metallurgy led into chemistry, for which alchemy played the part that astrology played for astronomy. Through a vast amount of suffering man attained some know^ledge of anatomy, because of his need for surgery, and finally of physiology. Thus, step by step, science advanced through the ages until we reached the seventeenth century. Then there was a sudden and definite change in the rate of learn- ing. The experimental method of research ^vas discovered, and the advance in scientific method and knowledsre sud- denly became much more rapid. The cause and nature of this sudden change are discussed later. Indeed, the nature of science and the methods of experimental inquiry form the principal subjects of this book. In the meantime, we may complete our picture of the helix of history by realizing that it shows a steady increase in the separation of the coils and then, suddenly, after the discovery of the methods of experi- mental science, springs upward in an almost vertical direction. Chapter III THE METHOD OF SCIENCE In the previous chapter the great pageant of the historical past ^vas discussed, in which \\'e can trace the gro^vth of scien- tific kno^vledge, ^v^hich has followed the rise and fall of civi- lization but Avhich, nevertheless, has increased as tiine has gone on, so that it has been the index of all man's progi^ess. Now let us consider the nature and origin of this scientific knowledge. But first it is necessary to re\'ise and clarify the implications of some earlier statements. Progiess in civiliza- tion has been said to correspond to an increase in scientific knowledge and to its application to the social and economic life of the time. Up to the present, science and technology have been treated as synonymous; but we find upon investi- gation that they do not have a common origin. Scientific knowledo^e arises from certain characteristics in the mind of man ^vhich cause him to seek to understand phenomena. Technology arises from an entirely different motive— the desire to acquire more or better things. The flint knapper was not a scientist; he '^vas a technologist, and he proceeded by the immemorial method of technology- practice and invention. The science of flint knapping ^vould involve a study of the structure of the flint, of those proper- ties which produce the conchoidal fracture characteristic of the substance, and this was far beyond the ability of anybody who wished to make flints for practical use as tools. In practice, technology advances to an astonishing extent in the absence of any accurate knoTvledge of the principles on ^vhich it is based. ^Vhen the modern building contractor under- takes the erection of a building, he makes a survey of the materials he will need and arranges for the delivery of the 42 THE METHOD OF SCIEXCE 43 necessary quantity as required. But a primitive builder will fetch his materials as he wants them, obtaining more and more until the building is finished, without any preliminary survey of the quantity required. Modern industry makes use of statistical surveys and cost analysis. Only a fe^v years ago such aids to operation ^vere unknots n. Such matters have no relation to the technical skill of the craftsman; the builders of the Pyramids and the goldsmiths ^vho wrought the coffin of Tutankhamen ^vere craftsmen of superb skill, but they probably did little calculating before they started work. Technology has usually proceeded by trial and error. The practice of photography, for instance, preceded any knowl- edge of the theory of the photographic process. Photographic materials w^ere made by trial, and to this day the making of photogiaphic materials is in advance of the understanding of the basic science of the subject. Advances in photographic science have pro\'ided a "^vorking theory of the light sensi- tivity of photographic materials, of ^vhat happens to them during exposure, and of ^vhat happens to them during de- velopment. But the relationship bet^veen the operations of making the photographic emulsion and the properties of the resultant emulsion is not yet understood. Only a ie^v years ago practically nothing was kno^vn of the "^vay in "vvhich cer- tain dyes sensitize silver bromide in photographic emulsions to the regions of the spectrinn which the dyes absorb. The matter is being elucidated, but ignorance of it did not pre- vent our discovering great numbers of dyes and applying them to the sensitizing^ of silver bromide. There comes a point in technology, however, where prog- ress is sloAV or even stops for lack of knowledge of the funda- mental science. Progress in photogiaphy has been greatly accelerated by our luiderstanding the physical chemistry un- derlying the photographic process. Progress in engineering is dependent to a very great extent on fundamental physics, on ^vhich all engineering is based. But the invention of the steam engine ^vas not dependent upon the understanding of Ne^vton's work, nor was the de- 44 THE PATH OF SCIENCE velopment of the gasoline engine dependent upon the under- standing of Carnot's cycle. It is easier to improve engines if you understand thermodynamics; but the men ^vho invented the engines did not understand thermodynamics, and many of those A\ ho improved them almost to the present level did so ^vithout any knowledge of the scientific principles which underlay their ^vork. The greatest inventor of all time, Thomas A. Edison, was not a scientist and was not even interested in science. He w-as interested in doing: thinQ^s and not in understanding how he could do them. Nevertheless, the advance of technology has been greatly stimulated by the advance of scientific knowledge and, to a considerable extent, has been made possible by that advance. Edison, for in- stance, observed the Edison effect; that is, from a glowing filament in a lamp, a current would pass through the vacuum to a second filament in the same lamp. But Edison was not interested in studying this further or, at any rate, did not do so, and it w^as left for Owen Richardson to sho^v the origin of the current and for J. A. Fleming and his successors to design the electronic tubes, on which so much of our recent electrotechnology is based. The ^vhole technology of elec- tricity is based on scientific discoveries, and without those discoveries the technologists ^vould probably never have ap- plied electrical methods, because there is no convenient source of electricity in nature except the intractable lightning flash and the phenomena of static electricity, which have even at present very little application in practice. Technology even today proceeds by trial and error, the experimental method, but as a result of our knowledge of pure science, we have learned to experiment more actively and more efficiently. Science suggests to the technologist ex- periments by means of which progress can be made. Tech- nology is not an offspring of science; it is a separate activity of mankind, but it is very much stimulated by the other human activities of scientific study and research. The special activity of mankind which we call science began as a classification of facts. Certain types of men have a desire THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 45 to classify facts into patterns, to associate facts ^vith each other and thus understand, as they ^vould say, the connections bet^veen the facts. This understanding usually arises from repetition of the same facts in the same order. There is no difficulty, for instance, in associating the phenomenon of rain with the presence of clouds, and one of the earliest facts of Tvhich man ^vas a^vare must have been that rain comes from the clouds. It was much later, however, w^hen he realized that lightning and thunder were also natural phenomena associated with the clouds; and primitive man does not seem to have associated them at all ^\dth rain. The beginnings of science, then, are to be found in a system of classification in ^vhich different facts are associated and regarded as being in the same classification or, as it is usually put, as being due to the same cause. Very often, early man was ^vrong in his classification, and his association of facts proved later to be incorrect; such incorrect associations have persisted through the ages. AVhen such incorrect associations have been held by many men for many years, w^e often call them superstitions^ and they become so rooted in our minds that they are very difficult to eradicate. One of the most interesting systems of incorrect associa- tion of facts is known as magic. One of the earliest facts of which an animal becomes conscious is that its o^vn body is not functioning normally. Usually the trouble corrects it- self and the animal recovers. As soon as man began to reason, he must have tried to find remedies for his bodily disorders; and those remedies were associated ^\ ith his daily routine and especially, perhaps, with food. If a plant can make you ill, cannot the same plant or another make you well? If you eat the same plant, you are using a homeopathic medicine; if you eat a different plant, an allopathic medicine. If you simply hang the plant around your neck, you are employing magic. In so far as men have kno^vledge, they use that knowledge. AVhere knowledge fails, they attempt to supply it, and ^ve term the attempt magic. Thus, in the medical w^orks of the Egyptians, anatomical and surgical knowledge and the diag- 46 THE PATH OF SCIENCE nosis and treatment of disease are interminorled with magrical spells. Among primitive peoples, magic has always played a great part, and it is perhaps a little difficult for us to realize how deeply the principles of magic are entrenched in the thought and history of man. Sir J. G. Frazer * analyzes the principles on which magic is based: first, that like produces like or that an effect re- sembles its cause; and, second, that things which have once been in contact with each other continue to act on each other at a distance. From the first of these principles, which he calls the lazv of similarity, it is inferred that a man can pro- duce any effect he desires merely by imitating it. If a savage, for instance, wants a good crop, he will take care to have it sown by a woman who has many children; or, if a witch doctor, as the practitioners of primitive magic are called, wants to hurt a man, he will make an image of him and then destroy it in the belief that just as the image suffers, so does the man, and when it perishes, he must die. From the second principle, it is inferred that whatever is done to a material object will affect any person with whom the object was once in contact. Most savages are very careful to burn any hair they cut off or the parings of their nails, lest an enemy inight use them to do them harm. And in some African tribes, anything once touched by the king must be carefully de- stroyed. The negative principle, corresponding to the principle of similarity, is the great widespread la^v of taboo, which governs the things that a man abstains from doing lest, on the principle that like produces like, they should spoil his luck. The Eskimo boys, for instance, are forbidden to play cat's cradle because if they do so their fingers might in later life become entangled in the harpoon line. The principles of inagic are so 'widespread that almost all the acts of primitive peoples are connected with the production of good luck or with the avoidance of ill luck. These wide- spread principles are by no means extinct among us today. * J. G. Frazer, TJie Golden Bough, p. 11, one-volume edition, New York, The Macmillan Company, 1922. THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 47 On careful analysis many of our beliefs will be found to be essentially magical in origin though we are generally no longer conscious of the sources from \vhich those beliefs have sprung. Malinowski * considers that Frazer overstresses the ritual aspect of magic and that it is the practical aspect of magic as an answer to necessity that explains its persistence. A sick man or a bereaved woman feels that something must be done to assuage the hurt; and, if no effective remedy is available from knowledge, magic takes its place. An even greater factor than magic in the history of man has been the development of religion. Very early man ob- served that his food and well-being were closely connected ^vith natural phenomena, such as the cycle of the seasons, which we know to be due to the movement of the earth around the sun. He, ho^vever, catalogued the facts that he knew under the hypothesis that natural phenomena ^vere due to the actions of intelligent beings made in his image; and he gave these invented beings jurisdiction over gioups of natural phenomena, so that there were gods of the earth, the sky, the sea, and minor gods of trees, rivers, and mountains. Sometimes psychological phenomena ^vere classified in the same way. There were gods of love and ^var, of terror and sorrow, and thus ^vas built up the structure of religion. AV^hen the gieat prophets came— Buddha, Jesus, and Mohammed— their philosophy drew on this structure and their followers incorporated much of the earlier religious belief iYi the sys- tems of philosophy that were founded on their teaching. To- day, among what ^ve term religious belie js, we continually encounter groups of associations that started as hypotheses to be used in the classification of natural phenomena. Christian hymns still repeat the belief that the crash of sound that follows the discharge of electricity from a cloud to earth is the voice of a god. But basically religion fulfills a need that men have always felt, the need for knowledge of the funda- mental issues of existence. How did the world come into * B. Mahnowski, A Scientific Theory of Culture, p. 199, Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1944. 48 THE PATH OF SCIENCE beinof? Whence did man come? And where does he 2^0 after death? These are the problems of religion that differ from magic in subject matter,* since magic relates to the specific problems of everyday life— to health and sickness and the supply of food and water. Bit by bit, in spite of mistakes and false starts, man suc- ceeded in building up a series of associations among the facts he knew that bore the only test having any value, that of confirmation by direct observation or experiment. Through- out the greater portion of recorded history, the material froin which scientific conclusions were drawn was the observation of naturally occurring facts. Astronomy was, of course, de- rived purely from observation. Medicine in the sense of anatomy and pathology was the observation of the structure of the body and of disease. The experimental sciences were almost non-existent before the seventeenth century, when direct experiments were made to ascertain facts that could not be observed without such experiments. As A\e have already seen, it was the development of experimental science that produced changes in the evolution of society that ^vere so startling compared with those that had occurred previously. The method of science is the accumulation of facts, partly by direct observation of naturally occurring phenomena- aided, of course, by all the instrumental appliances that have been developed to assist the use of the senses— and partly by the production of new facts as the result of direct experiment. These facts are then classified in such a way as to sho\\^ their interrelations and coincidences and are built up into a body of ideas that are considered valid by the experts in the sub- ject. This body of ideas is itself the science of which they form the material. Thus the science of physics consists of a gToup of physical ideas accepted as valid by physicists; the same is true for chemistry, for biology, and the other sciences. These groups of ideas are undergoing constant change. As new facts accumulate, they are integrated into the old ideas * Malinowski, loc. cit. THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 49 or, if necessary, into new ideas; sometimes new facts force the revision and change of accepted ideas. The methods used in different branches of science are to some extent peculiar to each, and the tests required to justify the acceptance of an idea as vaUd are selected by those working in each branch. Thus, as Polanyi says, "Science consists of autonomous branches, ruled by their several systems of ideas; each of these is continuously producing new minor propositions suitable for scientific verification; and by these verifications they are being steadily strengthened and revised." * The methods of scientific research are analyzed by W. H. George in his book, The Scientist in Action.-f He defines scientific research as a form of human action, and science, that is, ordered knowledge, as a product of the activity of human beings. But it is not a product of the activity of all human beings; it is only a special and very limited class of human beings Avho can produce scientific knowledge. The first qualification of a scientist is often said to be curi- osity, that is, a scientist is interested in the observation of facts; but this alone does not distinguish scientists. If it did, there w^ould be far more scientists than there are, since curi- osity is a very common characteristic of human beings. A scientist not only observes facts but has an instinctive desire to classify them and set them in order. It is by this classifi- cation of facts that science progresses. The mere observation of facts is not by any means a simple operation. To be of value, facts must be generally received by different observers as true or acceptable; and this, of course, accords with the practice of scientific research, that facts about which there is any doubt must be checked by different observers and discrepancies must be reconciled. If various observers cannot agree as to the facts, it is customary * M. Polanyi, Rights and Duties of Science, p. 175, the Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies, Manchester, England, October 1939. f \V. H. George, The Scientist in Action, London, Williams and Norgate, Ltd., 1936. 50 THE PATH OF SCIENCE to put those facts in what we may term a "suspense account," reserving judgment of their validity until a consensus by qualified observers is reached. In the history of science, many observations have been published that were not ac- cepted immediately as accurate. Some of them were later agreed to be erroneous; many were confirmed by further study. A requirement for this agreement between different ob- servers is that they be critical of the method of observation employed. It is well known to psychologists, for instance, that the reports of different observers of a series of incidents may disagiee. George quotes an experiment by A. AV. P. Wolters * in which a disorderly incident was deliberately introduced into the middle of a lecture he was giving on observation. The students ^\ ere then asked to write at once a detailed account of what had occurred. An accurate and full report would have contained ten essential points of de- tail. The average number of points correctly reported was 3,5, and the reports contained many completely false state- ments, it being impossible for some of the details to have occurred in that particular room. The cause of these dis- crepancies is, of course, the unanticipated nature of the events. Reliable observations can be obtained only if the observer is paying attention to the action observed. The more suddenly the phenomenon happens and the more un- expected it is, the less likely are reliable observations to be made. A second factor in observation is that the observer will see more if he is not only looking at what is to be observed, but looking for it. A histological section under a microscope will convey no information to one who is ignorant of minute anatomy. I recall once studying an x-ray photograph on an illuminator. The photograph had been taken as a test of the photographic plate. Some one looking over my shoulder said: "Isn't that a beautiful photograph?" To this I replied * George, op. cit., p. 79. THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 51 at once: "I was thinking it was very bad." W'e were, of course, ol^serving different things. He was interested in the general appearance of the radiograph and would have been equally pleased ^vith any photograph of the same subject. I was critically observing the rendering of detail in the shadows, in ^vhich respect that particular photographic material ^vas unsatisfactory. Observations must be controlled by knowledge of the errors which the sense organ itself may introduce in the ob- servation. The W'hole class of optical illusions, for instance, may produce false conclusions. The unaided ear, and espe- cially the untrained ear, cannot be trusted to give reliable information as to sounds. There is also the question of personal error. The observer must recognize what H. G. Wells calls "the limitations of the instrument," not only as regards the sense organ but also, as Wells uses it, in regard to the mind itself. In scientific research, observation is not always direct; much use is made of instruments and apparatus. Instead of the eye, the photographic film or the photoelectric cell may be used. Sound vibrations may be measured electrically. Instruments have many advantages over the unaided senses. The microscope makes very small things visible. The tele- scope collects light from a large lens surface and then enables magnification to be applied. Moreover, such instrumental methods of observation enable us to overcome the limitations imposed by the recording system of the brain. It does not matter how unexpected or ho^v rapid and transient a phe- nomenon is, if we have a photographic record of it. A motion picture of the disturbance in the classroom ^vould have enabled all observers to agree on the facts after they had seen it several times. The sudden flash of the lines in the spectrum at the second contact point of an eclipse can be recorded photographically and studied at leisure. Observations made with instruments are essentially judg- ments of coincidence. The observer measures a length by seeing the point at w^hich the object to be measured comes 52 THE PATH OF SCIENCE into coincidence with a mark on a scale, or weighs by ob- serving tlie weight which will enable the pointer of the bal- ance to swing uniformly over the center of the scale. The impersonal data, therefore, that form the basis of scientific knowledge come from judgments of coincidence, and it is only when such determinations of coincidence can be made that general agreement between different observers is found. When men are asked to judge the values of truth or beauty, goodness or merit, there is no approximation to universal agreement; but different observers will agree when they are making coincidence observations. It is true that the precision of coincidence observations is limited. A scientist is sometimes asked how he can tell that certain points really coincide. The answer is that the word really has no meaning. Within certain limits, fixed by the sensitivity of the instrument and by the skill of the indi- vidual in judging coincidence, different observers will agree. As Newton wrote in a letter in 1675, dispute about what can be observed in an experiment "is to be decided not by dis- course but by new trial of the experiment." * In the observation of facts, the scientist and, indeed, all human beings select some of the facts for attention and do not treat all of them in the same way. Scientific facts repre- sent, indeed, only a very small portion, selected from all the facts that could be observed. The selection depends upon the previous knowledge and upon the interest of the observer. Suppose, of two men entering a room, one was extremely thirsty, and the other was a painter interested in modern art. The first on entering the room ^vould see the jug of water on the table, and, whether or not his manners would restrain him from making a dash at it, the jug ^vould certainly be the center of his interest until his thirst was satisfied. The artist, not being thirsty, would probably not be conscious of the existence of the jug. His interest might be attracted by a picture on the wall. An extreme case of this difference in * George, op. cit., p. 100. THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 53 interest and experience is shown when an animal, a dog, for instance, enters a room in which people are sitting. The dog's reaction to his new environment is quite different from that of any human being. The scientist in general, being by definition a person curi- ous concerning facts and eager to record and arrange them, observes phenomena somewhat differently from other human beings. The parody addressed to Huxley * by Miss May Kendall comes to mind: Primroses by the river's brim Dicotyledons were to him. And they were nothing more. But when scientists are definitely making observations in practical research, they go much further. They deliberately choose certain facts for observation, facts which in some way fit into the pattern in which they are interested. When a scientist has selected the facts which he wishes to observe and has made the necessary coincidence observations, for instance, by means of instruments, he classifies the facts. In biology, and especially the more general biological work which comes under the heading of natural history, classifi- cations sometimes remain simple classifications; at any rate, for a long period. Thus Charles Darwin classified enormous numbers of facts relating to the properties and habits of animals of many kinds in all parts of the w^orld. But, even- tually, the scientist, if he is really a scientist, desires to cover this whole classification by some statement or formula into which the observations can be integrated as a whole. Darwin, who had collected great numbers of facts relating to the existence and survival of species among animals, finally evolved his doctrine of natural selection and embodied the whole in his great book. On the Origin of Species. It must always be remembered that it is the observed facts themselves that have validity, and the formulae or statements about * Leonard Huxley, Life and Letters of T. H. Huxley, p. 112, Vol. I, London, Macmillan and Co., 1900. 54 THE PATH OF SCIENCE them are merely convenient methods of summarizing them, classifying them, and suggesting the possibility of the observa- tion of further facts. Facts are the foundation of science however they may be interpreted. As Faraday said: I cannot doubt but that he who, as a wise philosopher, has most power of penetrating the secrets of nature, and guessing by hypothesis . . . will also be most careful . . . to distinguish that knowledge which consists of assumption, by which I mean theory and hypothesis, from that which is the knowledge of facts and laws, never raising the former to the dignity or authority of the latter nor con- fusing the latter more than is inevitable with the former.* The patterns into which scientific men fit the facts which they have observed are generally known as hypotheses or theories. In practice, a theory is an elaborate hypothesis that deals with a wider range of facts than does the simple hy- pothesis. In the initial stages, especially before verification, what is later called a theory is often called an hypothesis. At the point where an hypothesis is formed after the considera- tion of the observed facts, the scientist ceases to consider only the facts and proceeds to draw on his imagination. He at- tempts to see some connection between the facts he has ob- served, to form some pattern that he can generalize into which they fit. Then he examines his generalization to see whether any facts relevant to the subject and of the type which he has been observing invalidate that generalization. This is the very important verification of a theory; an un- verified theory is merely an initial guess and is not accepted as valid. Further verification is obtained by deducing from the theory results leading to facts that can be tested by ob- servation. If this test is met and the facts are established, the theory is considered to have strong support and to be a scientific theory having validity until facts are discovered that are not consonant with it. Thus we see that a scientific theory is formulated by the examination of a selected gioup * Michael Faraday, Philosophical Magazine, 24, 136 (1844). (Quoted by George.) THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 55 of facts in accordance with certain basic ideas that may be termed the postulates. It is necessary that these postulates should be logical and that they should be clear in the sense that they can be reasoned about. Moreover, in scientific work stress is laid on the simplicity of the postulates and on the postulates being as few in number as possible. The simplicity rule is always applied when a choice must be made between two theories. Newton says: "Nature is pleased with simplicity." * This is so well recognized in scientific work that there are classic statements of the rules of systematic inquiry. William of Occam, the English philosopher of the fourteenth century, expressed it in a phrase which is known as ''Occam's razor." In Hamilton's translation, it is: "Neither more, nor more onerous causes are to be assumed than are necessary to account for the phenomena." Newton's version in his Rules of Philosophizing reads: "No more causes of natural things are to be admitted than such as are both true and sufficient to explain the phenomena of these things." In practice, this demand for simplicity competes with the further requirements that the theory shall fit as many types of fact as possible. The very simple rule that Robert Boyle gave for the relation between the volume and the pressure of a gas holds for only a limited range of pressures. In order to cover a wider range, it must be complicated by the addition of the term suggested by van der Waals. George points out that, provided the postulates of a theory are sound, it does not matter if they appear absurd or con- trary to common sense. Almost everything new appears ab- surd. Absurdity is associated primarily with the unusual. The headdress of a Zulu rickshaw man does not appear ab- surd to a resident of Durban, but it would excite a great deal of interest and amusement in San Francisco. And the story of the ridicule excited by the first umbrella should warn us against regarding the appearance of absurdity as having any relation to value. Both the quantum theory of Planck and * George, op. cit., p. 240. 56 THE PATH OF SCIENCE the relativity theory of Einstein appeared completely absurd when introduced. Ralph Fowler wrote in Nature in 1934, "Nothing could have exceeded the apparently wild extrava- gance of de Broglie's first work on electron waves which led directly to quantum mechanics." This does not mean that the formulator of a scientific theory would try to make his theory appear absurd or contrary to common sense. It means only that common sense has nothing whatever to do ^vith scientific theorizing or with the practice of scientific research. Common sense is a judgment depending on common beliefs rather than logic. As Enriques says, "It is a prudent safe- guard for whoever w^ants to spare himself the critical study of scientific expressions." * In an analysis of the part played by theory in the develop- ment of science, Margenau f divides the world of the scien- tist into two parts: sense data and constructs. The sense data we have discussed as facts or coincidence data; the con- structs are concepts invented by certain rules and bearing certain relations to sense data. We look at a line in the spectrum and say that it is blue. We associate this blueness with the existence of light and of light of a certain wave length. These ideas are constructs. Other constructs are, in mathematics, number^ integral, space; in chemistry, element j atom, compound, valence bond; in physics, electron, electric field, mass. The ideas that form the body of scientific knowl- edge deal primarily wdth these constructs, which represent sense data symbolically and have properties that permit their discussion logically and wdth the aid of mathematics. These are a scientist's operations: The scientist assembles his facts, he translates his data into constructs that he invents for the purpose according to cer- tain rules that experience has shown to be useful. He then assembles these constructs, frequently using the language and * Enriques, Problems of Science, English translation, p, 329, London, 1924. (Quoted by George, op. cit., p. 247.) f H, Margenau, "Theory and Scientific Development," Scientific Monthly, LVII, 63 (1943). THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 57 methods of mathematics, into a theory and, finally, he verifies the theory by deriving from it new conclusions that can be determined by observation. The evolution of the scientific method has depended upon the realization of the importance of these operations and, particularly, of the importance of verification before any theory is allowed to fit into the exist- ing pattern of scientific knowledge. When a set of scientific facts can be summarized by a simple statement and, especially, when that statement can be ex- pressed in a mathematical form, it is said to be a law. Physi- cal observations generally are classified by means of laws that can be expressed in mathematical form. When a set of observations is finally reduced to a law or mathematical form, the scientist who succeeds in the effort feels a sense of satisfaction and receives the approval of his scientific colleagues, especially if the formula that he has developed covers a wide field of previously unreduced ob- servations. Sometimes, on the other hand, new observations which would be expected to fit into a known formula do not do so. This raises questions as to whether the observations are erroneous, whether some factor has been ignored, or whether the formula is not broad enough to include the new observations. The discovery of facts that are fundamentally new and that require a considerable revision of established laws to represent them is an important event in the history of science and one that is frequently misunderstood, particu- larly by the layman. In the nontechnical interpretations of science, whether written by laymen or by professional scientific w^orkers, the nature of scientific theory and law is very rarely borne in mind and made clear to the reader. In any case it is difficult to make the layman understand the nature of a scientific law. This is partly perhaps because of the unfortunate name that has been given to it.* We speak of "laws" in various senses— * The origin of the term is discussed by E. Zilsel in his article, 'The Genesis of the Concept of Physical Law," Philosophical Review, LI, 245 (May 1942). He points out that the roots of this concept go back 58 THE PATH OF SCIENCE the laws of men, which are enforced by police power; the laws of God, which are thought to be enforced by supernatural authority. When a scientist speaks of a law, the public thinks that, if the law is disobeyed, some penalty will follow. But a scien- tific law is not an order which must be obeyed; it is a state- ment of fact. There is no way of obeying or disobeying it, and since disobedience is impossible, there is no penalty. The so-called laws of health can be disobeyed; they are state- ments of desirable action that have been formulated. But the law of gravity cannot be defied. If a man jumps out of a window and is caught in a net, he is not defying the law of gravity; he is acting according to the law of gravity. The feeling that there is some connection between natural law and divine law has given rise to the idea that, in his establishment of laws^ the scientist is approaching some form of absolute truth— that the whole process of scientific re- search, in fact, is the uncovering of truth and, if we only knew enough, we should be able to approach to a knowledge of absolute truth concerning all things. This idea leads to the personification of the existence of nature^ an order of things external to ourselves concerning which generalizations may be made. Such a personification is often to be found in the writings of scientific men, especially those written for lay- to antiquity. The divine lawgiver is the central idea of Judaism, and since God in addition is the creator of the world, it is easy to under- stand that the idea arose of his having prescribed certain prohibitions to the physical world. Thus Job says that God made a law for the rain. In classical antiquity also is to be found the idea that physical processes are enforced by gods. The term law was used by Francis Bacon as synonymous with form, and Bacon probably derived the term from the Bible. Kepler used the word to some extent, and Descartes adopted the whole concept of nat- ural law referring to the laws that God has put into nature, arguing, in fact, that natural laws must be immutable because God and his opera- tions are perfect and immutable. The word in its present sense owes its popularity primarily to its adoption by Newton, who, however, used the term without any tinge of metaphysics and simply as the description of a phenomenon. THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 59 men. But nature is only the summation of observed facts fitted into patterns which resume and classify them. The approach of a scientist to the phenomena which he observes may be realized perhaps by means of an analogy. Suppose you enter a room and see a man playing a violin. You say at once that this is a musical instrument and is pro- ducing sound. But suppose that the observer were abso- lutely deaf from birth, had no idea of hearing, and had never been told anything about sound or musical instruments, his whole knowledge of the world having been achieved through senses other than hearing. This deaf observer entering the room where a violinist was playing would be entirely unable to account for the phenomenon. He would see the move- ments of the player, the operation of the bow on the strings, the peculiarly shaped instrument, but the whole thing would appear to him irrational. But if he were a scientist inter- ested in phenomena and in their classification, he would pres- ently find that the movement of the bow on the violin pro- duced vibrations, and these vibrations could be detected by means of physical instruments, and their wave form could be observed. After some time, it might occur to him that the vibrations of the strings and violin would be communicated to the air and could be observed as changes of pressure. Then he could record the changes of pressure produced in the air in the playing of a piece of music, and by analyzing the record could observe that the same groups of pressure changes were repeated periodically. Eventually he could attain to a knowl- edge of the whole phenomenon of music— the form of musical composition and the nature of different musical forms— but none of this would give him any approach to absolute truth in that he would still be unaware of the existence of sound as a sense and of the part that music could play in the mental life of those who could hear. To the scientist as such, absolute reality has no meaning. It is a metaphysical conception, not a scientific one. The scientist neither affirms nor denies it; he merely ignores it. His purpose in forming abstract ideas is to classify facts ob- 60 THE PATH OF SCIENCE served through his senses, especially those facts that are ob- served by the methods of coincidences using instruments. And his interest in making this classification is greatly stimu- lated, perhaps chiefly stimulated, by the fact that from it he can deduce the possibilities of observing and correlating other facts. It is impossible to discuss the method of the scientist with- out giving the impression that it is a purposeful method, that the scientist is aware of what he is doing, but this is usually not the case. A scientist does not always collect facts and deliberately endeavor to fit those facts into a pattern. He often collects the facts and continuously fits them into patterns without regard to the process itself. He may select the facts in which he is interested and attempt to fit them together into a theory, change his mind and try another theory, abandon some facts about which he is doubtful, and replace them by others without any conscious direction of the operation.* In this process, the scientist draws upon his imagination and relies upon his intuition. The operation, in fact, is largely performed by the subconscious mind, and it is in the facility with which they do this that scientists differ most in their quality. In practical scientific discovery and in technology, three factors are involved, and people vary considerably in their ability as regards these individual factors. They are theo- retical synthesis, observation and experiment, and invention. Psychologically, each involves distinct methods of working and different types of mind. There is even opposition among them; that is, it is unlikely that one man wdll excel in more * Charles Singer (A Short History of Science, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1941) points out that scientific articles, and especially scientific textbooks, give a false impression of the process by which investigators reach their conclusions. In articles and books, no information is given on the false starts and discarded hypotheses. The account reads as though the work ran smoothly to its inevitable conclusion in accordance with the principles of scientific investigation. As Singer says, "For this reason, among others, science can never be learned from books, but only by contact with phenomena." THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 61 than one direction. It is rare, for instance, for a capable in- ventor to be a theoretical thinker. Some scientists excel in their ability to visualize general syntheses and thus evolve theories. Some excel in their skill in observation or in their ingenuity in designing experiments. Some have a capacity for inventing and can design entirely new ways of accom- plishing their ends. In addition, certain qualities that are not in any way connected with the scientific mind are, never- theless, of great value in scientific work. In some fields of science, organizing ability is valuable, and men who are outstanding in one of the other factors will be specially quali- fied to use their organizing ability to promote the progress of science. Other qualities of considerable value are clarity of thought and ease of expression, and scientists differ as much in these attributes as do other men. Scientists and technologists can advantageously be classified according to the extent to ^vhich they possess the three scien- tific factors and the ability to organize. Descartes, for in- stance, possessed a great power of theoretical synthesis. We have no evidence that he could experiment or that he showed any ability to invent. He probably had no opportunity for organization. Galileo was not only a good theorist but an excellent experimenter, and some of his work suggests that he had considerable ability as an inventor. Newton was out- standing in his capacity for theoretical understanding and as an experimenter. It is improbable that he had any consid- erable talent for invention in spite of his work on the tele- scope and on some other instruments. Turning to the moderns, we may compare three great inventors: Lord Kelvin, Thomas Edison, and Elihu Thom- son. Of these, Kelvin was a most capable theorist, an excel- lent experimenter, and an outstanding inventor. There is some reason to believe that he was lacking in capacity for organization, but his distinction in the other three fields makes him one of the greatest scientists of all time. Edison seems to have been purely an inventor. He was not inter- ested in theory, and his experiments were conducted not to 62 THE PATH OF SCIENCE obtain knowledge but to make something work. He is, of course, the inventor par excellence. Thomson was far more of a scientist than Edison. He made a great number of in- ventions, and his excellent organizing ability gave him a rank in applied science that vies with that of Kelvin and Edison. To a very great extent, the choice of the subject on which a scientist focuses his attention is a matter of fancy or even of chance. Moreover, not infrequently he does not succeed in reaching the end that he sought. Very often important dis- coveries are made by workers who are not looking for them, and great advances in science have arisen from a simple study of natural phenomena. The great value of applied science has led to a school of thought that argues that scientific discovery is only justified by its application and that scientific research should, in fact, be engaged in only when it can be applied. This doctrine has been expressed very explicitly by some of the philoso- phers of the Soviet Union. It is endorsed also by such writers as Profe.ssor J. D. Bernal, who lays great stress upon the "frustration" of science, by which term he summarizes his belief that under a better (in his case, a collectivist) system of society, the development and, especially, the application of science would contribute more rapidly to the improvement of human welfare.* The fact is, however, that it is quite * The origin of the feeling of frustration by experts such as Bernal is discussed by F. A. von Hayek (The Road to Serfdom, p. 53, University of Chicago Press, 1944). Von Hayek points out that "almost every one of the technical ideals of our experts could be realized within a com- paratively short time if to achieve them were made the sole aim of humanity. There is an infinite number of good things, which we all agree are highly desirable as well as possible, but of which we cannot hope to achieve more than a few within our lifetime, or which we can hope to achieve only very imperfectly. It is the frustration of his ambitions in his own field that makes the specialist revolt against the existing order. We all find it difficult to bear to see things left undone that everybody must admit are both desirable and possible. That these things cannot all be done at the same time, that any one of them can be achieved only at the sacrifice of others, can be seen only by taking into account factors that fall outside any specialism." THE METHOD OF SCIENCE 63 impossible to predict in advance whether any particular scheme of scientific work will produce results which can be "applied." No one would have guessed that Lord Rayleigh's work on the density of nitrogen would have affected street lighting or that Gregor Mendel's study of peas would be of the utmost importance in the breeding of cattle; nor, in fact, was the applicability of these researches recognized for many years after they had been completed. All the arguments as to the applicability of scientific research are ex post facto. Moreover, it is the general opinion of those engaged in the application of science that there is no frustration in Pro- fessor Bernal's sense. Bernal believes that when the applica- tion of a scientific discovery can be seen to have been delayed, the delay should be ascribed to the faults and weaknesses of those w^ho might have applied it. The practical men know that such delays are often due to conditions unknown to the critics and are unavoidable. Those who have themselves engaged in the slow and difficult task of translating a labora- tory discovery into a product available to the public know how many pitfalls lie in the path. Our difficulty is not "frustration"; it is ignorance in each individual case. AV^hat is needed to solve the difficulty is not organization; it is more knowledge. The creation of scientific knowledge, the advancement of science, has been carried out by the methods discussed in this chapter. The whole operation is so individualistic, it de- pends so much upon the psychology of the various scientific workers, that it is difficult if not impossible to direct it, even if a general agreement were possible as to the goal toward which it should be directed. Many times in the history of science the greatest experts have expressed themselves as to the feasibility of solving certain prqblems or achieving certain results, and in most cases their decisions have been erroneous. The application of science can be directed to produce results of value; the creation of science proceeds from the free opera- tion of the minds of scientists. 64 THE PATH OF SCIENCE The scientist, whether his work is the creation of knowl- edge without thought of its application or is the application of scientific knowledge to the use of mankind, may adopt as his motto and guide the words of Thomas Henry Huxley: * Thus, without for a moment pretending to despise the practical results of the improvement of natural knowledge, and its beneficial influence on material civilization, it must, I think, be admitted that the great ideas, some of which I have indicated, and the ethical spirit which I have en- deavoured to sketch, in the few moments which remained at my disposal, constitute the real and permanent signifi- cance of natural knowledge. If these ideas be destined, as I believe they are, to be more and more firmly established as the world grows older; if that spirit be fated, as I believe it is, to extend itself into all departments of human thought, and to become co- extensive with the range of knowledge; if, as our race approaches its maturity, it discovers, as I believe it will, that there is but one kind of knowledge and but one method of acquiring it; then, we, who are still children, may justly feel it our highest duty to recognize the ad- visableness of improving natural knowledge, and so to aid ourselves and our successors in our course towards the noble sfoal which lies before mankind. * Thomas Henry Huxley, "On the Methods and Results of Ethnol- ogy," Collected Essays, VII, London, Macmillan and Co., 1899. Chapter IV THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD Having considered die nature of the scientific method, let us return to the course of human history and study the origin of that sudden change in the seventeenth century, from which came the developments in technology and science that have changed the life of man. W^e have seen that if we judge the level of civilization by its accomplishments and, particularly, by the arts of sculpture and architecture, of which the prod- ucts of many generations of men are available, it appears to move in cycles. At the beginning of a cycle, the sculpture and architecture are primitive or, to use the more appropriate term, archaic. Gradually the artists improve in the freedom of their style until a point of high excellence is reached; then degenera- tion sets in, the style becomes overornate or formalized, and finally we are justified in speaking of decadence. Yet, while these cycles recur age after age, varying greatly in details and in the changes which are of importance in each cycle, there has been a definite progress in the knowledge and technical skill of men. This progress is due to the slow accumulation of technology and even slower accumulation of scientific knowledge. This slow growth, however, has accelerated greatly at certain historical periods. Perhaps the traditional account of the knowledge of Imhotep, vizier of Zoser, the outstanding king of the Third Dynasty of Ancient Egypt, is a memory of one of those periods. Imhotep was so greatly revered that he was deified as the patron god of learning and was eventually identified with Asklepios, the Greek god of 65 66 THE PATH OF SCIENCE medicine. As James Breasted says: "In priestly wisdom, in magic, in the formulation of wise proverbs, in medicine and architecture ... he left so notable a reputation that his name was never forgotten." * As we shall see later, another period in which great progress was made in science followed the death of Alexander, in the third century B.C. In the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the growth of modern science began and has continued to accelerate to the present day. The advance in wealth, comfort, and convenience that has characterized the last three hundred years has been achieved by a very small number of men, and even today our produc- tive system is operated by a small group of men trained in the sciences who utilize the knowledge that has accumulated largely since the birth of Newton. This group is called "The Fifth Estate" by Dr. A. D. Little in an essay in which he discusses their relation to the rest of mankind.f He says: The fifth estate is composed of those who have the sim- plicity to wonder, the ability to question, the power to generalize, the capacity to apply. It is, in short, the com- pany of thinkers, workers, expounders, and practitioners upon whom the world is absolutely dependent for the pres- ervation and advancement of that organized knowledge which we call science. Little considered that the effective number of those indi- viduals was very small. In 1928, he guessed that there might be less than a hundred thousand in the world. The history of the development of science is the history of the evolution of this small body of specialized workers, who originally took an interest in science as amateurs— those who loved the subject— and only in recent times became profes- sionals devoting their whole time to study and the advance- ment of knowledge. * James Breasted, A History of Egypt, p. 112, New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1912. f A. D. Little, The Handwriting on the Wall, p. 253, Boston, Little, Brown and Co. and Atlantic Monthly Press, 1928. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 67 The growth of scientific knowledge started so suddenly at the beginning of the seventeenth century that it might almost be considered a revolution. As we study the course of this revolution, it becomes evident that it represents a unique event in history, and it is difficult to understand why it did not occur earlier. We can, of course, ascribe the rapid growth of science in the seventeenth century to the existence of certain men, Galileo, Boyle, and Newton, for example, but such individuals are known through all the ages of history. Why did not the Greeks develop experimental science? Singer says: "By the end of the fifth century b.c, not only had philosophical thought taken a scientific turn, but science itself had emerged as a preoccupation of men set aside from their fellows." * Later many of the Hellenistic Greeks of the Alexandrian school— Archimedes, for instance— were famous for their interest in natural philosophy and for the inventions that they made. But, in spite of the progress for which they themselves were responsible, they did not act as catalysts to set off a sudden growth of science contributed to by many other men. Several explanations are possible for the unique phe- nomena of the seventeenth century. Zilsel studied the emer- gence of modern science as a sociological process. f He points out that the end of the Middle Ages was a period of rapidly progressing technology and of technological inventions and that in the fifteenth century economic competition and the spirit of enterprise were emerging from the fetters of the feudal system. Feudal society was ruled by tradition and custom, whereas the early capitalism proceeded rationally. It calculated and measured, introduced bookkeeping, and began to use machines. Thus at this period the social ban against personal labor weakened sufficiently to enable edu- cated men to carry out experiments with their own hands. * Charles Singer, A Short History of Science, p. 30, Oxford, Claren- don Press, 1941. f E. Zilsel, "Sociological Roots of Science," The American Journal of Sociology, XLVII, 544 (1942). 68 THE PATH OF SCIENCE In the ancient world, the craftsmen were slaves, and it was below the dignity of a man of the upper class to handle materials himself. One profession in Greece was partially exempt from this rule, that of medicine. A genuine experi- mental science in medicine and especially in surgery, diet, and gymnastics was developed by the Greeks. It was em- bodied in the writings attributed to Hippocrates of Cos, in which are described the clinical observations of patients suf- fering from various diseases. The followers of Hippocrates had the correct scientific method, but the development of science in medicine was impossible at that time. The true science of medicine depends upon the advance of physiology', and the physiology of the human body is so complex that medicine is still largely empirical. Instead of developing experimental science, the most popu- lar Greek philosophers based their views of nature on a priori assumptions,* and their progress was largely confined to pure mathematics, especially geometry and the theory of numbers. Their actual progress in physics was certainly much handi- capped by their feeling that practical experimental ^vork was not suitable for a philosopher and thinker. If this seems strange, we should remember that the feeling existed in some English universities not more than fifty years ago. Charles L. Dodgson, better known as Lewis Carroll, wrote a most violent diatribe against the supply of funds for scientific re- search at Oxford.f The social ban on the practical handling of materials prob- ably did not exist in Egypt, where the rulers not infrequently boast in their tombs of their accomplishments as engineers and where some of the priests were noted for their knowledge * Nevertheless, Thales, the first outstanding Greek scientist, enun- ciated the fundamental scientific principle of the sequence of cause and effect. It was largely the influence of the Pythagoreans and of Plato that diverted the Greek mind from observational and experimental science. ■f Fame's Penny Trumpet, 1876, and also letter to Pall Mall Gazette, "Natural Science at Oxford," Life and Letters of Lewis Carroll, by S. P. Collingwood, p. 187, London, Fisher Unwin, 1898. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 69 of medicine. But many technical developments in Eg)'pt reached a certain le\'el and then ceased to progress, so that it is not astonishing that experimental science did not de- velop to a greater degiee in the Egyptian system. There is yet another possible explanation for the failure of the ancient world to discover the method of experimental science. The individual scientist, hou'ever much he might discover personally, had no satisfactory way of communicat- ing it to his fellows before the art of printing was discovered. He could, of course, write manuscripts, but he had no means of knowing all those to whom his manuscripts would be of interest; and it must be remembered that experiinental science, especially in earlier times, -^vas of interest only to a very small audience. The specialists today from whom the great advances come have an understanding audience of only a few people in the Avhole world. The rest do not read original papers or, if they do read them, do not realize what has been done. Realization and acceptance by the scientific world as a whole await recognition by the specialists and the explanation of the work by other writers than the original discoverers. Moreover, interest and ability in writing are not necessarily correlated with interest and ability in experi- mental discovery. Newton communicated his results to the Royal Society in the most casual manner; and, if it had not been for the insistence of Edmund Halley, it is doubtful if Ne^vton's collected papers ^vould ever have been published in such a form that they could produce the effect achieved by the publication of the Principia. In the earlier days, there was no mechanism whatever by which the scientist could find an audience. Nor was he often interested in finding an audience. The poet, the dramatist, and even the eloquent speaker might ^vrite for the delight and interest of his fellow men; the philosopher and teacher would write; but the experimental scientist ^vould make his observations, store them in his memory, tell a few of his friends, whose attitude toward him might be one either of derision or of uncomprehending veneration, and the kno^vl- 70 THE PATH OF SCIENCE edge he had won would generally die with him. But after the invention of printing, scientific works could be repro- duced so easily that they had a much larger circulation and, thus, a much greater chance of reaching the few students of the subject. The great book of Copernicus, for instance, published when he was on his deathbed, produced an im- pression on all astronoiners. The early history of science is only slowly emerging through the work of the archaeologists. As in other fields in the history of human understanding, there is little doubt but that, as we learn more of the ancient world, we shall find that that world knew more than we realize of the ideas that we value today. The Dawn of Conscience, which fifty years ago would have been ascribed to the early Hebrew prophets, whose work we happen to have in written form dating from the eighth century b.c, has now been traced by Breasted back beyond the Old Kingdom of Egypt to a period as remote from that of Amos as Amos is from us. And so it is not unlikely that many of the scientific ideas that we meet first among the Greeks had their true origin in Babylon or in Egypt or even perhaps in Crete or the Hittite Empire. We simply do not know the origin of many of the ideas that the Greeks developed in systematic and written form. Much valuable work has been done recently on the mathematical and astronomical ideas of the Babylonians and on the methods used by the Egyptian engineers, but it is not until we reach the beginning of the classic era in Greece that we meet an organized school of science. The philosopher to whom the Greeks ascribed the earliest scientific thought was Thales of Miletus, who achieved fame by his prophecy of the eclipse of 585 b.c, a prophecy which he was able to make from information on the timing of eclipses that he had acquired during a visit to Babylon. Thales worked chiefly on geometry. His pupil Anaximander was interested in geography and the making of maps. Hera- clitus of Ephesus, Leucippus of Miletus, and Democritus ad- vocated a priori views of the "nature of things," and Pythag- THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 71 oras of Samos gave the philosophy of science a mystical turn that took it far from the path to which it had been directed by Thales and Hippocrates. Then the whole trend of Greek thought was revolutionized by the teaching of Socrates. In his youth, Socrates studied physics, and it is interesting to speculate as to what ^vould have happened if he had con- tinued to be interested in science. But Socrates grew im- patient with the difficulty he found in deducing science from a single fundamental idea, and turned instead to the teaching that it is the great business of life to practice the care of one's own soul. Socrates followed Pythagoras in believing that reality consists of abstract ideas and that mathematical truths were divine and illustrated the nature of the mind of God, a view that has been advocated to some extent by modern mathematicians. Thus Socrates and Plato, his great follower, rejected experimental science and established the priority of mind over matter. The outstanding philosopher through whom the views of the ancient Greeks were made available to a later world ^vas Aristotle, who seems to have combined the po^ver of an orig- inal and creative thinker with the instincts of a natural teacher. Aristotle at the age of seventeen left Macedon for Athens to study under Plato. He worked on mathematics and physics and wrote treatises on astronomy and physics. In these fields he followed the platonic philosophy and de- duced the laws of nature from a priori assumptions, at the same time adopting the conclusions of the Pythagoreans, who used arithmetic relations as the basis of the physical world. Thus he adopted the idea of Empedocles of Acragas in Sicily, that matter is composed of four elements, each of which is distinguished by two primary qualities: fire is hot and dry; air, hot and fluid; water, cold and fluid; and earth, cold and dry. After the death of Plato, Aristotle began more and more to abandon these a priori assumptions and to rely on observation. Perhaps because he was the son of a physician, he turned to the field of biology, in which he made very rapid progress. The material that Aristotle ^vrote on biology is in 72 THE PATH OF SCIENCE Startling contrast to that which he ^vrote on physics. In his discussion of one set of observations, we might hear Bacon or Newton ^vriting t^\o thousand years later: "... the facts have not yet been sufficiently grasped; if they ever are, then credit must be given to observations rather than to theories and to theories only in so far as they are confirmed by the observed facts." Aristotle was the tutor of Alexander the Great. After the death of Alexander in 323 b.c, his general, Ptolemy, became king of Egypt and established his capital at Alexandria. In Alexandria, Ptolemy II founded the Museum, in which the personal schools of Plato and Aristotle were developed into a university. And there arose the greatest school of the ancient world, in which most of the best scientists of the time were professors. At the Museum, Euclid established his sys- tem of geometry, which became the standard of the world for more than two thousand years; Aristarchus ^vas the lead- ing astronomer; Archimedes, the outstanding mathematician and physicist. Archimedes himself came from Syracuse, to w^hich he returned after his studies in Alexandria. Era- tosthenes made such precise observations in astronomy that he was able to calculate the diameter of the earth with con- siderable accuracy and to elucidate the necessity for the Julian calendar, with its Leap Year. An even more accurate observer was Hipparchus, who discovered the precession of the equi- noxes and established theoretical astronomy in the form that it retained until the time of Copernicus. The civilization of Alexandria was, however, doomed to collapse. The history of the Ptolemies is one of steadily worsening government until finally the Romans absorbed the fragments of the Alexandrine Empire. The prevalent philosophy among the Roman leaders was Stoicism, ^vhich laid great stress on conduct and duty and had a completely rigid conception of nature. The Epicurean philosophy was less widely adopted but had gieater influence on those few Romans ^vho were interested in science or in the writing of philosophy. Of these, by far the best known THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 73 is Lucretius, whose book, On the Nature of Things, is often regarded as a predecessor of our inodern ideas, especially as Lucretius, follo^ving the Epicurean philosophy, explains the origin of the entire Avorld as due to the interaction of atoms, so that atoms are the only reality. The best-known writer on scientific subjects during the Roman period was the elder Pliny, who ^vrote a natural history consisting of a vast collec- tion of observations and statements about animals and plants, many of them hearsay. Pliny's book formed a kind of en- cyclopedia that ^vas accepted as the best description of the natural world for a thousand years; and, although un- doubtedly it represented progress at the time, its authority was eventually detrimental to the improvement of natural kno^vledge. More and more, the Greek inspiration, which so nearly achieved the discovery of the experimental method of science, died out, and, except for the occasional appearance of indi- vidual thinkers, the world steadily receded into intellectual darkness. Among these individual thinkers, one of the great- est was Galen of Pergamum, who ranks with Hippocrates as the outstanding medical authority of the ancients. Galen made accurate anatomical and physiological studies of many animals and worked out a complete physiological system that survived as the accepted description of physiology until the sixteenth century. As Singer says, "The ^vhole knowledge possessed by the world in the department of physiology— nearly all the biological conceptions, most of the anatomy, much of the botany, and all the ideas of the physical structure of living things from the third to the sixteenth century— were contained in a small number of works of Galen." * The works were translated into many languages, commented on by later writers, and reproduced in many forins. Galen be- lieved that everything was made by God to a particular end, .a doctrine known as teleology. Because this view fitted the theological attitude of the Middle Ages so perfectly, Galen became the authority in his field. * Charles Singer, op. cit., p. 92. 74 THE PATH OF SCIENCE The final blow to the study of science came from the de- velopment of Neoplatonism in Alexandria. This philosophy derived mainly from Plato, but in part also from Stoicism. In it, matter was considered to be governed by the Platonic "Idea" as the soul governs the body, and the factual study of science disappeared into mysticism. Neoplatonism lasted only about a century, but it passed into Christianity largely through the work of St. Augustine. With the coming of Christianity both the classical science and the classical philos- ophy vanished, and men devoted their intellects to the study of theology. Through this period there survived a memory of the writings of Aristotle, whose alleged views on the struc- ture of the universe formed the framework on which the whole of medieval science came to be built. It was held that Aristotle felt that the stars were noble beings and exercised influence over the human destinies— a more definite and sys- tematized astrology than that of the ancients; that the circle was a perfect geometrical figure; and that the stars, therefore, must move regularly in circles. Thus arose the doctrine of determinism, every man's life being assumed to be written at the time of his birth, a determinism that reached its most extreme development in the theological field with John Calvin. This whole era filled one of the periods of great depression in the cycles of civilization. It followed the long decay of the Roman Empire, and for a time the world lay almost pros- trate, ruined economically by the internecine struggles of the feudal system and lost spiritually in the squabbles of the monks, who, in the monasteries, carried on the only intellec- tual life. Francis Bacon said of the inhabitants of these monasteries: Having sharp and strong wits, and abundance of leisure, and small variety of reading, but their wits being shut up in the cells of a few authors [chiefly Aristotle, their dic- tator], as their persons were shut up in the cells of monas- teries and colleges, and knowing little history, either of nature or time, [they] did out of no great quantity of THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 75 matter and infinite agitation of wit spin out unto us those laborious webs of learning which are extant in their books. The Christian religion, which so greatly modified the mes- sage of the Greek thinkers as it was transmitted by the medieval scholars, was of Hebrew origin and was dominated by a doctrine that had no echo in Greek thought, the doc- trine of authority. The account of cosmology, history, an- thropology, religion, and ethics given in the Hebrew scrip- tures, together with the New Testament, was accepted as the unquestioned authority for all thought in that field, so that very soon opinion as to any event was based entirely upon what could be found on the subject in the Holy Scriptures or, if there was nothing available in the Scriptures, in the writings of the fathers, ainong whom Aristotle was often in- cluded. One may guess that Aristotle would have been very much astonished at the company in which he found himself. At the universities, theology and scholasticism predomi- nated even while the towns were emersrino^ from the intellec- tual deadlock. Casuistry and fine-drawn distinctions became a game to which men devoted their lives, and natural phe- nomena were judged primarily for their theological implica- tions. It was held always that each individual phenomenon had been decided by the will of God for a definite purpose and that the interest of man lay in detecting the purpose behind the will. Zilsel * says that the first representatives of secular learning appeared in the fourteenth century in Italian cities. They were the secretaries and officials of the governors of the cities who chiefly had to conduct the cor- respondence and external relations of their employers. To do this, they strove after perfection of style and the exhibi- tion of knowledge, making their ^vritings very polished and their speeches most eloquent. Thus the humanists emerged, ^vho soon, because of their learning, became teachers— in- structors of their employers' children and then professors at the universities. In this way, the humanist scholars became * Op. cit., p. 549. 76 THE PATH OF SCIENCE part of the university system, and they were proud of their social rank and their education. They encouraged particu- larly the study of the ancient languages, in which the writings of the past were to be found. Curiously enough, much of Greek thought, the writings of Aristotle, for instance, had been kept alive during the Dark Ages of Europe by transla- tion into Arabic and by preservation by the Arabs, who had swept over Africa and through a great part of Spain. No true eclipse of learning had occurred among the Arabs, whose cycle of civilization was in a different phase from that of the western world. But the Arabic philosophy, and particularly its devotion to the writings of the Prophet as the source of authority, provided little stimulus to original thinking. The writings of many of the Greek authors had been translated into Arabic through Syriac, which was the language in many parts of the Byzantine Empire and had from the third cen- tury replaced Greek in W^estern Asia. Thus, during the greatest period of Moslem rule in the eighth century, the old Syriac versions of the works of the outstanding Greek writers ^vere revised, and in the next century many of them were translated into Arabic. Galen's writings as well as those of Aristotle were widespread in Arabic translations. In the fourteenth century, the ancient classics began to be recovered, Greek was studied, and the Arabic works ^vere translated into Latin and even retranslated into Greek. It was not until the fifteenth century that the original Greek versions were available instead of those that had passed through the difficulties of the Arabic translation. As has already been mentioned, the introduction of the art of print- ing in the middle of the fifteenth century was of the utmost importance for its influence on science. The first books to be printed were, ho\\ ever, the classics rather than the prod- ucts of conteinporary thought. First came the Bible and the works of authors of theological authority, then the treatises on law and medicine, and the writings of classical antiquity. Many contemporary Avriters are, however, to be found among the early printed books. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 77 In the fifteenth century, feudalism began to collapse and to be replaced by capitalism. As Zilsel points out, in feudal society the castles of knights and rural monasteries ^vere the centers of culture. In early capitalism culture was centered in the towns. This capitalism depended on the spirit of enterprise of the individual, whereas in medieval society the individual was dominated by the traditions of the group to ^vhich he belonged. With the individualism of the new o society came the beginnings of invention and of scientific thinking. In the sixteenth century, the "shaking of the dry bones" * became much more evident; and, in one field of science after another, individuals arose who departed from the traditions of the ancients and began to create knowledge themselves. Of these, by far the most gifted and original was Leonardo da Vinci, one of those men of great genius who illuminate an era. Leonardo was primarily a painter; although his ar- tistic work was recognized as of the first rank, his greatest interest seems to have been in mechanical invention. He was the engineer for several princes of the time, but very little of his work seems to have been adopted. The fact is that Leonardo, like many inventors, had the primary ideas for very many more inventions than he could develop. Even today it would be difficult for one man, unless he were a great organizer, to develop to practical success the large number of inventions sketched in Leonardo's notebooks. A more prac- tical, though far less gifted, man was Agricola, ^vho ^vrote a great Avork on metals, in which he set forth the whole tech- nology of mining. In the field of biological kno^v ledge, the first necessary step was to get rid of the idea that the ancient writings of Aristotle and Galen were authoritative. In the sixteenth century a man arose who set himself against the ^vhole weight of au- thority. Born in Brussels in the second decade, Andreas Vesalius carried out his investigations on the anatomy of the * Ezekiel XXXVII. 78 THE PATH OF SCIENCE human body, mainly in Italy. He soon found errors in Galen's descriptions and corrected them. Despite bitter op- position, Vesalius at last prevailed; and modern anatomy was born. Even more revolutionary in its opposition to authority than the work of Vesalius was that of Copernicus, which affected the whole thought of man with its new picture of the universe. This picture was important not only in its scientific aspect but also from the philosophical point of view. Before Copernicus, the earth was the center of the universe, and the teleological point of view, that the earth was created for man, was a basic idea of both philosophy and theology. With the abandonment of the earth as the center and the understanding that the sun was the center of the solar system, around which the planets revolved, man lost his intrinsic importance as the being around whom the whole universe was designed. About this time, two great optical instruments were in- vented, the compound microscope and the telescope. The use of the telescope by Galileo led to his astronomical dis- coveries. In addition, Galileo throughout his life was occupied with physical investigations. His work opened the way to the advancement of the science of mechanics, especially because he was able to demonstrate experimentally the incorrectness of a statement ascribed generally, but wrongly,* to Aristotle, that bodies should fall with velocities proportional to their ^veights. Galileo showed by direct ex- periment that this statement is incorrect. The effect of Galileo's experiment was much greater than the inere dem- onstration of a new fact might be assumed to be, because it tended to destroy the authority of Aristotle and to teach men that the validity of a fact is to be tested by direct experiment instead of by quotation of any authority, however great. The first astronomical observation made by Galileo in- volved another disproof of an Aristotelian doctrine. In 1604, he observed a nova and foinid that, like the stars in general, it showed no parallax. Aristotle had regarded the outer zone of the stars as absolutely changeless, whereas the * V. Nature, 158, 1946, p. 906. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 79 inner zones of the sun and planets sho^ved changes. Yet here was a change in the stellar realm! In 1610, Galileo embodied the early astronomical discoveries that resulted from the use of the telescope in a little pamphlet, The Messenger of the Heavens. In it, he described the mountains of the moon, the great increase in the number of visible stars, and, above all, the satellites of Jupiter, which offered a model for the solar system as conceived by Copernicus. These and other observations produced an attack on Galileo, especially be- cause much controversy arose as to the habitability of the moon, the planets, and even the stars. The idea of a plural- ity of inhabited w^orlds was felt to be contrary to the Chris- tian doctrines as well as to those of Aristotle. The Inquisi- tion ordered Galileo to abandon his opinions and to stop discussing^ them. Galileo turned to the philosophy of science and discussed the properties of objects that are primary to the object and those that depend upon the observer and are secondary to the object. In this, we see the beginning of a definition of the special field of science, the subject of our third chapter. Then Galileo returned to his astronomical work and wrote his Dialogue between the Ptolemaic and Copernican systems, in which he endorsed the latter. It was received with en- thusiasm by the learned but wdth wrath by the Inquisition, whose edict it clearly infringed. Galileo was arrested, forced to recant, and after a short period of imprisonment ordered to spend the remainder of his life in seclusion, a retirement that he used to the greatest advantage by further discoveries in mechanics and astronomy. By the time that Galileo died, in 1642, science had emerged from the medieval world, and the great revolution in the thought of man was under way. Promoting this revolution also were two philosophers who did not themselves carry out any important experimental work. They were Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon. Descartes believed that the laws of the universe could be deduced from certain simple and definite principles and that these principles apply to all phenomena everywhere. The 80 THE PATH OF SCIENCE aim of science, therefore, is to understand and define these basic principles; tliey can then be applied to any special case that is under investigation. Descartes believed that the cor- rect principles could be selected by using their clarity as a criterion; the clearest image would be the most nearly cor- rect. These ideas, which were similar to those of Pythagoras and his followers, represent an extension to other studies of the methods of mathematics, in which Descartes himself made great advances, applying algebraic methods to geometrical problems. The method of Descartes consisted in beginning with the simplest and surest notions and proceeding cau- tiously to deduce inferences. Descartes realized, of course, that knowledge is derived from experience as well as from deduction. In contrast to Bacon, however, he put more faith in deduction than in experience. Descartes' views on the philosophy of science represented a very wide break from the scholastic principles identified with the name of Aristotle; but they were of a form acceptable to the orthodox scholars of his time, and they received wide recognition. Francis Bacon '^vas a very extraordinary man. Born in 1561, the younger son of a British nobleman, he entered Trinity College, Cambridge, and at the age of eighteen took up residence at Gray's Inn and became a lawyer. His patron was the Earl of Essex, and Bacon's career was largely in- fluenced by that of Essex. When Essex was tried on a charge of treason. Bacon was one of the Crown counsel, a fact that gave rise to much criticism. It was not until the accession of James I to the throne that Bacon had any chance of advance- ment. Then he was promoted rapidly until, in 1618, he was made Lord Chancellor. In 1621, however, his enemies dis- covered that he had been guilty of corrupt dealings, for which he was sentenced to a severe penalty, largely remitted by the king.* The greater part of Bacon's important writings were pub- lished in the last five years of his life. Bacon was not a * Compare John R. Baker, The Scientific Life, p. 52, London, George Allen & Unwin, Ltd., 1942. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 81 scientist; he took no part in experimental work, and he was largely ignorant of the great work of the scientists of his time. Leonardo da \^inci in mechanics, Kepler in astronomy, Gilbert in electricity, and Vesalius in anatomy had made great contributions to scientific knowledge, but Bacon ig- nored all of them in his writing. He was a philosopher but, above all, he was a writer and advocate. He had a wonderful gift in his trenchant pen and in his facility of expression, and he carried the popular imagination with him in his em- phasis on observation and experiment as against the accept- ance of tradition. Bacon believed that all fruitful knowledge was to be based upon inference from particular occasions in the past to particular occasions in the future, and this he called the method of inductive reasoning. In addition, he had two ideas of the utmost importance, ideas that were in- strumental in producing the scientific revolution. They w^ere that knowledge is to be acquired primarily by observation and experiment and that the application of scientific knowl- edge could lead to practical results of the utmost value. Bacon overestimated the ease with which scientific knowl- edge can be obtained, and he fell into an error in ^vhich he is followed by many today— the error of believing that scien- tific research can be organized like an engineering project and that the way to make scientific discoveries is to plan to make them. Bacon's first aim was to organize a system for the investi- gation of nature by observation and experiment. A great number of observed facts would be collected, and from them the fundamental processes of nature could be understood. In this way, he believed, it was possible to attain to "the knowledge of Causes and secret motions of things, and the enlarging of the bounds of Human Empire, to the effecting of all things possible." This w^as a great vision, a new vision on the earth, and a vision that has been realized. The method that Bacon suggested for carrying out this idea was the organi- zation of a research institute,* which he entitled the "House * Chapter VIII, p. 180. 82 THE PATH OF SCIENCE of Salomon" and described in his New Atlantis. This in- stitute contained a series of laboratories for experimental research equipped with Utopian perfection— caves in the ground, high towers, buildings on mountains, "the highest of them three miles at least; great lakes, both salt and fresh," pools, rocks in the sea, and bays upon the shore; artificial wells and fountains; great and spacious houses, in which could be imitated meteors and sno^v, hail, and rain; orchards and gardens full of trees and herbs, with soil of various kinds in which could be produced new plants differing from those kno^vn. In these experimental stations and laboratories. Bacon saw the possibilities of experiments in genetics, physiology, pharmacology, mechanical arts, metallurgy, optics, crystal- lography, and all branches of physics and chemistry. This research institute was to be manned by a great company of Fello^vs, to whom Bacon, with his passion for detailed or- ganization, allotted specific functions. Some were to study written w^orks and to travel in search of kno^vleds^e from abroad; some were to make observations and experiments; and some were to carry out computations on the results of these experiments and to develop theories and devise ne^v experiments. A noble dream, much before its time and greatly overorganized, but it led to the idea of co-operation in the pursuit of knowledge. From it came the impulse that founded the Royal Society. Martha Ornstein says that Bacon's description of the House of Salomon "bears to the cause of learned societies the same relation as does Marx's 'Communist Manifesto' to socialist propaganda. No histori- cal account can ever be given of gatherings of learned socie- ties without reference to this, their 'romantick' prototype." * Bacon, however, was not really describing a learned so- ciety; he was describing a research institute or, rather, a group of research institutes. His plan was much more akin # Martha Ornstein, The Role of Scientific Societies in the Seventeenth Century, p. 43, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, Third Edition, 1938. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 83 to the Kaiser Wilhelm Institut or to the research institutes of the U.S.S.R. than to the Royal Society or the Academie des Sciences. In addition, Bacon believed, as some do today, that scientific research should be planned with a view to the application of discoveries to practical human needs. This has already been discussed,* but in any case it had no im- mediate effect upon the course of events. The discovery of the telescope and the microscope and the discussion of the wonders they revealed created widespread interest, and men from many strata of society joined the ranks of the amateurs studying new experiments. Many of these amateurs be- longed to the English aristocracy, foremost among whom was Robert Boyle, a younger son of the great Earl of Cork. Boyle devoted his whole life to scientific research and discovered the relation between the pressure and the volume of a gas, still known as Boyle's law. When a young man, Boyle asso- ciated with a group of enthusiastic experimenters, to ^\ hich he refers in a letter as "our invisible college." The meetings of this group were greatly interrupted by the Civil W^ar, and it was not until the restoration of the monarchy that life in London could move on the old lines. But in 1660 a move- ment was made toward a definite org^anization of this interest in experimental philosophy, and in the next two years a society was formed that in 1662 was incorporated under the patronage of King Charles II with the name of the Royal Society. Among those who founded the society were Robert Boyle, John Evelyn, and Sir Christopher Wren, who, though com- monly thought of only as an eminent architect, was the most widely accomplished man of his time. Among the subjects in Tvhich he was a recognized authority were mathematics, astronomy, meteorology, and anatomy. With the formation of the Royal Society, organization entered the history of science. For the first time, there were a nucleus and a meeting place for those interested in experi- * Chapter III, p. 62. 84 THE PATH OF SCIENCE mental science, a method of exchanging vie^vs, and, what was perhaps even more important, a method of publication. The first task of the Royal Society was to begin publication of its Philosophical Transactions^ which has continued ever since. In 1642 was born the greatest scientist qf all time, Isaac Newton. It ^vas expected that Newton would follow the farmer's life that had been led by his ancestors, but, w^hen he was sixteen, he showed such incompetence as a farmer that he was sent back to school and thence to Cambridge. In 1665 the plague drove him from Cambridge, and in his mother's farmhouse the young man worked out his discoveries of the binomial theorem, the mathematics of infinite series, the dif- ferential and integral calculus, the idea of universal gravita- tion, the production of the spectrum by dispersion, and the formulation of the laws of mechanics, following the work of Galileo. In order to understand Newton's life, we must realize the difference between the attitude of the men of the seventeenth century toward their scientific work and that of the professional scientists of today. The founders of the Royal Society were, as has already been said, amateurs. They were experimenting and speculating in natural philosophy for their own interest. They considered their conclusions and their discoveries to be their own property, -^vith which they could do as they pleased. As Sir James Jeans says, "We see Newton's terrifically powerful mind playing with the problems of science as we play ^vith a crossword puzzle and regard the incident as finished when ^\e have solved it." * Newton discovered the calculus in 1665, yet, before pub- lishing it even partially, he allo^ved t^venty-eight years to elapse, years in which Gottfried von Leibniz discovered and published the same thing in Germany. At the same time, he satisfied himself that the force of gravity, obeying an in- verse square law, explained the motion of the moon "pretty nearly" and w^as content to leave it at that until Halley asked him many years afterward what were the orbits of the planets. * Sir James Jeans, "Newton and the Science of Today," Nature, 150, 712 (1942). THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 85 In reply, Newton casually remarked that he had solved the problem five years previously but had mislaid the proof. But for Halley's coaxing and insistence, Newton's great work would probably never have been published as a whole, and it owed its publication largely to a quarrel with Hooke and the sequel to that quarrel. The story of this extraordinary man in relation to the science of his age is discussed in an interesting series of papers published in Nature in 1942 to celebrate the tercentenary of his birth. The Royal Society was not the first scientific society. That honor belongs to Italy, w^here the Accademia del Cimento (the Experimental Society) was organized in Florence in 1657. It was not an association of independent workers; it was formed by the Medici brothers— the Grand Duke Ferdinand II and Leopold of Tuscany. The Academy held its meetings at the palace of Leopold, who defrayed all expenses and was the active leader of the group. The members were ardent ama- teurs in experimental work, many of them disciples of Galileo or students of his disciples. When Leopold became a car- dinal in 1667, the Academy was given up, but an account of the work of its members was published, entitled "Saggi di Naturali Esperienze Fatte Nell' Accademia del Cimento." This account contained so inuch experimental detail that it became the laboratory manual of the period. It was trans- lated into English in 1684, Latin in 1731, French in 1755, and was republished in a new edition in 1780. This book formed the beginning of experimental physics and gave Italy the leadership in that field at the time. The Academic des Sciences, founded in 1666, arose, like the Royal Society, from the meetings of a group of enthusi- astic amateurs. Jean Baptiste Colbert, the great minister of Louis XIV, obtained for it the patronage of that monarch and the support of the French treasury. Colbert believed firmly in a strongly centralized government, a policy that was to some extent responsible for the misgovernment that eventually led to the French Revolution. The Academic was organized as a co-operative laboratory for scientific re- 86 THE PATH OF SCIENCE search rather than as a free association of scientific workers. The results of this co-operative work were of some value but, as a whole, the method proved a failure, and the most im- portant discoveries were made by individuals. The most distinguished physicist, Huygens, was so dissatisfied that he withdrew. In comparing the Academic with the Royal Society, we must remember that it had no member whose influence could rival Newton's, for which reason its work was of the greatest value toward the end of the eighteenth century, whereas the Royal Society had become world-famous a century earlier. The Berlin Academy was founded by Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz, whose life span was approximately contemporaneous with Newton's. Leibniz was, above all, a mathematician. His work covered the whole field of physics, however, and, in addition, he was determined to effect a reform of the edu- cational system, especially that of the universities. He be- lieved in the teaching of science and of "modern" subjects such as history, geography, and mathematics, and was strongly opposed to the emphasis placed on Latin, which acted as a barrier to the extension of education to the people. Leibniz made a series of proposals for the organization of a scientific society in Germany and finally seized an opportunity created by the formation of a commission to adopt the Catholic cal- endar. Leibniz proposed that the Elector of Brandenburg (the ruler of Prussia) should keep the monopoly of calendars and use the receipts to establish a learned society and an observatory. In 1700 the charter of the Berlin Academy was granted, with Leibniz as its president. The results, however, were disappointing, and Leibniz continued to agitate for the formation of other societies in Dresden, St. Petersburg, and Vienna. The American Philosophical Society, the oldest scientific society in the United States, was founded by Benjamin Frank- lin in 1743 as the successor to a small group of enthusiasts, the "Junto," which dated from 1727. In 1769 the American Philosophical Society and the American Society joined to THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD 87 form the American Philosophical Society Held at Philadel- phia for Promoting Useful Knowledge, under which name the society still flourishes. The development of science in the seventeenth century and, indeed, in much of the eighteenth, was the work of the scientific societies rather than of the universities. These societies assumed responsibility for the progress of science and developed the experimental method, which found no welcome in the universities of that period, steeped as they were in the spirit of tradition. As Martha Ornstein says: It was the unmistakable and magnificent achievement of the scientific societies of the seventeenth century, not only to put modern science on a solid foundation, but in good time to revolutionize the ideals and methods of the uni- versities and render them the friends and promoters of experimental science instead of the stubborn foes they had so lonor been.* * Martha Ornstein, op. cit., p. 263. Chapter V THE GROWTH OF PHYSICAL IDEAS The science of physics originated in the study of the move- ments of the heavenly bodies. The apparent movements of the sun and moon in relation to the earth and the movement of the planets through the constellations of the stars, the an- nual rise and fall of the altitude of the sun, were obviously related to the seasons and, therefore, to agriculture, to seed time and harvest, and to such phenomena as the inundation of the Nile, upon which the existence of Egypt depended. After the first fanciful images, the traverse of the heavens by the sun in a boat, for instance, a very definite cosmology was developed to account for the observed facts; and this system became more and more complicated as the accuracy of the observations increased. The practical requirements of en- gineering also demanded a system of mensuration, which involved methods of determining the volumes of spheres, cylinders, pyramids, and the areas of conic sections. The early methods available to the astronomers and engineers were essentially geometrical in form, and geometry continued as the principal mathematical discipline until the eighteenth century, when it was largely replaced by algebra. It was in physical science that the Alexandrian school of philosophers approached the discovery of the method of ex- perimental science; * and it was, again, in physical science that Galileo initiated the scientific revolution.f Galileo's experiments showed that the acceleration of falling bodies is not proportional to their weight, as was believed by the followers of Aristotle, but that light and heavy bodies fall * Chapter IV, p. 72. t Chapter IV, p. 78. 88 THE GROWTH OF PHYSICAL IDEAS 89 in the same time and, therefore, with the same acceleration. This discovery marks the beginning of the understanding of the laws of motion. Another observation made by Galileo, that the time of swing of a pendulum is constant, regardless of the extent of the swing, and depends only upon the length of the pendulum itself, involved inertia and the principle that Newton embodied in his first law of motion— that a body at rest cannot get into motion of itself and that a body in motion tends to continue so with the same velocity unless it is acted upon by external forces. This law led to the idea of mo- mentum, the product of mass and velocity. Galileo was thus able to define acceleration: "I call a motion uniformly ac- celerated when, starting from rest, its momentum or degree of speed increases directly as the time measured from the beginning of motion." Newton embodied the same principle in his second law in the following words: "The time of rate of change of mo- mentum in any direction equals the moving force impressed in that direction upon the mass particle." This second law introduces the concept of mass as opposed to weight, which was Galileo's concept. Galileo had realized, of course, that matter has weight, but he did not realize that it was desirable to have a term for the quantity of matter that a body con- tains apart from the acceleration to which it is exposed. The weight of a body is its mass under the acceleration of gravity. In the first paragraph of his great book on natural philosophy, however, Newton defined mass thus: "The quantity of matter is the measure of the same arising from its density and bulk conjointly. ... It is this quantity that I mean hereafter everywhere under the name of body or mass." Thus a quan- tity of mass remains the same, and under acceleration by other means than gravity, the force is acting upon a given mass rather than upon a given weight since the idea of weight involves the acceleration of gravity. To the two fundamental laws of motion, Newton added a third, which dealt with reaction and in some ways seems to 90 THE PATH OF SCIENCE be even more original than the concept of mass. Newton showed that if a given mass is attracted toward the earth with a certain force corresponding to its weight, the earth must be attracted toward the mass with the same force. When a gun is fired, for example, the shot is violently accelerated forward, but the gun is accelerated, and not too gently, backwards. Newton said: "Reaction is always equal and opposite to action; that is to say, the actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal and directly opposite." If these laws of motion had been applied only to the observation of par- ticles upon the earth, they would have produced much less effect upon the minds of men than was actually the case. Newton applied them to the movements of the heavenly bodies and to the explanation of the law^s which Kepler had deduced from those movements. Johannes Kepler was the successor of Tycho Brahe, the great Danish astronomer. At Uranienborg in Denmark, Tycho Brahe built the first modern observatory, where by means of quadrants he observed the positions of stars and planets. It must be remembered that this was before the invention of the telescope, and these quadrants were the an- cestors of the transit instruments, fixed in meridian, with which the time of passage of an object across the meridian can be observed. With these quadrants equipped with sights, Brahe made the most astonishingly accurate observations of the positions of seven hundred and seventy-seven stars. The cosmic theory which Brahe used was a modification of Ptolemy's theory. He did not adopt the heliocentric Coperni- can theory because he saw that if the positions of the stars were observed six months apart, and Copernicus were right, the earth would have moved in its passage around the sun a prodigious distance in those six months and the stars should show displacement relative to each other. Brahe's observa- tions, made with the utmost precision of which he was capable, showed no such movement; and he concluded that the earth must be at rest. This is one of the many cases to be found in the history of science where an effect which really THE GROWTH OF PHYSICAL IDEAS 91 existed was sought for but not found because the effect was too small to be detected by the method of observation used. With the development of powerful telescopes, making pos- sible observations very much more accurate than Tycho Brahe's, the effect of the movement of the earth on its orbit can be detected in the displacement of some stars, which we now know to be the nearer ones. The effect is known as the parallax and is used for determining the distance of the stars. Tycho Brahe could not be expected to have realized the enor- mous distance of the stars in comparison even with the size of the orbit of the earth. After Brahe removed to Bohemia, Kepler became his as- sistant and on his death succeeded to his position. He could not continue the great campaign of observation to which Brahe had devoted his life; instead, he used Brahe's astro- nomical data to compute the orbits of the planets. He adopted the Copernican theory, however, which by that time had been generally accepted. According to that theory, the orbits of the planets were circles. But when Kepler studied the observations of the planet Mars, he soon realized that it did not revolve about the sun in a circle and that when it was nearest to the sun, its motion was more rapid than when it was farther away. Then he announced that the planets revolved about the sun in ellipses, with the sun at one of the foci. This was his first law. Next he showed that if a line were drawn joining a planet to the sun as the planet revolved in its orbit, the line would sweep out equal areas in equal times. Finally he gave his great third law, that the squares of the periods of revolution of the planets around the sun are proportional to the cubes of their average distances from the sun. These laws were statements of fact that Kepler de- rived from Brahe's observations. When Newton took up the matter, he showed that Kepler's third law would be true provided that there were an at- tracting force between the sun and the planet that varied inversely as the square of the distance and that Kepler's second law could be explained by the same assumption. If 92 THE PATH OF SCIENCE the sun attracted a planet by a force varying inversely as the square of the distance, a line joining the planet to the sun would sweep out equal areas in equal times. This assump- tion—that there existed in the universe a force extending out- ward to the planets and varying inversely as the square of the distance to them— applied, of course, to all heavenly bodies; and Newton applied it to the position of the moon in its movement around the earth. He found, however, that it did not agiee exactly with the observations, which involved, of course, the diameter of the earth; and for sixteen years Newton put the work aside. In 1682 it was discovered that the diameter of the earth had been measured incorrectly and was over 500 miles greater than the figure that had been adopted.* Newton immediately repeated his calculations and found that they agreed with the observed motion of the moon. He then extended the work to include the motions of the planets and their satellites, comets, and even the tides of the sea. He stated his general law of gravitation: "Every particle of matter in the universe attracts every other particle with a force that varies directly as the product of the mass and inversely as the square of the distance." The discovery of the fundamental laws of motion was a challenge to philosophers to seek fundamental principles that would supply laws of a general nature. The mathematicians d'Alembert, Euler, Lagrange, and Laplace developed such general principles, derived from the laws of motion, which were applicable not only to material bodies but to the flow of light, heat, and electricity. On the mathematical prin- ciples that they established, the science of physics has been built. Although the physical ideas themselves have changed with the progress of experimental science, the new ideas have been expressed in terms of the same fundamental principles. In the nineteenth century, physicists thought that it might be possible to reduce all laws to the laws of mechanics. * It is possible that Newton's difficulty arose instead from lack of proof that the mass of a spherical body would behave as if it were concentrated at the center. THE GROWTH OF PHYSICAL IDEAS 93 Laplace said: "Give me the position and velocity of all the particles at a given moment and I will predict the state of the world at any future moment." The statistical theory of heat, attributed to Ludwig Boltzmann, the electromagnetic theory of light, and the "fluid" theory of electricity tended to confirm this mechanistic viewpoint. The nature of heat attracted little attention in ancient times. Fire was one of Aristotle's four elements, and heat was considered an imponderable substance, to which Antoine Lavoisier s^ave the name caloric. That some substances should absorb heat more readily than others ^\ as ascribed to their greater power of attraction and was expressed as their having greater capacity for heat. The first scientist to study heat systematically was Joseph Black, a chemist of Glasgow. He observed that when ice melts, it absorbs heat without undergoing any change in temperature; and Black named the heat which disappears in the process latent heat. Black showed that, in the melting of ice, heat was absorbed equivalent to that made available by the cooling of an equal mass of water through 140° Fahren- heit. Black also discovered that heat is used in the evapora- tion of water. It requires, indeed, nearly seven times as much heat to change a pound of water into steam as to melt a pound of ice. The discovery that heat was not a substance was made by Benjamin Rumford and Humphry Davy, who showed by ex- periment that heat could be produced by friction. Rumford was engaged in the boring of cannon in the military work- shops of Bavaria and observed the amount of heat produced by the boring tool. He arranged one experiment in which water was boiled by the heat generated in boring the metal. Davy showed that ice could be melted by friction. These experiments were made at the end of the eighteenth century. At the beginning of the nineteenth century John Dalton ad- vanced his atomic theory (see Chapter VI, page 121), and it was realized that matter consisted of molecules and that its properties might be due to the behavior of these molecules. 94 THE PATH OF SCIENCE Thus evolved the idea that heat is a mode of motion, the motion of the molecules; that a hot body is one in which the molecules are moving energetically; and that the latent heat of evaporation of water is the energy absorbed in giving rapid motion to the molecules leaving the liquid surface. As a result of the work of Nicolas Carnot on the theory of the steam engine and of Julius Mayer and James Joule on the transformation of mechanical work into heat, the law of the conservation of energy was enunciated, often known as the first law of thermodynamics: "Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, but it may be changed from one form to another." This principle, simple as it seems, has been one of the chief guiding principles of physics ever since it was first stated. Motion, heat, light, and electricity— all are forms of energy, and they can be transformed into each other. Indeed, the science of physics deals primarily with this transformation. With the discovery by Einstein that mass and energy also are interchangeable, that the motion of a particle involves a change in its mass— a change that becomes great only when its velocity approaches that of light— and, still more impor- tant, that the destruction of mass liberates enormous quan- tities of energy, the understanding of the transformations of energy became a knowledge of the physical laws of the uni- verse. The great principle that governs transformation of energy is the second law of thermodynamics: In those trans- formations, energy loses potential. Heat, for instance, can- not of itself pass from a colder to a warmer body. Mechani- cal effect cannot be derived by cooling matter below the temperature of the coldest surrounding objects. The tend- ency of energy transformations is to diminish the difference in energy levels. The quantity of energy transferred, divided by the temperature, is called the entropy. And the second law of thermodynamics can be stated in the terms that the entropy of any closed system tends to increase. In mechanics and electricity the potential always decreases if no outside energy is added. A transformation in which the entropy THE GROWTH OF PHYSICAL IDEAS 95 remains constant is reversible, whereas one in which the entropy increases must be irreversible. In dealing with the transformation of energy, therefore, physicists use two vari- ables: the energy involved and the entropy of the system. In any transformation of energy for which ^ve wish to write the equations, the first law of thermodynamics states that the energy must remain constant after the transformation; that is, the two sides of the equation must balance. The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy must increase in carrying out the transformation. The attempt to reduce all laws to mechanical laws led to the statistical theory of heat, formulated by Boltzmann and very successfully applied to chemical problems by W^illard Gibbs. The investigation of the states of matter (gaseous, liquid, solid) and especially of its behavior at very low tem- peratures (near the absolute zero) forms the basis of much research in the field of thermodynamics. In the earliest speculations on the nature of light, Plato and Aristotle held that light is derived from the eye, and they pictured the eye as sending out something that inter- cepted an object and so illuminated it. This idea, however, was supplanted by the idea that the light was emitted from the object seen; and much later it was realized that light is emitted by such light sources as the sun and reflected to the eye by objects seen. Lenses were known to the ancients. The use that was made of them is not known. Possibly the crystal lenses that have been found were considered to be merely ornamental, although the fact that they would concentrate the rays from the sun and would act as burning glasses is mentioned by Aristophanes. In medieval times lenses were certainly used as magnifying glasses to assist in reading. It is not a very long step from the use of a lens in the hand to the produc- tion of lenses in a mount that can be carried on the face and thus to the invention of spectacles; but the invention of spectacles must have been a most important step in increas- ing the efficiency of those suffering from the small defects 96 THE PATH OF SCIENCE of vision that are so common. Spectacles came into use in Italy about the end of the thirteenth century, and it is hard to believe that nothing else of importance was done with lenses until two were combined to form a telescope, nearly three hundred years later. The first attempt to discuss the theory of lenses was made by Kepler, who wrote a book on the theory of the telescope. This was just after the publication of the work of Galileo and the discoveries he had made with the instrument. It is interesting that the effect of the revolutionary discovery of the telescope on Kepler was to incite him to a discussion of its theory. One can imagine how different would have been the course of events if Tycho Brahe had lived to learn of the existence of the telescope. The results of Kepler's calcula- tions varied little from the observed facts, but he did not know the law of refraction; that is, the way in which a ray of light is deviated when it passes from air to glass. In spite of this, Kepler's work was undoubtedly very valuable in pro- viding a basis for the design of refracting telescopes. The correct statement of the law of refraction was given by Willebrord Snell at the University of Leyden in 1621, but his manuscript was not published at the time; and the law was embodied by Descartes, the great philosopher and mathe- matician, in his book on optics. Descartes, however, prefaced the statement of Snell's law with a mechanical theory of the nature of light, in which he assumed that light traveled more rapidly in denser media. Pierre de Fermat, the French mathematician who formulated the theory of numbers, de- duced the law of refraction from exactly the opposite as- sumption, namely, that light travels more slowly in denser media, and announced the great principle known ever since by his name— that a ray of light originating at a point in one medium will travel to a point in another medium by the path which requires the minimum of time. Of all principles in optics, this has been perhaps the most fruitful. As in mechanics, the great scientist who advanced the whole theory of optics was Isaac Newton. Newton showed THE GROWTH OF PHYSICAL IDEAS 97 experimentally that a prism splits a ray of light refracted through it into a band of colors. White light could there- fore be considered to contain rays of various degrees of re- frangibility, the least refrangible rays being red and the most refrangible, violet. Thus Newton discovered the spectrum and with it much relating to the nature of color. Newton made another observation which later became of the utmost importance, namely, that when a thin film of air occurs be- tween two plates of glass, the film shows colors, and these colors depend upon the thickness of the film. The distinction between the physical and the psychological properties of color was first made clear at the beginning of the nineteenth century by Thomas Young, who advanced a theory of color vision according to which the eye perceives three fundamental sensations— red, green, and violet— and all other color sensations arise from combinations of these three. Yellow, for instance, arises from simultaneous sensations of red and green. The distinction between the psychological basis of color and its physical basis in the differing refrangi- bility of the rays of light has been a difficulty for scientific workers and artists ever since the days of Newton. The pig- ments of the artists have as their fundamental colors the com- piementaries to Young's sensation primaries, and only with the advance of color photography in recent years have the relations between the sensation primaries and the pigment colors become familiar to the general public. As a result of his work on the refraction of light through prisms, Newton inferred that the dispersion of a prism is always proportional to the deviation it produces; that is, he didn't realize that by the use of glass of different kinds prisms could be made that for a given refraction would give different deviations between the rays of varying colors. Newton con- cluded that it was not possible to correct the variation in the focal length of a lens for different colors, an effect which is generally known as the chromatic aberration of the lens. He abandoned the idea of making telescopes of great power by 98 THE PATH OF SCIENCE means of lenses and invented reflecting telescopes, using mir- rors to avoid the difficulty with chromatic aberration. It was shown experimentally about the middle of the eighteenth century that Newton had been wrong and that achromatic lenses could be made. The whole subject was put on a solid foundation by Fraunhofer, who in 1817 discovered that in the solar spectrum there were certain dark lines that enabled him to identify the positions of the colors of the spectrum with accuracy and to measure with precision the refractive indices of glass for light of different colors. Joseph von Fraunhofer was able to calculate the principles required for the achromatism of the telescope and made an excellent refractor of 9%-inch aperture to be used by the astronomers of Dorpat Observatory. Fraunhofer also made optical glass and was really the first working optical instru- ment maker of the modern school. While the use of light in optical instruments w^as advanc- ing, the nature of light continued to engage the minds of men. Newton had devoted much thought to the dynamics of particles, and it is not surprising that he considered light to consist of material particles emitted from heated bodies and producing a mechanical effect by their action on the eye. A phenomenon observed by Francesco Grimaldi, however, was difficult to reconcile with any theory that considered light to consist of particles, that is, that if a point source of light illuminates a sharp straight edge, such as a knife blade, the shadow will be bounded by a series of light and dark bands. To this phenomenon Grimaldi gave the very appropriate name of diffraction^ by which it is still known. Diffraction had also been observed by Robert Hooke, the energetic and versatile secretary of the Royal Society, who concluded that there was some kind of vibrating motion in light. Thus Newton was induced to suggest that the corpuscles of light embodied a vibratory element. The rays of light, for in- stance, in passing by the edges of bodies might be bent back- wards and forwards several times "with a motion like that of an eel." THE GROWTH OF PHYSICAL IDEAS 99 Another observation of the greatest importance in under- standing the nature of light was the discovery, as a result of observations of the eclipses of the satellites of Jupiter by the body of the planet, that light did not travel with infinite speed. Indeed, in 1676 Olaus Romer calculated from these observations that the velocity of light was about one hun- dred and ninety thousand miles a second, a value little dif- ferent from the value used today. The great opponent of Newton's theory of the emission of light as particles was Christiaan Huygens, the Dutch astrono- mer who first made accurate clocks by the use of the pendu- lum and discovered the double refraction of Iceland spar and the refraction of the light of the stars by the atmosphere. Huygens regarded light as being non-material because of its great velocity of propagation and because two rays traversing the same path in contrary directions do not hinder each other. He therefore adopted the theory that light consists of wave motions in a hypothetical medium that is called the ether. The properties of the ether are deduced from the properties of light. Huygens considered each point of a luminous body to be the origin of elementary spherical waves, of which the envelope corresponds at any instant to the position of the wave front. Thus, as the wave front travels forward ^vith the velocity of light, it could always be considered as the envelope of an infinite number of elementary waves. The perpendicular to the wave front corresponds to what is termed a ray. Newton's corpuscular theory and Huygens' wave theory are equally adapted to describe the phenomena of reflection and refraction. The literature of the eighteenth century is full of discussion of the two theories, but in 1827 W. B. Ham- ilton proved that they are only different aspects of the same mathematical laws which can be derived from de Fermat's principle. The wave surfaces can be considered as the poten- tial surfaces of the light rays, and the light rays as the normals of the wave surfaces. None of these theories alone, however, can explain the phenomena of diffraction and interference. 100 THE PATH OF SCIENCE They involve a periodic disturbance moving along the rays from wave surface to wave surface. Two rays or two waves coming from the same point source can be united in a point in such a way that the maximum of one wave ^vill coincide with the minimum of the other and so neutralize it. Thus two waves of light can, under certain circuinstances, produce darkness. This idea was given definite form in 1801 by Thomas Young. Before this, the corpuscular theory of light had been generally accepted for almost a century, largely be- cause it had been sponsored by Isaac Newton. Young founded his views on the nature of light on the following hypotheses: A luminous body produces ^vaves in a medium, the ether, w^hich pervades the entire universe. Different colors of light owe their differences to the frequency of their vibrations, which produce different sensations in the retina. The pro- duction of darkness by the mutual action of two waves of light Young described as interference; and he was able to measure and explain by the wave theory both the diffraction fringes discovered by Grimaldi and the colors of thin films discovered by Newton. Young measured the length of the waves of light, finding that the limit of the spectrum in the red corresponded to waves about 0.0007 millimeter long, while the violet rays at the other end of the spectrum had a length of 0.0004 millimeter. Young's theory was improved by Augustin Fresnel, who considered that the waves moving along the rays ^vere trans- verse waves, vibrations in the plane perpendicular to the path of the light. This made it possible to explain not only diffraction and interference but also the phenomenon of polarization, which had been discovered in 1809 by E. L. Malus, a French physicist, who had observed that light re- flected by a mirror at an incidence angle of about 57° is totally polarized, that is, it has vibrations only in the direc- tion normal to the ray in the plane of reflection. A second reflection from a plane at right angles to the first will extin- guish the light. Malus had then directed his attention to the THE GROWTH OF PHYSICAL IDEAS, TOr double refraction of Iceland spar and had found tFiat both rays are polarized, the planes of polarization being at right angles to each other. Fresnel's theory explained both inter- ference and polarization and gave the mathematical relations for all these phenomena. Fresnel thought of the vibrations of light as vibrations of the ether, which now assumed con- tradictory qualities because the great velocity of light made necessary the idea that the ether was a solid of enormous rigidity, while at the same tiine it imposed no resistance to the passage of matter such as the planets. Much of the theoretical work of the nineteenth century was concerned with the discussion of the properties of the ether and its relation to matter, but the gi^eatest advance in the whole theory of radiation came with the suggestion in 1864 by J. Clark Maxwell that light w^as an electromagnetic phenomenon. Maxwell investigated mathematically the propagation of electric and magnetic forces in space and found the velocity of propagation to be identical with the known velocity of light and the calculated properties— those- actually exhibited by light. He showed that in electromag-- netic waves the electric and magnetic vibrations occur at right, angles to each other and to the direction of the ray, ^vhich is,, of course, normal to the waves of light, and that electromag-. netic waves would be capable of being polarized and w;ould show the phenomena of refraction, reflection, and interfer- ence. Thus he considered light an electromagnetic phenome- non corresponding to a restricted range of wave lengths; and he concluded that longer waves might exist which were far too long to be seen by the eye but could conceivably be detected by other means. This theory was confirmed experimentally by Heinrich Hertz in 1887, and the electric waves discovered by him are those now used in radio communication. The w^hole range of electromagnetic radiation between the radio waves, many meters long, and the waves of light has been generated and observed. Moreover, the discovery of waves shorter than those of visible light, known as ultraviolet waves , was fok Tl02 THE PATH OF SCIENCE lowed by the detection of waves too short to pass through the air and then by the proof that the x-rays (page 106) are very short eleGtromagnetic waves of the same nature as light waves. As we shall see later, the most recent work on the nature of ,electrornag;Hetic waves has brought us back to the conception that all wayes are associated with particles and that the long .controy-ersy between the wave theory and the corpuscular •theory .can ;b;e j.esolved to some extent in a compromise. Only t-^y<9 manifestations of the properties of electricity were knawn ^p the ancients. They knew that magnetite ore would attract aBcJ be attracted by iron and that amber when rubbed would attract light particles, straw, paper, etc. In the Middle Age^ it wa^:? found that a suspended piece of magnetite would poi^t i0.c)ir!tji :and south, and the mariner's compass was invented. At;the time when Galileo was working in Florence, an English physician, William Gilbert, was carrying out ex- periments on the magtiet and the attracting properties of sub- stances ys^hic^h Ji:^d J^^n rubbed, and he showed that the be- havior of the ,camTp^aounds having a high molecular weight and usually valuable properties comparable with those of the natural products that have been of such value to man throughout the ages, such as wood, wool, cotton, and glass. The study of the plastics and of high-molecular compounds generally is now a very important branch of chemistry, and the ideas involved in the structure of polymers are coming to the front in modern chemical theory. The chemical reactions that occur in living organisms have been studied primarily by chemical physiologists, and the determination of the nature of some of the simpler of these reactions will be discussed in the next chapter (page 169). The identification of some of the compounds formed and their synthesis in the laboratory have, however, been among the triumphs of organic chemistry, which, indeed, owes its very name to this field of work. The nitrogen-containing compound urea was identified by von Liebig in the blood and urine of mammals, in which it is the chief vehicle for the elimination of the nitrogen produced by the katabolism of the proteins. In 1828 Wohler synthesized urea, an event that aroused great interest and some controversy since urea had been considered a typical product of "vital" processes. After von Liebig, the greatest name in this field of chemistry is Emil Fischer, who, after acting as assistant to Adolf von Baeyer at Munich, became professor of chemistry successively at Erlangen, Wiirzburg, and Berlin. While studying deriva- tives of hydrazine, he discovered that phenylhydrazine reacts with sugars to form well-crystallized compounds, osazones. Then he turned his attention to nitrogen-containing com- pounds related to uric acid and showed that all of them were derived from a base, purine, which he synthesized, wdth many of its derivatives. Then he returned to the study of 130 THE PATH OF SCIENCE the sugars and synthesized many of them, identifying and, in many cases, preparing the stereoisomeric forms. The dif- ficulties produced by fermentation in this work turned Fischer's attention to the chemical ferments and enzymes, in regard to which he and his coworker, E. Abderhalden, laid the foundations of our present knowledge. From the sugars and ferments Fischer transferred his at- tention to the proteins. He succeeded in breaking down these complex products of vital metabolism into amino acids and other nitrogenous compounds, solving their constitution and synthesizing them. He was thus able to prepare in the laboratory polypeptides analogous to the natural proteins. Other fields of the chemical study of naturally occurring substances relate to the plant alkaloids, which are of great pharmaceutical interest, and to the coloring matters of plants. Perhaps the most striking examples of this field of chemistry are the recent determinations of the structure of the vitamins and the hormones derived from the ductless glands. The industrial production of synthetic vitamin C (ascorbic acid) and especially of vitamin Bi (thiamin) provides an adequate supply of these necessary materials. The properties of the compounds of carbon and their pro- duction by synthesis are the field of organic chemistry. On the other hand, the study of chemical reactions and of the equilibria produced in those reactions is the field of physical chemistry. It had long been known that the progress of a chemical reaction is influenced by the amounts of the reacting sub- stances, but it was not until 1850 that the progiess of a reaction was measured and the results expressed as a mathe- matical equation. This was done by L. Wilhelmy at Heidel- berg, who showed that when cane sugar was inverted by acids, a reaction which can be followed with the polariscope, the amount of cane sugar inverted in a unit time is proportional to the amount of sugar present. Just at that time, the atten- tion of chemists was largely directed to the discussion con- cerning the structure of organic compounds, and it was twelve THE GROWTH OF CHEMICAL IDEAS 131 years before the study of reaction velocities was resumed. Then, in 1867, the full significance and generality of the problem were recognized by two Norwegian scientists, C. M. Guldberg and P. Waage. They stated that the velocity of a reaction at constant temperature is proportional to the prod- uct of the active masses of the reacting substances, this being the fundamental law of chemical kinetics, which is generally called the law of mass action. With the discovery of this principle, many chemists turned their attention to the velocity of reactions, which soon centered upon the phenomenon of catalysis. This term had been introduced by Berzelius for reactions the velocity of which was greatly increased by the presence of small amounts of foreign substances that apparently took no part in the reaction and underwent no chang^e. The conversion of starch into sugar, for instance, is accelerated by dilute acids. Hy- drogen peroxide decomposes rapidly in the presence of finely divided platinum, which also assists the oxidation of ethyl alcohol to acetic acid. Berzelius said: "I don't believe that this is a force quite independent of the electrochemical af- finities of matter, but since we cannot see the reaction and mutual dependence, it will be more convenient to designate the force by a separate name." That name was catalysis. \Vg have seen that Wilhelmy discovered the laws of chem- ical kinetics in the study of the inversion of cane sugar, which was catalyzed by acids. It was at Wilhelm Ostwald's labora- tory at Leipzig, sixty years after the work of Berzelius, that the study of catalytic phenomena was systematically brought into the domain of chemical kinetics and investigated quanti- tatively. Ostwald founded the greatest school of physical chemistry and brought together the work of Guldberg and Waage, of Willard Gibbs, J. H. van't Hoff, Svante Arrhenius, and W. Nernst in his great textbook of general chemistry, which, with the Zeitschrift filr physikalische Chemie^ sup- plied the written sources through which physical chemistry could be taught to the student. Just as the work of Guldberg and Waage supplied the key 132 THE PATH OF SCIENCE to the study of reactions in homogeneous systems, the phase rule of Willard Gibbs opened the door to the effective analysis of heterogeneous systems in which the reacting substances are present in more than one phase— as solids and liquids, for instance. Willard Gibbs published his work in the trans- actions of the Connecticut Academy. Because of this rather obscure place of publication and the mathematical form in which it was developed, chemists were slow to recognize its value. It was not until Ostwald published his translation of Gibbs' papers in 1891 and H. W. B. Roozeboom, at the beginning of the twentieth century, studied heterogeneous equilibria on the basis of Gibbs' phase rule that it became generally known to chemists and physicists as a principle of the highest value in the classification of heterogeneous equilibria. In a general way, it may be stated that the effect of chang- ing temperature, pressure, or concentration in any hetero- geneous system would have to be considered a special prob- lem for each system investigated were it not for the phase rule. In any system, w^e have components— such as salt, water, and acid; phases— gaseous, liquid, and perhaps several solid phases; and variables— such as temperature, pressure, and con- centration, which are known as degrees of freedom. The phase rule, which states that the degree of freedom of the system is equal to the number of components plus two minus the number of phases present, enables any well-defined sys- tem to be classified and analyzed without difficulty. This rule has been of the greatest importance in many practical ap- plications of chemistry, and, in particular, chemical engineer- ing has made great use of it. All phenomena of precipitation, evaporation, separation of salts, and compositions of alloys are interpreted by Gibbs' phase rule. The great rise of in- dustrial chemistry around 1900 was largely conditioned by this chemical idea, which had remained in incubation for so long a period between the time when it was conceived by Gibbs and the time when it was generally adopted. In the years between Gibbs' writing and the application of THE GROWTH OF CHEMICAL IDEAS 133 his work, the physical chemists developed another great chem- ical idea, the theory of electrolytic dissociation, first advanced by the S\vedish chemist Svante Arrhenius. Arrhenius' theory arose from the application of the gas laws to chemical solu- tions by the Dutch chemist van't Hoff. Just as the pressure of a gas is a measure of the concentration of the gas molecules, so the osmotic pressure of a solution, which is the pressure produced through a semi-permeable membrane that transmits the solvent but not the molecules of the material dissolved, is a measure of the concentration and, thus, of the molecular weight of the substances present. In dilute solutions of salts this principle, which held beautifully for solutions of sugar, failed until Arrhenius introduced the conception that salts in solution dissociated into unit particles that were oppositely charged electrically. Faraday had already postulated such charged particles to explain the conduction of an electric current through a solution and had termed them ions. It is now recognized that the simple picture developed by Arrhenius is not adequate to account quantitatively for the behavior of solutions of electrolytes, although his funda- mental concept of dissociation is still the basis of the modern theories of Peter Debye, E. Huckel, J. N. Bronsted, and others. Today we do not consider the behavior of the single ion, but the potential forces of the whole system of ions, in which each is acted upon by the electrostatic field created by the others. From such considerations, we can calculate with reasonable accuracy many of the thermodynamic properties of solutions, and can predict something of salt and ion ef- fects as related to rates of reactions. As the chemical elements were identified and their atomic weights were determined, it became possible to discern a sort of order in their properties. They could be classified into families whose chemical properties were similar. Thus, there are the alkali metals, the alkaline earths, the halogens, and so on. The compounds of sulfur resemble those of oxygen far more closely than they do those of nitrogen, which, how- ever, are akin to those of phosphorus. As a result of similar 134 THE PATH OF SCIENCE considerations, D. I. Mendeleev, professor of chemistry at St. Petersburg, was led to classify the elements by plotting properties which could be measured quantitatively, such as the atomic volumes, against the atomic weights. The curves showed that the same properties repeated periodically, and Mendeleev classified the elements in what is known as the periodic table. By extrapolating this table, he was able to prophesy the existence of elements that had not yet been dis- covered and to state their approximate properties. Several of these prophesies were justified by the discovery of the ele- ments that he had foreseen. In the last years of the nineteenth century, two discoveries were made that disclosed the existence of elements for which there seemed to be no room in the periodic table. The first was the discovery by Sir William Ramsay of the rare gases of the atmosphere. In 1882 Lord Rayleigh started to re- determine the density of oxygen and hydrogen and later ex- tended the work to nitrogen, whose atomic weight is of fundamental importance in connection with the determina- tion of the atomic weights of many elements. He used ni- trogen prepared from the atmosphere by the elimination of the oxygen and of all other reactive gases, such as carbon dioxide and water vapor, and also nitrogen prepared by the decomposition of ammonia. To his astonishment, the at- mospheric nitrogen was appreciably heavier than that pre- pared chemically. After many checks, he discussed the matter in 1894 with Ramsay, who investigated the nature of the atmospheric nitrogen by causing it to react with metals, such as magnesium, which combine with nitrogen. About one per cent of the gas would not react, and this proved to be a new gas having a higher density than nitrogen and a different spec- trum. Moreover, this new gas ^vould not react with anything at all, for which reason it was named argon, the "lazy" gas. Following this discovery, Ramsay succeeded in isolating four other gases having properties similar to argon— helium,* * Chapter V, p. 116. THE GROWTH OF CHEMICAL IDEAS 135 neon, krypton, and xenon. For a little time it looked as if there were no place for them in the periodic table, and then it ^\as realized that they formed a ne^v group of elements of zero valency unable to form compounds. Instead of casting doubt on the classification, they extended and enhanced its validity. An even more important discovery of hitherto unknown elements was made when Pierre Curie and his wife isolated from the residues of uraniimi ore the strongly radioactive radium, of which the atoms ^vere found to be decomposing and chans^ino^ into atoms of lower atomic ^veioht. Stimulated by Roentgen's discovery of the x-rays in 1895, a number of observers tested various fluorescent materials under the im- pression that the origin of the x-rays might be connected ^vith the fluorescence that the cathode stream excited in the glass. Among these observers, Henri Becquerel used some beautiful yellow-green crystals of uranium salts and found that when these ^v ere wrapped in black paper and left in contact ^vith a photographic film, they produced a blackening of the film ^vhen it was developed. This observation excited a good deal of interest. Madame Curie and her husband studied salts of other elements and discovered that thorium ^\'ould also produce an effect on a film in the same ^vay that uranium did and that the activity of different thorium and uranium ores differed, some of them producing four or five times as much effect as another ore containing the same amount of metal. The tests finally indicated that the natural uranium ore kno^vn as pitchblende contains something highly active. Monsieur and Madame Curie undertook to analyze systemati- cally about a ton of pitchblende ore, testing all the products at each step for their activity as sho^vn in the production of ionization in an electroscope, an eff^ect that proved to be parallel to the exposure of a photographic plate. This re- sulted in the isolation of two residues, in one of which the barium of the pitchblende was isolated and in the other, the bismuth; these residues ^vere forty to sixty times more ac- tive than uraniimi. Ho^vever, normal barium and bismuth 136 THE PATH OF SCIENCE showed no activity, so that it was concluded that these resi- dues contained substances originally in the pitchblende that were chemically very similar to barium and to bismuth. These substances could be isolated by a long tedious process of fractional crystallization, and w^hen it was carried out, new elements were identified chemically. The one associated with the barium was named radium^ and to the one found with bismuth Madame Curie gave the name polonium^ from her own country, Poland. If the scientific world had been startled by the discovery of the x-rays and the identification of the electron, this dis- covery was even more astonishing. Here for the first time were chemical elements that were obviously unstable. The radium salts w^ere visibly decomposing. In the process of decomposition, they emitted (1) beta rays, that is, electrons; (2) gamma rays, which were soon shown to be x-rays; and (3) a new radiation of short penetrating power but of great intensity, to which the name alpha rays w^as given. These rays, when studied in a magnetic and an electric field, proved to be streams of positively charged particles. The relation of their mass to their charge showed that they had a mass either twice that of hydrogen, that is, they had an atomic weight of 2, or they were atoms of helium that had a weight of 4 but carried two positive charges. Sir Ernest Rutherford, whose name now comes into the story, showed that the par- ticles were, indeed, doubly charged atoms of helium and that they turned into helium by picking up negative electric charges by collision wdth hydrogen atoms, the helium being identified by the bright yellow line with w^hich it glows and which can be seen in the spectroscope. The successive transformations of radium and polonium were followed by chemists and physicists. It was sho^vn that radium changes into several solids successively, and then into a gas, which, in turn, changes into a solid and then into an- other solid, and so on until, finally, the changes cease and a stable atom of lead is produced. In this process, a series of ra- diations are emitted— sometimes alpha rays, sometimes the THE GROWTH OF CHEMICAL IDEAS 137 beta rays or electrons, and almost ahvays some of the gamma or x-rays. Uranium has an atomic weight of 238. It passes through five transformations in becoming radium, which has an atomic weight of 225; and the radium passes through nine transformations before becoming lead with an atomic weight of 206, the last element before lead being polonium. Thorium, in the same way, goes through a series of trans- formations before the atom stabilizes as an atom of lead, with an atomic weight, however, not of 206 but of approxi- mately 208. H. G. J. Moseley, a young student working with Ruther- ford at Liverpool in 1913, measured the wave lengths of the x-rays emitted by various elements when they were used as the anti-cathode in an x-ray tube; that is, when the stream of electrons falling upon them in the tube produced x-ray emission. Using Rutherford's picture of the atom, Moseley was able to show that the frequency of the x-radiation is pro- portional to the square of the number of the element, the number being the position of the element in the list of all known elements; that is, the number of hydrogen, the light- est element, is 1; that of helium, 2; of lithium, 3; and so on. This discovery enabled Moseley to assign the numbers to all the elements and thus to show what elements were missing from the list, the numbers of the kno^vn elements being re- lated to their chemical properties by the periodic classifica- tion. When it was realized, after the ^vork of Rutherford and Bohr, that an atom consisted of a positively charged nu- cleus surrounded by electrons traveling in orbits, the total charge of ^vhich was equal to that of the nucleus (Chapter V, p. Ill), it became clear that the chemical properties of the atom depend upon the electrons in the outermost orbit. From the periodic classification, it "was realized that the in- nermost orbit can contain at most two electrons, that the next two orbits may contain eight each, and then the orbits con- tain eighteen electrons, and so on. The number of electrons in the atoms of each element can be stated definitely and corresponds to Moseley's atomic number. 138 THE PATH OF SCIENCE The structure of the chemical elements, therefore, the charge on the nucleus, which is the same as that of the atomic number, and the nuinber of electrons were all worked out. One difficulty still remained, ho^vever. The atomic weights of the elements are not the same as their atomic numbers. The atomic weight, for instance, of helium is 4; its atomic number is only 2; and it has only 2 electrons. If the hydro- gen nucleus, which is generally called a proton^ has a weight of 1, helium might be expected to have 2 protons in its nu- cleus, ^vhich would give it t^vo positive charges. Having 2 electrons, it would be neutral, and its atomic weight should be 2. The problem was solved when James Chadwick— like Moseley and Aston, one of Rutherford's collaborators— found that, under some circumstances, from atoms exposed to radia- tion, particles could be obtained having a mass equal to that of the proton but no electric charge. They are called neutrons^ and they represent the missing units in the struc- ture of the nucleus of the atom. The helium nucleus, for instance, contains 2 protons and also 2 neutrons, these sup- plying the necessary units of weight to account for the atomic weight of the element as a whole. The discovery of the neutron made possible an explanation of the nature of the isotopes, discovered by Aston. The chem- ical properties of an element depend upon the number of its electrons, and the nucleus must have a number of protons equal to the electrons to maintain electric balance in the atom as a whole. The number of neutrons in an atoin, however, do not affect the chemical properties, so that it is possible to have two atoms with the same number of electrons, the same atomic number, and the same chemical properties, but a different total mass, because of a difference in the number of neutrons present in the nucleus. Thus, in the case of the two isotopes of neon that Aston discovered in the mass spec- trograph, the particles in the rays had different masses. The neon with an atomic weight of 20 has in its nucleus 10 protons and 10 neutrons; its atomic number is 10, and it has 10 elec- trons; but the neon with an atomic weight of 22 has the same THE GROWTH OF CHEMICAL IDEAS 139 Structure as regards protons and electrons but has 12 neutrons instead of 10. It differs from its twin only by being slightly heavier, which makes it possible to achieve a separation in the mass spectrograph. The most interesting isotopic element discovered is the isotope of hydrogen, which has an atomic weight of 2. It was isolated by Harold Urey at Columbia University in 1931 after its existence had been predicted by R. Birge and D. Menzel at the University of California to explain the difference be- tween the chemical atomic ^veight of hydrogen, w^hich repre- sents, of course, the average weight of the atoms of the mixed isotopes, and the atomic weight as determined in the mass spectrograph, w^hich sho^vs only the weight of the proton it- self. This isotope of hydrogen has t^vice the atomic weight of hydrogen, since the neutron ^veighs as much as the proton, and it is consequently not very difficult to separate it from ordinary hydrogen. Moreover, the difference in ^veight is sufficient to make it behave somewhat differently from hy- drogen itself. The hydrogen isotope has even been dignified by a separate name, deuterium. As a result of the clarification of atomic structure, chemists were able to make a new attack on the nature of the valence bond. The valence bonds of Kekule and Couper w^ere rep- resented by a line drawn bet\veen the symbols of two chemical elements, indicating that the elements were connected in some way, but the nature of the bond "^\^as completely un- known. Indeed, its nature could not possibly be known be- fore something was known of the structure of the atoms. In 1916 G. N. Lewis worked out the electron theory of valence, in which he emphasized the stability of the group of 8 electrons in the case of the lighter atoms. If the outer ring contains exactly 8 electrons, the element has zero valence; that is, it is one of the rare gases and is incapable of forming molecules or compounds. AV'hen the outer electron ring of the element contains less than 8 electrons, it can form com- pounds in w^hich the electron ring of the one element is com- pleted by electrons from another element, making 8 electrons 140 THE PATH OF SCIENCE in all. On the basis of this theory, Lewis and Irving Lang- muir were able to explain the structures of many chemical compounds; and the Lewis model of the nature of valency has been generally accepted. One difficulty in this explana- tion, however, is that the electrons, depicted by Lewis as part of the structure of the atoms, were bound in position, whereas in the Rutherford-Bohr atoms, the electrons were free to re- volve in their orbits. In fact, the atom as pictured by the physicists has never been entirely reconcilable with the prop- erties required by the chemists for their atoms. Recently, however, the mathematical physicists appear to have found the solution for such difficulties.* By the application of quan- tum mechanics, it seems that the orbital atom may provide the necessary mechanism for the formation of the electronic bonds required for the stability of compounds. Recent developments in nuclear physics have accelerated the synthesis of chemistry and physics into one subject. We have seen that the nuclei of the atoms are known to consist of protons and neutrons, the total number correspond- ing to the atomic weight of the element, whereas the number of protons gives the atomic number. The atoms of nearly all the elements are stable; only the few radioactive elements disintegrate of their own accord. These radioactive ele- ments, however, give out a great deal of energy when their atoms disintegrate. The total energy given out by a pound of radium in a year would convert nearly a ton of water into steam, although it would take twenty-five hundred years for half the radium to disintegrate. The radioactive elements, therefore, indicate that an enormous amount of energy is available if the nuclei of the atoms can be made to disinte- grate. Experiments by Rutherford and his associates showed that this disintegration could be accomplished Avhen the nuclei were struck by particles of very great energy, such as the alpha rays from radium. The breakdown of nitrogen atoms by * Chapter V, p. 113. THE GROWTH OF CHEMICAL IDEAS 141 Rutherford in 1919 by these charged alpha particles was the first example of the artificial disintegiation of atomic nuclei. The next problem for the physicists was to produce artifi- cially accelerated particles that would disintegrate nuclei in- stead of using the alpha particles naturally emitted from radioactive atoms. Attention was therefore turned to the production of very high voltages, by ^vhich beams of elec- trons and heavier particles, such as charged protons or deu- terons— the nuclei of deuterium— could be accelerated. By the use of large induction machines or high-voltage trans- formers and valve tubes, it was found possible to obtain electric pressures of the order of millions of volts. An im- portant step was taken by E. O. Lawrence, who invented the cyclotron. In it, a beam of atomic nuclei started at a comparatively low voltage is accelerated by an alternating electric field as the particles travel in a spiral orbit produced by a magnetic field. As they swing around the circle, they are continually exposed to acceleration and travel faster and faster until finally they escape as a very rapidly moving beam of atomic nuclei. The nuclei generally used are those of hydrogen and helium and, especially, deuterium. Using hydrogen nuclei (protons) produced in an electric discharge and accelerated to high velocity by means of ap- plied voltage, J. D. Cockroft and E. T. S. Walton in 1932 found that they could produce helium nuclei by the combi- nation of protons with lithium nuclei. If we write this out as an equation, and insert the weights of the particles in- volved, we get the following: Li + H = 2He 7.0182 1.0081 8.0080 [H- .0183] Thus in this reaction the transformation of the lithium and hydrogen nuclei into two helium nuclei leaves a surplus of mass; and, since no other particles of matter are produced, this mass must be converted into energ)\ The experiment showed, indeed, that large amounts of energy "^vere produced in the form of radiation. W't can calculate the amount of 142 THE PATH OF SCIENCE energy produced from Einstein's equation (Chapter V, p. 115), stating that the energy produced, in ergs, is the change of mass, in grams, multiplied by the square of the velocity of light, which has the tremendous value of 9 X 10-^. When atoms are disintegrated in this way, enormous amounts of energy are released. No effective energy could be obtained from such experiments, ho^\ ever, because only a very few of the charged protons are captured by the lithium nuclei, and so much energy is required to produce the beam of charged protons that the procedure is quite hopeless as a means of producing useful energy. What is needed is a nuclear reaction that would be self- propagating. When a piece of paper is lighted, only a small portion burns initially, but the flame spreads until all the paper is consumed. To get energy from the atom, an atom is required that in disintegiating produces particles that will disintegrate the next atoms they meet. In 1939 some experi- ments showed that such a self-propagating reaction w^as pos- sible for one of the uraniuin isotopes. There are several isotopes of uranium; the coinmon one has an atomic weight of 238. It is radioactive and disintegrates very slowly indeed to form the radium series of elements. Another isotope of uranium has an atomic ^veisrht of 235 and occurs to the ex- tent of 0.7 per cent, or about 14 pounds per ton of uranium. This isotope is disintegrated by the impact of neutrons, but it does not disintegrate by simply emitting one or two par- ticles. The atom actually splits in two, forming two new elements that are first radioactive and then turn into stable elements. This process is known as fission^ and when such a catastrophe happens to an atom, a number of neutrons are emitted. In the case of uranium 235 , as it is called, a neutron starts the reaction, and then it is propagated by the neutrons produced by fission. For this reaction to be propagated through a mass, a certain quantity of 235 is required. Other- wise, so many neutrons escape froin the outside into the air that not enough are available to keep the disintegration go- ing throughout the mass. Also, the 235 must be fairly pure. THE GROWTH OF CHEMICAL IDEAS 143 If too much of the common isotope of uranium, the 238 isotope, is present, the neutrons will be absorbed by the atoms of 238 and will not be available to disintegrate the 235. The production of the atomic bombs that were dropped on Japan depended on the working out of these problems on an engineering scale. The uranium 235 was separated from ordinary uranium by very laborious processes that produced only a very small amount in each piece of apparatus, but by building enormously large factories enough of the isotope could be obtained for effective use in bombs. At the same time, a new element, plutonium, was produced, this ma- terial being made by the exposure of uranium 238 to neu- trons supplied from uranium 235, the whole reaction taking place in a structure called a pile. Plutonium was first made in a cyclotron. A neutron adds uranium to an atom of 238 to produce an unstable uranium isotope, which emits an electron from its nucleus and turns into a new element, number 93; and this in its turn emits an electron and turns into plutonium, el-ement 94. Plu- tonium is similar in its radioactive properties to uranium 235. Chemically, of course, it differs from uranium and can be separated from it by chemical means. Plutonium in sufficient quantity undergoes a self-prop'a gating fission like uranium 235, so that atomic bombs can be made either by the use of the uranium isotope 235 or by the use of plutonium produced from uranium in a pile. Chapter VII THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS * The sciences did not develop in a logical order. Without previous advances in the physical sciences, biology could make only limited progress. It was, however, one of the first sciences to which serious study was devoted; whereas chemistry, as we have seen (page 119), made very little ad- vance until toward the end of the eighteenth century. Twenty-two centuries before, in the fourth century B.C., Aristotle had already made considerable progress in the in- vestigation of animal life. He was an acute natural his- torian with a particular interest in the study of reproduc- tion and development. In the following centuries biology continued to be studied and taught in the museum at Alex- andria. The store of biological knowledge continued to grow until the time of Galen, in the second century after Christ. Galen studied in Alexandria and his native Asia Minor, and later in Rome. He was essentially a medical man, but he made important studies on the anatomy and physiology of various mammals. With his death the helix of history had completed a revolution, and biology sank back into insignificance. It is true that knowledge of the work of Aristotle and Galen was kept just alive during the long period of the Dark Ages, but there was little or no progress. When the study of the ancient authors ^vas revived, they came to be regarded as * The reader who requires a textbook treatment of the history of biology should use one or more of the following standard works: W. A. Locy, Biology and Its Makers, New York, Henry Holt, 1915. E. Nordenski()ld, The History of Biology, London, Kegan Paul, 1929. C. Singer, A Short History of Biology, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1931. 144 THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 145 authoritative and not open to correction. It is not easy now- adays to understand the spirit of those times, when biologists were not expected to discover new facts, but only to expound and illustrate the old opinions. Progress demanded not a revival of the ancient knowledge but a breaking down of the belief in the infallibility of the writers of antiquity. When at last this tradition was broken, largely through the initiative of the anatomist and physiologist Andreas Vesalius (page 77), new knowledge of living organisms came rapidly; so rapidly, indeed, that the old knowledge was soon of relatively small importance, and it can scarcely be regarded as the basis of modern biology. For this reason the biology of antiquity, despite its considerable intrinsic interest, deserves only a passing mention in a short history. Modern biology may be said to have originated about 1537, when Vesalius left his native Belgium, settled in the Uni- versity of Padua, and began to become influential. From then onward progress has been more or less continuous. Nevertheless, it is convenient to divide the history of mod- ern biology into earlier and later periods; and 1838 is a con- venient year from which to date the later period. The first decades of the nineteenth century were a time of steady ad- vance in several departments of biology. In 1838 this steady advance was suddenly followed by spectacular discoveries. The cell theory, enunciated by Schleiden in 1838, led to an outburst of cytological research; and the study of the minute structure of organisms received a second great stimulus from the re-introduction of the staining technique about a decade later. Then in the fifties came the first understanding: of the alternation of generations in plants, and Dar^vin's and Wallace's theory of evolution by natural selection. All these advances, following one another in rapid succession, make it reasonable to date the later period of modern biology from the year 1838. Our history will therefore be related in tw^o sections, the first covering the three centuries that started in 15^7, and the second dealing with the rapid advances that 146 THE PATH OF SCIENCE have occurred in many branches of biology between 1838 and the present day. The rebirth of biolog)% then, started about 1537 in the fields of human anatomy and physiology. Although A^esalius' factual additions to knowledge ^vere considerable, his main service to science ^vas to dare openly to doubt the authority of the ancient writers. Greater discoveries than his were made by others. Andrea Cesalpino, a man of extraordinarily diverse interests in science, technology, and philosophy, de- scribed the circulation of the blood in 1593 but, unfortu- nately, failed to give particulars of the ^vay he got his kno^vl- edge. It was left to the Englishman, William Harvey, to put the physiology of the circulation on a really sound basis. His Exercitatio anatomica de Motu Cordis et Sanguinis is de- servedly one of the classics of science. He not only described the path of the circulation but also made quantitative studies of the amount of blood pumped by the heart. KnoTvledge of human anatomy progressed rapidly, and by 1664 the Oxford professor Thomas Willis had described the external form of the brain and cranial nerves of man so accurately that little of major importance has been added to his ac- count. People had come at last also to understand that glands are synthetic organs that pour out their secretions through ducts. The object of Vesalius, Willis, and most of the other early anatomists and physiologists was practical. They wished to improve the art of medicine. Before biolog)' as a whole could flourish, it was necessary that the true spirit of science shoidd develop, that the study of nature should be undertaken as an end in itself. A nuinber of people ^vere studying and classi- fying plants during the sixteenth century, but they ^vere do- ing so mainly because they ^vished to identify the species that provided drugs and other substances of material value to man. So long as this was so, real progress in botany could not be made. The first person to treat the subject as an inde- pendent science, without regard to practical applications, ^vas THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 147 the versatile Cesalpino; and when he died in 1603, the stage was set for rapid developments in this science. Kaspar Baiihin of Basle made a fairly natural classification of the higher plants, using the idea of genera and species, thouoh without Qrivinor them names. That w^as at the bes^in- ning of the century; toward its close Bachmann of Leipzig (or Rivinus, as he called himself) suggested that no plant name should contain more than two words. Half way through the eighteenth century the great Swedish natural historian Linnaeus applied Bachmann's suggestion to both the plant and animal kingdoms, founding the universally accepted principles of the nomenclatinx of organisms. His classifica- tion of larger groups, ho^vever, ^vas defective. It was not until near the end of the century that the first real attempt to classify plants on a natural system was made by Antoine de Jussieu, a member of the celebrated French family of biologists of that surname. The first fairly satisfactory classification of the animal king- dom was made by that great comparative anatomist Georges Cuvier in his Le Regne Animal (1816). Cuvier divided all animals into four groups: the A^ertebrata, Mollusca, Articu- lata, and Radiata. With the true mollusks he classified three lots of organisms (the lampshells or "brachiopods," the sea squirts and their allies, and the barnacles), which subsequent research showed to be unrelated both to the mollusks and to each other. The Articulata, again, have had to be dismem- bered into two separate phyla, or main divisions of the animal kingdom, the Annelida and Arthropoda. His Radiata was not a natural group. It contained eight major phyla of the animal kingdom and some lesser groups, the affinities of which are still obscure. Cuvier did much to increase knowleds^e of fossil animals. The study of paleontology had begun long before. In 1669 that versatile Dane, Nils Steensen— Catholic priest and human anatomist of the first rank— recognized the organic origin of fossils and concluded that the rocks in which they occur had been laid down as sediment in ^vater. Although he could not 148 THE PATH OF SCIENCE know it, he thus originated that branch of knowledge in which the theory of evolution would one day find its firmest basis. De Buffon, an imposing figure of eighteenth century science, considered that a certain amount of change occurred in the form of organisms with the passage of time, but he did not formulate any systematic theory or explain the causes. Near the end of the century Immanuel Kant, the great phi- losopher, allowed the possibility of evolution in his Critique of Judgmentj and Charles Darwin's grandfather was already a firm believer in the gradual adaptation of organisms to their needs through the inheritance of what were later to be called acquired characters. So also was the brilliant though specu- lative Lamarck, although his ideas on the subject did not attract a lot of attention at the time. More important than any of these for the firm foundation of the theory of evolution was a clergyman and economist named Thomas Malthus. He was not himself a student of evolution or even of biology; he was interested in the pressure of human population on the available means of subsistence. But his writings on the sub- ject were later to influence both Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace, whose theory of evolution was to have such a profound effect on biological thought sixty years later. Modern ideas on evolution are closely bound up with our knowledge of heredity, but in the eighteenth century that subject was illuminated by only a single glimmer of light. Just the very beginnings of knowledge were visible in Joseph Koelreuter's experiments on hybridization. But no one then could aruess what wonders Mendel and his successors would do with the numerical analysis of results in this field. Koel- reuter made a start along a line that did not begin to in- fluence thought on the causes of adaptation until long after the main battle for evolution had been fought and won. Understanding of the processes of reproduction came very slowly. A Dutch student, Hamm, discovered spermatozoa in 1679. In the next century Spallanzani filtered semen and showed that fertilization cannot take place unless spermatozoa are present in it; but he did not conclude that they were the THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 149 actual fertilizing bodies. Reproduction could not be seri- ously investigated until it was known for certain whether organisms arise only from pre-existent organisms or whether, on the contrary, they are sometimes spontaneously generated from non-living matter. Harvey himself in 1651 announced that every organism originates from an egg (though he never saw the tgg of mammals); and ten years later Redi, physician at the court of Florence, showed experimentally that larvae appear in rotting meat only if flies lay eggs on it. That re- markable man John Needham, an English Catholic priest living on the continent, performed experiments nearly a cen- tury afterward that caused him to be a firm believer in spon- taneous generation. Toward the end of the eighteenth cen- tury Spallanzani boiled various organic materials in airtight containers and showed that life did not originate in them. His experiments were so carefully done that they might have settled the matter, but, as we shall see (page 166), the subject was raised again much later. The Mammalian egg was first seen in 1827 by the Esthonian K. E. von Baer, who also made marvelously exact studies of the development of various animals and may be regarded as the father of modern de- scriptive embryology. It is not only from eggs, however, that animals arise. This had been shown toward the middle of the eighteenth century by a Genevese naturalist, Abraham Trembley, who was acting as tutor in a family living near The Hague. Trembley ob- served some remarkable polyps in water taken from a ditch and studied them with such profundity that his work is quoted in modern textbooks not as a historical curiosity but for its sound information on an important subject. He was the first to show that certain animals can be multiplied artifi- cially by cutting them into pieces, and he made a careful study of the processes of regeneration. His friend Lyonet, a Frenchman living at The Hague, made equally exact studies in a different field. His description of the anatomy of the goat-moth caterpillar is an example of accuracy and careful observation that is thought by many good judges never to 150 THE PATH OF SCIENCE have been surpassed to this day, although others before him— especially that unhappy Dutchman, Jan Swammerdam— had done magnificent work on insect anatomy. Such men as these show how wrong it is to adopt a cynical or contemptuous atti- tude toward the biologists of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Trembley made a marvelously detailed study of the natu- ral budding of his little fresh-water polyp. Hydra. He showed how a small part of the body wall protrudes, develops new parts, and becomes a new individual, which separates. His work on this subject actually proved that there is a real epigenesis or increase in complexity during development. But he was influenced so much by the belief of his friend and compatriot Charles Bonnet in preformation that he never relinquished belief in it. Bonnet had shown that plant- lice multiply without the intervention of a male parent. He was struck by the high degree of development of the young at birth and knew that in many insects each stage of develop- ment is enclosed within the skin of the previous stage. He generalized from these facts and imagined that each genera- tion of organisms was folded up in a minute form within the reproductive bodies of the previous generation. Develop- ment, then, was only an unfolding, not a real increase in com- plexity. Extending this idea still further, he imagined that all subsequent generations were already folded up within the first female of each species that existed on the earth. This emhoitement of generation within generation was widely be- lieved during the eighteenth century. Although Trembley's observations were sufficient to disprove it, it was the writings of the placid Caspar Wolff that at last made people reject preformation and accept epigenesis. Working first at Halle and later in St. Petersburg, Wolff showed that there is a gen- uine increase in complexity in the development of both plants and animals and not a mere unfolding of preformed parts. His work was scarcely noticed until the beginning of the nineteenth century, after his death. AV^olff paved the way THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 151 for von Baer and other great descriptive embryologists of the nineteenth century. Scarcely anything was known about the function or sig- nificance of flowers until toward the end of the seventeenth century, when people at last began to realize that the stamens and pollen could be regarded as male and the style, ovary, and ovule as female. This knowledge came from the work of the English medical practitioner Nehemiah Grew and the Tubingen professor, Camerarius. The latter removed the male flowers of plants in w^hich the sexes are borne sepa- rately and found that fruit was not set. It was in the sixties of the eighteenth century that the professional botanist Koel- reuter first showed clearly that certain plants are pollinated by the wind and others by insects. At the end of the century the hermit-like Christian Sprengel made a wonderfully exact study of insect pollination and the devices by which plants escape self-fertilization. Understanding of the significance of leaves came later than that of flowers. In the first half of the seventeenth century the mystical chemist van Helmont had made one very con- crete observation: a willow watered only with rain water gained 159 pounds, while the soil contained in the bowl in which it grew lost only three ounces in dry weight. No one followed up this observation until in 1727 Stephen Hales, a Middlesex clergyman, published a work of genius called Vegetable Staticks, in w^hich he showed that plants absorb air through their leaves and that part of their substance is de- rived from the air so absorbed. This work marked the origin of knowledge about the nutritive function of leaves. Hales also measured the transpiration of water through plants and studied root pressure. In the second half of the eighteenth century the Unitarian clergyman Joseph Priestley showed that air that had been "injured" by the burning of candles could be made suitable for animal respiration by keeping green plants in it; in fact, green plants give off the gas that we now call oxygen. Jan Ingenhousz, a Dutch doctor, showed in 1779 that plants only 152 THE PATH OF SCIENCE give off "dephlogisticated air" in sunlight; in darkness, on the contrary, they produce the gas that we call carbon dioxide. These discoveries were not fully understood at the time. We now know, of course, that green plants take up carbon dioxide from the air through their leaves and under the influence of sunlight build the carbon into the substance of their tissues. In both light and dark they use oxygen and produce carbon dioxide in respiring, just as animals do, but it is only in dark- ness that the carbon dioxide is passed out into the air, for it cannot then be used as a source of nourishment. It was not until the beginning of the nineteenth century that the Swiss investigator Nicolas de Saussure put the subject of plant respiration and nutrition on a firm basis by means of quanti- tative studies. Meanwhile something was being learned about the respira- tion of animals. Up to the middle of the seventeenth century no one had the slightest idea why one must breathe to live; respiration was not in the least understood. In 1660 Robert Boyle, the famous chemist, showed that mice and sparrows die in partial vacua. Eight years later a more fundamental discovery was announced by John Mayow, the lawyer and Oxford don (though Boyle was probably partly responsible for it). It was shown that it is not air as a whole, but some- thing in air, that is necessary for life. Mayow called that something igneo-aerial particles; it was, of course, oxygen. Nearly a century then elapsed without further discoveries being made on this momentous subject. At last Joseph Black, professor of chemistry at Glasgow, showed that ''fixed air" (carbon dioxide) is a product both of combustion and of respiration. Not long afterward a young Scottish medical man Daniel Rutherford showed that "fixed air" is not the only irrespirable matter in air; but he missed the actual dis- covery of nitrogen. It was in 1780 that the fundamental dis- covery about respiration was made by the famous French scientists Lavoisier and Laplace: "Respiration is therefore a combustion, slow it is true, but otherwise perfectly similar to the combustion of charcoal." They had realized that THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 153 both burning and respiration are examples of oxidation. The old ItaHan biologist Spallanzani corrected their one big error not long before he died at the end of the century: the com- bustion does not occur in the lungs, as Lavoisier and Laplace had thought, but in the various tissues of the body. The cell theory was first foreshadowed in the seventeenth century. The English microscopist Robert Hooke described the cellulae of cork; the Italian Marcello Malpighi, the ultric- ulae of various plants; and Nehemiah Grew, their cells or bladders. The Dutch petty official Anton van Leeuwenhoek frequently figured cells. He also discovered blood corpuscles and saw the nuclei of those of fishes, but the time was not ripe for an understanding of the fact that both plants and animals consist of cells. The follow-up of these seventeenth century discoveries was slow. Half way through the eighteenth cen- tury Caspar Wolff, the epigenesist, held that both plants and animals consist of ampullae, but rigid proof was lacking and the science of cytology had yet to be born. At the be- ginning of the nineteenth century a Frenchman, Mirbel, maintained that the cell is the basis of all structure in plants. That extraordinary and erratic genius Lorenz Oken, amid a maze of fantastic writings, claimed that all organic beings— not plants alone— originate from and consist of little blad- ders. About the same time advances were made in other branches of what we should now call histology and cytology. The young Professor M. F. X. Bichat— he was to die almost at once, at the age of thirty— was making the first comprehen- sive classification of the tissues of the human body, strangely enough, without using the microscope. In 1825 a much-over- looked French scientist, F. V. Raspail, introduced the use of iodine into microscopical studies to show the distribution of starch in tissues by its intense blue reaction. He thus founded the science of histochemistry , and went on to devise tests for other substances occurring in plant and animal tissues. From about 1830 onward cytology progressed rapidly, as though in anticipation of the events of 1838. The versatile 154 THE PATH OF SCIENCE Scottish botanist Robert Brown (as eminent in plant geog- raphy as in microscopical studies) recognized the nucleus as a regular feature in plant cells. It had already been named in 1823, but the universality of its occurrence had never been realized. Attention had been focused on the cell wall, a mere lifeless box, and not on the living substance within. The most obvious object in the living substance within the box is the spherical or oval nucleus, and it is perhaps not strange that the nucleus attracted attention before the substance in which it was embedded. Now at last the substance itself was studied, by the French zoologist Felix Dujardin, who called it sarcode. His description of it was remarkably accurate. "I propose to give this name," he wrote, "to what others have called a living jelly— this viscous, transparent substance, in- soluble in water, contracting into globular masses, attaching itself to dissecting needles and allowing itself to be drawn out like mucus; occurring in all the lower animals interposed be- tween the other elements of structure." We could hardly do better today in so few words, though nowadays we have nu- merical data for viscosity and elasticity, and we should not restrict the substance to the lower animals. Dujardin's word, however, did not stick. The Czech investigator Johannes Purkinje introduced protoplasm, and this caught on some years afterward when the great cytologist Hugo von Mohl of Tubingen applied it to the same substance in plants. Purkinje did something a good deal more important than introduce a useful new word. He pointed out that the skin of animals, especially embryos, consists of cellulae like those forming the connective substance or parenchyma of plants. The stage was now set for the enunciation of the cell theory. It was in October 1838 that the ex-lawyer M. J. Schleiden and the anatomist Theodor Schwann dined together in Berlin. They were a strangely assorted pair. The volatile Schleiden, having shot himself in the forehead and recovered, can have had little in common with the placid Schwann apart from their intense interest in the minute anatomy of organ- THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 155 isms. Schleiden described to Schwann the nucleus of plant cells, and Schwann at once recognized it as corresponding to something with which he was familiar in cells of the spinal cord of Vertebrates. The two men repaired forthwith to Schwann's laboratory in the Anatomical Institute of the Uni- versity. Schwann showed his friend the cells of the spinal cord, and Schleiden at once recognized the nuclei as corre- sponding to those with which he was familiar in plants. Due recosrnition must be g^iven to the researches of those who had preceded them in cytological investigations, but this occasion may nevertheless be justly regarded as marking the first gen- eral formulation of the cell theory. The two men published separately. They made big mistakes, but the cell theory— the theory that plants and animals simply consist of cells and the products of cells— must properly be ascribed to them. Throughout the forties discoveries followed one another quickly. Mohl came to regard cell division as the usual means of production of new cells. The Swiss zoologist von Kolliker showed that spermatozoa are cells, not mere parasites in semen. His friend and compatriot Karl Nageli witnessed nuclear division and was the first to glimpse the chromo- somes. It was these two friends, more than anyone else, who established one of the profoundest truths in biology: that the egg is itself a cell and gives rise to the cells of the new indi- vidual by repeated division. (It is true that Schwann had already regarded the egg as a cell, but he did not understand how new cells arise.) It was not until the fifties, however, that it became generally accepted that cells never arise except from pre-existing cells, and not until the sixties that proto- plasm was called "the physical basis of life," and the cell "a lump of nucleated protoplasm." Much was being learned, then, about the minute structure of animals; something also about the physical properties of protoplasm; and its chemistry was not being neglected. Fried- rich Wohler, the distinguished German chemist, had already synthesized urea from inorganic components in 1828 and thus shown that there was no sharp distinction between organic 156 THE PATH OF SCIENCE and inorganic compounds. Raspail was making advances by applying chemical color tests to thin sections of plant and animal tissues, and the word protein was coined. Just at the end of the forties, however, a striking technical advance w^as made, which greatly encouraged the study of structure while turning attention away from the study of substance. This was the rediscovery of staining. Dyes had been used sporadically in biological microtechnique a long time before, but the biologists of the day did not know this. One after another they began to rediscover what had been forgotten and to apply it very much more actively than it had ever been applied. The different constituents of tissues and cells have extraordinarily different affinities for different dyes; and by a little experimenting one can soon learn to make one part of the cell stain in one color and another part in another. One of the great difficulties in studying protoplasm had been its transparency. That difficulty was now removed at a stroke, and a clear insight was given into the minute structure of organisms. Dyes, unfortunately, tell us little about chemical composi- tion, and the study of substance soon became overshadowed by that of structure. Raspail's work with real chemical tests was overlooked, and microscopists began to become amateur dyers. Then came Darwin with his Origin of Species; and morphology— the study of form— received a second powerful stimulus. People began to think that the main purpose of biology was to exhibit the evolutionary relationships of or- ganisms, and that could be done by the study of structure, without much attention being paid to substance or function. In recent years there has been a healthy tendency to revert to the study of substance instead of concentrating exclusively on structure. All sorts of interesting^ methods have been used to find out more about the actual substances of which cells are composed. Some of these methods are actually new; others are revivals of very old ones. One of them, micro- incineration, actually originated with Raspail in the eighteen twenties but has only recently been developed. Thin slices THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 157 of plant and animal tissue are heated in an oven until all the organic matter is burned away and only inorganic ash is left. The process is so carefully carried out, however, that the ash remains exactly where it was, and the microscope reveals the exact location of the inorganic constituents within individual cells. America has led the world in originating and developing novel methods for investigating the substances of which the cell is composed. Professor R. R. Bensley of Chicago, youth- ful despite his years, has been and still is a pioneer in this work. It was he who first showed how the minute com- ponents of cells can be separated from one another by pass- ing: tissues throuo^h fine sieves and then centrifusrino^ the ma- terial at carefully regulated speeds. In this way some of the most elusive cell constituents, previously only peered at under the highest powers of the microscope, have been obtained in masses that one can hold in one's hand. Instead of having to rely on conjecture as to their composition, one can now subject the material to direct chemical analysis. But we must return to the outburst of discovery in various fields that followed the formulation of the cell theory. The phenomena of reproduction began to be put upon a cellular basis. In 1855, for the first time, the German botanist Nathaniel Pringsheim saw the essential feature in the act of fertilization. As early as 1823 the microscopist Giovanni Amici had observed the tube formed by the pollen grain and seen it enter the ovule. Pringsheim now saw the cellular nature of fertilization. He was working with Vaiicheria, one of the lowly plants that form masses of branching green threads in our ponds and ditches. He found that two cells, the active male spermatozoid and the female ovum or egg, fuse together to form a single cell and that the single cell grows and differentiates until it becomes a new plant indi- vidual. Spermatozoa had been known since the seventeenth century and the corresponding spermatozoids of ferns since the forties, and it seems rather surprising that an understand- ing of the general principles of fertilization came so slowly. 158 THE PATH OF SCIENCE It was not until the seventies that the Swiss scientist Hermann Fol actually saw the spermatozoon of the starfish enter the egg and thus showed for animals, as Pringsheim had shown for plants, that fertilization consists of the fusion of two cells. Meanwhile, the fundamental principles of the reproduc- tion of plants were at last being discovered. A considerable obstacle had to be overcome before progress could be made in this subject. It had been supposed, quite naturally, that the ovule was to a plant what the egg is to an animal. It was an amateur botanist ^vho made all the fundamental discov- eries that exposed the falsity of this view. Early in the fifties Wilhelm Hofmeister, a music-seller, showed that mosses and ferns exhibit an alternation of generations: that the spore of a fern plant does not grow into another fern but into a com- pletely different kind of plant, which itself reproduces sex- ually to produce the fern plant once more. That was remark- able enough, but Hofmeister went straight on to show that there is an exactly comparable alternation of generations in the flowering plants: part of the ovule is actually another generation living parasitically on the parent that produced it. This was one of the most important botanical discoveries ever made, and it was all the more noteworthy because Hof- meister did his work at a time when the actual process of fertilization was not understood in either plants or animals. Hofmeister, who was self-taught and had had no academic training, now became a professor of botany at a great Ger- man university. Attention now began to be focused on nuclei. When nuclear division occurs, chromosomes become apparent. Chromosomes are colorless and transparent, but they have an intense affinity for many ordinary dyes. Indeed, it is for that reason that they are called by a name that means color bodies. They had been glimpsed by Karl Nageli early in the forties; now, owing to the rediscovery of staining, they had become one of the easiest things in the cell to study. In the seventies the German botanist Eduard Strasburger made out the principal features of nuclear division in plants, and shortly THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 159 afterward the process was found to be essentially the same in animals. Each chromosome divides longitudinally at cell division, and of the two halves one goes into each daughter cell to help reconstitute a new nucleus. About the same time the German biologist Oscar Hertwig made the momen- tous discovery that the essential feature of fertilization is the fusion of two nuclei, one derived from each parent. It was in the eighties that the Belgian zoologist Edouard van Beneden made one of the most fundamental discoveries of cell science: each nucleus in the body contains two packs of a definite number of chromosomes, the number beino;- con- stant throughout all the cells of the body in each species, ex- cept the spermatozoon and egg, which have only one pack each. The significance of fertilization now began to become apparent; it brought two packs together again. People were not slow to see that the extraordinarily precise behavior of the chromosomes must indicate some function of significance for life; and it was suggested that they were con- nected with heredity. So they are, and the knowledge that would have proved it was already lying on the dusty shelves of the libraries of Europe. But no one read the necessary paper. An almost unknown Austrian biologist, the monk Gregor Mendel, had written it in 1866. It had been pub- lished in an obscure journal and sent to London and else- where; but scarcely anyone paid any attention. His paper was independently rediscovered in 1900 by three scientists in different parts of Europe; and it was at once realized that a very important discovery had been made, so important, in- deed, that the study of heredity is to this day often called Mendelism. Mendel worked mainly with edible peas, which he grew in the garden of his monastery. His experiments were novel in that he crossed plants differing in one or a few sharply contrasting characters; and these he followed through, gen- eration by generation, always counting accurately the number of plants showing each character. It was particularly his analysis of the ratios in which the characters reappear that 160 THE PATH OF SCIENCE brought him posthumous fame. He showed that the genes, as we now call the units responsible for heredity, do not in- terfere with one another when they come together at fertili- zation. A hybrid inheriting genes for both tallness and dwarfness does not have genes for medium size in its germ cells: on the contrary, each of its offspring inherits from it only tallness or dwarfness. When Mendel's paper was dis- covered, it was quickly shown that his laws of inheritance, as they came to be called, were not soinething peculiar to the edible pea but were of universal application to plants and animals, including man. The paper was discovered in 1900, and two years later a fact of first-rate importance was pointed out by W. S. Sutton of Columbia University. The way in which the chromo- somes are distributed from parent to offspring was known. Sutton pointed out that it was exactly the same as the way in which the genes are distributed, according to Mendel's findings. Mendel had died in 1894, a few years before van Beneden had made his discoveries. Had he lived those few years, Mendel might perhaps have forestalled Sutton. But the last years of his life were so much occupied with the financial affairs of his monastery that it is unlikely that he kept in touch with chromosome research. It was already known in 1901 that the sexes differed slightly in their chromosome complement, and it was not long before people realized that chromosomes are not only the bearers of the genes for ordinary characters, but also the determinants of sex. A few years later an American biologist began study- ing inheritance in a little fly rather similar to the housefly but smaller, called Drosophila. This animal presents extraordi- nary advantages for the study of heredity. It can easily be kept in large numbers in the laboratory, the reproductive cycle from one generation to the next is very short, and the chromosomes are few. It has taught us more about heredity than any other organism. A group of workers centered around T. H. Morgan at Columbia University began to make marvelous discoveries. It had been known for some time THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 161 that certain genes behave under certain circumstances as though they were linked to others in heredity. Soon it be- came apparent that the number of groups of linked genes is the same as the number of different chromosomes (only four in each cell, in Drosophila). Morgan and his collaborators were soon able to say which chromosome was concerned with the inheritance of which group of linked genes and, further, in what order the genes were arranged along each chromo- some. They could say that at this point on a given chromo- some was the gene that expresses itself most obviously by its effect on the shape of the wings; here, farther along the same chromosome, another affecting the size of the legs; farther again, a gene affecting body color; and farther still, one af- fecting^ the size of the winsjs; and so on for hundreds of other genes. The evidence for the arrangement of the genes in a certain order along the chromosomes was entirely indirect. The chromosomes looked more or less the same all along their length; there were no little marks that might actually be the genes. The complicated indirect evidence was obtained, like Mendel's, from the counting of the numbers of individuals showing various inherited characters in each generation, not from a minute study of the chromosomes themselves. It was not until the nineteen thirties that final ocular proof of the chromosome theory of heredity was obtained. It became known that some curious objects in certain cells of Drosophila and other flies were nothing but gigantic chromosomes, about one hundred times as long as normal ones. They are like tapes with stainable marks across them. These marks are something like the divisions on a measuring tape but differ in that some are thick and some thin; and these thick and thin marks follow one another in a resrular order. That resf- ular order is the same in very nearly all the corresponding chromosomes in the cells of all the flies of the same species,— very nearly, but not quite— and the exception gave the clue to a most important discovery. A few peculiar specimens of Drosophila were known, in which the ordinary indirect evi- 162 THE PATH OF SCIENCE dence suggested very strongly that some of the genes, cor- responding to a short length of one chromosome, were the "wrong" way around. It occurred to T. S. Painter and his associates at the University of Texas to look at the giant chromosomes of these particular specimens. In his micro- scope he saw for the first time concrete proof of the chromo- some theory of heredity: the thick and thin marks were in fact arranged the wrong way around in part of the chromo- some concerned. Our modern understanding of heredity has thrown a strong light on the causes of evolution without, as yet, providing an explanation that commands general assent. Back in 1858 a theory of causes had been put forward by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace. The idea had occurred to them independently. Both had read Malthus on population (page 148). In Darwin's mind the idea formed gradually over a long period of years; into Wallace's it flashed suddenly while he was suffering from an attack of malaria in the East Indies. They saw that organisms produce far more offspring than can survive; that those offspring differ among themselves; and that, on the average, those that chance to be the best adapted to their environment will survive. These fittest individuals would pass on their characters to their offspring, and thus the race would gradually evolve. The publication of The Origin of Species in 1859 is a landmark in the history of biology. Nowadays we can see that Darwin's chief service to science was the production of a mass of evidence that evolution has occurred. That mass of evidence has been multiplying ever since, and the fact of evolution is not today in doubt. But although he studied variation and wrote a large book on it, Darwin never found out how variations are inherited. It was Mendel who did that. It is interesting to speculate on what would have happened if Mendel had sent a copy of his paper to Darwin. The latter, however, died without ever hearing of Mendel's work, and real study of the causes of THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 163 evolution was delayed until after the product of the monas- tery had been brought into the light of day in 1900. The geographic distribution of organisms, their habitats, foods, and "enemies" seem relatively simple matters for study, and one might have looked for the development of these branches of biology early in the history of science. It is true that Linnaeus and other eighteenth century biologists re- corded the habitats of the plants they described, and Captain Cook took biologists with him on his great voyages of explora- tion; but no serious attempt was made to draw general con- clusions or to found a special branch of biology covering the natural conditions of life of plants and animals. It was not until 1858 that an ornithologist, P. L. Sclater, made an at- tempt to divide the world into zoological regions. The theory of evolution then gave an impetus to such studies. It was necessary to find not only what organisms lived where, but how that particular distribution had come about in the course of geological time. In the seventies Alfred Russel Wallace, himself a great traveler, rounded off his general contribution to the theory of evolution by a particular study of geographic distribution. His zoological regions, founded for the most part on those of Sclater, have retained much of their validity to the present day. Wallace's line, w^hich he drew with such remarkable accuracy through the map of the East Indian archipelago, still separates the extraordinary fauna of the Australasian region from the animals of eastern Asia. The study of the home life of organisms or ecology, as it eventually came to be called, still remained in a primitive state. Darwin himself was a first-rate ecologist, as every reader of The Origin of Species must know. Academic biolo- gists, however, continued to leave the subject alone, as though mere natural history were beneath their notice. Not suffi- cient attention was paid to the fact that plants and animals have their particular structure and functions simply because their ancestors lived in certain habitats, were subject to the rigors of certain climates, fed on certain foods, and were liable to attack by certain other organisms. It was inde- 164 THE PATH OF SCIENCE fensible to make detailed studies o£ structure and function while neglecting the environmental factors in response to which the structure and function evolved, but ecology is only now coming into its own. Old-fashioned natural history is becoming strictly scientific. The habitats of organisms are coming to be described not in vague terms, but in the form of accurate numerical data for the temperature and humidity of the atmosphere, the intensity of the visible and ultraviolet light, and so forth. The complex interrelations of organisms are also beinsr disentans^led. It has been shown that there are regular cycles in the abundance and scarcity of many species, though we do not yet understand the underlying causes. It is very unfortunate that ecological studies have come so late in history; for man has acted like a vandal in destroying the natural habitats in which organisms evolved. In Great Britain only a few small patches of virgin country remain. Through his radical transformation of his own habi- tat, man has disturbed that of most terrestrial organisms. He himself has become an environmental factor in the lives of plants and animals comparable in importance with the nat- ural phenomena of temperature, humidity, mountain-build- ing, and the rest. It is a pity that he did not start studying ecology before he nearly destroyed the natural subject matter of this branch of biology. The ecology of the future is likely to be concerned mostly with the relationships of organisms to the artificial environments created by man. The grand period of biology started and ended with cyto- logical studies. The year 1838 saw the formulation of the cell theory. About half a century later the general principles of chromosome behavior were known. Now, at last, a retro- gressive movement had set in. Darwin's theory led to a con- centration of attention on the structure of organisms with a concomitant loss of interest in their substance and functions. People who could have been continuing the scientific study of organisms were indulging in speculation and drawing dia- grams from their imagination showing ho^v one group of organisms had been derived from another. A book was writ- THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 165 ten to show that Vertebrates evolved from kino: crabs. No limit was set to the free play of the imagination when once the idea of evolution had been accepted. Side by side, how- ever, with much that was valueless— and often curiously inter- mingled with it— went a profound study of the comparative anatomy of animals. So complete, indeed, was this study that no problem of major importance was left for solution in the twentieth century. Comparative anatomy alone could not provide insight into the causes of evolution. Help came at last from quite an unexpected quarter. It was the rediscovery of Mendelism in 1900 that eventually gave the necessary impetus to studies of evolution. It gradually became apparent that the survival of organisms in the struggle for existence might depend on what Mendelian genes they possessed. Those individuals that had genes determining characters favorable to survival would be automatically selected; the rest would perish and leave few or no offspring. It was seen that in any species a very large set of possible combinations of different genes was available, and on these combinations "natural" or automatic selection would operate: there would be survival of the individuals with the fittest genes. But this was not all; it was found that the genes themselves sometimes undergo sudden changes. The cause of this process of mutation is not understood, but it certainly results in the production of new genes; and these behave according to Mendel's rules, generation after genera- tion, until mutation occurs again. Mutation and recombina- tion, then, are thought to provide the material on which Darwin's natural selection can act; but our ideas on the causes of evolution must remain hypothetical until we can demon- strate unequivocally the selection of favorable genes under natural conditions of existence. Although we do not know the causes of natural mutation and are, thus, still ignorant of the real cause of evolution, quite a lot is kno^vn about how mutation can be made to occur artificially in the laboratory. In 1927 H. J. MuUer, at the University of Texas, discovered that the rate of muta- 166 THE PATH OF SCIENCE tion can be enormously increased by subjecting organisms to x-rays; and ultraviolet light and radium have since then been shown to act in the same way. These agencies act on the chromosomes of the germ cells. We may look for great ad- vances in this line when someone has discovered how to con- trol the process. At present it is a hit-or-miss affair; there is no known way of producing one ne^v gene rather than another. It is strange to recall that the controversy on spontaneous generation was only laid to rest in the middle of the nine- teenth century. We have already seen (page 149) that Spal- lanzani had disproved spontaneous generation by careful ex- periments in the sixties of the century before, but people were not easily convinced. The great Swedish chemist Ber- zelius (page 121) still believed in the spontaneous generation of some of the lower animals at the beginning of the nine- teenth century; so, later still, did that restless genius of physi- ology and marine zoology, Johannes Miiller. The most ardent supporter of spontaneous generation, however, was the Rouen professor Felix Pouchet, who thought that the fermentation of decaying substances was actually the process by which the micro-organisms found in such substances orig- inate. This cart-before-the-horse opinion was opposed by Louis Pasteur, whose critical experiments finally convinced the scientific world in 1861. Pasteur went straight on to the study of micro-organisms as the causes of disease. In 1835 an Italian amateur microscop- ist, Agostino Bassi, had shown that a disease of silkworms was caused by a microscopic fungus. Not much attention had been attracted by this discovery; and now, strangely enough, Pasteur started his investigation of germs by studying another disease of the same insect. Things moved quickly in the six- ties. Another Frenchman, Casimir Davaine, discovered bac- teria in the blood of animals suffering from anthrax and showed that one-millionth of a drop of infected blood was sufficient to carry the disease into a previously healthy indi- vidual. Pasteur's final proof that micro-organisms are not THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 167 spontaneously generated but arise only from pre-existing micro-organisms naturally had a profound influence on the development of bacteriology; for it was at last obvious that exclusion of the germ meant exclusion of the disease. Early in the seventies a German investigator, C. J. Eberth, per- formed the experiment that linked Davaine's with Pasteur's. He filtered the deadly blood of animals suffering from an- thrax and showed that the filtrate ^vas innocuous. There was nothing in the filtered blood that could multiply and cause disease, and the germs could not be generated spontaneously. Bacteriology now made rapid strides, thanks largely to ad- vances in technique. Robert Koch introduced valuable methods for making bacteria readily visible under the micro- scope by staining them, and he also discovered how to grow them outside the body on jelly in glass vessels, a technique that is still in use today. Microscopists now looked confidently for the germs of the most diverse diseases; but their confidence was misplaced. It was soon discovered that some diseases could be artificially transmitted from one animal to another, as are diseases caused by germs, despite the fact that no sign of any micro-organism could be detected under the microscope. Pasteur considered that such diseases must be caused by micro-organisms too small for the microscope to resolve. Diseases of this kind were found to occur also in plants. And now, in the last decade of the century, Eberth's filtration experiment was found not to be universally valid. It was shown that the juice of a tobacco plant infected with mosaic disease would cause the same disease in previously healthy plants even if the juice were filtered. Something had been discovered that could only be observed through its effects on organisms; this some- thing had the power of self-multiplication but, unlike ordi- nary germs, could pass through a filter. This was the starting point of our knowledge of the filter-passing viruses, which are the cause of so many diseases of man, such as smallpox, chicken pox, measles, German measles, influenza, and com- mon colds. 168 THE PATH OF SCIENCE Soon after the turn of the century it was found by P. Rem- linger in Constantinople that the virus of rabies will pass through one filter but not through another. This gave the clue that made it possible to estimate the size of virus par- ticles, although the microscope could not reveal them. Ex- traordinarily fine filters were made, in which the size of the holes, though ultramicroscopic, could be determined indi- rectly. In the twenties virus particles were already known to be minute. The virus of foot-and-mouth disease is particu- larly small, not many times larger, in fact, than certain large molecules, such as the molecule of hemoglobin. A compli- cated building cannot be constructed from a few bricks, and it is clear that the viruses must be extremely simple in struc- ture: they seem to stand halfway between living and non- living matter. We cannot regard them, however, as the forms in which life first appeared on this planet, for they seem remarkably dependent on the living cells of organisms, and they do not multiply in profusion outside the body as bacteria do. The invention of the electron microscope is already beginning to help in the elucidation of the nature of viruses. The resolving power of this new instrument with suitable objects is much higher than that of the ordinary light microscope, and actual micrographs of virus particles have been obtained. Again and again in the history of science we see new devel- opments foreshadowed in old writings. In 1656 the London physician Thomas Wharton had claimed that the secretion of the pineal gland, in the brain, passed into the blood stream; but no one followed up this idea. It had only recently been discovered that glands have ducts, and the contrary idea— that some of them have not— was unattractive. It was not until the nineteenth century that people began to understand how hormones or chemical messengers originate in ductless glands, pass into the blood stream, and exert powerful in- fluences on the action or growth of distant parts of the body. In our own times it has been discovered that plants too have their hormones. THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 169 From the thirties of the nineteenth century onward, thanks largely to the work of the great German chemist Justus von Liebig, proteins, fats, carbohydrates, salts, and water were recognized as the main nutritional requirements of man and other animals. So firmly did this idea take root that great independence of mind was necessary in anyone who would doubt it. Yet a Dutchman, G. Grijns, working inconspicu- ously in the East Indies, did dare to doubt it; he even claimed that men became ill and died just because proteins, fats, carbo- hydrates, salts, and water were not enough. That was at the very beginning of the present century, and not long afterward the great Cambridge biochemist Sir Frederick Hopkins set the study of vitamins on its feet by critical feeding experi- ments on animals. We left the grand problem of respiration on page 153 with Spallanzani's discovery that the reaction of combustible sub- stances with oxygen occurs not in the lungs, as Lavoisier thought, but in the various tissues of the body. This was not definitely proved until the eighteen thirties, and at that time it was still thought that the oxygen traveled from the lungs to the tissues in simple solution in the water of the blood. In the fifties people began to think that it must travel in loose combination with some unknown substance. Today it seems difficult to believe that it was not until the eighteen sixties that this substance was shown to be hemoglobin, the familiar red coloring matter of blood. The discovery was largely due to the investigations of the great German biochemist F. Hoppe-Seyler. Everything seemed straightforward. The oxygen in the air of the lungs combined with the hemoglobin in the red blood corpuscles and was carried in this combined form to the tissues; it then escaped from combination, dif- fused out of the blood into the cells, and there combined with carbon and hydrogen to form carbon dioxide and water. The energy produced by this combustion was the energy necessary for life. The form in which oxygen travels in the blood stream had, indeed, been discovered, but the manifold complications of 170 THE PATH OF SCIENCE its behavior when it gets to the tissues had not even been glimpsed. In the eighteen eighties C. A. MacMunn brought for^vard evidence that the tissues themselves, apart from the blood, contain substances resembling hemoglobin. These he named histohaematin and myohaematin. The great Hoppe- Seyler said that MacMunn's substances were simply decom- position products of the hemoglobin of the blood. MacMunn defended himself: he had shown in his very first paper that his substances were present in the tissues of insects, which have no hemoo^lobin in their blood. This miQ;ht have seemed conclusive, but Hoppe-Seyler refused to consider the evidence from insects. He simply printed a note alongside MacMunn's last paper saying that he considered all further discussion of the subject superfluous. People accepted his opinion, and little more was heard of histohaematin, myohaematin, or MacMunn. It was not until the twenties of the present century that D. Keilin of Cambridge showed that MacMunn had been right and Hoppe-Seyler wrong. It would appear that throughout the plant and animal kingdoms every cell that gets its energy by the ordinary process of combustion con- tains MacMunn's substances (or cytochrome, to use Keilin's word). MacMunn had really been studying something far more fundamental than Hoppe-Seyler. The latter was inter- ested in the vehicle by which oxygen is transported to the tissues in certain animals; MacMunn, on the contrary, was on the verge of discovering what happens to oxygen when it actually gets to cells, whether by Hoppe-Seyler's vehicle or not. We realize nowadays that cell respiration is a matter of enormous complexity. The oxygen by no means simply diffuses into cells and combines with combustible substances. It first combines with cytochrome and is then handed on by this cellular respiratory pigment to combine with the hydro- gen of combustible substances, each stage of the process being made possible by the presence of particular intracellular fer- ments. Knowledge of the processes of cellular respiration is growing rapidly. It is strange to think that if MacMunn had THE GROWTH OF BIOLOGICAL IDEAS 171 not been crushed by Hoppe-Seyler, we should probably have had this knowledge nearly forty years sooner. A useful lesson can be learned from the sad story: under no circumstances must research be controlled by authority. It is true that Hoppe-Seyler had no legal authority, such as one scientist has over another in a totalitarian state; yet his influence was suf- ficient to retard by several decades the investigation of one of the most fundamental problems of life. One cannot guess what branches of biology' are going to develop most rapidly in the future, though one can surmise that certain lines have been rather thoroughly ^vorked out and offer poor prospects. Much may be expected from the full incorporation of physiology into biology. In the past animal physiology has been a sort of ancillary branch of medi- cine, as botany was of pharmacology^ in the sixteenth century. Plant physiology has never suffered under the same disadvan- tages; it has developed naturally like the other branches of botany and in concert with them, and is universally regarded as a branch of botany. Zoology, greatly to its detriment, ^vas for lono: resrarded as being^ concerned with all branches of knowledge of animals except that of function. This idea was as detrimental to physiology as to the major subject. A change of outlook is at last manifesting itself. Physiologists have begun to untie the strings that have bound them to man, guinea pig, and frog. If physiology can break loose from subservience to medi- cine and stand on its own legs, we may look for rapid progress in our understanding of the processes of growth and differ- entiation. These are tw^o of the most fundamental phenom- ena of life. Until now they have been studied mostly by biologists lacking special training in physiology, for profes- sional physiologists have held aloof. Wilhelm Roux, son of a fencinor instructor, founded the science of the mechanics of development toward the end of the nineteenth century. The embryological experiments carried out by the philosophic Hans Driesch about the turn of the century led him to con- clude that a purely mechanical and chemical explanation of 172 THE PATH OF SCIENCE development was impossible. Then, in the early part of the present century, Hans Spemann of Freiburg was able to local- ize in early embryos the actual substances that "organize" its further development. And W. Vogt of Munich, by marking spots with stains on the surface of living embryos, has watched and recorded the complex movements of cells during differ- entiation. These men and others have made real progress in investigating the causes that transform a simple egg into a complex adult body, the old problem that Wolff started to attack nearly two centuries ago. This surely should be a very attractive problem for present-day physiologists, but it is only one among many that await solution by a fully integrated science of biology, in which animal physiology will take its natural place. Chapter VIII THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE We have followed the growth of scientific research from its beginning in the seventeenth century, when the investigators were amateurs engaged primarily in other pursuits but in- spired by interest to experiment in the field of natural philos- ophy. As their knowledge grew, they found a natural home in the universities as professors of natural philosophy. Their welcome in the universities arose from the fact that in the Middle Ages the study of natural phenomena was considered suitable for ecclesiastics, w^ho regarded the knowledge that they derived from their inquiries as a means of developing the fullness of the reliofious belief both of themselves and of those whom they taught, and who felt that the revelation of the marvels of nature was a fitting part of worship. These ecclesiastics not only studied in their retreats but also taught the more intelligent young men of the day, so that the uni- versities evolved from the institutions of the church. When the methods of experimental science were developed, the readiness of the universities to accept the responsibility for the advancement of knowledge was due essentially to the fact that the results obtained w^ere immediately applicable to the purpose of teaching. Indeed, only by assiduous effort and discovery could the facts of natural philosophy be suffi- ciently correlated to make it possible to present them in an orderly manner so that they could be understood by the im- mature minds with which a university has to deal. This need for investigation by the teacher was so marked and the success of teachers who w^ere engaged in experimental study was so pronounced that it was generally recognized that the best ad- 173 174 THE PATH OF SCIENCE vanced training in science could be obtained only under a man who was himself actively engaged in promoting the science that he taught. Through the nineteenth century, the advancement of science was a function of the work of the universities. Toward the end of the nineteenth century, the impact of science upon the social life of the western world became evi- dent. Lecturers and writers, such as Tyndall and Huxley, were pointing out to the public that the advances which were occurring in the scale of living arose from the growing knowl- edge of natural science. And H. G. Wells had a considerable influence upon public thought when he published in 1902 his book entitled Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific Progress upon Human Life and Thought.* In this book Wells attempted to analyze the trends of invention and development apparent at the beginning of the twentieth century and to foresee how those new developments might react on the structure of society. It is an excellent book, and, looked at forty years later, it is astonishingly accurate, sug- gesting that an anticipation of the general course of events over a limited period is not at all impossible, though quite obviously there will be a considerable distortion of the time scale for the different phenomena. Wells, for example, seri- ously underestimated the rate of development of aircraft. On the other hand, he overestimated apparently the development and influence of the technically trained men. In the nineteenth century there arose a number of technical industries that depended primarily upon discoveries and in- ventions made by some individual or group who developed their original discoveries into an industrial process. The history of many industries is that they were originated and developed by a man of genius fully acquainted with the prac- tice of the industry and with such theory as was then known; that his successors failed to keep up with the progress of the industry and with the theory of the cognate sciences; and * London, Chapman and Hall, Ltd., 1902. THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 175 that sooner or later some other genius working on the subject advanced the available knowledge and gave a new spurt to the development of that industry. Thus, in the early days of the technical industries, the development of new processes and methods was often dependent upon some one man, some- times the owner of the firm which exploited his discoveries. But with the increasing complexity of industry and the paral- lel increase in the amount of technical and scientific informa- tion, necessitating increasing specialization, the work of in- vestigation and development, ^vhich had been performed by an individual, was delegated to a special department of the organization, from which arose the modern industrial research laboratories. The organization of research sections in industry first be- came of importance in the dye industry in Germany. After the initial discovery of the synthetic dyes by Perkin in Eng- land, Hofmann and his students made large numbers of dyes from the oils separated from coal tar, and the students of Hof- mann founded manufacturing companies to make the dyes. In this industry, continual research was essential, and very soon gi'oups of chemists were producing a stream of new processes and products, all of them protected as completely as possible by patents. The success of this organization and the expansion of the dye works until they controlled the chemical industry of Germany and a great part of the world inspired others to follow their example. Certain other industries were founded by scientific men who had made discoveries, and these also engaged in scien- tific research on a large scale. Research was organized from the very beginning in the telephone companies that Alex- ander Bell founded, and Elihu Thomson brought the same system into the General Electric Company when it was formed. Soon after the beginning of the twentieth century, therefore, industrial research was firmly established in the German chemical and electrical industries, in the American electrical industry, and, to a small extent, in the British and American chemical industries. 176 THE PATH OF SCIENCE The prototype of another kind of organization for the ap- plication of science to industry is the Mellon Institute of the University of Pittsburgh. Laboratories of the type of the Mellon Institute may perhaps be distinguished as technologi- cal research institutes, since their work is primarily in tech- nology rather than in pure science.* At the end of the nineteenth century, the governments of the world started to support a limited amount of scientific research. The oldest government-supported research is that of the observatories, of which the first was Greenwich Ob- servatory, founded in 1675 and supported on a very parsi- monious scale by the British government ever since, the head of the institution enjoying the title of Astronomer Royal. During the nineteenth century the federal government of the United States created the Coast and Geodetic Survey, the Naval Observatory, the Department of Agriculture, and the Geological Survey. On the whole, these institutions ^vere devoted primarily to the application of science, although the Bureau of Standards, founded in 1901, and the British Na- tional Physical Laboratory, founded in 1899, like the Reichs- anstalt, organized by the German government after the Franco-Prussian War, carry out much basic research in physics in addition to their primary task of maintaining the physical standards used in commerce and industry. At the beginning of the twentieth century, a new factor entered the field of pure science. This was the creation of two privately endowed institutions— the Carnegie Institution in Washington and the Rockefeller Institute. From the for- tunes that supplied the funds for them came also the Rocke- feller Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation. The great sums available from these sources, no less than the wise judg- ment of those who administered the sums, have enabled them to make the greatest contributions to the progress of science not only in America but also throughout the world. The Carnegie Institution, particularly, originated a new type of * Chapter IX, p. 214. THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 177 scientific laboratory. The Geophysical Laboratory and the Mount Wilson Observatory are of the convergent type, in which the work of many scientists specializing in diverse fields of science can be concentrated upon certain groups of prob- lems. Such laboratories, which are discussed later under the name of research institutes^ are likely to be most powerful agencies for the production of scientific knowledge in the future. One of the most important factors in the organization of scientific research at the present time is the increasing com- plexity and elaboration of the apparatus used not only in applied science but even in pure science. Research in pure physics in the nineteenth century required a very minimum of equipment, and substantial increases in knowledge were made by workers in small laboratories who spent only a very small sum on apparatus and constructed much of that ap- paratus with their own hands or with the assistance of a lab- oratory mechanic. Today the apparatus required for physical research is of the most complex type and requires a great expenditure of money and very well-equipped machine shops. The nuclear physicist, for example, has progressed from the simple apparatus used by J. J. Thomson, Aston, and Ruther- ford to the cyclotrons invented by Lawrence, of which the largest has cost well over $1,000,000. The cryogenic labora- tries, which make large quantities of liquid hydrogen and helium for research at low temperatures, are necessary for much physical research, and the physical phenomena ex- hibited by the stars are studied with the aid of telescopic equipment involving capital expenditures of millions of dollars. Again, the identification of coincidences in the frequency differences between spectral lines, which enables the lines to be assigned to different systems in an element, is an extremely laborious operation when performed by hand, and progress in this field of physics was very slow until instruments were designed by which these frequency differences could be ana- lyzed automatically. As a result, the very complicated spectra 178 THE PATH OF SCIENCE of a number of the elements have been analyzed ^vithin a few years. In chemistry, the simple laboratories used for analytical work and for the early research in organic chemistry are no longer sufficient for progress in many fields. Work on gas reactions requires very complex equipment. Much chemical work is done at high pressures and much at very high tem- peratures, and more and more these methods of producing and studying chemical reactions are of importance. Silicate chemistry has involved a complex technology of furnace work. In certain fields of work, a whole laboratory may be con- sidered a tool. In the advancement of physiology, for in- stance, a requisite is a synthetic organic laboratory that can prepare the many compounds required. And now it seems likely that physiological research will require a supply of chemicals made with isotopes of the elements or with radio- active isotopes prepared synthetically in the laboratories of nuclear physics. During a recent discussion of the co-operation that might be effected between industrial research laboratories and the investigators who were studying medicine, it ^vas suggested that what was really required by the medical men ^vas not co- operation but a supply of synthetic chemicals for which they did not have to pay. Experimenters in medicine, as in physi- ology, require a very large number of synthetic chemicals, the cost of which is far greater than can be met from the usual scanty budget of the investigator. What is needed is a philan- thropic organic chemist to make the chemicals that are re- quired; and if progress is to be made in medicine and physi- ology, this demand must be met. Perhaps one of the most useful things that a philanthropist could do at the present time would be to endow a synthetic organic laboratory to prepare chemicals for use in the medical sciences. Another tool absolutely necessary in physiological chem- istry is the animal colony, and for this to be really effective it will be distinctly expensive both in first cost and in opera- tion. Colonies of selected animals kept under very uniform THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 179 conditions and supplied widi analytically controlled food must be established, and these require much attention and care if the experiments are not to be interrupted by acci- dental losses from disease. It is necessary, in fact, for us to pay more attention to the health of our experimental animals than we do to our own health. Similar colonies are required for the study of heredity. The mere accumulation of facts is being expedited very much by improved apparatus. In the study of photography, for instance, much of the fundamental information is ob- tained in the form of a curve known as the characteristic curve, which relates the density of a developed image to the exposure given to the light-sensitive material. To obtain these curves, the material is exposed to a series of light in- tensities and developed, and then the densities resulting are measured and the curve plotted. With a visual instrument, the measurement of density is a very slow operation, and much effort is required to produce twenty curves in a day. Indeed, such a rate of production cannot be maintained; the making of some four hundred photometric matches in a day is very tiring. Today automatic instruments using photo- electric cells measure the densities and draw the curves, and it is well within the capacity of such an instrument to produce over a thousand curves in a day when used by an unskilled operator. More and more, scientific men are designing im- proved methods of collecting and analyzing the data on which they can base their studies. Thus they are again accelerating our production of knowledge. A useful classification of research laboratories in general is based on consideration of whether all the problems investi- gated are connected with one common subject or are of many kinds having no connecting bond of interest. The first type of laboratory might be called unipurpose or convergent and the second, multipurpose or divergent. In the convergent laboratories, although the actual investi- gations may cover as great a range of science as those under- taken in a divergent laboratory, all the investigations are 180 THE PATH OF SCIENCE directed toward a common end, that is, toward the elucidation of associated problems related to one subject. Thus the staff of the Geophysical Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution, which includes physicists, geologists, crystallographers, min- eralogists, and chemists, works on the structure of the rocks and their manner of formation. Although the field of the actual investigations ranges from high-temperature photom- etry to the study of complex solubility diagrams and their interpretation on thermodynamical principles, the results of all the work carried out are converged on the problem of the structure and formation of the earth's crust. The Nela Park Laboratory of the General Electric Company, in the same way, is studying the production, distribution, and measure- ment of illumination; and all its work, which may involve psychology, physiology, physics, and chemistry, is related to that one subject. A laboratory of the convergent type, which carries on work in one field of science for a considerable time, may conveni- ently be described as a research institute. Research institutes have come into existence in the last half century without our realizing that they represent an innovation in the organiza- tion of research, but they will probably be the most important agencies for the production of scientific knowledge in the future. In many cases they have been formed by outstanding investigators at universities. A professor specializes in some field of work and directs the studies of his graduate students into that field. Then others who are interested are attracted to join him until his laboratory is recognized as the natural center for researches on that subject. Many examples of this process could be given, from which I can take, almost at random, only a few as illustrations. The invention of the cyclotron has made the radiation laboratory at the University of California the central point of the world for research in nuclear physics. At Cambridge University in England, the Cavendish Laboratory has been an institute of physical research under two successive directors, J. J. Thomson, who determined the nature of the electron, and THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 181 Sir Ernest Rutherford, who established the foundations of radioactivity. Under men such as tliese, ahnost all the ^vork carried on in the laboratory has been concentrated on the subject in which they themselves were working; and instead of teaching general physics, the laboratory is a most valuable and effective research institute. Kamerlingh Onnes estab- lished at Leyden a laboratory for research at very low tem- peratures, where he investigated the superconductivity of metals and the extraordinary properties of liquid helium. Peter Kapitza was so original in his ideas for the study of the physics of very high magnetic fields that the Royal Society fathered for him a special laboratory at Cambridge, and Kapitza is now carrying out similar work in the Soviet Union. In different fields of scientific work, Harlow Shapley at Har- vard is concentrating the work of a group upon the proper- ties of the meta-galaxy, and T. H. Morgan in his laboratory at the California Institute of Technology has concentrated on the problems of genetics, especially as exemplified in the Drosophila fly (Chapter VII, page 160). In all these cases, the interest and capacity of a university teacher have supplied the incentive for the organization of a research institute as part of the university structure. Unfor- tunately, such institutes often languish and die when the teacher himself passes; only rarely can the university find a successor who will justify the continuance of the specialized work. Greater stability is attained when such institutes have been founded deliberately by philanthropic foundations who desired to expend money on the advancement of scientific knowledge. With the present trend toward the use of more and more complicated and expensive apparatus and toward greater specialization in the methods used in investigation, research institutes are becoming more and more necessary for the advancement of knowledge in the future. At this point it may be well to summarize the various agencies available for the production of scientific knowledge. The basic institution on w^hich everything else depends is the scientific department of the university, and this differs from 182 THE PATH OF SCIENCE all other institutions in that it has and should have no direc- tion from outside and complete freedom in its choice of sub- ject. It is from the universities that the bulk of the new ideas by which science is advanced are likely to come, since in all other institutions there is some restriction and will probably always be some restriction in the fields selected for work. The application of science is dealt with primarily in the re- search laboratories of industry, in the endowed technological institutes, and in the laboratories operated through govern- ment departments, which are increasing very rapidly in size and complexity. The more complicated fields of science re- quire for their exploitation research institutes, each of which deals with a limited field of science and is recognized as a center for the advancement of knowledge in that field. Research institutes will not relieve the universities of their responsibilities for teaching and for conducting scientific re- search; indeed, the activity of the universities in the prosecu- tion of research may be expected to increase. Whereas the fundamental business of a university is to teach, the argument for research has been that teaching is impossible unless the knowledge is available and that those engaged in the produc- tion of knowledge are the best teachers of it. This is un- doubtedly true within limits, and it is probable that a research institute is the best training place for a research student. Certainly the giaduates from the Cavendish Laboratory would justify the policy of its directors, and a student who had worked under Ramsay would be the first to insist that the eager pursuit of knowledge in that ill-equipped labora- tory at University College, London, was a inost stimulating atmosphere in which to acquire the methods and habit of research. But for the student who wants a general kno^vl- edge of the subject and does not propose to devote himself to research, a too specialized university laboratory has its disadvantages. Moreover, the universities are finding it in- creasingly difficult to supply the equipment required for re- search. In the past, the enthusiasm of the investigator, the availability of sympathetic wealthy individuals, and, by no THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 183 means least, the great philanthropic foundations have, in the end, provided the funds, but at a great sacrifice of time and effort by scientific men. To a certain extent, the industrial research laboratories will undertake responsibility for special fields of work. The Kodak Research Laboratories in Rochester are, indeed, a research institute devoted to the study of photography (Chap- ter IX, page 208). But industrial laboratories are funda- mentally intended to deal ^vith the application of science rather than with the creation of new knowledge, and it is almost certain that they cannot be expected to provide ade- quately for the advancement of science on all fronts. Public taxation is a very important source of the funds needed for the support of scientific research at the present time and one likely to supply the greater part of those funds in the future. In Soviet Russia, with its planned economy, the government has already organized its scientific ^vork in a great group of research institutes distributed throughout the land and controlled, in the last instance, by the members of the Academy of Sciences.* The Academy was founded by Peter the Great. Formerly, its headquarters were in Lenin- grad, but they have been transferred to Moscow. There are about ninety academicians. In general, each group of in- stitutes is operated by a special committee wIiost^ chairman is one of the members of the Academy. Thus, in agricultural science. Professor T. D. Lysenko of the Academy is the presi- dent of the Academy of Agiicultural Science, which includes altogether thirty members of the Academy of Sciences. Under this operating committee there are throtighout the Soviet Union over three hundred institutes of various sizes contain- ing, as a whole, about ten thousand scientists and, in addi- tion, about eight thousand general assistants, field, and labora- tory workers. The administrative control of the system is operated separately from the direction of the scientific work. * J. G. Crowther, Soviet Science, London, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., Ltd., 1936. 184 THE PATH OF SCIENCE Similar groups of institutes exist in Russia in all fields of science. A very large organization deals with physics, which is chiefly supported through a division of the government com- missariat of heavy industry known as the Scientific Research Sector. Institutes operated by it include the Physico-Techni- cal Institute in Leningrad, directed by Professor Joffe; the Institute of Chemical Physics in Leningrad; the Optical In- stitute of Leningrad; the Karpov Institute of Physical Chem- istry in Moscow; and the Physico-Technical Institute of Kharkov. That in Russia, as elsewhere, institutes are de- veloped to suit the idiosyncrasies of individual scientists is shown by the example of the Institute of Physical Problems.* This institute was organized by Kapitza in 1937 under the control of the Academy to study problems of theoretical physics, especially those relating to the use of low tempera- tures and strong magnetic fields. In his account of its or- ganization, Kapitza einphasizes his use of a relatively small staff and his practice of following personally the work in the laboratory. The elaborate organization of science that has developed in the Soviet Union is, of course, of the same pattern as other developments in that country. It is an organized and planned system erected to perform a specific function, and to only a small extent is it the result of organic growth over a number of years.f The recent proposals put forward by Dr. Vannevar Bush, director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, in his report to the President of the United States entitled * A very interesting report on the work of this institute by P. L. Kapitza is published in English in Voks Bulletin, No. 9-10, 22 (1943). ■j- A number of British and American scientists visited Russia on the occasion of the two hundredth anniversary of the founding of the Academy of Sciences. Their reports on the scientific work done there (Nature, Sept. 8 and Sept. 15, 1945) show that the actual conduct of work by no means corresponds to the regimented organization suggested in earlier accounts of the system. If we may judge by these reports, the Russian scientific workers control their own work and choose their own problems very much as is done in other countries. THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 185 Science^ the Endless Frontier, include a new organization for the production of scientific knowledge in the United States. It is to be known as the National Research Foundation. It is intended to make available a considerable amount of money estimated to start at $33,500,000 and to reach §122,500,000 in five years, these sums to be supplied by the federal govern- ment from taxation. It is not proposed that the Research Foundation should build, own, or operate laboratories. In- stead, continuing the practice of the Office of Scientific Re- search and Development through the war, programs will be organized and supported in existing laboratories and especially in the universities, and funds will be available for assisting in the training of research workers and in the sup- port of publication. This wide proposal has not yet been implemented by legislation, so that it is too early to judge its effect upon the future organization of scientific research in the United States. The effect should, of course, be very bene- ficial though there is certainly some danger that the support of scientific research in the universities by an external body might limit the freedom of choice of subject. No doubt this danger will be recognized by the members of the Foundation, and they will do their utmost to guard against it. Neverthe- less, the history of science is full of cases where the interests of some scientific worker have been so opposed to the general trend of thought at the time that it would have been quite impossible for him to obtain support for his ideas, and he has been subject to active opposition and ridicule (Chapter VII, page 170). The most important advances in science will continue to be unexpected, improbable, and even unpalatable, and it is essential that the men who are to make them should not be prevented from doing so. In consideration of this matter, it must not, however, be forgotten that universities at the pres- ent time are tending more and more to embark upon indus- trial research in co-operation with industry, much of this so-called research being really development work of a type calling for energy and inventive ability rather than for scien- 186 THE PATH OF SCIENCE tific imagination. This is likely to be far more disastrous to the free spirit of inquiry in the university than the receipt of support from such an organization as the National Re- search Foundation. In Great Britain, as in the United States, the public and the government have been impressed by the great importance of the work done by the scientific men for the prosecution of the war and are considering actively the possibilities of in- creasing scientific work by the supply of public funds, w^hose source lies eventually in taxes. There appear to be no pro- posals in Great Britain for the establishment of research in- stitutes. It is proposed instead to aid the universities and to construct one or more technological institutes of the type of the Mellon Institute, w^hile every effort will be made to en- courage research in the laboratories owned by industry and, especially, under the direction of the Research Associations, which are a feature of the organization of research in Great Britain. In the widespread discussion of scientific research pub- lished during recent years, there is little material relating to the actual organization of research laboratories and institutes. It has generally been assumed, in fact, that their organization would be similar to that of a factory or an army. Thus, in 1920, the author of this book wrote: * There are tw^o forms of organization. In the depart- mental system the organization is that familiar to most businesses. The work of the laboratory is classified into several departments; physics, chemistry, engineering, and so on, according to the number necessary to cover the field, and each of these departments has a man of suitable scien- tific attainments in charge. In a large department each of these men will in turn have assistants responsible for sec- tions of the department, all the heads of departments finally being responsible to the director of the laboratory. Under the alternative or cell system the laboratory con- sists of a number of investigators of approximately equal * C. E. Kenneth Mees, The Organization of Industrial Scientific Re- search, p. 81, New York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1920. THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 187 Standing in the laboratory, each of them responsible only to the director, and each of them engaged upon some specific research. Each such investigator, of course, may be provided with assistants as may be necessary. Each of these systems has advantages and disadvantages. Under the departmental system, the advantages are strict organization, good co-operation throughout the depart- ments, a plentiful supply of assistants for the abler men who form the heads of departments or sections of the de- partments. The chief disad\'antage is that the system tends to stifle initiative in the younger men. While it is true that research men require to serve a considerable appren- ticeship to older investigators, there comes a time when every man wishes to try to develop his oun line of research on his own initiative and to carry out work by himself, and while it is quite possible to provide for such men in a de- partmental organization, there is some danger that men who are really capable of original work may not get the opportunity to carry it out. The cell system, on the other hand, provides a good ar- rans^ement for men of orio^inal initiative and of the self- reliant type; it enables a man to continue a single line of work by himself for a long time and patiently to bring to a conclusion work that in a departmental organization might have been abandoned because of its apparently un- remunerative character. On the other hand, the cell sys- tem tends to exaggerate the vices of such men. They tend to become secreti^'e, to refuse co-operation, to be even re- sentful if their work is inquired into; ^vhile if a man who has developed a line of work for himself in a cell leaves the laboratory, it may be very difficult for anybody else to take up the work, in ^vhich case a great deal of time and money is lost, and w^ork that should have been carried forward is left unfinished. Another objection to the cell system is that men who are good organizers and who are of the type that can carry on work requiring many assistants do not easily find a place in it. In practice, a balance between these t^vo systems of or- ganization is essential and will develop in any laboratory. It is not possible to work a rigid departmental system, and, on the other hand, no cell system in its most definite forai could be effective. The form of orsfanization ^vhich is the easiest in administration is undoubtedly some modification of the departmental system, since only by this means can 188 THE PATH OF SCIENCE Students fresh from college acquire adequate training and at the same time keep in touch with different branches of their subject and avoid the danger of immature specializa- tion. A laboratory should therefore be organized in de- partments with an intradepartmental section in which a young man who develops the ability to carry out his own work may be able to take up work on his own initiative, retaining his position in the department and carrying on his work under the general supervision of the chief of his department. There will always be a tendency in the de- partmental organization for men to desire to split away from the department to which they are attached and be- come semi-independent in the laboratory, and this tendency must be resisted in the organization and by the director of the laboratory. At the same time, it is important that the control should not be so rigid that men feel that they are prevented from exercising their own initiative. Twenty-five years later, the writer of this passage must acknowledge that it does not correspond to the realities of the situation. Scientific research cannot really be organized under department leaders, who are themselves working scien- tists carrying out research w^ork. The fact is that the unit of scientific research is a scientist ^vith a group of assistants and he is, by definition, capable of directing his own work by his own methods. In the operation of his work, he must be inde- pendent of all control and free to do whatever he ^vishes. The function of his superior in the organization is not to con- trol the operation of the work; it is to direct the work toward the problems that seem most desirable, to insure and assist co-operation between the individual research units, to pro- vide the necessary working conditions and environment, and, in an industrial laboratory, to see that any results obtained are applied in practice. This cannot be done by a man ^vho is himself interested in his own scientific w^ork since he ^vill inevitably devote himself to research on certain problems, using some members of the department as assistants and leav- ing the rest of the department without control. This state- ment can easily be challenged by those who have observed the successful direction of university laboratories by active THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 189 scientific workers. Nevertheless, inquiry will show that even where the laboratory and its chief have become famous, the direction of the laboratory was weak, and success ^vas due to the gieat skill sho^vn by the chief and those who worked di- rectly with him in his own problems. In a university labora- tory, the junior scientists are there for only a short time; they are still learning the methods of research and will soon pass on to other positions. Neglect by a chief absorbed in his own problems can be tolerated by such men; but in an industrial laboratory or a research institute, where men spend their whole career, such neglect leads to much unhappiness and frustration.* The point at issue can be understood, perhaps from an analogy. The type of organization generally adopted is derived from the military analogy. The department leaders correspond to officers who give orders to their subordinates. But the true analogy of a scientific research organization is not an army; it is an orchestra. Each musician of an orchestra is important and independent; the members are correlated through the conductor, who is represented in the laboratory by the department head or in small laboratories by the di- rector. It is not the duty of the laboratory head to command his scientific staff; it is his duty to lead it. Thus the military type of organization usually adopted for industrial labora- * P. L. Kapitza (Voks Bulletin, No. 9-10 [1943]) believes that the director of a laboratory cannot be effective unless he works with his own hands. He says: "Only when one works in the laboratory oneself, with one's own hands, conducting experiments, even the most routine parts of them,— only under these conditions can real results be achieved in science. Good work cannot be done with other people's hands. A person who devotes ten or twenty minutes a day in directing scientific work can never be a great scientist. At least, I never saw or heard of a great scientist who worked in that manner, and I do not think it can be done. I am certain, that the very moment even the greatest scientist stops working in the laboratory himself, he not only ceases to develop but, in general, ceases to be a scientist." Kapitza, however, is speaking of an institute employing only a very few scientists, and he acknowledges that when the work expands and development work is involved, the time of the director will be taken up with other matters than work in the laboratory. 190 THE PATH OF SCIENCE tories and even for research institutes, as shown in Figure 4, does not really operate at all. Instead, the operating system is that shown in Figure 5. In a small laboratory, one having less than about twenty scientific men, no department heads for research work are necessary; the men can be responsible to the head of the DIRECTOR ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF EXECUTIVE STAFF ffiSSi SCIENTISTS Figure 4. Formal Organization Chart of a Research Laboratory. laboratory, who is generally known as the director. Any "service" or "development" divisions, on the other hand, should have efficient department heads in control of them so that the director can devote his attention to the scientific re- search without being distracted by the demands of those to whom the "service" is given. In a large laboratory, each section engaged in work in a special field should be respon- sible to a department head acting as an assistant director. Thus the organization of a large industrial laboratory might be represented by the chart shown in Figure 6. The efficiency of a research laboratory depends to a very great extent upon the director. The qualifications of the director of a research organization are scientific ability, in- THE PRODUCTION OF SCIEXTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 191 tegrity of character, and energetic activity. There are scien- tists who are splendid research men and can operate with a small group of students or assistants and obtain most success- ful results, but who ^vould be utterly useless in a large labora- tory. They would not have the energy to keep in touch with the innumerable details of such a laboratory and, at the same DEVELOPMENT GROUPS \ SERVICE GROUPS S- SCIENTIST AND ASSISTANTS Figure 5. Approximation to the Actual Organization of a Laboratory of Medium Size. time, to concentrate on the critical points in the research work and lead their men rapidly to a successful conclusion in each field of ^vork in which such a conclusion became pos- sible. Accounts of great research leaders always refer to them as spending time in the laboratory, discussing -matters ^vith their staff, helping or suggesting in one field after another, encouraging the despondent, and rejoicing ^vith the suc- cessful. The problems involved in finding suitable directors for industrial research laboratories are discussed later. In lab- oratories Avorking in pure science, the difficulties are perhaps 192 THE PATH OF SCIENCE less, since it is not necessary to find a scientific man who is also capable in the commercial field. Nevertheless, the suc- cess of research institutes will depend to a large extent upon the choice of directors. The trustees of such institutes must find suitable directors for the institutes and then apply the DEVELOPMENT GROUP DEVELOPMENT GROUP SERVICE GROUPS S- SCIENTIST AND ASSISTANTS Figure 6. Approximation to the Actual Organization of a Large Lab- oratory. pragmatic system to their enlargement or diminution. When an institute director is being successful and is producing val- uable work, his field of activity should be enlarged and the institute given increased support. When he is doing only moderately well, it is probably unwise to expand his field even though he may blame insufficient support for his in- ability to produce results. Good men will produce results with a minimum of means, but as soon as they do so, the further means should be supplied. THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 193 Great care must be taken in the oriQ;inal selection of the director, since it is very difficult to remove him and his re- moval involves a great disruption of the work of the institute. Occasionally those responsible for the organization will realize that they have made a mistake— that the man they have chosen cannot do the work set before him— and then there should be no hesitation in making a change. This may seem an easy thing to do, but it is really very difficult. The great defect in management of all kinds is the tendency of those in authority to tolerate inefficiency rather than to face the unpleasant task of removing the inefficient. It is commonly believed that business men are harder in their dealings than public officials or executives in other walks of life. Anyone who has had much business experience will, however, agree, I think, that the greatest fault of business management is a tendency in personnel matters to avoid the issue because of weakness and sentiment. The motto for an executive of any kind in the treatment of those responsible to him is that he should be tough and he should be generous. He should demand a high standard of efficiency and endeavor to maintain it by making any changes that seem necessary, but he should be generous to the weaknesses of the inefficient and the misfortunes of the unlucky. It is unlikely, of course, that these principles for the selection and guidance of research directors will be carried out fully by any board of direction, but I believe that their application will be greatest if the controlling body con- sists primarily of scientific men. The oreat dangrer is that the institutes misrht fall victims to a system of political jobbery and that the staff and even the director might be appointed for other reasons than their com- petence. This difficulty, however, would supply its own remedy. The institute would simply fail, and the advance of science, locally checked, would proceed elsewhere. A problem that will arise if a considerable number of research institutes are supported by public fimds will be the use and application of the results obtained. This will be complicated by the belief held by the public that a new tech- 194 THE PATH OF SCIENCE nical development is largely accomplished when the original discovery is made, a belief which has been encouraged by scientists without industrial experience who believe that any delay in the application of a scientific discovery is due to malignancy on the part of industrialists rather than to the inherent problems of promoting a scientific discovery to the stage where it is of general use. In industrial research ^ve usually consider that the cost of the work in the research laboratory is of the order of 10 per cent of the total cost of developing an entirely new product to the point where it is ready for the market. Since the cost is an accurate measure of the energy involved, it is fair to consider that the original invention represents on the average only 10 per cent of the work involved in the development of a new product. In a system of private enterprise, discoveries made in re- search institutes are not developed commercially unless those who develop them can see the possibility of a return for the work they have to do. If such discoveries are offered for development by the granting of non-exclusive patent licenses without any possibility of even a temporary monopoly being obtained, they will not be attractive to those who must spend much inore money and energy than were required for the original discovery. On the other hand, the spirit of the time is quite opposed to the gianting of an effective monopoly for even a moderate term of years. During the second W^orld War, the Alien Property Custodian in the United States made available a large number of patents confiscated from enemy holders, but in the terms on which these patents are offered, there was a provision for an exchange of licenses if the licen- see holds patents in the same field. This requirement of itself was sufficient to prevent industries from availing them- selves of these patents to any great extent. The problems, therefore, arising from any attempt to control the use of discoveries and inventions of government-controlled research institutes are very great indeed. Probably by far the best solution would be to publish all the results, to take out no THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 195 patents, and to leave the industrial ^vorld to apply whatever it could, obtaining its protection from the control of sub- sidiary inventions, which almost always arise in the develop- ment of a primary discovery. The conclusions reached, therefore, as to the system of scientific research likely to develop in the future may be sum- marized as follows: The advancement of science will continue to depend upon the universities and upon the industrial lab- oratories, but much of the responsibility may be transferred to institutes devoted to special branches of science, probably supported by public funds and, it is to be hoped, controlled eventually by the scientific academies. If such a development comes to pass, it may be expected that science will advance more rapidly than at the present time; that society at large will recognize its dependence on the advance of science to a much greater extent than it does at the present time; and that there will be a considerable amount of insistence by both the general public and the official world on the planning and control of the scientific work. There is at present much discussion of the value of plan- ning for the promotion of scientific research, and the discus- sion has become somewhat embittered by its relation to party politics. The laissez-faire attitude of liberalism that per- vaded intellectual thought in the nineteenth century is largely displaced today by the desire for a planned economy, which has developed from the writings of Marx, Engels, and their successors. This change arises from several causes, but mainly from the anxiety for the future that men feel today and from the rising importance in the intellectual life of the world of the engineers, to whom planning is a fundamental of life. If you have been educated chiefly by reading Plato and Euripides, you will have little faith in planning. If, on the other hand, you have been educated at an engineering school and have since spent your time in erecting buildings, mak- ing bridges, or designing automobiles, you will have much faith in planning. The people who dominated thought fifty years ago had been educated as classicists; the people who 196 THE PATH OF SCIENCE lead thought today have been educated as engineers. Which school of thought is right? The ans^ver to this depends on what we want to do. We can plan for the future and then we can carry out our plans provided that we remember the limitations of planning. We can only plan things that we can control, and our plans will be carried out only so long as our control is effective. We can plan production in a factory because we can control it. If the production is falling below our needs, we can increase it; if it exceeds them, we can diminish it. To plan, \ve need two things: first, the kno'^vledge of the processes that we are attempting to control; second, the physical power to control those processes. It is when we extend our planning from the things that we know to the fields where our knowledge is weak and from the things that we can control to those that are in their nature uncontrollable that our planning fails. When these principles are applied to the planning of scien- tific research, we find that the kinds of research that can be planned best are those which are least fundamental. Pro- duction can always be planned. The last stages of develop- ment can be planned with considerable certainty. When a new chemical has been made in the laboratory and the yields have been tested, a pilot plant must be built. The building of this pilot plant and even the time which it will take to test the processes on a moderate scale can be foreseen, and so in chemical factories pilot plant operation is usually carried out not as a research experiment but as a co-operative effort in- volving both the research men who originated the process and the production men who will operate it. Not infre- quently the whole is under the direction of a chemical engi- neering group who specialize in pilot plant operations. When more basic research is considered, planning neces- sarily becomes less certain. If ^ve have made a new chemical in the laboratory, we know that we can make it in a pilot plant in spite of the fact that new problems may arise. But if the chemical has never been made or even if it has been made but the yields are unsatisfactory, we know less certainly ho^v THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 197 much time and effort will be required to get the process ready for a pilot plant test. Nevertheless, all applied research of this type can be planned and, to a considerable extent, should be planned. W'hen, however, we go back still further and attempt to discover an entirely new process, it is unlikely that any close planning of the work will be of value. In practice, what is done is to present the problem to a competent chemist and leave him to study parallel syntheses in the literature and to try one method after another which may lead to the result that he requires. The chances of making discoveries that will advance a branch of science can be increased simply by having more men engaged in work in that field. Much of the recent ad- vance in the science of astronomy has come from the accumu- lation of facts by a considerable number of observers, these facts being published and so made available for analysis by a limited number of skilled mathematical analysts. Many discoveries in astronomy have been made, as is said, "by ac- cident," but the accident could only have occurred to an astronomer who w^as working in that field. The discovery of the sharp absorption lines produced by the scattered mole- cules of interstellar space, for instance, could not have been made unless astronomers had been photographing distant galaxies with powerful spectroscopes, and even then their detection depended upon the use of a comparatively fine- grained and therefore relatively insensitive photographic plate. Scientific discoveries of a basic type result, therefore, not from an attempt to make a given discovery but from con- centration upon a special field of work by men using instru- ments of sufficient power and having sufficient skill to recog- nize the discoveries when they appear. In the organization of scientific research, therefore, the value of planning varies from the necessity for detailed plan- ning by engineering experts when a discovery is to be applied on a large scale to the most complete freedom of thought and experiment when we do not know what to look for and have 198 THE PATH OF SCIENCE no conception o£ what is likely to be found. As Dr. Baker said when discussing the discovery of the x-rays: If someone had thought it convenient to make the human body transparent, and had allocated money for the research, the result would have been a comprehensive plan, a team of research workers, a very large card index, a waste of money, and no x-rays. . . . Yon Rontgen had no thought of trying to make human flesh transparent when he discov- ered the penetrating powers of x-rays. He was interested in the phenomena of electric discharge in high vacua, and did not guess that the result of his work would be the dis- covery that certain rays could be used in the diagnosis and treatment of human illness.* A most interesting discussion on the planning of scientific research has arisen in the columns of the New York Times following the publication of the report by Bush to the Presi- dent of the United States. The report was criticized in an editorial (New York Times ^ J^^ly 21, 1945) on the ground that it does not go far enough in providing for the planning of the work under the control of the federal government. This editorial brought a reply from J. B. Conant, who had through the war been the chairman of the National Defense Research Committee. Dr. Conant's views may be summarized by a quotation: "There is only one proved method of assist- ing the advancement of pure science— that of picking men of genius, backing them heavily, and leaving them to direct themselves. There is only one proved method of getting results in applied science— picking men of genius, backing them heavily, and keeping their aim on the target chosen." In wartime, targets can be chosen with a reasonable degree of certainty and the second procedure succeeds. In pure science, no such objective can be defined. The subject was taken up by O. E. Buckley, president of the Bell Telephone Laboratories,-)" who protests against the idea that industrial * John R. Baker, The Scientific Life, p. 59, London, George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1942. f This is by far the largest research laboratory in the world, employing over five thousand people and costing about 530,000,000 a year. THE PRODUCTION OF SCIEXTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 199 research can be directed successfully from above. Buckley says: "One sure way to defeat the scientific spirit is to at- tempt to direct inquiry from above. All successful industrial research directors know this, and have learned by experience that one thins^ a 'director of Research' must never do is to direct research, nor can he permit direction of research by any supervisory board." Buckley upholds Bush's plan, agreeing, however, that re- search efficiency can be improved by teamwork but objecting to the planning or "mapping out the field of science to reveal gaps in knowledge" suggested by the New York Times. Warren Weaver, a prominent member of the directing staff of the National Defense Research Committee, believes that any attempt to use the methods effective during the war would be disastrous if employed to control scientific investi- gation during times of peace. He believes that national sup- port for science should sponsor every movement and develop- ment that helps to create a favorable atinosphere for research but should by no means set up any group to chart its course. In an article dated September 9, 1945, W^aldemar Kaempf- fert, a scientific editor of the New York Times, insists that the advance of science should be accelerated by planning and organization, contrasting this with "the inefficient laissez-faire method of the past." He suggests that "a J. Willard Gibbs," who wanted to apply statistical mechanics to chemistry, might "join the organization" and "work happily in its atmosphere." Dr. Kaempffert says: "Whether such a man Tvorks alone or with others, no Director in his senses would tell him ho^v he should proceed." When we remember the history of \\^illard Gibbs, it scarcely seems probable that if an organized research group had existed he would have been invited to join it or would have worked happily in its atmosphere. W. R. Whitney, director of the great laboratory of the General Electric Company, the prototype of all industrial research laboratories, wrote in 1931: There exist two widely divergent paths by which man- kind has advanced. One is Bacon's "variation in the ef- 200 THE PATH OF SCIENCE ficient"— doing better in some ways what has ah^eady been done. It has become familiar to man in economics, in ^vork of general welfare, in the mere mechanics of time- saving. The other path, extending beyond specific concep- tions, leads to random and bold experiment— to pure re- search, where discovery is often unexpected. The most remarkable discoveries of the next eighty years will be of that kind. It is interesting that even those w^ho are most anxious to introduce the maximum of planning into the control of scien- tific research agree on its failure in regard to discoveries of the greatest importance. J. D. Bernal says: In any survey of the business of scientific research, gen- eral lines of advance can be seen and fairly probable con- clusions drawn from them. What cannot be seen are the possibilities of fundamental, new discoveries and their effect in revolutionizing the whole progress of science. The practical problem is to see that science advances on the ^\ idest and most comprehensive front, being prepared to accept and use as welcome gifts the radical discoveries that come in its way.* This is in fact, of course, the abandonment of planning. It is these very revolutionary discoveries that make it im- possible to plan the future of science. When looking back, it is very easy to see how science could have been planned. Looking forward, all we can do is to continue to spread the frontiers of our knowledge and, as Bernal says, "to accept and use as welcome gifts the radical discoveries that come in our way." Phillips f points out that since progress is made by trial and error, and its extent is therefore proportional to the number of trials, the conditions most favorable to progress will be those that favor the greatest number of trials. These conditions will be those where the number of independent thought centers is greatest, that is, the conditions of maxi- * J. D. Bernal, The Social Function of Science, p. 343, New York, The Macmillan Co., 1939. f Chapter II, page 19, footnote. THE PRODUCTION OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE 201 mum individual liberty. This is the true reason for the importance of personal liberty; progress depends on liberty. It is also the reason for the failure of any system for planning scientific research. The increase in efficiency of operation achieved by planning is balanced by the loss of independent thought, -^v ith a consequent diminution in the trial of ideas. This is especially true of the conduct of scientific research in the universities where any restriction of the liberty of investi- gators to choose their own ^vork or even any inducement to follo^v lines chosen for them is to be deplored. It is even desirable that a large number of investigators should be forced, by lack of external suggestion, to find for themselves subjects for their work. Chapter IX APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH As we have seen, the apphcation of science to industry developed first in the industries which themselves owed their existence to the gi^owth of science, especially the chemical and electrical industries. The value of research in producing new materials and methods of manufacture slowly made it clear that in every industry in which technical processes were in- volved—and in what industries are they not involved?— organ- ized scientific research was necessary if the industry was to survive and flourish. The thing that convinced business men of this was the age-old fear of competition. A man might believe that new scientific discoveries were of no value to him, but he could not entirely forget that his active com- petitor might take advantage of these discoveries— might, in- deed, even be secretly making discoveries behind his back and might come out some day with a new line of products that would take his business away from him. The primary function of the research department in an industry is to provide the scientific knowledge to meet diffi- culties, improve processes and products, and discover and develop new products; but in modern industry the research department has assumed broader functions. George East- man once said that his research laboratory ^vas "responsible for the future of photography." On the other hand, C. C. Paterson of the General Electric Company, Ltd., has said: "Industrial research exists in order that industry may have within itself those scientific resources in workers and equip- ment which will help the industry to cultivate the scientific outlook throughout all its personnel and activities." These 202 APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 203 two statements together may be taken as representing the ideals to^^vard which every industrial research laboratory should strive. In the early days of industrial research, a business assigned to it only a very small part of the executive budget. Confi- dence in the attainment of valuable results was small. If the use of science in the business succeeded, it was regarded as a kind of windfall. The success of the business depended, as in the past, upon the efficiency of production and selling. Businesses, at any rate all except the very largest, tend to be dominated by one of the gi^eat functional departments, such as that concerned with selling, in which case production is attuned to the needs of the sales department. In others, the more actixe and aggressive groups are those engaged in pro- duction, and these companies sell what they produce rather than produce what they need to sell. But with the gi'owth of industrial research, the development and introduction of new products have become of such great importance that there are companies in which quite avoAvedly the research and development departments represent the primary driving force; the production departments manufacture the new products and the sales department sells them. In many com- panies the economic value of the research work is now fully recognized, and the financial journals devote a considerable amount of space to the development of industrial science. The number and size of the industrial research laboratories have increased rapidly during the last thirty years. In the excellent monograph issued by the National Resources Plan- ning Board, it is stated that since the first World W^ar, indus- trial research in the United States has assumed the propor- tions of a major industry.* In 1920, about three hundred laboratories xvere engaged in industrial research. In 1940, the number had increased to more than 2200. The total personnel had groxvn from approximately 9000 to over * Report of the National Research Council to the National Resources Planning Board, p. 37, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C, 1941. 204 . THE PATH OF SCIENCE 70,000. An estimate of the total expenditure on industrial research in the United States, based upon the cost per man in a number of laboratories, gives a total figure for 1940 ex- ceeding $300,000,000. Since the increase in industrial re- search continued through the years of war, it is not unlikely that the total expenditure for 1945 was of the order of $500,000,000. Incidentally, these figures offer a complete refutation to the gloomy prophesies of certain "liberal" think- ers of thirty years ago. At that time, one of the arguments that Justice Brandeis used against the development of large units in industry was that they would infallibly neglect technical and scientific research and, thus, progress would be stifled by the operation of what he considered to be monopoly.* Industrial research in the United Kinordom has o^rown rapidly both before and during the war. According to Dun- sheath, f the direct expenditure of the Department of Scien- tific and Industrial Research was about $2,000,000 and of the Research Associations J (in 1938) about as much again. Expenditure by private companies is much lower than in the United States but is still very considerable. A survey by the Federation of British Industries published in the early part of 1946 recorded 9000 graduate scientists engaged on research and development in British industry, with a total expenditure thereon of about £20,000,000 annually— a proposed increase of research staff of 25 per cent and of laboratory space of more than 2,000,000 square feet. Industrial laboratories may be classified in three general divisions: 1. Plant laboratories exerting analytical and testing con- trol over materials, processes, and product. * The statement by Brandeis was actually quoted in 1944 by N. Kaldor at a conference on industrial research in England as if it represented a fact instead of a quite erroneous prediction! f P. Dunsheath, "Industrial Research in Great Britain: a Policy for the Future," Journal of the Royal Society of Arts, 91, 167, 242 (1943). iPage 211. APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 205 2. Development laboratories working on improvements in product and processes, tending to lessen cost of production and to introduce new products on the market. 3. Laboratories working on pure theory and on the funda- mental sciences associated with the industry. Laboratories of the first type are so obviously necessary that practically all plants are equipped with them, and fre- quently each department of a factory maintains its own control laboratory. Laboratories of the second class are frequently called "re- search" laboratories and have been largely instrumental in introducing scientific control into industry. In such a devel- opment laboratory, the work ranges from the simplest and most obvious alterations to problems of extreme difficulty involving scientific knowledge of a high order. The func- tion of the development laboratory is to collect ideas from all sources and apply them to manufacture. Those investi- gations of the pure research section that result in new prod- ucts or methods will usually pass through the development branch to the manufacturing departments. The man -^vho has been in charge of an investigation in pure research should follow his work through the development branch into the manufacturing departments until it becomes a recognized and established feature in manufacture. It is often desirable for the laboratory itself to have facili- ties for carrying new developments to the stage of production, and, indeed, in many laboratories it is considered necessary not only to manufacture on a small experimental scale but even to place certain new products on the market, transfer- ring production to the works only when the demand is such that a full-scale manufacturing organization is required to meet it. This is particularly useful in the case of products that are new to the industry and that require novel and diffi- cult manufacturing methods and, at the same time, the de- velopment of a new market. If the whole future of an industry is dependent on the work of the research laboratory, then not merely an improvement 206 THE PATH OF SCIENCE in processes or a cheapening in the cost of manufacture will suffice, but fundamental work is required in the whole field in which the manufacturing firm is interested. For this pur- pose something very different from the usual plant laboratory is needed, and to inaintain progress, the w^ork of the research laboratory must be directed primarily toward the funda- mental theory of the subject. This is a point that has some- times been overlooked in discussions of industrial scientific research, much stress being generally laid upon the imme- diate returns to be obtained from plant laboratories and upon the advantage of scientific control of the operations. But in every case where the effect of research ^vork in industry is very marked, that work has been directed not toward the superficial processes of industry, but toward the fundamental and underlying theory of the subject. According to C. M. A. Stine of the Du Pont Company: Fundamental research and what may be termed "pio- neering applied research" should be differentiated. The distinction is based principally upon the scope of the work and the extent to which it is limited by certain recognized practical objectives. In general, research undertaken upon some broad general subject, such as the structure of cellu- lose, belongs to the category of fundamental research. On the other hand, if a company engaged in the produc- tion of textiles coated with cellulose derivatives, or in the manufacture of photographic film, or of other products utilizing derivatives of cellulose, undertakes research aimed at the development of new cellulose derivatives, in the hope of developing such derivatives as might exhibit useful prop- erties fitting them for application in manufactured prod- ucts, the w^ork becomes pioneering applied research. After the discovery of a new cellulose derivative and the evalua- tion of its properties, the next step might be actually to manufacture it, wiiereupon the investigation assumes the complexion of ordinary applied research. The investigation of monomolecular films by a producer of electrical equipment might be fundamental research, whereas the investigation of monomolecular films by an oil refiner engaged in the production of lubricants might be largely in the field of applied research. Thus, the classi- APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 207 fication of the research depends upon the character of the problem and the nature of the agency carrying on the investigation.* Fundamental research involves a laboratory very different from the usual plant laboratory. It requires a large, elabo- rately equipped, and heavily staffed laboratory engaged mainly in ^vork that for many years is unremunerative and that, for a considerable time after its foundation, produces no results that can be applied to manufacture. Such a lab- oratory has a cumidative value as its work is continued. At the beginning it is of service to the industry in bringing a new point of view to bear on many of the problems; it is of value especially in establishing standard methods of testing and standard specifications for the purchase of raw materials, while much of its energy may profitably be devoted to the investigation of the use of the products of the industry. Many large industrial laboratories, indeed, are maintained as much in the interests of the customer as for the produc- tion departments. A research laboratory of this type also studies the merits of new industrial propositions of which the value has not been commercially established, but all these early uses of the laboratory eventually prove subsidiary to its main work on fundamental problems. When this main line of research begins to bear fruit, it- absorbs the energies of both the laboratory and the factory. This, however, takes many years. As explained previously, research laboratories may be of the divergent or convergent type. Those of the Bell Tele- phone Company, the General Electric Company at Schenec- tady, the W^estinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Com- pany, and the Eastman Kodak Company are essentially of the convergent type. The work of the research laboratory of * Charles M. A. Stine, Vice President, E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Wilmington, Del., "Fundamental Research in Industry, Re- search—A National Resource, II. Industrial Research." Report of the National Research Council to the National Resources Planning Board, p. 98, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C, 1941. 208 THE PATH OF SCIENCE the Eastman Kodak Company is concentrated primarily on the study of photography. The extent of its work in this field is shown by its publications. In the last thirty years, the laboratory has published about a thousand scientific papers, and of these by far the greater number deal with some aspect of the theory of photography. To take a single year: In 1936, papers were published on the formation of the latent image; the analysis of gelatin; the absorption spectra of cyanine dyes; the theory of image errors in lenses; the measurement of photographic densities; the stability of developers; the meas- urement of graininess; the decomposition of cellulose ni- trate; the effect of stilfur compounds on photographic emul- sions; and the application of quantum mechanics to the process of exposure. In the divergent group of laboratories are included many research institutions that are interested in science in general or in science as applied to industry and that attack any prob- lem promising progress in knowledge or, in the case of an industrial laboratory, financial return. The greater number of university and industrial laboratories are necessarily of this type. It would be a disadvantage for a university lab- oratory, whose primary business is training students, to be too narrowly specialized. Specialized university laboratories are desirable only for post-graduate students. Industrial lab- oratories, on the other hand, must be prepared to deal ^vith any problems presented by the plant. As these are of all kinds, covering generally the whole field of physics, chem- istry, and engineering, it is impossible for many plant labora- tories to specialize except in so far as they deal ^vith the plant processes themselves. The position of an industrial research laboratory in the organization and its relation to the other departments of the company with which it is associated are of considerable importance. Research laboratories have originated in many different ways. The earliest grew out of plant testing and control laboratories and were, therefore, responsible directly to the APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 209 works manager. More recently, laboratories have generally been established as independent departments of the company and are responsible to the general manager only. If an execu- tive of a manufacturing company is a technical scientific expert, he may have felt the need for a laboratory and estab- lished one under his own control. In this case, the laboratory is necessarily very closely associated with his W'Ork. A labora- tory may have been established under a separate director, not himself associated with the executive officers of the company, as a reference department for the executives. In this case also the laboratory is closely associated with the officers of the company and tends to be concerned largely with questions of policy and the introduction of new products. In a large com- pany, a research laboratory is usually established as a separate department, having its own organization and available as a reference department for all sections of the company. The position that the research laboratory should occupy in an industrial organization is perhaps best determined by the criterion that the research department should be responsible to the officer of the company wdio is in charge of the develop- ment of new products. If the introduction of new products is in the hands of the plant organization, the research depart- ment should be responsible to the plant manager; if there is a definite development department, or, if new products are introduced through the agency of some definite executive, it is to that executive that the research department should be responsible. The research laboratory, in fact, should be asso- ciated primarily wdth development. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that the success of the research laboratory depends upon the application of its work. Since application naturally depends to a great extent upon co-operation with other departments of the company, every- thing that promotes such co-operation is to be encouraged and anything different is to be discouraged. There is some question, on the other hand, w^hether the laboratory^ re- sponsible for original w^ork leading to new products should deal with manufacturing problems. If a research staff en- 210 THE PATH OF SCIENCE gaged on fundamental research is frequently called upon to deal Tvith plant problems, the more fundamental work is subject to interruption and disrupted efficiency. At the same time, the study of plant problems suggests many important lines of work to the laboratory staff. Nothing is more stimu- lating to the co-operation of manufacturing departments Tvith the laboratory than the successful solution by the laboratory of problems submitted by the plant departments. It is some- times difficult for the laboratory to solve such problems. \^ery often the practical solution depends upon minute knowledge of the working process; and a laboratory is expected in some supernatural way to solve problems that have baffled men thoroughly acquainted with all aspects of the process. But even if the laboratory fails to solve a given problem to the satisfaction of the department concerned, the study of the process itself is quite likely to result in suggestions which may be of more value than the solution of the problem submitted. If the manufacturing organization is of sufficient size, a sepa- rate laboratory for the more fundamental problems may be desirable, leaving special departments of the laboratory better acquainted with manufacture to undertake those from the plant. Thus a link is formed between the purely scientific research and the manufacturing departments.* While a large laboratory fully equipped for fundamental research represents the most effective means of prosecuting industrial research, such a laboratory can be maintained only by large manufacturing companies, as the cost of maintenance is very heavy and only a large company can afford such an expenditure. On the other hand, national industry is not carried on principally by large manufacturing companies, either in the United States or in Great Britain. In Britain, 98 per cent of the factories are said to employ less than a thousand workers, and 80 per cent less than a hundred. Prob- ably the situation is the same in the United States. The chief * P. G. Nutting, "Research and the Industries," Scientific Monthly, 7, 149 (1918). APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 211 problem, therefore, in the application of science to national industry is presented by the smaller businesses that cannot afford to maintain a really large laboratory. In Great Britain, the solution offered by those responsible is membership in one of the research associations organized under the Depart- ment of Scientific and Industrial Research to serve entire industries. A conference on problems of scientific and industrial re- search was held in 1944 at Nuffield College, Oxford, England, and an excellent summary of the discussion was published by the Oxford University Press.* In this report the operations of the research associations are described. The British Re- search Associations ^v ere formed during the first World War when the British government at the end of 1916 announced its intention to allot £1,000,000 for the formation and main- tenance by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Re- search of approved associations for research in co-operation with the industries. The plan was to form associations of which approximately half the cost would be paid by the in- dustries and the remainder by the government, these asso- ciations to carry out systematic research and to apply science to the problems of industry. The scheme was widely ap- proved, and by the end of 1920, thirteen research associations had been formed. The total number to date is just under thirty. In the twenty odd years since the first associations were formed, the plan has met with little opposition, yet those men who have been most closely connected ^vith the research associations have, on the whole, been disappointed, a disap- pointment which is commonly attributed to the lack of funds. The sum of £1,000,000 was, of course, utterly inadequate for research relating to the whole of the British industry; yet it w^as found difficult to raise an equal sum from the industries. Undoubtedly, funds could be raised after a research associa- * Problems of Scientific and Industrial Research, Oxford University Press, April 1944. 212 THE PATH OF SCIENCE tion had demonstrated its value; on the other hand, it is very difficuk for a research association to do this until it has the funds. After the first ten years' work of the department, the advisory council in their review in 1925-1926 said that, when they reflected how trivial in relation to the total output of an industry is the expenditure needed, they could not be- lieve that private enterprise would fail to maintain on an adequate basis the associations that had already shown their value. Nevertheless, the council believed that voluntary con- tributions would be inadequate and favored the introduction of some kind of compulsory levy. After this report had been issued, there was a gradual improvement in the financial sup- port of the associations, and under war conditions it has in- creased, although it is still inadequate. The Nuffield report goes on to discuss the objectives of the research associations. Should they, for instance, undertake long-term programs of applied research, study the scientific facts on which the processes of the industries are based, and merely publish their results, leaving it to the firms to apply them to their own work? Or should the research association translate as much as possible of its work into results that can be applied by the industry even though the individual firms have no adequate scientific staffs? Again, should the associa- tions devise their own research programs or should they be ready to study problems proposed by any subscribing firm and advise such firms how to deal with their o^vn specific prob- lems? The conference felt that there could be no uniform answer to these questions. The answer would depend upon the industry. Modern scientific industries such as the elec- tric or scientific instrument industries need a different policy from that of the older technologies, such as the textile or leather industries. In the more technical industries, the in- dividual firms have their own laboratories, and they allot to the research association only long-term problems suitable for collective effort. In the older industries, where the processes are still largely based on tradition, the research associations have a double function. On the one hand, they must study APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 213 short-range problems, ^vhich offer immediate results; on the other, they should certainly undertake a long-range study of the fundamental scientihc problems of the industry that have been neglected in the past. Thus the older industries need an active program of scientific research much more than the modern industries, but it is much more difficult to do this work and to obtain support for it. Some industries, such as those dealing with textiles, are divided between the succes- sive stages of production. The research association must think in terms of the industry as a whole rather than of a single section. In the cotton industry, for instance, there are not only the problems of the spinning, weaving, dyeing, bleaching, and finishing branches, but there are also the problems of the cotton plant itself and of the raw material that it produces. Most research associations are faced with the problem of combining a variety of functions in one institution. If the association concentrates on the major long-run problems, many of the smaller firms with immediate difficulties will be dissatisfied. If, instead, it deals primarily with service work, it may degenerate into a mere testing station, and will cer- tainly lose the good will of larger firms to whom it is giving little information of value. Research associations cannot take the place of the research laboratories of the industry itself. In the latter, the new de- velopments achieved are important for the individual firm. They give that firm advantage over its competitors and an improved position in the industry, and they bring to the laboratory, therefore, the enthusiastic support of the other parts of the organization. No company capable of doing its own research will pass to an association serving its competi- tors equally with itself the problems that seem to it most promising. While the British Research Associations have undoubtedly been useful to the small units in their industries, they cannot be considered on the whole to have promoted the establish- ment of research laboratories in the individual companies of 214 THE PATH OF SCIENCE the industry. The examples of successful research have, of course, tended in this direction and, in many cases, may have induced manufacturers to form their own research groups. But their effect in this direction has been offset to some ex- tent by the tendency on the part of the financial heads of the industries to assume that membership in a research associa- tion is sufficient to take care of their scientific needs. In the United States there are a few organizations com- parable to the British Research Associations. Most firms, however, have their own centralized research laboratories or utilize the facilities of large endowed laboratories such as the Mellon Institute, Battelle Memorial Institute, or the Armour Research Foundation, w^hich may conveniently be called Technological Research Institutes. The Mellon Institute, at the University of Pittsburgh, the prototype of these laboratories, was founded in 1911 to carry out the scheme of industrial fellowships originally introduced by Robert Kennedy Duncan of the University of Kansas. Duncan adopted this scheme partly to train students in indus- trial research and partly because he felt that such research work as was attempted in small factories was often undertaken under very bad conditions.* He felt too that the manufac- turer often has neither the knowledge nor the experience requisite to establish successful research, that he is not will- ing to allow sufficient space or equipment for it, and that a man w^orking alone in a small industry is hampered both by lack of the stimulation he might get from association with other scientific workers and by want of proper skilled direc- tion of the work. In such a laboratory as the Mellon Institute, the manu- facturer can arrange to have the work done under conditions that insure that he alone obtains the result of the work; and yet the research men will have the advantages of the Insti- tute, contact with other scientific workers, the availability of * R. K. Duncan, "Industrial Fellowships," Journal of the Society of Chemical Industry, 28, 684 (1909). APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 215 sources of information such as a reference library, and direc- tion of the work by experienced administrative officers of the laboratory. According to the system in operation at the Mellon Institute, a manufacturer having a problem that re- quires solution may become the donor of a fello^vship, ^vhich provides the salary of the fellow selected, and the Institute supplies laboratory space and the use of all ordinary chemicals and equipment. In 1944-1945, there were 94 industrial research programs in operation, employing 242 scientists and 232 assistants. The service staff of the Institute numbered 169, and total expendi- ture was slightly more than $2,000,000. The subjects under investigation were diversified: for instance, catalysis as related to the synthesis of butadiene; utilization of corn products, such as starch, oil, and zein; improvement in ^vaste disposal in streams; structural glass; coal and coke products; synthetic lubricants; properties of cotton fibers; petroleum products; organic silicon resins; industrial hygiene. The Battelle Memorial Institute was founded by Gordon Battelle, industrialist, whose will provided for the building and endowment of an independent institute "for the purpose of education . . . the encouragement of creative research . . . and the making of discoveries and inventions" for in- dustry. Its operation began in 1929. In its plan, Battelle provides the plant, equipment, and staff. The company or group under whose auspices the re- search is done pays for the time of the personnel assigned to the project and the out-of-pocket costs. Sponsored research at Battelle in 1945 was estimated at $3,000,000, and the lab- oratories housed a staff of approximately 800 technologists and assistants. Each project undertaken is the responsibility of the Institute as a whole, and, using the methods of group research, all equipment and the knowledge of the entire staff of technologists in diversified fields can be brought to bear on the solution to a technological problem. In addition to its research work, Battelle conducts a program that offers 216 THE PATH OF SCIENCE training to selected young men who plan to follow industrial research as a career. The Armour Research Foundation developed in 1936 from industrial research directed by the faculty of the Armour Institute of Technology. It has grown very rapidly and in the year 1943-1944 had in operation 117 long-term projects with a total budget of $1,670,000. It carries on its work under a plan whereby each problem is subjected to the col- lective thinking and co-operative action of a permanent staff of research workers in many fields of science, and in which every possible routine operation is removed from the research T worker's responsibility and placed in the hands of auxiliary service laboratories. In general, these technological research institutes are in- creasing both in size and in number and are rendering a great service to American industry. During the year 1945 alone, two new ones were founded— the Southern Research Insti- tute, at Birmingham, Alabama, and the Midwest Research Institute, at Kansas City, Missouri. Research facilities are thus made conveniently available to industries within these regions. The institutes provide equipment, often on a semi-plant scale, that would not otherwise be available for experimental work, and they often specialize in certain fields of work with a long-range, continuous progiam approximat- ing to the work of a specialized research group. They are also of great value for training men; and in many cases manu- facturers who have endowed an industrial fellowship even- tually establish research laboratories of their own, employing in them the men who have carried on the work as fellows. These technological institutes thus serve as nurseries for pri- vate industrial research laboratories in addition to doing work directly and training men. This influence is of the greatest importance, because however effective is the actual research work done in an external laboratory, that ^vork should supple- ment rather than take the place of scientific work done as an integral part of the business. APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 217 The technological status of industry has little permanency. It is often assumed that those hrms that have developed large amounts of technical skill Avill continue to dominate their industries and that other industries will remain ^vithout any corresponding scientific guidance. This is not true, how- ever, as the Nuffield College report points out. Industrial progress depends not only on the existence of large firms carrying on research over a wide field but equally on the continual emergence of ne^v^ firms animated by a scientific spirit in their approach to industrial problems. Before 1920 the petroleum industry of the United States, one of the most wealthy and po^verful industries, did very little scientific research. Since then it has not merely estab- lished scientific divisions and research laboratories, but it has come to the very forefront of industrial scientific research and has developed entirely new branches of industrial chem- istry. This is no rare phenomenon. Again and again, a change in management or the emergence in management of one individual has revolutionized a manufacturing company and eventually an industry. Thus, instead of a picture of a static industrial world in w^hich there are giants and pygmies, the facts show a Avorld in ^vhich the giants must ^vork unceas- ingly to remain strong and the pygmies are continually grow- ing and asserting their right to a place in the sun. It is asserted far too often that "small businesses cannot afford to support scientific research." Few businesses can afford to support research. They carry out their research, as they do the rest of their operations, for profit, that is, to be supported by it; and if they are successful, they do not remain small, they gro^v. When Ernst Abbe joined Carl Zeiss, he entered a very small business, ^vhich became the leading op- tical industry of the world. Wlien Ludwig Mond joined John Brunner, he founded a business w^hich became one of the chief components of Imperial Chemical Industries. The Zeiss firm or the alkali works of the future are today small firms with an active leader imbued Avith the spirit of science. The problem for the small business, in fact, is not 218 THE PATH OF SCIENCE how to get its scientific work done by somebody else but how to find that active leader. When the first industrial research laboratories were or- ganized, in the early years of this century, the managers of industrial undertakings realized that they required a group of investigators whose results could be applied to that par- ticular industry. They realized also that they themselves did not understand how scientific work ^vas carried out or how it could be applied. They therefore chose an individual, fre- quently a teacher of science at a university, who was em- ployed to enter the industrial organization as director of re- search. Characteristically, the first task assigned to the re- search director was usually to build a laboratory, an opera- tion which he undertook with the enthusiasm and zest born of ignorance, since very few scientific men know anything about buildings. Having built the laboratory, the research director proceeded to organize a staff and to start doing scien- tific research. The success of these early pioneers varied con- siderably, but almost all were successful to some extent. The efficiency and accomplishment of an industrial labora- tory depend to a very large extent upon the director. In fact, it may be said of research laboratories, as of other human institutions, that they are the reflex of a man. The large in- dustrial research laboratories are at the present time passing through a critical stage, in which the founding directors are passing and are being replaced by their successors. Their experience shows to how great an extent the success of a re- search laboratory is dependent upon the individuality of its director. There are laboratories which have had a distinctly successful career and which, with the passing of the directors who organized and developed them, have fallen into obscurity. Moreover, it is extremely difficult to find suitable men to direct industrial laboratories. Such a man must be both a scientist and an executive, and he must have an interest in and a capacity for the commercial operations of the business in which he is eng^as^ed. The reason that the director of an industrial research laboratory must be interested in the com- APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 219 mercial operations of his company is that he must make his laboratory pay; and if he does not know how to do that, no one else can do it for him. It is even more difficult to select a director for the research department of a small company than for the large laboratory of a great manufacturing concern. The ideal would be a man who combined the necessary scientific ability and experience with definite capacity for the executive operation of a busi- ness, so that he could very soon become one of the senior of- ficers in charge of the business. Unfortunately, though the necessary characteristics are not really rare, there is no source to which those responsible for the conduct of business can turn for guidance in their selec- tion. What is needed is a staff college or university depart- ment where scientists ^\ ho wish to specialize in the applica- tion of science can obtain post-graduate training- of the type supplied by the Harvard School of Business Administration and wdiere they will be known to be available for positions. The establishment of such colleges or departments in Great Britain and the United States would go far toward supplying the present need for the increased application of science in the smaller businesses. C. G. Renold * in his address to the Manchester Chamber of Commerce realized that the application of science to a small business required the services of a scientist with execu- tive functions. Since he assumed, however, that such a con- cern could not set up its own research department and would rely on a co-operative laboratory, he suggested the appoint- ment of a "Scientific Liaison Officer" to formulate problems and interpret the answers into practice. If such an officer were competent, he would almost certainly want to do re- search work under his own direction and would establish a laboratory. Perhaps, however, there are business manage- ments to whom the idea of a "liaison officer" might seem less startling and dangerous than a research director. * Science and Industry, p. 28, Manchester Chamber of Commerce, King St., Manchester 2, England, 1944. 220 THE PATH OF SCIENCE The actual direction of industrial research is a matter of great importance and one on which there is much difference of opinion. The fundamental problems are what researches are to be done, along what lines is work to be started, how long is it to be kept going when the prospects for success look bad, when is loss to be cut and the work abandoned? These problems are at the heart of the whole matter, and the decisions with regard to them constitute the direction of research. As business managements have become familiar with the use of science and its importance to industry has increased, manao^ements have tended to become more and more inter- ested in the actual direction of the scientific work. They no long^er feel that the research director can be left to initiate work along the lines that he thinks are likely to be profitable, to exploit his idiosyncrasies, or even to play his "hunches." They consider it necessary to operate the research and de- velopment sections because the future of the business depends upon it. The research director must expect to receive direc- tion and instructions from the management of the company, and must expect to have to justify the plans that he puts for- ward. This tendency is common among almost all the com- panies in which industrial research has been successful. As a result of the anxiety of management to supervise the work of the research department, there has arisen a system of control that is sometimes known as the project system. Ac- cording to this, the research manager proposes a plan of re- search divided into a large number of individual projects, to each of which are allocated certain definite funds. This plan is considered by various groups and, finally, by a special com- mittee of the executives of the company assigned to the task, and is approved both in whole and in detail. The work done is reported periodically, and the expenditure on each project is considered in relation to the original allocation of funds for that purpose, new funds being allocated as necessary, and each project being finally closed either as a success or as a failure APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 221 that must be abandoned. This project system may be re- o^arded as one extreme in the control of the research work. The other extreme, almost universal in the early days of industrial research, is the direction of the research by an indi- vidual responsible only to the top management of the com- pany and ^vithout supervision in his own work. To him, the company entrusts the funds that it proposes to spend, and from him the company asks only results, with such account- ing controls as insure merely that the funds have been ex- pended for research in accordance with ordinary business principles. This method regards the whole of the research expenditure frankly as a gamble in which the management, having hired an expert in the field, leaves it to him and to his men to spend their funds in the hope that the company will get an adequate return. The project system regards research as a business which can be organized, and, ^vhile recognizing that some of the projects will fail, proposes that the successful ones should carry the failures. Viewed in this way, the project system will be far more attractive to business management than the opposite system, in which control over the choice of research projects is exercised only by the research men. In assessing the relative advantages of the project system and of the individual direction of industrial research, we must consider their relative efficiency and their cost. The overhead cost of a laboratory operated on the project system is necessarily greater than that of a laboratory operated with- out it, so that it should be demonstrably more efficient if it is to be worth while. The development of new products for the market, like production itself, can be organized and planned; so can the service work. But when we turn to the scientific '^vork of the laboratory, to the researches from which new discoveries may come, any systematized planning becomes difficult and per- haps impossible. This can be met by the direct allocation of certain funds for this fundamental ^vork. It enables the scien- tific men to carry out work that no committee ^vould approve 222 THE PATH OF SCIENCE or could direct and, to a great extent, meets the most serious objection to the operation of the project system. For the direction of the service and the development prob- lems, which in most laboratories represent the greater portion of the work, the project system would be preferable were it not for the fact that it costs a great deal more. The project system requires a complete accounting system, a great deal of reporting involving stenographic assistance and filing, and, in addition, it consumes an immense amount of time, both of the scientific staff and of the management of the company, spent on the careful consideration of the various projects. In many large laboratories, much of the time of the senior scientific staff is devoted to conferences and committee meet- ings at which the problems of the laboratory are discussed in detail. This is so serious that some laboratories openly state that it is undesirable for the best scientific men to be group leaders since they are left little time for scientific work and that the scientific experts should have their work directed by a group leader who is essentially a business man with scien- tific training. It is very difficult to calculate accurately the relative costs of the two systems, but with certain simplifying assumptions, it is not impossible to make guesses. 1. Let us assume that in both systems the scientific men are paid the same amount. 2. Let us assume that in both systems the scientific men are of the same average ability. Then the cost by the two systems per scientific man employed for the same total amount of ^vork done can be measured by the total cost of the laboratories. Accordino^ to available figr- ures, the cost of some laboratories run by the project system is approximately $10,000 a year for each scientific man working in the laboratories; in laboratories without the project sys- tem, in which the work is directed only by the scientific staff, the average cost is of the order of $7000 per man per year.* * These figures date from 1930; they have undoubtedly increased, but the proportion will be unaffected. APPLIED SCIENCE AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH 223 Thus, under the project system, the work of a scientific man costs approximately 40 per cent more than if there were no external control of the work done. In addition, it must be remembered that no allowance is made for the time of the company executives not in the laboratory who assist in the supervision of the laboratory work. For the project system to be worth while, therefore, from a purely commercial point of view, it must be assumed that approximately 40 per cent of the work of the scientific men in a laboratory operating without the system will be mis- directed and could be eliminated by the use of the project system. It is doubtful that this is the case, and it is probable that the project system materially increases the cost of operat- ing a research laboratory and does not produce an equivalent efficiency in results. In the unplanned laboratories, many mistakes are made. These are evils of commission. Probably the project system avoids them to some extent, but under the project system there are more likely to be errors of omission. The errors of commission are visible to the management; the errors of omission are invisible because unknown. If a piece of work that costs $100,000 ends in failure, it is obvious, and it ap- pears reasonable to everybody that the man responsible should be broug^ht to account for it and told not to make the same mistake another time. There is no real danger of his doing so, of course; next time he will make a different mistake. On the other hand, an error of omission, in which the possibility of a most valuable development is not recognized, is unknown even to the director himself, since he will be satisfied, in the characteristic human fashion, that his judgment was probably right. There is only one case where an error of omission can be evaluated. It is where it has been decided to make a change in the plans— not to do a thing or to stop doing some- thing; then, for no reason directly connected with the de- cision, it is not put into effect and the work is carried on. For instance, a suggestion for a particular piece of research is considered by the scientific men concerned and by the 224 THE PATH OF SCIENCE director in the light of the information he has. They decide not to do it, but then the legal department reminds them: "You have forgotten that we made a contract in which we agreed to carry out this piece of work." The success or fail- ure of the work, then, is a clear test of the validity of the original decision. In three cases from the author's experi- ence, where the decision had been made to abandon a piece of work but where it was carried forward without any change in opinion and for quite other reasons, the work proved en- tirely successful. Experiences of this kind demonstrate how difficult it is to make plans for the conduct of research and even the decisions essential for its operation. The experience of the last thirty years suggests that the greatest success has attended those industrial research labora- tories in which the director has been permitted a high degree of autonomy and an assurance of continued support. Indus- trial research is an adventure; it is even a gamble, though one in which the odds are on success, provided that the ^vork is continued in spite of delays and discouragements. Such an adventure demands from its sponsor much courage and much confidence. But if the director and his staff are well chosen, the confidence will not be misplaced, and the re- wards will be commensurate with the risks. Chapter X THE PATH OF SCIENCE In the early chapters of this book, we followed the growth of human civilization. We saw in the history of that giowth the mountins: knowledsie of science, visible first as the ration- alization of technology and then pursued for its own sake. It was found convenient to represent the history of civilization as a helix, in which the cyclic structure discernible in the arts is shown in the coils, and the cumulative giow th of knowl- edge is shown as the vertical component. It will be recalled that at the beginning the vertical component was small and the coils, representing the cycles of civilization, lay closely upon one another. With the coming of the Graeco-Roman culture, organized knowledge developed, and in the seven- teenth century, after the invention of printing and the dis- covery of the experimental method, modern science came into existence. At the present time, the progress of science is so rapid that it dominates the whole world picture and chal- lenges the ability of the leaders of mankind to meet the social changes that it produces. As we follow the path of science through the ages, ^ve can note certain points at which the scientific method was applied to a new group of the problems that confronted mankind. These are not the points at which the major discoveries and inventions were made; they are the occasions when new ap- plications of the scientific method emerged. Perhaps the first of these occasions may be chosen as that at which causa- tion was realized— when it was understood that like causes beget like effects and, as a result, rational technology was born. Another turning point in history came after the in- vention of writing, when the methods and formulae for tech- 225 226 THE PATH OF SCIENCE nology were written down and so preserved and transmitted, a point that in Egyptian history is associated with the work of the architects and engineers who carried out the great build- ings of the Old Kingdom, including the Pyramids. In the later Greek period, from 400 B.C. to 200 b.c, the relation of science to philosophy emerged; logic and mathematics evolved as the tools of thought; and the epistemology of science de- veloped. In the seventeenth century, the experimental method was discovered; and the development of the body of valid ideas, which today we term science, proceeded apace. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the experi- mental method of science ^vas found to be directly applicable to the control of industry, and from that application has come the rapid growth in the efficiency of production that has marked the present age. But the path of science is not ended. As Joan Evans says: "The present should retain its true proportion ... a mo- ment between an infinite past and a hurrying future." In that future, there are already signs of a new field for the application of the methods of science, the field of the social sciences— sociology, economics, and politics. The application of the methods of science to the social sciences is by no means novel. Plato and Aristotle discussed it and, indeed, regarded the understanding of the principles of political economy as the chief end of scientific investiga- tion. Francis Bacon laid down the application of science to politics as the principal object of the pursuit of knowledge. The philosophers of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries based much of their sociological and economic doctrines upon the supposed nature of scientific knowledge. Two of those philosophers, holding very different political views, Herbert Spencer and Karl Marx, founded all their sociological pre- cepts upon what they believed to be the teachings of science. A. N. Whitehead, however, points out that the whole tradition of the thinkers who have written on sociology and political philosophy is warped by the assumption that each generation follows the practices of its fathers and transmits THE PATH OF SCIENCE 227 to its children the conditions that it finds in society.* For the first time in history, this assumption is false (compare Chapter I, page 10 ff.). Moreover, since the social and eco- nomic changes characteristic of the present age are produced by the development of science, they increase as the develop- ment of science accelerates. As Whitehead says: "Today we are at the beginning of a new crisis of civilization, which gives promise of producing more fundamental change than any preceding advance. . . . The whole of human practical ac- tivity is in process of immediate transformation by novelties of organized knowledge." f This is true because the growth of science is not only very rapid, but it is still accelerating. The production of new science, in fact, is accelerated by the science already produced; and this phenomenon is parallel to that which the chemist knows as an autocatalytic reaction. Autocatalytic reactions are those in which the product of the reaction itself increases the rate at which the reaction proceeds. If we heat guncotton, that most important ex- plosive, it gives off a little nitric acid, which makes it decom- pose faster, so that it gives off more nitric acid and decom- poses faster and faster until finally the heat generated may be sufficient to produce an explosion. Any chemical reaction that produces heat will increase autocatalytically if the heat is not conducted away. Such a reaction is interesting to watch. We put the solvent in a vessel, add all the ingredients, and perhaps warm them a little. Then, the reaction starts and generates heat as it proceeds. It goes faster and faster, and the solution may rise in the vessel and froth; and then, as the reaction decreases and the materials are used up, the solution sinks again. If there is not enough room, the vessel will boil over; if there is enough room, it will undergo a complete transformation into a new system. The termination of the reaction is produced by the exhaustion of one of the com- * A. N. Whitehead, Adventures of Ideas, p. 117, New York, The Mac- millan Co., 1933. f "Statesmanship and Specialized Learning," Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 75, No. 1, p. 5 (1942). 228 THE PATH OF SCIENCE ponents, just as the production of plankton in the sea is lim- ited by the supply of mineral salts, principally phosphate, in the water. In northern latitudes, the phosphate in the sur- face water is renewed by the change of temperature in the spring and in the fall. As the temperature of the surface water in the spring rises to 28° fahrenheit, it becomes heavier than the colder water and sinks, bringing to the surface a supply of fresh water containing phosphate. This is followed by an outburst of plankton growth limited only by the min- erals available. If the autocatalytic production of science is limited by some factor necessary to it, it will accelerate until that factor be- comes exhausted and then settle down to progress at a rate dependent upon the supply of the factor. Up to the present, no such limiting factor for the production of scientific knowl- edge is apparent. As the production of new knowledge and of new inventions goes on, the conditions under which we live change, and we have to adjust our lives to meet the changing conditions. Sometimes adjustment is delayed either because the need for it is not realized or because some group having power in the society resists any adjustment. Then, when the adjustment comes, it is violent. Our efforts should be directed, there- fore, so that we can adjust our social conditions continuously as the advance of science makes changes necessary, and so that we recognize that the world today is a changing world and not the relatively static world of the past. The realization of the need for adjustment has led many thinkers to the conclusion that the method of adjustment is simple, that all that is required is to plan changes in our social and economic systems to meet the advances of science. It is believed that by planning we can avoid the difficulties and disasters that afflict us in the absence of a central planning organization. This goes so far in some circles that it is even proposed to plan scientific discovery, but it is equally impos- sible to plan in detail the economic future of a society. The reason is the same. We do not know what discoveries are THE PATH OF SCIENCE 229 possible; we do not know what will happen to our economics in the near future; nobody knows. It is not even possible to plan the whole conduct of a war, at least if the war is to be won. There is little doubt that the German and the Japanese staffs had complete plans for the war that they have just lost. Those who defeated them, of course, planned their operations, their supplies, and their production. But these plans were based on fundamental prin- ciples and were subject to instant change as the conditions of the struggle changed. For this reason, prophesies as to the course of the war had no validity; and an excellent lesson in the weakness of human prevision can be obtained by reading any book written between 1930 and 1945 that deals with the probable course of the struggle between Germany or Japan and their opponents. In politics and economics, the lesson is the same: No one foresaw the Great Depression, the long- continued New Deal administration in the United States, or even such an isolated event as the fall from power of Winston Churchill at the end of the European War.* The progressive adjustment of social organization to meet the rapid changes produced by the development of science and technology cannot be determined by the direct transfer of the techniques used in the physical and natural sciences. As von Hayek points out, there are great differences between the methods of the physical sciences and those of the social sciences.f The scientist confronted with the problems of sociology tends to imagine a theoretical society that will follow the principles of physical science and which he can therefore understand. This is clearly marked in the social philosophy of Comte and Saint-Simon and in the suggestions of the "technocrats" and of J. D. Bernal and J. G. Crowther with their idea of "frustration" (Chapter III, page 62). * H. B. Phillips, "On the Nature of Progress," American Scientist, 253 (1945). ■f F. A. von Hayek, "Scientism and the Study of Society," Economica, N.S., 10, 39 (1943). 230 THE PATH OF SCIENCE This application of the methods of physical science to the study of society has been extended to history, so that those who believed that a cyclic pattern could be discerned in his- tory have desired or have been urged to "verify" their theory by relating it to the present course of events or even by prophesying the future. If the prophecies were confirmed, the theory would be "verified," just as the reappearance of Halley's comet confirmed the calculations of that great as- tronomer. This is, of course, absurd; we know nothing of the future, and the actors in the drama of history cannot possibly understand the part that they themselves play in that drama. This is true in fact, and it is also true even if we assume that, when viewed from the standpoint of the future, the present happenings will fall into a definite pattern. If we are pre- pared to accept provisionally Petrie's cyclic theory (which can only be justified strictly for art), a glance at Figure 1 (Chapter II, page 32) will show that according to Petrie the present corresponds to the end of the medieval cycle, while the modi- fication suggested in Figure 2 places the present at the rising stage of a modern cycle. Which is right cannot be deter- mined for several hundred years even if the cycles continue unperturbed by the unprecedented rise of science. While the techniques of the physical sciences cannot be transferred to the field of sociology, the scientific method it- self can and must be used for the study of the structure of society, its reaction to changing conditions, and the adjust- ments required to enable it to retain stability as those condi- tions change. An example of the application of the scientific method to a primitive society is Malinowski's * study of the social organization of the Trobriand islanders, which de- pends upon the elaborate ceremonial trading system known as the kula. A scientific study of modern industrial society by T. N. Whitehead f is based to some extent upon field * B. Malinowski, Argonauts of the Western Pacific, London, Rout- ledge, 1922. f T. N. Whitehead, Leadership in a Free Society, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1936. THE PATH OF SCIENCE 231 Studies made by the Western Electric Company in their fac- tories. Whitehead points out that any group in society en- deavors to insure its own survival, and that if changes are to be acceptable they must originate within the group, prefer- ably as from the established leader of the group. Thus the conservative forces of society can be overcome by evolution from within but they will oppose changes from without. The trade union movements or the co-operative movements are based upon the support of the individual members, many of whom have been active in their development. In the same way, a new religion makes rapid headway as a spontaneous movement among the people, only to be resisted to the death when its followers attempt to impose it upon others. Modern society, however, has an economy based upon machine in- dustry, and this industry is engaged in continual never-ending change controlled by relatively logical, scientific thinking. The result has been an increasing clash between the con- servative instincts of the various groups of society and the interests of the industrial leaders whose operations imperil the continuance of those social groups. As Whitehead says, it is impossible to resist the changes pro- duced by the impact of technology even if such a resistance were desirable. "So the next stage in the progress of an in- dustrial society is surely to increase the range of systematic thinking to include not only the technological processes but also the social processes which hold men together." * Twenty-five years ago, scientists were believed by the lay public to be impractical, absent-minded people devoid of administrative ability or common sense. Today public opin- ion has swung to the opposite extreme, and it is even urged that men trained in the methods of scientific research should enter political life and endeavor to obtain a controlling posi- tion in the administration of the commonwealth. As Bernal says, "This solution suffers from two radical objections: first, that no one can think of any way of transferring control into * T. N. Whitehead, loc. cit., p. 84, 232 THE PATH OF SCIENCE their hands; and, second, that most existing scientists are manifestly totally unfitted to exercise such control." * There are, indeed, certain characteristics of scientific think- ing that make it difficult for scientists to operate in the po- litical sphere. The age-old foe of the scientific method is authority, and for a scientist to accept authority is to abandon his faith. But an almost equally objectionable idea to the scientific mind is that a decision should be made under the influence of emotion, and in politics emotion plays a very great part. In most political matters we do not think; we feel. One who claimed to know him praised a certain na- tional statesman, whereupon his listener reminded him that though the statesman might be the wisest and noblest of man- kind, he was yet a man and not a god. When, a few years later, the eulogist had changed his political views, he was reminded that the statesman might be the vilest and basest of mankind, but he was a man and not a devil. The cleavage in intellectual outlook and mental habits be- tween the political leader and the scientist, the engineer, or, for that matter, the industrialist is a very real and funda- mental one and is by no means to be dismissed summarily. It is common for scientists and industrialists to discuss the methods of the politician as if he were either merely stupid or deliberately wicked, f while the views of the political ex- pert on the "intellectuals" are often scornful in the extreme. As long as men's actions are controlled by their emotions, an objective thinker who discusses every proposition without emotion can have no part in modern political life, since a politician must understand the effect of emotional thought and must be prepared to utilize emotional appeal if he is to * Bernal, The Social Function of Science, p. 398. •f An antidote for this error can be found in F. W. Oliver's The End- less Adventure (London, Macmillan and Co., 1930), The section "Some Modern Dilemmas" should be of particular value to those prone to facile criticism, while that "In Praise of Politicians" presents an excel- lent picture of the debt we owe to those who govern us. See also "The Magnitude of the Task of the Politician," F. M. Davenport, Harvard Business Review, III. 468 (1933). THE PATH OF SCIENCE 233 obtain popular support. A successful political leader must tend, therefore, either to believe his own emotional appeal or to become a cynic and to some extent a hypocrite if he exerts that appeal without belief. It is this difficulty that makes even the greatest democratic leaders seem insincere in many of their actions. The appeal to emotion is unavoidable if popular sanction is to be obtained, and yet their critics and often they themselves in retrospect feel that appeal to be false and unwarranted. For this reason alone the political arena would seem to be unsuitable for the scientific man, and those who believe most fully in the value of the scientific spirit should be prepared to understand and sympathize with leaders who must obtain general popular approval for their actions. In practice the adoption of political methods controlled by pure reason could only succeed if they involved a dictatorship and the rule of the majority of the people by a small minority. A realization of this is evident in some of the writings of those scientists who advocate planning.* J. G. Crowther says that "in crises the possession of power is more important than the cultivation of intellectual freedom." f Crowther has evi- dently forgotten Lord Acton's dictum based on the saying of William Pitt: "Power corrupts, and absolute power cor- rupts absolutely." At the present time, therefore, it seems that the many at- tempts to frame a scientific theory that could guide political action have been wholly unsuccessful. Political action, never- theless, need not be arbitrary; the long-established funda- mental principles remain that have been available to guide human action through the ages. Truth and justice, mercy to the weak, and understanding for the erring are principles that require no formal justification. These are not the * For a full discussion of planning in relation to science, see J. R. Baker, Science and the Planned State, London, George Allen 8: Unwin, 1945. f J. G. Crowther, The Social Relations of Science, p. 331, New York, The Macmillan Co., 1941. 234 THE PATH OF SCIENCE principles of science; they relate to spiritual rather than natural laws. Nevertheless, the study of the phenomena of society and the reactions of human beings to their social and economic environment, if pursued in accordance with the fundamental principles of science, will lead to a more gen- eralized knowledge of the subject and eventually to methods that can be applied in practice. If the present system of government cannot change to meet the requirements of the changing world, it must inevitably give way to other systems. That this is so is the claim of many leaders of political thought. But only a few years ago it seemed impossible that industry should ever be organized to use scientific methods. The industries of the last century were, with few exceptions, utterly remote from the methods of thought current in the laboratories of the universities and were controlled largely by * 'self-made" autocrats. Within our lifetimes all that has changed, and the leaders of our modern industries are often technically trained experts, completely removed from their predecessors as to their outlook and habits of thought. In order to attain a similar result in the field of politics, we need no revolution; we require only an orderly evolution. As Janssen says, "There are very few difficulties that cannot be surmounted by a will strong enough or by study sufficiently profound." * To effect this orderly change, we must improve the meth- ods of thinking of the public so that they will select suitable governors and then will require from them real leadership and accurate thought. It is both our right and our duty to select for ourselves those who govern us, and the necessary changes can be effected by the proper exercise of that right and duty. The art of government is exceedingly difficult, and it is of the utmost importance, especially in times of transition * In reference to his establishment of an observatory on the summit of Mont Blanc in spite of his lameness. R. A. Gregory, Discovery or The Spirit and Service of Science, p. 67, London, Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 1916. THE PATH OF SCIENCE 235 such as the present, that the men chosen as administrators should be selected with the utmost care. The selection of the best methods of procedure in govern- ment, as in science, depends eventually upon judgment, and judgment depends upon the natural capacity of the judge and on his training and experience. In any judgment there will be error, and errors will occur in accordance with the laws of probability. The judgment will be better as the probable error is smaller, but there will always be some error. The administrator, moreover, will suffer from bias. If he is sufficiently objective in mind and sufficiently experienced, he will recognize that and will attempt to make a correction for it just as we correct precision measurements for the "personal equation." We should, therefore, select our methods of gov- ernment so that there is a maximum chance of arriving at the best judgment, a minimum opportunity for bias, and a probability that the best judgment that can be arrived at will be applied. In so far as our present methods do not meet these require- ments, they should be changed. The most important matter, however, is that we must be prepared to seek out specifically the best men that we have for the functions of government— not always the best in ability but often the best in character, since a man might have first-class judgment and yet be so biased by his ambitions that his decisions would be affected. In addition to selecting the most suitable leaders, however, the public must be willing to accept their leadership, to value the expression of intelligent thought, and to discount all appeals to emotion and to sectional interests. As Sir Ronald Ross says: We must not accept any speculations merely because they now appear pleasant, flattering, or ennobling to us. We must be content to creep upwards step by step, plant- ing each foot on the firmest finding of the moment, using the compass and such other instruments as we have, observ- ing without either despair or contempt the clouds and precipices above and beneath us. Especially our duty at 236 THE PATH OF SCIENCE present is to better our present foothold; to investigate; to comprehend the forces of nature; to set our State ration- ally in order; to stamp down disease in body, mind, and government; to lighten the monstrous misery of our fellows, not by windy dogmas, but by calm science.* * R. A. Gregory, op. cit., p. 233. INDEX Abbe, Ernst, 217 Abderhalden, E., 130 Academic dcs Sciences, 85, 86 Academy of Agricultural Science, 183 Accademia del Cimento, 85 Acetic anhydride, 128 Acetylene, 125 Achromatism, 98 Acton, Lord, 233 Adams, Brooks, 72 Agricola, 77 Agriculture, 26 Alaric, 27 Alchemy, 119 Alembert, Jean d', 92 Alexandria, 72, 88, 144 Alexandrian school, 67 Aliphatic chemistry, 125 Alkaloids, 130 Alpha particles, 111 Alpha rays, 136 American Philosophical Society, 86, 87 Amici, Giovanni, 157 Ampere, A. M., 104 Anatomy, 78, 144, 145 Anaximander, 70 Andromeda nebulae, 117 Animal colonies, 178 Animals, respiration of, 152 Anode rays, 108 Anthrax, 166 "Anticipations," 174 Arabic philosophy, 76 Arabic translations, 76 Arabs, settling of, 38 Archaeology and history, 17, 18 Archimedes, 67, 72 Argon, 116, 134 Aristarchus, 72 Aristophanes, 95 Aristotle, 71, 72, 74, 75, 76, 78, 79, 80, 88, 95, 144, 226 Aristotle's elements. 93 Armour Research Foundation, 216 Aromatic chemistry, 125 Arrhenius, Svante, 131, 133 Art, cycles of, 39 development of, 21 introduction of, 25 modern, 39 Aston, F. W., 108, 138, 177 Astrology, 41 Astronomer Royal, 176 Astronomy, 41, 88, 115, 116 Astrophysics, 117 Atlantis, New, 82 Atom, Bohr-Rutherford, 112, 137, 140 Rutherford, 111, 137 Atomic bombs, 143 Atomic nuclei, 140 disintegration of, 141, 142, 143 fission of, 142 Atomic numbers, 137 Atomic structure, 137, 138 Atomic theory, 93, 121 Atomic weights, 138 Attila, 27 Augustine, St., 5, 74 Aurelius, Marcus, 4 Authority, doctrine of, 75 237 23S INDEX Authority and scientific method, 232 Autocatalytic reactions, 227, 228 Avogadro, A., 122 Bachmann (Rivinus), 147 Bacon, Francis, 3, 6, 58, 72, 74, 79, 80, 81, 83, 226 Bacteria, 166 Bacteriology, 167 Baer, K. I. von, 149, 151 Baeyer, Adolph von, 129 Baker, John R., 80, 126, 198, 233 Bassi, Agostino, 166 Battelle Memorial Institute, 215 Bauhin, Kaspar, 147 Beard, C. A., 13 Becker, J. J., 120 Becquerel, H., 135 Bell, Alexander, 175 Bell Telephone Company, 175, 207 Beneden, Edouard van, 159 Bensley, R. R., 157 Benzene, 125, 126 Berlin Academy, 86 Bernal, J. D., 62, 63, 199, 200, 229, 231,232 Berzelius, J. J., 121, 122, 124, 131, 166 Beta rays, 136 Bichat, N. F. X., 153 Biology, analogy with cycles, 37 development of, 144 Birge, R., 139 Black, Joseph, 93, 152 Blood, circulation of, 146 Bohr, Niels, 111, 112, 137 Boltzmann, L., 93, 95 Bonnet, Charles, 150 Boullay, P., 124 Boulting, A. S., 20 Boyle, Robert, 55, 67, 83, 152 Brahe, Tycho, 90, 91, 96, 117 Brandeis, L., 204 Breasted, J. H., 66, 70 Britain, destruction of Roman cul- ture in, 3 Broglie, Louis de, 56, 113 Bronsted, J. N., 133 Brown, Robert, 154 Brunner, John, 217 Buckley, Charles E., 198, 199 Buffon, Georges de, 148 Bunsen, Robert, 116, 124 Bureau of Standards, 176 Bury, J. B., 6 Bush, Vannevar, 184, 198, 199 Byzantine art, 33 Cabot, Philip, 9, 16 Caloric, 93 Calvin, J., 74 Camerarius, 151 Capitalism, growth of, 77 Carnegie Corporation, 176 Carnegie Institution, 176 Carnot, N. L. S., 94 Carroll, Lewis, 68 Catalysis, 131 Cathode rays, 105 Catholic struggle in England, 20 Causation, realization of, 225 Cavendish laboratory, 180, 182 Cell structure, 153, 155 Cell theory, 145, 155, 157, 164 Cells, differentiation of, 172 nuclear division in, 155 respiration of, 170 Cesalpini, Andreas, 146 Chadwick, J., 138 Changes, 10, 12, 14, 15, 41 Characteristic curve, photographic, 179 Characters, acquired, 148 Chemical analysis, 122 Chemical apparatus, 178 Chemical formulae, 121 Chemical ideas, growth of, 119 INDEX 239 Chemical Physics, Institute of, Leningrad, 184 Chemical structure, 125 Chemical symbols, 121 Chemical synthesis, 122 natural compounds, 129 Chemicals, aliphatic, 125 aromatic, 125 synthetic organic, 122 ff., 178 Chemistry, 41 apparatus for, 119 development of, 119 organic materials for, 119 organic synthesis, 123 physical, 130 physiological, 129, 178 Childe, Gordon, 17, 18 Christianity, astronomical doc- trines of, 79 effect on science, 74, 75 Christianity and philosophy of his- tory, 5 Chromatic aberration, 97 Chromosomes, 158, 159, 160, 161 Civilization, conditioned by migra- tion, 36 cycles of, 29 history of, 225 progress of, 21 revolutions of, 28 Cockroft, J. D., 141 Coincidence observations, 51 Colbert, J. B., 85 Collingwood, R. C, 8, 9, 33 Color vision, 97 Combustion, principle of, 120 Common sense, 55, 56 Communication in ancient times, 18 Comte, Auguste, 7, 116, 229 Conant, J. B., 198 Constantinople, fall of, 19 Constructs, 56 Cook, Captain, 163 Coolidge, ^V. D., 110 Copernicus, 70, 78, 79, 90 Cosmology, 90 Copernican, 91 early, 88 Couper, A. S., 125, 139 Crafts, J. AI., 127 Crawford, O. G. S., 37, 38 Crookes, William, 105, 106 Crowther, J. G., 183, 229, 233 Cryogenic laboratories, 177 Curie, Madame, 135, 136 Curie, P., 135 Cuvier, G., 147 Cyclotron, 141, 177 Cytochrome, 170 Cytology, 145, 153, 155 Dalton, J., 93 Daniel, G. E., 23 Darwin, Charles, 53, 145, 148, 156, 162, 163, 164, 165 Darwin, Erasmus, 148 Data, sense, 56 Davaine, Casimir, 166, 167 Davenport, F. M., 232 Davisson, C. J., 113 Davy, H., 93, 103 Debye, P., 133 De Forest, Lee, 109 Democritus, 70 Descartes, Rene, 6, 58, 61, 79, 80, 96 Deuterium, 139 Diffraction, 98, 99, 100 Disintegration, social, 10 Dispersion, 97 Dodgson, Charles L., 68 Doppler, Christian, 118 Doulton, John, 121 Dreisch, Hans, 171 Drosophila, 160, 161, 181 Dujardin, Felix, 154 Dumas, Jean, 124 240 INDEX Duncan, R. K., 214 Dunsheath, P., 204 Dye industry and research, 175 Dynamo, 104 Eastman, George, 202 Eastman Kodak Company, 207, 208 (See Kodak Research Labo- ratories) Eberth, C. J., 167 Ecclesiastics and universities, 173 Ecology, 163, 164 Economics and politics, foresight in, 228 Edison, Thomas A., 44, 61, 62, 109 Edison effect, 44 Eggs, fertilization of, 158, 159 of mammals, 149 Egypt, art in, 36 craftsmen in, 68 Eighteenth Dynasty, 28 Fourth Dynasty, 27, 28, 30, 37 history of, 27, 30 instrumental equipment in, 18 Middle Kingdom, 28, 30, 37 New Kingdom, 30, 37 Old Kingdom, 27, 28, 30, 226 prehistoric dating of, 25 Twelfth Dynasty, 28, 30, 37 Einstein, Albert, 56, 94, 113, 114, 115, 142 Electric arc lamp, 103 Electric battery, 103 Electric light, 104 Electric motor, 104 Electrical engineering, 104 Electricity, alternating current, 104 conduction of, 102 through gases, 105 current, 103 early history, 102 induction of, 102 nature of, 104 static, 103 Electricity, technology of, 44 Electrolytes, 133 Electrolytic dissociation, 133 Electromagnetism, early, 103 Electron microscope, 113, 168 Electronic tubes, 109 Electronics, 109 Electrons, 108, 109, 137 diffraction of, 113 Electrons and waves, 113 Elements, chemical, classification of, 133, 134 Embryology, 149 Emotion and politics, 232 Empedocles, 71 Energy, conservation of, 94 radioactive, 140 transformation of, 94 Engineering, progress in, 43 Enriques, 56 Entropy, 94, 95 Enzymes, 130 Epicurean philosophy, 72, 73 Epigenesis, 150 Eratosthenes, 72 Essex, Earl of, 80 Ether, 99 Euclid, 72 Euler, L., 92 Evans, Joan, 226 Evelyn, John, 83 Evolution, 145, 148, 162, 165 Facts, classification of, 44, 49 collection of, 81 observation of, 49, 53 observers of, 49 selection of, 52 Facts and theories, 54 Faraday, Michael, 20, 54, 104, 105, 125, 133 Fellowships, industrial, 214 Fermat, Pierre de, 96, 99 INDEX 241 Fermat's law, 115 Ferments, 130 Ferns, reproduction of, 158 Fertilization, of eggs, 158, 159 of plants, 157 Feudal system, collapse of. 11, 77 Field, general theory of, 115 Fischer, Emil, 129, 130 Fission of atomic nuclei, 142 Fleming, J. A., 44, 109 Flint, 23, 24 technology of, 42 Flowers, function of, 151 Fol, Hermann, 158 Foresight, 229 Fowler, Ralph, 56 France, Anatole, 19 Frank, Tenney, 39 Frankland, E., 127 Franklin, Benjamin, 86, 103 Fraunhofer, J. von, 98, 116 Frazer, J. G., 46, 47 Fresnel, Augustin, 100, 101, 113 Friction, heat produced by, 93 Friedel, C, 127 Frustration, 62, 63, 229 Galen, 73, 76, 78, 144 Galileo, 18, 61, 67, 78, 79, 85, 88, 89, 96, 119 Galvani, L., 103 Gamma rays, 136 Gassiot, J., 105 Geissler, Heinrich, 105 Genera, 147 General Electric Company, 207 Generation, spontaneous, 166 Genes, 160, 165 Genetics, 181 Geophysical Laboratory, 177, 180 George, W. H., 49, 50, 52, 55 Gerhardt, C. F., 124 Germer, L. H., 113 Gibbs, Willard, 95, 131, 132, 199 Gilbert, William, 81, 102 Glands, 168 Glass, optical, 98 Government, the art of, 234, 235 Grant, Joan, 18 Gravitation, Newton's law of, 92 Gray, Stephen, 102 Greece, craftsmen in, 68 cycles in, 33 dark period in, 3 history in, 3 medicine in, 68 philosophers in, 70 philosophy in, 4 science in, 67, 70 Greek books translated into Ara- bic, 76 Greek education, 3 Greek philosophers, 68 Greek science, 226 Greenwich observatory, 176 Grew, Nehemiah, 151, 153 Grid tubes, 110 Grignard reaction, 127 Grijns, G., 169 Grimaldi, Francesco, 98, 100 Growth, processes of. 172 Guldberg, C. M., 131 Gutenberg, J., 20 Hales, Stephen, 151 Halley, E., 69, 84, 85 Hamilton, W. B., 55, 99, 113 Hamm, 148 Harvey, William, 146, 149 Hatshepsut's temple, 31 Havens, Raymond Dexter, 39 Hayek, F. A. von, 1, 2, 62, 229 Heat, 93, 95 Hebrew scriptures, 75 Heisenberg, W., 113 Helium, 116. 134 Helmont. J. B. van, 151 Hemoglobin, 169 242 INDEX Henry, Joseph, 104 Heraclitus, 70 Heredity, 159 Herodotus, 28 Hertwig, Oscar, 159 Hertz, H. R., 101, 106 Hill, A. v., 15 Hipparchus, 72 Hippocrates, 68, 70, 73 Histochemistry, 153 Histology, 153 History, 65 classical cycle of, 30, 33, 37 cycles in, 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 27, 31, 33, 35, 36, 40 duration of, 31 events of, not understood, 19 helix of, 173,225 la^vs of, 2 natural, 164 perspective, distortion in, 18, 19 principles of, 1, 27 science of, 2 theory of, cyclic, 7, 39, 230 helical, 40, 173 written, 17 History and archaeology, 17, 18 History and Christianity, 5 History and physical science, 230 Hittorf, J. W., 105, 106 Hoff, J. H. van't, 131, 133 Hofmann, A. W. von, 122, 123, 175 Hofmeister, Wilhelm, 158 Hooke, Robert, 85, 98, 153 Hopkins, Frederic, 169 Hoppe-Seyler, F., 169, 170, 171 Hormones, 130, 168 Huckel, E., 133 Humanism and science, 16 Humanists, early, 75 Huxley, Leonard, 53 Huxley, T. H., 53, 64, 174 Huygens, Christiaan, 86, 99 Hybridization, 148 Hydra, 150 Hydrogen isotopes, 139 Hyksos, 28, 30, 37 Hypotheses, 54 Ice, melting of, 93 Imhotep, 65 Imperial Chemical Industries, 217 India, 15 Inductive reasoning, 81 Industrial research, application of, 209 control of, 220 early days, 203 small industry, 211. 217 United Kingdom, 204 Industrial research laboratories, classification of, 204, 205 co-operation with, 210 development, 205 function of, 202 fundamental, 205, 206 number, 203 origin of, 208, 209 plant, 205 position in organization, 208, 209 size, 204 Industrial society, 230, 231 Industry, application of science to, 202 scientific control of, 234 Ingenhousz, Jan, 151 Inquisition and Galileo, 79 Institute, Optical, Leningrad, 184 Institute of Chemical Physics, Len- ingrad, 184 Institute of Physical Chemistry, Moscow, 184 Institute of Physical Problems, 184 Institutes, research, 177 Interference of light, 99, 100 Invention, 43 INDEX 243 Inventions, development of, 194 major, 23 Inventors, 61 Ions, 133 Isomers, 127 Isotopes, 109, 138 chemicals made with, 178 neon, 108 uranium, 142, 143 Janssen, Jules, 116, 234 Jeans, Sir James, 84 Joffe, 184 Joule, J. P., 94 Junto Society, 86 Jupiter, satellites of, 79, 99 Jussieu, A. de, 147 Kaempffert, Waldemar, 199 Kaldor, N., 204 Kant, Emmanuel, 6, 148 Kapitza, Peter, 181, 184, 189 Keilin, D., 170 Keith, Sir Arthur, 37 Kekule, August, 124, 125, 126, 127, 139 Kelvin, Lord, 61, 62 Kendall, May, 53 Kepler, J., 58, 81, 90, 91 Kepler's laws, 91, 92, 96 Kirchhoff, Gustav, 116 Koch, Robert, 167 Kodak Research Laboratories, 183 Koellicker, Rudolf, 155 Koelreuter, Joseph, 148, 151 Koerner, W., 127 Kula, 230 Lacy, W. A., 144 Lagrange, J. L., 92 Lamarck, Jean de, 148 Languages, classical, 3 Langmuir, Irving, 140 Laplace, P. S., de, 92, 93, 152, 153 Laue, Max von, 111 Laurent, A., 124 Lavoisier, A. L., 93, 120, 121, 152, 153, 169 Law, scientific, 57, 58 Laws of history, 2 Laws of motion, 89 Lawrence, E. O., 141, 177 Leaders, selection of, 235 Leadership in free society, 230 Leaves, function of, 151 Leeuwenhoek, Anton van, 153 Leibniz, G. W. von, 84, 86 Lenard, P., 106 Lenses, 95, 96 Leucippus, 70 Lewis, G. N., 139, 140 Liaison officer, scientific, 219 Liebig, Justus von, 122, 123, 124, 127, 129, 169 Light, corpuscles of, 98, 99 electromagnetic theory of, 101 interference of, 100 polarization of, 101 rays of, 99 velocity of, 99 waves of, 99, 100 Linnaeus, 147, 162 Literature, development of, 22 modern, 39 Little, A. D., 66 Lockyer, Norman, 116 Louis XIV, 85 Lucretius, 5, 73, 121 Lyonet, 149 Lysenko, T. D., 183 MacMunn, C. A., 170 Magic, 45, 46, 47 Magic and religion, 48 Magnet, discovery of, 102 Malinowski, B., 47, 48, 230 Malpighi, Marcello, 153 Malthus, T., 148, 162 244 INDEX Malus, E. L., 100 Margenau, H., 56 Marx, K., 82, 226 Mass, definition of, 89 Mass action, law of, 131 Mass energy relation, 115 Mass spectrograph, 108, 139 Maxwell, J. Clerk, 101, 113 Mayer, Julius, 94 Mayow, John, 152 Mechanics, beginnings of, 78, 88 laws of, 92 Medici brothers, 85 Mees, C. E. K., 186 Mellon Institute, 176, 214, 215 Mendel, Gregor, 63, 148, 159, 160, 161, 162, 165 Mendeleev, D. I., 134 Mendelism, 165 Mensuration, early, 88 Menzel, D., 139 Mercury, perihelion of, 114 Metallurgy, 41 Meteorology, science of, 45 Michelson, Albert, 113 Michelson-Morley experiment, 114 Microincineration, 156 Micro-organisms, 166 Microscope, invented, 78, 83 Middle Ages, 67 Midwest Research Institute, 216 Migration, effect on civilization, 36 Mirbel, 153 Mohl, Hugo, 154, 155 Molecules, 122 motion of, 94 Monasteries, 74 Mond, Ludwig, 217 Moon observed by Galileo, 79 Morgan, T. H., 160, 161, 181 Morgan, William, 104, 106 Morley, Edward, 114 Morphology, 156 Moseley, H. G. J., 137, 138 Motion, laws of, 88, 89, 92 Mount Wilson Observatory, 177 Miiller, Johannes, 166 Muller, H. J., 165 Museum at Alexandria, Egypt, 144 Mutation, 165 Niigeli, Karl, 155, 158 National Physical Laboratory, 176 National Research Foundation, 185 Natural selection, 145, 165 Nature, existence of, 58 Nebulae, 117, 118 Andromeda, 117 Needham, J., 38, 149 Nela Park Laboratory, 180 Neolithic period, 23, 24, 40 Neon isotopes, 108 Neoplatonism, 74 Neptune, discovery of, 116 Nernst, W., 131 Newton, Sir Isaac, 20, 52, 55, 58, 61, 67, 69, 72, 84, 85, 86, 90, 91, 92, 96, 97, 98, 100, 119, 138 laws of, 89, 92 Nezv York Times, 198, 199 Nordenskiold, E., 144 Nova, observation of, 78 Nuclear physics, 140, 180 Nuclei of atoms, 140 Nucleus, cell, 154 Nuffield College, Oxford, 211 report of, 217 Nutrition, 169 Nutting, P. G., 210 Observations, 51 Observer, interest of, 52 Oersted, H. C., 103, 104 Oken, Lorenz, 153 Oliver, F. W., 232 Onnes, Kamerlingh, 181 INDEX 245 Optical glass, 98 Optical Institute, Leningrad, 184 Organisms, classification of, 147 Ornstein, Martha, 82, 87 Osmotic pressure, 133 Ostwald, Wilhelm, 131, 132 Oxygen, 121 Painter, T. S., 162 Paleolithic period, 23, 40 Paleontology, 147 Parallax of stars, 91 Pasteur, Louis, 166, 167 Patents, development of, 194 Paterson, C. C, 202 Pendulum, 99 Periodic table, 134 Perkin, W. H., 123, 175 Petrie, W. M. F., 9, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30, 31, 33, 35, 37, 38, 230 Petroleum, chemicals from, 128 Petroleum industry, research in, 217 Phase rule, 132 Phillips, H. B., 19, 200, 229 Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 84 Philosophy, Arabic, 76 Greek, 68 Stoic, 72 Phlogiston, 120 Photographic research, 179 Photographs, observation of, 50 Photography, science of, 43 technology of, 43 Photo tubes, 110 Phvsical Chemistry, Institute of, Moscow, 184 Physical methods and social sci- ences, 229 Physico-technical Institute, Khar- kov, 184 Leningrad, 184 Physics, growth of ideas, 88 nuclear, 140 origin of, 88 Physiological chemistry, 178 Physiology, 171 Pilate, Pontius, 19 Pile, atomic, 143 Pitchblende, 135 Pitt, William, 233 Planck, Max, 55, 112, 113 Planets, orbits of, 91 Plankton, production of, 228 Planning, industrial research, 6, 7, 8, 195, 221 ff. scientific research, 195 public discussion of, 198 in society, 228, 229 in war, 229 Plants, fertilization of, 157 reproduction of, 158 respiration of, 151 Plastics, 129 Plato, 4, 7, 9, 68, 71, 72, 74, 95, 226 Pliny, 73 Plutonium, 143 Polanyi, M., 49 Polarization of light, 100, 101 Political action, fundamental prin- ciples of, 233, 234 Political economy, 226 Political methods and pure reason, 233 Politician, task of, 232 Politicians as seen by scientists, 232 Politics and economics, foresight in, 229 Politics and emotion, 232 Politics and science, 226 Pollination, 151 Polonium, 136 Polybius, 7, 9 Polymerization, 128, 129 Pottery, 25, 26 246 INDEX Pouchet, Felix, 166 Preformation, 150 Priestley, Joseph, 120, 151 Pringsheim, Nathaniel, 157 Printing, its importance in science, 69 Printing early books, 76 Progress, 17 in engineering, 43 idea of, 6, 13 in material aspects, 11 Progress and science, 21, 42 Progress and technology, 43 Project system of research control, 220 Prophets, 47 Protein, 156 Proteins, chemistry of, 130 Proton, 138 Protoplasm, 154 Proust, J. L., 121 Ptolemy, 72 Ptolemy (astronomer), 90 Purine derivatives, 129 Purkinje, Johannes, 154 P)Tamid builders, 27, 30, 226 Pyramids, 43 Pythagoras, 4, 71, 80 Quadrants, use of, 90 Quantum mechanics, 113 Quantum theory, 112, 113 Rabies, virus of, 168 Radicals, 123, 124 Radioactive energy, 140 Radioactivity, 111 Radium, 136 Ramsay, William, 116, 134, 182 Raspail, F. B., 153, 155, 156 Rayleigh, Lord, 63, 107, 119, 134 Rays, anode, 198 cathode, 105, 106, 109 light, 99 Rays, positive, 108 Reaction, 90 Reactions, autocatalytic, 227, 228 chemical rate of, 130, 131 termination of, 228 Redi, 149 Reform bill, 20 Reformation, 11 Refraction, double, 99, 101 law of, 96 Regeneration, 149 Reichsanstalt, 176 Relativity, theory of, 113, 114 Religion, 47 Christian, and authority, 75 Religion and magic, 48 Religion and natural phenomena, 47 Remlinger, P., 168 Renaissance, 77 Renold, C. G., 219 Research, applied, differentiated from fundamental, 206 Department of Scientific and In- dustrial, 204, 211 direction of, 189 in the electrical industry, 175 General Electric, 175 in the German chemical indus- try, 175 industrial, 175 application of, 209 control of, 220 early days, 203 organization of, 186 origin of, 175 small industry, 211, 217 success in, 224 United Kingdom, 204 methods of, 173 organization of, 185 in the petroleum industry, 217 photographic, 179, 208 INDEX 247 Research, planning of, 195, 196, 197, 198, 221 fE. scientific, agencies for, 181, 182 apparatus used, 177 direction of, 189 government supported, 176 organization of, 81, 195 unit of, 188 telephone, 175, 207 Research associations, British, 204, 211, 213, functions of, 212, 213 Research department in industry, function of, 202 growth and importance, 203 Research director, 218 for small industry, 219 ff. training for, 219 Research institutes, 82, 83, 177, 182 support of, 193 technological, 176, 214 Research laboratories, classification of, 179 convergent, 180 directors of, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193 divergent, 208 industrial, classification of, 204, 205 co-operation with plants, 210 development, 205 function of, 202 fundamental, 205, 206 number, 203 origin of, 208, 209 plant, 205 position in organization, 208, 209 size, 204 organization of, 186, 190 Respiration of cells, 170 of animals, 152 of plants, 151 Richardson, O., 44 Rivinus (Bachmann), 147 Rockefeller Foundation, 176 Rockefeller Institute, 176 Roentgen, Wilhclm, 106, 135, 198 Roman Empire, 37, 38 fall of, 29 Roman law, 38 Roman philosophy, 72 Rome, collapse of republic, 9 cycle of, 33 Romer, O., 99 Roozeboom, H. W. B., 132 Ross, Ronald, 235 Roux, Wilhelm, 171 Royal Society, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86 Philosophical Transactions of, 84 Ruhmkorff coil, 105 Rumford, B. T., 93 Russia, organization of research in, 183 Russian Academy of Sciences, 183 Rutherford, Daniel, 152 Rutherford, Ernest, 111, 136, 138, 140, 141, 177, 181 Rutherford atom, 137 Rutherford-Bohr atom, 137, 140 Saint-Simon, Comte de, 229 Salomon, House of, 82 Sarton, George, 16, 21, 22, 41 Saussure, Nicolas de, 152 Scheele, Karl, 120 Schleiden, M. J., 145, 154, 155 Schroedinger, E., 113 Schwann, Theodore, 154, 155 Science, 41 application of, 182 to industry, 202, 226 applied, 62, 63, 64 development of, 57 direction of, 63 early, 70 248 INDEX Science, effect on conditions of life, 174, 228 experimental, 4, 48 growth of, 15, 22, 65, 67 history of, 21 ideas of, 48 instruments in, 51 laws of, 58 method of, 42, 48, 59, 60, 63, 64 observations in, 57 of photography, 43 production of, limiting factor for, 228 progress throughout history, 225 rate of, 225 publication of, 69 Science and classification of facts, 44 Science and humanism, 16 Science and meteorology, 45 Science and the Planned State, 233 Science and progress, 21, 42 Science and social conditions, 228 Science and society, 15 Science and sociology, 226 Science and superstition, 45 Science and technology, 44 Science and universities, 173 Science teaching in English uni- versities, 68 Sciences, social, 226 Scientific discoveries, chance of making, 197 Scientific laws, 57 Scientific Life, The 198 Scientific method, application to problems, 225 Scientific method and authority, 232 Scientific methods and industry, 234 Scientific methods and the struc- ture of society, 230 Scientific Research and Develop- ment, Office of, 184 Scientific revolution, 81 Scientism, 229 Scientist, characteristics of the, 49 Scientists, in action, 49 classification of, 61 kinds of, 60 as seen by politicians, 232 Scientists and politics, 231 ff. Sclater, P. L., 163 Sculpture, archaic age in, 31 Shapley, Harlow, 181 Silk worms, disease of, 166 Similarity in magic, 46 Singer, C, 60, 67, 73, 144 Snell, W., 96 Social conditions, improved, 12 Social conditions and science, 228 Social sciences and physical meth- ods, 229 Society, adaptation of, 234 planning in, 228, 229 structure of and scientific method, 230 Society and science, 15 Sociology and science, 226 Socrates, 71 Solar system, nature of, 78 Sound, reproduction of, 110 Southern Research Institute, 216 Soviet Union, philosophy of. 62 Spallanzani, L., 148, 153, 166, 169 Species, 147 origin of, 156, 162, 163 Spectacles, 95, 96 Spectra, analysis of, 177 mechanism, 112 Spectrum, 97 solar, 98 Spemann, Hans, 172 Spencer, Herbert, 7, 38, 226 Spenglcr, Oswald, 8, 9 Spermatozoa, discovery of, 148 INDEX 249 Spiral nebulae, 117, 118 Sprengel, Christian, 151 Stability of conditions, 1 Stahl, George Ernst, 120 Staining technique, 145, 153, 156 Stamp, Lord, 14 Stars, observations of, 90 Steensen, Nils, 147 Stellar composition, 116 Stine, C. M. A., 206, 207 Stoic philosophy, 72 Stoicism, 74 Strasburger, Eduard, 158 Sugars, chemistry of, 130 Superstition and science, 45 Sutton, W. S., 160 Swammerdam, Jan, 150 Swedish Empire, 27, 150 Sylvius, Aeneas, 20 Synthetic organic chemicals, 178 Technocracy, 229 Technological research institutes, 176, 214 Technology, 13, 42, 43 of ancients, 17 of electricity, 44 impact on society, 231 industrial rise of, 174 Technology and progress, 43 Technology and science, 44 Telegraph, 104 Teleology, 73 Telephone, 104 Telephone research, 179 Telescope invented, 78, 83 Thales, 68, 70, 71 Theories, 54 absurd, 55, 56 nature of, 57 postulates of, 55 verification of, 55 Theory, general field, 115 Thermodynamics, laws of, 94 Thomson, Elihu, 175 Thomson, J. J., 61, 62, 107, 109, 177, 188 Thorium, radioactivity of, 135, 137 Tobacco, mosaic, 167 Tools, 23 Trembley, Abraham, 149, 150 Trobriand society, 230 Tubes, electronic, 109, 110 photo, 110 Tutankhamen, 28, 43 Tyndall, J., 174 Types, chemical, 124 Universities, medieval, 75 Universities and ecclesiastics, 173 Universities and science, 173 Uranium, radioactivity of, 135, 137 Uranium isotopes, 142 Urea, 129 synthesis of, 155 Urey, H., 139 Valence bonds, 139 Valve tubes, 110 Vaucheria, 157 Vesalius, Andreas, 77, 81, 145, 146 Vico, 7, 9 Vinci, Leonardo da, 77, 81 Viruses, 167, 168 Vitamins, 130, 169 Vogt, W., 172 Volta, A., 103 Waage, P., 131 Wallace, A. R., 145, 148, 162, 163 Wallace's line, 163 Walton, E. T. S., 141 W^ar, foresight in, 229 Weaver, Warren, 199 Wells, H. G., 2, 51, 174 Western Electric Company, 231 250 INDEX Westinghouse Electric Company, 207 Wharton, Thomas, 168 Whitehead, A. N., 12, 13, 226, 227 Whitehead, T. N., 230, 231 Whitney, W. R., 199 Wilhelmy, L., 130 William of Occam, 55 Williamson, A. W., 124 Willis, Thomas, 146 Wohler, Friedrich, 123, 124, 127, 129, 155 Wolff, Caspar, 150, 153, 172 ^Volsey, Thomas, 12 Wolters, A. W. P., 50 Wren, Sir Christopher, 83 Writing, origin of, 26, 27, 225, 226 X-ray tubes, 110 X-rays, 110, 111, 135 diffraction of, 111 discovery of, 106, 198 emitted by elements, 137 nature of, 102, 111 producing mutation, 166 Young, Thomas, 97, 100 Zeiss Carl, 217 Zilsel, E., 57, 67, 75, 77 /