Hooke diary pdf download

His various innovations are noted in an interesting monograph on microscopy by Rooseboom. Just as Galileo did not invent the telescope, neither did Hooke invent the microscope. But what he described seeing in his compound microscope awakened learned Europe to the wonderful world within. In fact, Pasteur rediscovered the anaerobic lifestyle.

The first person to observe anaerobic microorganisms was Leeuwenhoek, who did a remarkable experiment, detailed in his letter of 14 June to The Royal Society. Using a flame, he sealed one of the tubes, whereas the other was left open. Beijerinck commented We thus come to the remarkable conclusion that, beyond doubt, Leeuwenhoek in his experiment with the fully closed tube had cultivated and seen genuine anaerobic bacteria, which would hap- pen again only after years, namely about by Pasteur.

That Leeuwenhoek, one hundred years before the discovery of oxygen and the composition of air, was not aware of the meaning of his observations is understandable. But the fact that in the closed tube he observed an increased gas pressure caused by fermentative bacteria and in addition saw the bacteria, prove in any case that he not only was a good observer, but also was able to design an experiment from which a conclusion could be drawn.

Robert Hooke — , an original Fellow of the Royal Society, was also an original and eccentric genius and inventor. His contributions to science are too well-known and numerous to mention; though his influence on his contemporaries and the part he played in the early days of the Society, are only just beginning to receive their due recognition ….

It is impossible and unnecessary to discuss this remarkable man and his work here [italics added]. In these two plates there were two apertures, one before, the other behind the glass, which were larger or smaller, as the glass was more or less convex, or as it magnified. Just opposite to these apertures on one side was placed sometimes a needle, sometimes a slender flat body of glass or opaque matter, as the occasion required, upon which, or to its apex, he fixes whatever object he has to look upon; then holding it up against the light, by help of two small screws, he places it just in the focus of his glass, and then makes his observations.

Such were the microscopes, which I saw, and these are they that he shews to the curious that come and visit him: but besides these, he told me that he had another sort, which no man living had looked through setting aside him- self; these he reserves for his own private observations wholly, and he assured me they performed far beyond any, that he had shewed me yet, but would not allow me a sight of them, so all I can do is barely to believe, for I can plead no experience in the matter.

As for the microscopes I looked through, they do not magnify much, if any thing, more than several glasses I have seen, both in England, and Ireland: but in one particular, I must needs say, they far surpass them all, that is in their extreme clearness, and their representing all objects so extraordinary distinctly.

I found him a very civil complaisant man, and doubtless of great nat- ural abilities; but, contrary to my expectations, quite a stranger to letters, master neither of Latin, French or English, or any other of the modern tongues besides his own, which is a great hinder- ance to him in his reasonings upon his observations; for being ignorant of all other mens thoughts, he is wholly trusting to his own, which, I observe, now and then lead him to extrava- gancies, and suggest very odd accounts of things, nay, sometimes such, as are wholly irreconcil- able with all truth.

You see, Sir, how freely I give you my thoughts of him, because you desire it. Leeuwenhoek, RS Manuscript letters nos and Johnson Reprint Corp.

Hunter and S. Bennett, M. Cooper, M. Hunter and L. VI ed. Hachette and J. Hyrtl , pp. Westfall, The construction of modern science: mechanisms and mechanics Wiley, New York, Martyn and Ja. Allestry, Printers to the Royal Society, London, Harwood, in Hunter and Schaffer, op. Ainsworth, Introduction to the history of mycology Cambridge University Press, VIII ed.

Lane and P. Macquer , pp. Leeuwenhoek, RS Manuscript letter no. Leeuwenhoek, , , The discovery of unicellular life. A creature normally known only as a speck that bites is made familiar in every detail. We can view its anatomy with our normal eyesight! What microscopes revealed to Robert Hooke was that even the tiniest creatures were made up of lots of different strange parts. Kept as a memorandum book to remind him of the many places he had been and people he had met each day, along with his pithy thoughts and observations about scientific research and the world around him, the diary offers an unparalleled glimpse into the exciting and vibrant world of restoration scientific discovery and the rebuilding of London from the ashes of the Great Fire.

Hooke did not intend his diary to be read by anyone else, so he could be candid in his observations about himself and his contemporaries. The diary shows a man striving to be open and honest with himself.

He found his body and habits to be worthy of investigation and research, so he noted his symptoms and the experimental, sometimes dangerous, medicines he self-administered. The master at Nuremberg.

Regiomontanus' death in Rome. His legacy to the future. His portraits. The spirit of Regiomontanus. Regiomontanus in the light of to-day.

The scientific achievements of Regiomontanus and Walther. Sources of information, and Index. The very real achievements of Regiomontanus are adequately dealt with by Dr.

Zinner and a sympathetic evaluation is made. This task is not easy, and it should be borne in mind that it is approaching years ago that Regiomontanus lived and worked and that he achieved his great results before the age of 40, at which he died!

The book is well printed on good paper; the plates are all half-tone reproductions on coated paper. Edited by H. Robinson and W. London Taylor and Francis.

Price 25s. This book is the transcription of a manuscript which has been preserved for over 40 years in the Library of the Guildhall, London, but which was, until recently, unknown to scientists. Its publication makes available to the historian of Science a very valuable document and no pains have been spared to make the publication worthy of the expense involved. It is also clear that the Society's grandees were determined to ensure Hooke's status as well by securing for him a proper academic position in addition to the curatorship.

The Society was founded primarily for the purpose of 'advancing natural knowledge by experiment'. Consequently, the Curator of Experiments was considered, at least initially, as more vital to the Society's mission than any other officer, the president and secretary included. The statutes of the Society, which were in the process of being drafted when Hooke was asked to serve as curator in the autumn of , are quite explicit on this matter, judging by the meticulous care in spelling out the election process and duties of the curator, compared with the rather perfunctory treatment of the other officers.

Thus, just as the Oxford professors were to be drawn 'from among men of good character and reputable lives', so the Society's curators were expected to be individuals of good credit.

Nor was there anything particularly demeaning in the stipulations concerning negligence and ejections. The Savilian statutes- just like the statutes of any other professorship - were explicit in specifying the grounds for forfeiture of salary or expulsion from office.

Finally, the stipulation that a curator was prohibited from seeking other positions was not an indication that he 'was not free to dispose of his own time', but that, like the Savilian professors, it was expected that the generous remuneration attached to the office would allow the incumbent to devote himself wholly to his duties 'without seeking for or engaging in any other employment', 35 Only ignorance of the fundamental principles that informed the architects of the Royal Society can account for the misguided notion that of the Sociery's chief officers, the curator alone was not expected to be a gentleman.

Indeed, it has been exclaimed, 'What Fellow other than Hooke occupied a social rank which would have permitted him to "be summoned to attend the next meeting of the council, to receive their rebuke for the neglect of his office"? But this m. The primacy of the curatorship was forcefully reiterated in Thomas Sprat's The History of the Royal Society 'Whatever Revenew they shall rais', he wrote, this or any other means, they intend thereby to make an Establishment for their Curators.

To this Office they have already admitted some of their Fellows, whom they will employ according to their Studies and sufficience. Indeed, the significance we attach today to Oldenburg's correspondence was not necessarily shared by his colleagues in the early s. To some, in fact, it proved a distraction, for the reading of letters took time away from the more important task of performing experiments. Yet the rare occasion when this happened hardly warrant conclusion that Hooke's 'daily work was largely subject to the will of others', who manifested 'their entitlement to set the terms of Hooke's scientific work and to chastise him when he failed to give satisfaction'.

Sir Robert Moray's good-natured reaction to hearing that Hooke required more observations in order to cocnplete his theory of comets is a case in point. The constructing of a theory was not a task set on Hooke by the Society, and he was not about to be rushed simply to satisfy the propagandist needs of the Society, a point of view accepted by Moray. A couple of weeks later, when Moray complained that Hooke was learning a hundred trades rather than complete 'taskes lyet upon him', he was hardly disapproving of Hooke's idling his time away; only that he was eager for Hooke to complete his work on a coach for wh1ch the Society had taken out a patent.

More troublesome still is the clairn that wealthy members of the gentry were accorded distinctive and privileged prerogatives in the realm of knowledge, while those divested of such means and status necessarily fell into a condition of dependence, with its contingent forfeiture of free action, integrity and, potentially, credibility. Again, Boyle alone is invoked as 'master of credibility' whose reports were allegedly hard1y ever put through a 'process of deliberative assessment', let alone negated: A remarkable feature of his relations with the Royal Society, and with the philosophical community in general, was the easy passage enjoyed by his factual testimony from personal claim to collective assent.

They either 'tended towards the margins of Boyle's circle' or 'assuredly placed then1selves beyond expectation of ever belonging'. As Sir Robert Moray informed Christiaan Huygens in July , apropos discussing Sir Kenelm Digby's forthcoming discourse on vegetation, 'in due course, the Society will examine the truth that he claims for his experiments, and will put everything to the test, as they do with all the pieces of Mr.

Boyle and others'. Boyle himself attested, on various occasions, to his testimony being challenged, and his need to repeat his experiments in order to persuade critics. YXTriting to Oldenburg on 29 October , for exam. Nineteen months later Boyle informed Oldenburg that he and Richard Lower had 'been repeating an Exp[erimen]t, to satisfie others rather then ourselves of the Truth of what I was relating at Gresham College when I was saying That I had observd that if the Thorax were sufficiently layd open the Lungs though unhurt would not play'.

In an unpublished note Boyle also recalled that in order 'to satisfie some scrupulous Inquirers', he was forced to repeat an experiment to substantiate claim 'that the white powder or Calx [he made] out of reftn' d Gold by disolving it in the menstruum And though he might not have been rou. Hooke: Gentleman of Science Consider the following typical illustrations of such purported mistrust or incredulity: 'Early in , the Royal Society's journal-Book recorded that Hooke, as remunerated Curator of Experiments, "made the experiment of condensing air by the pressure of water; but the trial agreeing not with the hypothesis, it was ordered to be repeated at the next meeting" ' Then, in , when Hooke attempted to establish 'whether air was generated or consumed by burning', his 'colleagues reserved the right to define whether or not his experimental work counted as success or failure;' hence the minutes 'referred guardedly to the experiment "he said, he had made", and members of the society were delegated to act as direct witnesses to a repetition'.

The first case is a red herring not only because Hooke was not a remunerated curator yet but, given the subject matter of the experiment, because it may well have been Hooke's own hypothesis that was at odds with the experimental result - and, in any case, requests to repeat an experiment did not imply scepticism in the performance of a member, but were an integral part of the investigative method established by the Society.

Nor do the minutes of the Society condone the gloss made on the case. They do not refer 'guardedly' to the success of the experiment but as a matter of fact- the phrase 'he said, he had made', was a formulaic figure of speech that carried no innuendos.

Nor was there a delegation of members to supervise Hooke. Rather, accepting the verity of the experiment, Hooke 'was desired to prosecute these experiments, and to give the Society an account of them from time to time, and to bespeak some members of the Society to assist at them'. Only that by virtue of his position as curator Hooke performed infinitely more experiments than had Boyle -not to mention that Hooke's trials were invariably communal events, and also included experiments at the behest of other Fellows.

Consequently, the prospects of failure or controversy were significantly higher in his case, a point that is lost on those who simply mine the documents in order to cull apt phrases in support of preconceived conclusions concerning status and credibility. Indeed, the myopic culling of phrases has been everywhere prevalent. One of the most important features of Boyle's identity as the Christian virtuoso is said to have been his public modesty. Naturally, by virtue of who he was, such a quality was conspicuously absent from Hooke's very mentality.