Иванов-Петров Александр (ivanov_petrov) wrote,
Иванов-Петров Александр
ivanov_petrov

Замечательные книги


FOKKO JAN DIJKSTERHUIS. 2004. Lenses and Waves. Christiaan Huygens and the Mathematical Science of Optics in the Seventeenth Century. Archimedes VOLUME 9. Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrech
книга довольно голландская. качественная и по делу

The Cambridge Companion to NEWTON. Edited by I. Bernard Cohen, George E. Smith. 2004
книга довольно английская. О себе с удовольствием, но практично и с пользой

Кстати - почерк Ньютона



Вот примерно так думают эти англичане:

William Newman
How could such a great mathematical mind, the father of modern physics, concern him self with such seemingly unintelligible gibberish? - это в статье "основы ньютоновской химии".

Although some have maintained that van Helmont exercised little influence on Newton, it is quite clea rthat Newton’s most fundamental positions in chymistry were of Helmontian origin, even if partially mediated by Starkey, Boyle, and other Helmontians such as John Webster.

Newton’s laboratory notebooks are filled with attempts to make various mineral and chemical products fermentand “putrefy.” Although fermentation was an idea dear to the heart of many an alchemist, the particular notion of fermenting water in order to produce the specified materials of the world perceived by the senses is at heart Helmontian.

One can see, then, that van Helmont’s work provided a vitalistic corpuscular theory: the “atoms” and corpuscles of which he speaks were endued with powers and forces which could cause them to “ferment” and “vegetate.” This vitalistic corpuscularism was developed further by the seventeenth-century English Helmontians such as George Starkey.

At the center of every metallic corpuscle, within the shell sprovided by van Helmont’s corpuscular theory, one could therefore find the active semen which provided the “fermentative force” (vis fermentativa) to that metal. Like most seventeenth-century chymists, Newton at this time envisioned the mineral acids as highly active and subtle salts dissolved in water. The acid particles congregated around metallic ones be cause of their “sociability” with them, and worked their way into the pores between the corpuscles of metal. What is truly striking about this explanation is its use of the shell/kernel terminology already employed by the Helmontian Philalethes. Now one could argue that Newton was not talking here about sulfur and mercury, but rather about salts enclosing particles of metal. The conversion of salts into sulfurous oils was a theme dear to the heart of Helmontians, and Newton’s laboratory notebooks contain passages excerpted from George Starkey.

As if to underscore his Helmontian allegiances, Newton then apparently dictated to his scribe that “all things can be reduced into water”. A final point at which the shell-theory emerges in Newton’s published work can be found in Query 31 of the Opticks. A quasi-metaphorical terminology of opposed “centers” and “circumferences” was the daily bread of seventeenth-century chymists, and it is highly likely that Newton is replaying the language of Eirenaeus Philalethes or earlier alchemists. In addition, Newton’s reference to a particle of salt as a “chaos” deserves comment. Newton, like other Helmontians, was both “alchemist” and “chemist” at the same time, and it does damage to the historical record to distinguish the two pursuits.


Karin Figala (Newton’s alchemy) – говорит, что на ньютона повлиял Polish alchemist Michael Sendivogius (1556–1636).
The spiritual leader of this alchemical group, who published under the pseudonym Eirenaeus Philalethes, was George Starkey(died 1665?), whose influence on the young Newton has been shown by Westfall and Dobbs, and more recently by the findings of William Newman.
Further influences on Newton’s philosophical concepts, less marked than those of the alchemists, can be attributed to Joan Baptista van Helmont (1579–1644), who advocated vitalism, and Pierre Gassendi (1592–1655), whore presented (atomism).

Как ни странно - Ньютон и в самом деле был в линии парацельсианских алхимиков, а не каких других. Если верить Ньюмену. Гремучая смесь алхимии Гельмонта и Гассенди.
Tags: books6, science4
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 5 comments