diff --git a/_index.db b/_index.db index b1d4d6749..4bd495ee7 100644 Binary files a/_index.db and b/_index.db differ diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Universe_of_Consciousness-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Universe_of_Consciousness-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..2db013027 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Universe_of_Consciousness-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ +--- +title: "A Universe of Consciousness" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Universe_of_Consciousness" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:48.830461+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +A Universe of Consciousness: How Matter Becomes Imagination is the title of a 2000 book by biologists Gerald Maurice Edelman and Giulio Tononi; published in UK as Consciousness: How Matter Becomes Imagination. This book, written with Giulio Tononi, is the culmination of a series of works by Gerald Edelman on the workings of the brain which include Neural Darwinism and Bright Air, Brilliant Fire. + + +== Synopsis == +It is divided into six sections: the first three cover existing work from philosophical, neurological and Darwinian perspectives. Part IV presents the novel thesis of the work: the Dynamic Core Hypothesis. The remaining two parts explore how it resolves various philosophical and practical issues. + + +=== The Background === +Since Descartes, philosophers have been occupied with the concept of consciousness and its subjective nature has posed a special problem for science. Its nature arises from the neuronal structures in the brain and some understanding of these, together with the experimental tools needed to explore them, is given in the following chapters. They then recapitulate Edelman's still controversial theory of somatic selectionism during early development which controls the topology of a particular brain and enables restructuring in response to experience. They argue that memory is not a symbolic representation but a reflection of how the brain has changed its dynamics in order to achieve motor activity. This leads to a discussion of primary consciousness which integrates with perception into a means of directing immediate behavior and requires significant levels of reentrancy to achieve its effects. + + +=== The Dynamic Core Hypothesis === +The problem of integrating, or binding, the activity of functionally segregated areas of the brain in order to concentrate attention on a particular activity in a short amount of time (typically 100-250 msecs) after the presentation of a stimulus is explored by means of large-scale simulations. It is shown that this can only happen if some elements interact more strongly among themselves than with the rest of the system including a large amount of reentrancy. These functional clusters are only slowly coming into the range of PET or fMRI scanning technology which commonly require much longer time scales. +At any given time, only a small subset of the neuronal groups in the brain are contributing directly to consciousness and this cluster is called a dynamic core. It represents a single point of view and each different state of consciousness corresponds to a different subset. Some dissociative disorders such as schizophrenia may result in the formation of multiple cores. + + +=== Implications of the hypothesis === +One of the recurring issues in consciousness is the existence of qualia, such as redness, warmth and pain. It is not enough to identify each quale with a particular neuron or neuronal group; what is crucial is all the other groups which are highly influenced by the sensation and will fire at the same time. Thus each conscious state deserves to be called a quale. A small perturbation of a group of neurons can affect the whole in a very short space of time provided the system is kept in a state of readiness by the thalamus. Primary consciousness can build up a bodily based reference space even before language and higher-order consciousness appear. +There is a preliminary approach to the relationship between conscious and unconscious processes, including sensors and motors, because so little is known. The evolution of language centres in the brain leads to higher order consciousness which enhances subjective experience and enables humans to describe qualia which are however experienced by a much wider range of animals. Thinking in humans has a range of representations—including pictorial. In contrast to computers which are Turing machines, brains are based on neuronal group selection. + + +== See also == +Wider than the Sky: The Phenomenal Gift of Consciousness, a similar 2004 book by Edelman + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_to_War-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_to_War-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..475fd5dc2 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_to_War-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "Accessory to War" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accessory_to_War" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:28.533234+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Accessory to War: The Unspoken Alliance Between Astrophysics and the Military is the fifteenth book by American astrophysicist and science communicator Neil deGrasse Tyson which he co-wrote with researcher and writer Avis Lang. It was released on September 11, 2018 by W. W. Norton & Company. The book chronicles war and the use of space as a weapon going as far back as before the Ancient Greeks, and includes examples such as Christopher Columbus' use of his knowledge of a lunar eclipse and the use of satellite intelligence by the United States during the Gulf War. While speaking on the book, Tyson told National Geographic that he regards the collaboration between science and the military as a "two-way street." +Marcelo Gleiser wrote that the book "rings like a wake-up call, even if an uncomfortable one." + + +== References == + + +== Further reading == +The long entanglement of war and astrophysics - Sharon Weinberger, nature.com +Neil deGrasse Tyson on ‘Accessory to War’ and the ‘moon situation’ - Brian McElhiney, stripes.com +Neil deGrasse Tyson on the Surprising Alliance Between Astrophysicists and the Military - John Ismay, The New York Times \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Oceans-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Oceans-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b381b1206 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Oceans-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +--- +title: "Alien Oceans" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_Oceans" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:29.704749+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Alien Oceans: The Search for Life in the Depths of Space is a 2020 non-fiction book by American writer and scientist Kevin Peter Hand. The book explores the possibility of life on planets and moons with subsurface oceans, and argues that the common understanding of the habitable zone should include natural satellites around gas giants. Satellites discussed in the book include Europa, Enceladus, Titan, and Ganymede. +Hand wrote the book to make the scientific information it discusses readily accessible to the public. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6ab527344 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +--- +title: "Almagest" +chunk: 1/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:30.906530+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Almagest ( AL-mə-jest) is a 2nd-century mathematical and astronomical treatise on the apparent motions of the stars and planetary paths, written by Claudius Ptolemy (c. AD 100 – c. 170) in Koine Greek. One of the most influential scientific texts in history, it canonized a geocentric model of the Universe that was accepted for more than 1,200 years from its origin in ancient Greece, through to the medieval Byzantine and Islamic worlds, and in Western Europe through the Middle Ages and early Renaissance until the Scientific Revolution. It is also a key source of information about ancient Greek astronomy. +Ptolemy set up a public inscription at Canopus, Egypt, in 147 or 148. Norman T. Hamilton found that the version of Ptolemy's models set out in the Canopic Inscription was earlier than the version in the Almagest. Hence the Almagest could not have been completed before about 150, a quarter-century after Ptolemy began observing. + +== Names == +The name comes from Arabic اَلْمَجِسْطِيّ al-majisṭī, with اَلـ al- meaning 'the' and majisṭī being a corruption of Greek μεγίστη megístē 'greatest'. The Arabic name was popularized by a Latin translation known as Almagestum made in the 12th century from an Arabic translation, which would endure until original Greek copies resurfaced in the 15th century. +The work was originally called Μαθηματικὴ Σύνταξις (Mathēmatikḕ Sýntaxis) in Koine Greek, as also in Modern Greek (primarily), and was known as Syntaxis Mathematica in Latin. The treatise was later called Ἡ Μεγάλη Σύνταξις (Hē Megálē Sýntaxis), "The Great Treatise" (Latin: Magna Syntaxis), and the superlative form of this (Greek: μεγίστη megístē, 'greatest') lies behind the Arabic name from which the English name Almagest derives. +In the study of medieval Hebrew texts, the Almagest is sometimes referred to as "Ptolemy's Book of Elections", to emphasize parallelism with Abraham ibn Ezra's manuscript of the same name. + +== History == +Written possibly around 150 CE, the text survives as copies, the oldest being from the 9th century when Arabic scholars started to translate the text, which in turn have survived in copies from the 11th and 13th centuries. + +== Contents == + +=== The Syntaxis Mathematica books === + +The Syntaxis Mathematica consists of thirteen sections, called books. As with many medieval manuscripts that were handcopied or, particularly, printed in the early years of printing, there were considerable differences between various editions of the same text, as the process of transcription was highly personal. An example illustrating how the Syntaxis was organized is given below; it is a Latin edition printed in 1515 at Venice by Petrus Lichtenstein. + +Book I contains an outline of Aristotle's cosmology: on the spherical form of the heavens, with the spherical Earth lying motionless as the center, with the fixed stars and the various planets revolving around the Earth. Then follows an explanation of chords with table of chords; observations of the obliquity of the ecliptic (the apparent path of the Sun through the stars); and an introduction to spherical trigonometry. +Book II covers problems associated with the daily motion attributed to the heavens, namely risings and settings of celestial objects, the length of daylight, the determination of latitude, the points at which the Sun is vertical, the shadows of the gnomon at the equinoxes and solstices, and other observations that change with the observer's position. There is also a study of the angles made by the ecliptic with the vertical, with tables. +Book III covers the length of the year, and the motion of the Sun. Ptolemy explains Hipparchus' discovery of the precession of the equinoxes and begins explaining the theory of epicycles. +Books IV and V cover the motion of the Moon, lunar parallax, the motion of the lunar apogee, and the sizes and distances of the Sun and Moon relative to the Earth. +Book VI covers solar and lunar eclipses. +Books VII and VIII cover the motions of the fixed stars, including precession of the equinoxes. They also contain a star catalogue of 1022 stars, described by their positions in the constellations, together with ecliptic longitude and latitude. +Book IX addresses general issues associated with creating models for the five naked eye planets, and the motion of Mercury. +Book X covers the motions of Venus and Mars. +Book XI covers the motions of Jupiter and Saturn. +Book XII covers stations and retrograde motion, which occurs when planets appear to pause, then briefly reverse their motion against the background of the zodiac. Ptolemy understood these terms to apply to Mercury and Venus as well as the outer planets. +Book XIII covers motion in latitude, that is, the deviation of planets from the ecliptic. The final topic of this chapter also covers how to determine when a planet first becomes visible after being hidden by the glare of the sun, as well as the last time it is seen before being hidden by the sun's glare. + +=== Ptolemy's cosmos === +The cosmology of the Syntaxis includes five main points, each of which is the subject of a chapter in Book I. What follows is a close paraphrase of Ptolemy's own words from Toomer's translation. + +The celestial realm is spherical, and moves as a sphere. +The Earth is a sphere. +The Earth is at the center of the cosmos. +The Earth, in relation to the distance of the fixed stars, has no appreciable size and must be treated as a mathematical point. +The Earth does not move. + +=== The star catalogue === \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..188bbc835 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +--- +title: "Almagest" +chunk: 2/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:30.906530+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The layout of the catalogue has always been tabular. Ptolemy writes explicitly that the coordinates are given as (ecliptical) "longitudes" and "latitudes", which are given in columns, so this has probably always been the case. It is significant that Ptolemy chooses the ecliptical coordinate system because of his knowledge of precession, which distinguishes him from all his predecessors. Hipparchus' celestial globe had an ecliptic drawn in, but the coordinates were equatorial. Since Hipparchus' star catalogue has not survived in its original form, but was absorbed into the Almagest star catalogue (and heavily revised in the 265 years in between), the Almagest star catalogue is the oldest one in which complete tables of coordinates and magnitudes have come down to us. +As mentioned, Ptolemy includes a star catalog containing 1022 stars. He says that he "observed as many stars as it was possible to perceive, even to the sixth magnitude". The ecliptic longitudes are given in terms of a zodiac sign and a number of degrees and fractions of a degree. The zodiac signs each represent exactly 30°, starting with Aries representing longitude 0° to 30°. The degrees are added to the lower limit of the 30-degree range to obtain the longitude. Unlike the situation with the zodiac of modern-day astrology, most of the stars of a given zodiac constellation in the catalog fall in the 30-degree range designated by the same name (the so-called 'zodiac sign'). The ecliptic longitudes are about 26° lower than those of AD 2000 (the J2000 epoch). Ptolemy says that the ecliptic longitudes are for the beginning of the reign of Antoninus Pius (138 AD) and that he found that the longitudes had increased by 2° 40′ since the time of Hipparchus which was 265 years earlier (Alm. VII, 2). But calculations show that his ecliptic longitudes correspond more closely to around the middle of the first century CE (+48 to +58). +Since Tycho Brahe found this offset, astronomers and historians investigated this problem and suggested several causes: + +that all coordinates were calculated from Hipparchus' observations, whereby the precession constant, which was known too inaccurately at the time, led to a summation error (Delambre 1817); +that the data had in fact been observed a century earlier by Menelaus of Alexandria (Björnbo 1901); +that the difference is a sum of individual errors of various kinds, including calibration with outdated solar data; +that Ptolemy's instrument was wrongly calibrated and had a systematic offset. + +Subtracting the systematic error leaves other errors that cannot be explained by precession. Of these errors, about 18 to 20 are also found in Hipparchus' star catalogue (which can only be reconstructed incompletely). From this it can be concluded that a subset of star coordinates in the Almagest can indeed be traced back to Hipparchus, but not that the complete star catalogue was simply "copied". Rather, Hipparchus' major errors are no longer present in the Almagest and, on the other hand, Hipparchus' star catalogue had some stars that are entirely absent from the Almagest. It can be concluded that Hipparchus' star catalogue, while forming the basis, has been reobserved and revised. + +==== Errors in the coordinates ==== +The figure he used is based on Hipparchus' own estimate for precession, which was 1° in 100 years, instead of the correct 1° in 72 years. Dating attempts through proper motion of the stars also appear to date the actual observation to Hipparchus' time instead of Ptolemy. +Many of the longitudes and latitudes have been corrupted in the various manuscripts. Most of these errors can be explained by similarities in the symbols used for different numbers. For example, the Greek letters Α and Δ were used to mean 1 and 4 respectively, but because these look similar copyists sometimes wrote the wrong one. In Arabic manuscripts, there was confusion between for example 3 and 8 (ج and ح). (At least one translator also introduced errors. Gerard of Cremona, who translated an Arabic manuscript into Latin around 1175, put 300° for the latitude of several stars. He had apparently learned from Moors, who used the letter س (sin) for 300 (like the Hebrew ש (shin)), but the manuscript he was translating came from the East, where س was used for 60, like the Hebrew ס (samekh).) +Even without the errors introduced by copyists, and even accounting for the fact that the longitudes are more appropriate for 58 AD than for 137 AD, the latitudes and longitudes are not fully accurate, with errors as great as large fractions of a degree. Some errors may be due to atmospheric refraction causing stars that are low in the sky to appear higher than where they really are. A series of stars in Centaurus are off by a couple of degrees, including the star we call Alpha Centauri. These were probably measured by a different person or persons from the others, and in an inaccurate way. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ad228f675 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +--- +title: "Almagest" +chunk: 3/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:30.906530+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +==== Constellations in the star catalogue ==== +The star catalogue contains 48 constellations, which have different surface areas and numbers of stars. In Book VIII, Chapter 3, Ptolemy writes that the constellations should be outlined on a globe, but it is unclear exactly how he means this: should surrounding polygons be drawn or should the figures be sketched or even line figures be drawn? This is not stated. +Although no line figures have survived from antiquity, the figures can be reconstructed on the basis of the descriptions in the star catalogue: The exact celestial coordinates of the figures' heads, feet, arms, wings and other body parts are recorded. It is therefore possible to draw the stick figures in the modern sense so that they fit the description in the Almagest. +These constellations form the basis for the modern constellations that were formally adopted by the International Astronomical Union in 1922, with official boundaries that were agreed in 1928. +Of the stars in the catalogue, 108 (just over 10%) were classified by Ptolemy as 'unformed', by which he meant lying outside the recognized constellation figures. These were later absorbed into their surrounding constellations or in some cases used to form new constellations. + +=== Ptolemy's planetary model === + +In Almagest, Ptolemy assigned the following order to the planetary spheres, beginning with the innermost: + +Later, in his "Planetary Hypothesis", he concludes that Mercury is the second closest planet. Other classical writers suggested different sequences. Plato (c. 427 – c. 347 BC) placed the Sun second in order after the Moon. Martianus Capella (5th century AD) put Mercury and Venus in motion around the Sun. Ptolemy's authority was preferred by most medieval Islamic and late medieval European astronomers. +Ptolemy inherited from his Greek predecessors a geometrical toolbox and a partial set of models for predicting where the planets would appear in the sky. Apollonius of Perga (c. 262 – c. 190 BC) had introduced the deferent and epicycle and the eccentric deferent to astronomy. Hipparchus (2nd century BC) had crafted mathematical models of the motion of the Sun and Moon. Hipparchus had some knowledge of Mesopotamian astronomy, and he felt that Greek models should match those of the Babylonians in accuracy. He was unable to create accurate models for the remaining five planets. + +The Syntaxis adopted Hipparchus' solar model, which consisted of a simple eccentric deferent. For the Moon, Ptolemy began with Hipparchus' epicycle-on-deferent, then added a device that historians of astronomy refer to as a "crank mechanism": he succeeded in creating models for the other planets, where Hipparchus had failed, by introducing a third device called the equant. +Ptolemy wrote the Syntaxis as a textbook of mathematical astronomy. It explained geometrical models of the planets based on combinations of circles, which could be used to predict the motions of celestial objects. In a later book, the Planetary Hypotheses, Ptolemy explained how to transform his geometrical models into three-dimensional spheres or partial spheres. In contrast to the mathematical Syntaxis, the Planetary Hypotheses is sometimes described as a book of cosmology. + +== Influence == + +Ptolemy's comprehensive treatise of mathematical astronomy superseded most older texts of Greek astronomy. Much of what we know about the work of astronomers like Hipparchus comes from references in the Syntaxis. +The book was circulated among astronomers, and also among philosophers who are interested in astronomy. The Almagest, however, was not translated into Latin in ancient times and had little influence on popular literature. +The first translations into Arabic were made in the 9th century, with two separate efforts, one sponsored by the caliph Al-Ma'mun, who received a copy as a condition of peace with the Byzantine emperor. Sahl ibn Bishr is thought to be the first Arabic translator. +No Latin translation was made before the 12th century. Henry Aristippus made the first Latin translation directly from a Greek copy, but it was not as influential as a later translation into Latin made in Spain by the Italian scholar Gerard of Cremona from the Arabic (finished in 1175). Gerard translated the Arabic text while working at the Toledo School of Translators, although he was unable to translate many technical terms such as the Arabic Abrachir for Hipparchus. In the 13th century a Spanish version was produced, which was later translated under the patronage of Alfonso X. +In the 15th century, a Greek version appeared in Western Europe. The German astronomer Johannes Müller (known as Regiomontanus, after his birthplace of Königsberg in Lower Frankonia) made an abridged Latin version at the instigation of the Greek churchman Cardinal Bessarion. Around the same time, George of Trebizond made a full translation accompanied by a commentary that was as long as the original text. George's translation, done under the patronage of Pope Nicholas V, was intended to supplant the old translation. The new translation was a great improvement; the new commentary was not, and aroused criticism. The Pope declined the dedication of George's work, and Regiomontanus's translation had the upper hand for over 100 years. +During the 16th century, Guillaume Postel, who had been on an embassy to the Ottoman Empire, brought back Arabic disputations of the Almagest, such as the works of al-Kharaqī, Muntahā al-idrāk fī taqāsīm al-aflāk ("The Ultimate Grasp of the Divisions of Spheres", 1138–39). +Commentaries on the Syntaxis were written by Theon of Alexandria (extant), Pappus of Alexandria (only fragments survive), and Ammonius Hermiae (lost). \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..5fc743a09 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@ +--- +title: "Almagest" +chunk: 4/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almagest" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:30.906530+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Modern assessment == +Under the scrutiny of modern scholarship, and the cross-checking of observations contained in the Almagest against figures produced through backwards extrapolation, various patterns of errors have emerged within the work. A prominent example is Ptolemy's use of measurements said to have been taken at noon, but which systematically produce readings that are off by half an hour, as if the observations were taken at 12:30pm. However, an explanation for this error was found in 1969. +The overall quality of Claudius Ptolemy's scholarship and place as "one of the most outstanding scientists of antiquity" has been challenged by several modern writers, most prominently by Robert R. Newton in the 1977 book The Crime of Claudius Ptolemy, which asserted that the scholar fabricated his observations to fit his theories. Newton accused Ptolemy of systematically inventing data or doctoring the data of earlier astronomers, and labelled him "the most successful fraud in the history of science". One striking error noted by Newton was an autumn equinox said to have been observed by Ptolemy and "measured with the greatest care" at 2pm on 25 September 132, when the equinox should have been observed at 9:54am the day prior. +Herbert Lewis, who had reworked some of Ptolemy's calculations, agreed with Newton that "Ptolemy was an outrageous fraud", and that "all those results capable of statistical analysis point beyond question towards fraud and against accidental error". +Although some have described the charges laid by Newton as "erudite and imposing", others have disagreed with the findings. Bernard R. Goldstein wrote, "Unfortunately, Newton’s arguments in support of these charges are marred by all manner of distortions, misunderstandings, and excesses of rhetoric due to an intensely polemical style." Owen Gingerich, while agreeing that the Almagest contains "some remarkably fishy numbers", including in the matter of the 30-hour displaced equinox, which he noted aligned perfectly with predictions made by Hipparchus 278 years earlier, rejected the qualification of fraud. +John Phillips Britton, Visiting Fellow at Yale University, wrote of R.R. Newton, "I think that his main conclusion with respect to Ptolemy’s stature and achievements as an astronomer is simply wrong, and that the Almagest should be seen as a great, if not indeed the first, scientific treatise." He continued, "Newton’s work does focus critical attention on the many difficulties and inconsistencies apparent in the fine structure of the Almagest. In particular, his conclusion that the Almagest is not a historical account of how Ptolemy actually derived his models and parameters is essentially the same as mine, although our reasons for this conclusion and our inferences from it differ radically." + +== Modern editions == +The Almagest under the Latin title Syntaxis mathematica, was edited by J. L. Heiberg in Claudii Ptolemaei opera quae exstant omnia, vols. 1.1 and 1.2 (1898, 1903). + +Three translations of the Almagest into English have been published. The first, by R. Catesby Taliaferro of St. John's College in Annapolis, Maryland, was included in volume 16 of the Great Books of the Western World in 1952. The second, by G. J. Toomer, Ptolemy's Almagest in 1984, with a second edition in 1998. The third was a partial translation by Bruce M. Perry in The Almagest: Introduction to the Mathematics of the Heavens in 2014. +A direct French translation from the Greek text was published in two volumes in 1813 and 1816 by Nicholas Halma, including detailed historical comments in a 69-page preface. It has been described as "suffer[ing] from excessive literalness, particularly where the text is difficult" by Toomer, and as "very faulty" by Serge Jodra. The scanned books are available in full at the Gallica French National library. +A new French translation, with some interactive diagrams, was prepared in 2022 and is freely available on the web. + +== Gallery == + +== See also == +Abū al-Wafā' Būzjānī (who also wrote an Almagest) +Book of Fixed Stars +Star cartography +Euclid's Elements + +== References == + +=== Notes === + +=== Citations === + +=== Sources === + +==== Books ==== + +==== Journals and magazines ==== + +==== Websites ==== + +== Further reading == +Evans, James (1998). The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-509539-5. +Neugebauer, Otto (1948). "Mathematical Methods in Ancient Astronomy". Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society. 54 (11): 1013–1041. doi:10.1090/S0002-9904-1948-09089-9. +Neugebauer, Otto (1975). A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy. Berlin: Springer. Part 1, Part 2, Part 3. ISBN 3-540-06995-X. +Hanson, Norwood Russell (1960). "The Mathematical Power of Epicyclical Astronomy". Isis. 51 (2): 150–158. doi:10.1086/348869. JSTOR 226846. +Ridpath, Ian (2018) [1998]. Star Tales (Rev. ed.). Cambridge: Lutterworth Press. ISBN 978-0-7188-9478-8. +Pedersen, Olaf (1993) [1974]. Early Physics and Astronomy: A Historical Introduction (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-40899-8. +Pedersen, Olaf (2011) [1974]. A Survey of the Almagest (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer. ISBN 978-1-4939-3922-0. +Ptolemaeus, Claudius. Syntaxis mathematica (in Greek). OCLC 767751182. Retrieved 10 April 2023 – via MDZ/München, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. +Shank, Michael H. (2009). "Islamic Science and the Making of European Renaissance by George Saliba". Aestimatio (Book review). 6: 63–72. + +== External links == + +Syntaxis Mathematica (Almagest), original Greek, edited by Johan Ludvig Heiberg, 1898. +Syntaxis mathematica in J.L. Heiberg's edition (1898–1903) +Ptolemy's De Analemmate. PDF scans of Heiberg's Greek edition, now in the public domain (Koine Greek) +Toomer's English translation Duckworth, 1984. +Ptolemy. Almagest. Latin translation from the Arabic by Gerard of Cremona. Digitized version of manuscript made in Northern Italy c. 1200–1225 held by the State Library of Victoria. +University of Vienna: Almagestum (1515) PDFs of different resolutions. Edition of Petrus Liechtenstein, Latin translation of Gerard of Cremona. +Almagest Ephemeris Calculator by Robert Van Gent. Positions for any date, translation of dates in calendars used by Ptolemy. Extensive list of references and articles. +Online luni-solar and planetary ephemeris calculator based on the Almagest +A podcast discussion by Prof. M Heath and Dr A. Chapman of a recent re-discovery of a 14th-century manuscript in the university of Leeds Library +Star catalog in ASCII (in Latin) +Animation of Ptolemy's model of the universe by Andre Rehak (YouTube) +(in French) French translation, with some diagrams animated, interactive, or random +(in Hebrew) Maimonides explaining why you need to learn Almagest first to understand science \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Eclipse_(book)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Eclipse_(book)-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..10c37fe36 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Eclipse_(book)-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +--- +title: "American Eclipse (book)" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Eclipse_(book)" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:32.056506+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +American Eclipse: A Nation's Epic Race to Catch the Shadow of the Moon and Win the Glory of the World is a non-fiction book by journalist David Baron, published by Liveright in 2017, about the popular impression of the 1878 solar eclipse as observed across the United States. It won the American Institute of Physics Science Writing Award in 2018. + + +== Background == +Baron was inspired to write the book after viewing his first total solar eclipse in Aruba in 1998. He decided that he would publish it in 2017 in order to coincide with the solar eclipse of August 21, 2017. + + +== Synopsis == +American Eclipse follows three scientists, James Craig Watson, Maria Mitchell, and Thomas Edison as they traveled to view the total solar eclipse on July 29, 1878. + + +== Reception == +Kirkus Reviews described American Eclipse as a "compelling... timely, energetic combination of social and scientific history." Graham Ambrose, writing for The Denver Post, lauded Baron's social history of a scientific topic and that Baron "successfully swerves from the dry, impenetrable prose of science writing, grasping instead at something poetic, often funny." + + +== Publication == +American Eclipse was released in hardcover in June 2017, paperback in 2018, and rereleased with a new afterword in 2024, to coincide with the solar eclipse of April 8, 2024. The book was also adapted into a musical in and premiered at Baylor University on April 7, 2024. + + +== Further reading == + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Official website \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Urchin_in_the_Storm-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Urchin_in_the_Storm-0.md index b7512b60a..65e9981d1 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Urchin_in_the_Storm-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Urchin_in_the_Storm-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Urchin_in_the_Storm" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:20:12.583257+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:23.418361+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhatiya-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhatiya-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c32998bc8 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhatiya-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +--- +title: "Aryabhatiya" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhatiya" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:33.274391+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Aryabhatiya (IAST: Āryabhaṭīya) or Aryabhatiyam (Āryabhaṭīyaṃ), a Sanskrit astronomical treatise, is the magnum opus and only known surviving work of the 5th century Indian mathematician Aryabhata. Historian of astronomy Roger Billard estimates that the book was composed around 510 CE based on historical references it mentions. + +== Structure and style == +Aryabhatiya is written in Sanskrit and divided into four sections; it covers a total of 121 verses describing different moralitus via a mnemonic writing style typical for such works in India (see definitions below): + +Gitikapada (13 verses): large units of time—kalpa, manvantara, and yuga—which present a cosmology different from earlier texts such as Lagadha's Vedanga Jyotisha (ca. 1st century BCE). There is also a table of [sine]s (jya), given in a single verse. The duration of the planetary revolutions during a mahayuga is given as 4.32 million years, using the same method as in the Surya Siddhanta. +Ganitapada (33 verses): covering mensuration (kṣetra vyāvahāra); arithmetic and geometric progressions; gnomon/shadows (shanku-chhAyA); and simple, quadratic, simultaneous, and indeterminate equations (Kuṭṭaka). +Kalakriyapada (25 verses): different units of time and a method for determining the positions of planets for a given day, calculations concerning the intercalary month (adhikamAsa), kShaya-tithis, and a seven-day week with names for the days of week. +Golapada (50 verses): Geometric/trigonometric aspects of the celestial sphere, features of the ecliptic, celestial equator, node, shape of the Earth, cause of day and night, rising of zodiacal signs on horizon, etc. In addition, some versions cite a few colophons added at the end, extolling the virtues of the work, etc. +It is highly likely that the study of the Aryabhatiya was meant to be accompanied by the teachings of a well-versed tutor. While some of the verses have a logical flow, some do not, and its unintuitive structure can make it difficult for a casual reader to follow. +Indian mathematical works often use word numerals before Aryabhata, but the Aryabhatiya is the oldest extant Indian work with Devanagari numerals. That is, he used letters of the Devanagari alphabet to form number-words, with consonants giving digits and vowels denoting place value. This innovation allows for advanced arithmetical computations which would have been considerably more difficult without it. At the same time, this system of numeration allows for poetic license even in the author's choice of numbers. Cf. Aryabhata numeration, the Sanskrit numerals. + +== Contents == +The Aryabhatiya contains 4 sections, or Adhyāyās. The first section is called Gītīkāpāḍaṃ, containing 13 slokas. Aryabhatiya begins with an introduction called the "Dasageethika" or "Ten Stanzas." This begins by paying tribute to Brahman (not Brāhman), the "Cosmic spirit" in Hinduism. Next, Aryabhata lays out the numeration system used in the work. It includes a listing of astronomical constants and the sine table. He then gives an overview of his astronomical findings. +Most of the mathematics is contained in the next section, the "Ganitapada" or "Mathematics." +Following the Ganitapada, the next section is the "Kalakriya" or "The Reckoning of Time." In it, Aryabhata divides up days, months, and years according to the movement of celestial bodies. He divides up history astronomically; it is from this exposition that a date of AD 499 has been calculated for the compilation of the Aryabhatiya. The book also contains rules for computing the longitudes of planets using eccentrics and epicycles. +In the final section, the "Gola" or "The Sphere," Aryabhata goes into great detail describing the celestial relationship between the Earth and the cosmos. This section is noted for describing the rotation of the Earth on its axis. It further uses the armillary sphere and details rules relating to problems of trigonometry and the computation of eclipses. + +== Significance == +The treatise uses a geocentric model of the Solar System, in which the Sun and Moon are each carried by epicycles which in turn revolve around the Earth. In this model, which is also found in the Paitāmahasiddhānta (ca. AD 425), the motions of the planets are each governed by two epicycles, a smaller manda (slow) epicycle and a larger śīghra (fast) epicycle. +It has been suggested by some commentators, most notably B. L. van der Waerden, that certain aspects of Aryabhata's geocentric model suggest the influence of an underlying heliocentric model. This view has been contradicted by others and, in particular, strongly criticized by Noel Swerdlow, who characterized it as a direct contradiction of the text. +However, despite the work's geocentric approach, the Aryabhatiya presents many ideas that are foundational to modern astronomy and mathematics. Aryabhata asserted that the Moon, planets, and asterisms shine by reflected sunlight, correctly explained the causes of eclipses of the Sun and the Moon, and calculated values for π and the length of the sidereal year that come very close to modern accepted values. +His value for the length of the sidereal year at 365 days 6 hours 12 minutes 30 seconds is only 3 minutes 20 seconds longer than the modern scientific value of 365 days 6 hours 9 minutes 10 seconds. A close approximation to π is given as: "Add four to one hundred, multiply by eight and then add sixty-two thousand. The result is approximately the circumference of a circle of diameter twenty thousand. By this rule the relation of the circumference to diameter is given." In other words, π ≈ 62832/20000 = 3.1416, correct to four rounded-off decimal places. +In this book, the day was reckoned from one sunrise to the next, whereas in his "Āryabhata-siddhānta" he took the day from one midnight to another. There was also difference in some astronomical parameters. + +== Influence == +The commentaries by the following 12 authors on Arya-bhatiya are known, beside some anonymous commentaries: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhatiya-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhatiya-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..25612c88c --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhatiya-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ +--- +title: "Aryabhatiya" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aryabhatiya" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:33.274391+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Sanskrit language: +Prabhakara (c. 525) +Bhaskara I (c. 629) +Someshvara (c. 1040) +Surya-deva (born 1191), Bhata-prakasha +Parameshvara (c. 1380-1460), Bhata-dipika or Bhata-pradipika +Nila-kantha (c. 1444-1545) +Yallaya (c. 1482) +Raghu-natha (c. 1590) +Ghati-gopa +Bhuti-vishnu +Telugu language +Virupaksha Suri +Kodanda-rama (c. 1854) +The estimate of the diameter of the Earth in the Tarkīb al-aflāk of Yaqūb ibn Tāriq, of 2,100 farsakhs, appears to be derived from the estimate of the diameter of the Earth in the Aryabhatiya of 1,050 yojanas. +The work was translated into Arabic as Zij al-Arjabhar (c. 800) by an anonymous author. The work was translated into Arabic around 820 by Al-Khwarizmi, whose On the Calculation with Hindu Numerals was in turn influential in the adoption of the Hindu-Arabic numeral system in Europe from the 12th century. +Aryabhata's methods of astronomical calculations have been in continuous use for practical purposes of fixing the Panchangam (Hindu calendar). + +== Apparent errors in Aryabhata's statements == +O'Connor and Robertson state: "Aryabhata gives formulae for the areas of a triangle and of a circle which are correct, but the formulae for the volumes of a sphere and of a pyramid are claimed to be wrong by most historians". For example Ganitanand describes as "mathematical lapses" the fact that Aryabhata gives the incorrect formula V = Ah/2 (instead of V=Ah/3) for the volume of a pyramid with height h and triangular base of area A. He also appears to give an incorrect expression for the volume of a sphere. However, Elfering argues that this is not an error but rather the result of an incorrect translation. This relates to verses 6, 7, and 10 of the second section of the Aryabhatiya, with Elfering producing a translation which yields the correct answer for both the volume of a pyramid and for a sphere. However, in his translation Elfering translates two technical terms in a different way to the meaning which they usually have. + +== See also == +Aryabhata's sine table +Indian astronomy + +== References == + +William J. Gongol. The Aryabhatiya: Foundations of Indian Mathematics. University of Northern Iowa. +Hugh Thurston, "The Astronomy of Āryabhata" in his Early Astronomy, New York: Springer, 1996, pp. 178–189. ISBN 0-387-94822-8 +O'Connor, John J.; Robertson, Edmund F., "Aryabhata", MacTutor History of Mathematics Archive, University of St Andrews University of St Andrews. + +== External links == + +The Āryabhaṭīya of Āryabhaṭa at the Internet Archive (1930) translated into English by Walter Eugene Clark \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..152d4f540 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 1/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Astronomia nova (English: New Astronomy, full title in original Latin: Astronomia Nova ΑΙΤΙΟΛΟΓΗΤΟΣ seu physica coelestis, tradita commentariis de motibus stellae Martis ex observationibus G.V. Tychonis Brahe) is a book, published in 1609, that contains the results of the astronomer Johannes Kepler's ten-year-long investigation of the motion of Mars. +One of the most significant books in the history of astronomy, the Astronomia nova provided strong arguments for heliocentrism and contributed valuable insight into the movement of the planets. This included the first mention of the planets' elliptical paths and the change of their movement to the movement of free floating bodies as opposed to objects on rotating spheres. It is recognized as one of the most important works of the Scientific Revolution. + +== Background == +Prior to Kepler, Nicolaus Copernicus proposed in 1543 that the Earth and other planets orbit the Sun. The Copernican model of the Solar System was regarded as a device to explain the observed positions of the planets rather than a physical description. +Kepler sought for and proposed physical causes for planetary motion. His work is primarily based on the research of his mentor, Tycho Brahe. The two, though close in their work, had a tumultuous relationship. Regardless, in 1601 on his deathbed, Brahe asked Kepler to make sure that he did not "die in vain," and to continue the development of his model of the Solar System. Kepler would instead write the Astronomia nova, in which he rejects the Tychonic system, as well as the Ptolemaic system and the Copernican system. Some scholars have speculated that Kepler's dislike for Brahe may have had a hand in his rejection of the Tychonic system and formation of a new one. +By 1602, Kepler set to work on determining the orbit pattern of Mars, keeping David Fabricius informed of his progress. He suggested the possibility of an oval orbit to Fabricius by early 1604, though was not believed. Later in the year, Kepler wrote back with his discovery of Mars's elliptical orbit. The manuscript for Astronomia nova was completed by September 1607, and was in print by August 1609. + +== Structure and summary == + +In English, the full title of his work is the New Astronomy, Based upon Causes, or Celestial Physics, Treated by Means of Commentaries on the Motions of the Star Mars, from the Observations of Tycho Brahe, Gent. For over 650 pages (in the English translation), Kepler walks his readers, step by step, through his process of discovery. The work is divided into 5 parts, and contains a total of 70 chapters. + +=== Part 1 === +In the first part, Kepler examines the relationship between the various astronomical hypotheses that were in use at the time. +In chapters 1-3, He shows that the heliocentric, geocentric and Tychonic models are all mathematically equivalent in that they predict the same angular positions of celestial object, and the variation in distance for any planet are also the same in all three models. This is so because the epicycle in the geocentric model plays the same role as the orbit of the Earth in heliocentric model and the orbit of the sun in Tycho's model. But the motion of the planets is observed to be non-uniform, even if we ignore the effects of the epicycle or the Earth's motion. Ptolemy and Copernicus had two different explanations for this. Ptolemy used an equant and eccentric circle, whereas Copernicus realized that he could combine two epicycles to explain the same effect. Kepler showed, however, that Copernicus' explanation is simply equivalent to an equant point with a non-circular orbit. The difference in the predictions between the two explanations were minor and are for practical purposes equivalent. +In chapters 4-6, Kepler considers a more physically plausible explanation for the non-uniform motion. He considers that the speed of the planet varies inversely with its distance from the sun. This explanation is shown, by calculation, to be consistent with the predictions of the equant or Copernicus' epicycles. But it requires Kepler to assume that the line of apsides for all planets intersect at the sun, whereas Ptolemy and Copernicus had assumed this point to be the center of the orbit of the earth/sun, which was referred to as the mean sun. The difference between the predictions is minor but is amplified if the effect of the Earth's orbit is accounted for, in which case the difference could get as high as + + + + 1 + ∘ + + + {\textstyle 1\circ } + +, which was certainly measurable. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..18658021a --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 2/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Part 2 === +In part 2, Kepler introduces the vicarious Hypothesis, his first hypothesis to explain the motion of Mars. +In chapters 7-10, Kepler tells the story of how he was introduced to the problem of Mars' orbit. Tycho and his assistant had been working on a theory of Mars, but they had failed to accurately account for the observed position of Mars. Tycho's observational data included 12 oppositions of Mars, for which he had determined its position in ecliptic longitude and latitude. They had managed to fit a theory to the observed ecliptic longitudes accurate to within 2 minutes of arc, yet it failed completely to account for the ecliptic latitudes. Kepler was then tasked with determining a more accurate theory to match this observational data. +His first step was to establish a precise definition of opposition. Since planets do not orbit in the same plane, in general they never reach precisely + + + + 180 + ∘ + + + {\textstyle 180\circ } + + in angular separation. Ptolemy had assumed the planet reaches opposition when its ecliptic longitude is 180 degrees from the mean position of the sun. This definition ignores the ecliptic latitude, so when constructing the table of oppositions, Tycho's assistant suggested a correction to account for this, by instead measuring when the angle between the sun and one of the nodes along the ecliptic, was equal to the angle between planet and the opposite node measured along the path of the planet. But Kepler showed this correction to be erroneous for two reasons. First, the path of the planet as seen from the Earth is not the same as seen from the sun, and second, the ecliptic longitude of Mars as seen from the sun will not be the same as the ecliptic longitude of the Earth. The whole point of using oppositions is to eliminate the effect of the Earth's orbit, so that when we observe Mars from Earth, its position will be the same as if we observed it from the sun. So this error, which Kepler shows to be as high as 9 arcminutes, defeats the purpose of the correction. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-10.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-10.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..646b7f0d9 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-10.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 11/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The sphere of the attractive virtue which is in the moon extends as far as the earth, and entices up the waters; but as the moon flies rapidly across the zenith, and the waters cannot follow so quickly, a flow of the ocean is occasioned in the torrid zone towards the westward. If the attractive virtue of the moon extends as far as the earth, it follows with greater reason that the attractive virtue of the earth extends as far as the moon and much farther; and, in short, nothing which consists of earthly substance anyhow constituted although thrown up to any height, can ever escape the powerful operation of this attractive virtue. + +Kepler also clarifies the concept of lightness in terms of relative density, in opposition to the Aristotelian concept of the absolute nature or quality of lightness as follows. His argument could easily be applied today to something like the flight of a hot air balloon. + +Nothing which consists of corporeal matter is absolutely light, but that is comparatively lighter which is rarer, either by its own nature, or by accidental heat. And it is not to be thought that light bodies are escaping to the surface of the universe while they are carried upwards, or that they are not attracted by the earth. They are attracted, but in a less degree, and so are driven outwards by the heavy bodies; which being done, they stop, and are kept by the earth in their own place. + +In reference to Kepler's discussion relating to gravitation, Walter William Bryant makes the following statement in his book Kepler (1920). + +...the Introduction to Kepler's "Commentaries on the Motion of Mars," always regarded as his most valuable work, must have been known to Newton, so that no such incident as the fall of an apple was required to provide a necessary and sufficient explanation of the genesis of his Theory of Universal Gravitation. Kepler's glimpse at such a theory could have been no more than a glimpse, for he went no further with it. This seems a pity, as it is far less fanciful than many of his ideas, though not free from the "virtues" and "animal faculties," that correspond to Gilbert's "spirits and humours". + +Kepler considered that this attraction was mutual and was proportional to the bulk of the bodies, but he considered it to have a limited range and he did not consider whether or how this force may have varied with distance. Furthermore, this attraction only acted between "kindred bodies"—bodies of a similar nature, a nature which he did not clearly define. Kepler's idea differed significantly from Newton's later concept of gravitation and it can be "better thought of as an episode in the struggle for heliocentrism than as a step toward Universal gravitation." +Kepler sent Galileo the book while the latter was working on his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems (published in 1632, two years after Kepler's death). Galileo had been trying to determine the path of an object falling from rest towards the center of the Earth, but used a semicircular orbit in his calculation. + +== Commemoration == +The 2009 International Year of Astronomy commemorated the 400th anniversary of the publication of this work. + +== Notes == + +== References == +Johannes Kepler, New Astronomy, translated by William H. Donahue, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Pr., 1992. ISBN 0-521-30131-9 +Kepler's Astronomia Nova +cosmology & astronomy + +== External links == +Astronomia nova by Johannes Kepler, 1609, in Latin, full text scan +Astronomia nova by Johannes Kepler, 1609, in Latin, full text at archive.org +Origins of Modernity - Kepler: Astronomia nova \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..5534d2c38 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,227 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 3/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The actual correction Kepler shows to be less than 1 minute of arc, which is smaller than the error in Tycho's observations, and for practical purposes can be ignored. So, opposition can be defined as the moment when the ecliptic longitude of the sun and Mars are + + + + 180 + ∘ + + + {\textstyle 180\circ } + + apart. Although the ecliptic longitude of Mars is the same from the Earth and sun at this point, the same is not true for the ecliptic latitude. In the diagram above + + + + G + + + {\textstyle G} + + is the sun, + + + + H + + + {\textstyle H} + + is the Earth and + + + + I + + + {\textstyle I} + + is Mars. The line + + + + G + H + + + {\textstyle GH} + + is in the plane of the ecliptic. The angle + + + + β + + + {\textstyle \beta } + + is the angle that Mars appears above the ecliptic when viewed from Earth; this is the ecliptic latitude. The angle + + + + α + + + {\textstyle \alpha } + + is the ecliptic latitude viewed from the sun, which is smaller than + + + + β + + + {\textstyle \beta } + +. The relation between these angles tells us something about the ratio of the Earth-sun distance + + + + G + H + + + {\textstyle GH} + + and the Mars-Sun distance + + + + G + I + + + {\textstyle GI} + +. +In chapter 11, Kepler attempts to determine the parallax of Mars. As Mars is close to the Earth, its position in the sky will appear to change slightly as the observer's position changes throughout the day, even if it is otherwise stationary. This effect, called parallax, would be greatest when Mars is at opposition, since at that time Mars is at its closest point to the Earth. The existing estimates of the distance to the sun, based largely on Aristarchus' method, suggested the parallax could be as high as 6 minutes of arc, but Kepler's own attempts to determine parallax gave values that were less than 2 arc minutes. +In chapters 12-14, Kepler determines the longitude of Mars' ascending and descending nodes and the orbital inclination of Mars. To find the nodes, Kepler looks for observations of Mars where its ecliptic latitude is close to + + + + 0 + + + {\textstyle 0} + +, then use interpolation to find the exact moment when it is zero and uses then use existing tables such as the Prutenic tables (which were based on Copernicus' theory) to compute the longitude of Mars at that time. Kepler located the ascending node at + + + + + 225 + + ∘ + + + 44 + + + + 1 + 2 + + + ′ + + + + {\textstyle 225^{\circ }44{\frac {1}{2}}'} + + and the descending node at + + + + + 46 + + ∘ + + + + + + 1 + 8 + + + ′ + + + + {\displaystyle 46^{\circ }{\frac {1}{8}}'} + +. These values are not precisely + + + + + 180 + + ∘ + + + + + {\displaystyle 180^{\circ }} + + apart. The longitudes in the Prutenic tables were measured from the mean sun. Kepler argues that if they were measured from the sun's actual position instead the values would be + + + + + 180 + + ∘ + + + + + {\displaystyle 180^{\circ }} + + apart. +The Prutenic tables also provided distances to the planets. This allows Kepler to solve the triangle in figure 1 above to compute heliocentric latitude from the observed geocentric latitude, from which he could deduce the orbital inclination of Mars by observing Mars when its latitude was greatest and computing its heliocentric latitude. He finds the orbital inclination to be + + + + + 1 + + ∘ + + + + 50 + ′ + + + + {\displaystyle 1^{\circ }50'} + +. This also allowed Kepler to demonstrate the important fact that plane of Mars orbit does not wobble in any way as many theories before him had suggested. Using observations from various points, he shows the orbital inclination is constant. +In chapter 15, Kepler recomputes Tycho's 12 oppositions, so as to determine the precise moment Mars's ecliptic longitude is + + + + + 180 + + ∘ + + + + + {\textstyle 180^{\circ }} + + from the sun. For each observation, he determines the ecliptic longitude and latitude of Mars as seen from the Earth, and the time when opposition occurs. +In chapter 16, Kepler constructs his first model, the vicarious hypothesis, to account for the observations. This is a modification of the equant model of Ptolemy. In this model, the planet is assumed to move on a circular orbit, and the speed on the orbit varies in such a way that it appears uniform from some point called the equant. The line connecting the equant and the center of the circle is called the line of apsides, and it intersect the circle at two points, one where the planet moves at its fastest speed called the aphelion and the other where the planet moves at its slowest speed called the perihelion. +For his model, Ptolemy had assumed that the center of the circle lies exactly halfway between the equant and the point from which opposition is measured (which for Kepler is the sun), this model is called bisected eccentricity. Kepler however considers the more general hypothesis that the center of the circle can be placed at any point along the line of apsides between the sun and the equant. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..eac325c9f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,340 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 4/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +In the diagram above, let + + + + A + + + {\textstyle A} + + be the sun, + + + + B + + + {\textstyle B} + + be the center of the circular orbit, and + + + + C + + + {\textstyle C} + + be the equant point. The points + + + + I + + + {\textstyle I} + + and + + + + H + + + {\textstyle H} + + are the perihelion and aphelion respectively. Let + + + + G + + + {\textstyle G} + + be the position of Mars at a particular observation. The angle + + + + ∠ + G + A + H + + + {\textstyle \angle GAH} + + Kepler refers to as the true anomaly, and the angle + + + + ∠ + G + C + H + + + {\textstyle \angle GCH} + + the mean anomaly. For any observation, the true anomaly could be deduced if we knew the longitude of aphelion, by finding the difference between this and the longitude of the observation. The mean anomaly could be deduced if we knew the time when Mars it at aphelion, and by using the fact the Mars, viewed from the equant, traverses equal angles in equal times. If the true anomaly and the mean anomaly were known, we could likewise determine the location of the point + + + + G + + + {\textstyle G} + + by finding where the lines drawn from + + + + B + + + {\textstyle B} + + and + + + + A + + + {\textstyle A} + + intersect. For the purposes of calculation, we can take the length of the line + + + + + + + C + A + + ¯ + + + + + {\textstyle {\overline {CA}}} + + to be + + + + 1 + + + {\textstyle 1} + +. +Kepler's procedure is to take for 4 observations of Mars at opposition. By taking an initial guess for the longitude of aphelion and the time of aphelion, values could be computed for the mean anomaly and true anomaly of each observation, from which the location of Mars at each observation could be determined by the intersection of the lines + + + + + + + A + G + + ¯ + + + + + {\textstyle {\overline {AG}}} + + and + + + + + + + C + G + + ¯ + + + + + {\textstyle {\overline {CG}}} + +. If the 4 points do not lie on a circle, then the line of apsides + + + + H + I + + + {\textstyle HI} + + is rotated about the point + + + + A + + + {\textstyle A} + +; this shifts the values for the true anomalies, until all 4 points lie on a circle. Then if the center of the circle + + + + B + + + {\textstyle B} + + is not on the line of apsides, the line + + + + H + I + + + {\textstyle HI} + + is rotated about the point + + + + C + + + {\textstyle C} + + until the point + + + + B + + + {\textstyle B} + + falls on the line of apsides; this shifts the values for the mean anomalies. But doing this also shifts the position of the points so that they no longer fall on a circle. This procedure is repeated again and again until all 4 points fall on a circle and the center of the circle + + + + B + + + {\textstyle B} + + falls on the line of apsides + + + + H + I + + + {\textstyle HI} + +. This iterative process takes a long time to converge. In describing the procedure, Kepler writes: + +If thou art bored with this wearisome method of calculation, take pity on me, who had to go through with at least seventy repetitions of it, at a very great loss of time. +At the end of the procedure, Kepler calculates the parameters for the model. He determines the longitude of aphelion as + + + + + 148 + + ∘ + + + 9 + + + {\textstyle 148^{\circ }9} + +. The eccentricity of the circle is defined to be the distance from the center of the circle to the sun + + + + + + + A + B + + ¯ + + + + + {\textstyle {\overline {AB}}} + +, divided by the radius of the circle + + + + + + + H + B + + ¯ + + + + + {\textstyle {\overline {HB}}} + +, the value Kepler determines to be + + + + 0.11332 + + + {\textstyle 0.11332} + +. The eccentricity of the equant is defined as + + + + + + + C + B + + ¯ + + + + + {\textstyle {\overline {CB}}} + + divided by the radius of the circle, which he finds to be equal to + + + + 0.07232 + + + {\textstyle 0.07232} + +. The sum of these values is referred to as the total eccentricity. +In chapter 17, Kepler makes a small correction for the fact that the longitude of aphelion and nodes are not constant but shift slowly over time. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-4.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-4.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..20bedcba5 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-4.md @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 5/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +In chapters 18-21, Kepler compares the theory to observations. First, he compares the longitude of the remaining 8 oppositions and finds that they all fit the predicted position of Mars to within Tycho's observational accuracy of two minutes of arc. This means that the vicarious hypothesis can be taken as an accurate theory for the true anomaly. Despite this remarkable accuracy, however, Kepler shows that the theory is false. He remarks:Who would have thought it possible? This hypothesis, so closely in agreement with the observations, is nevertheless false. +Using the latitudes of the opposition and the latitude triangle from figure 1, Kepler is able to find the ratio of the Earth and Mars distances from the sun. The Earth-Sun distances + + + + G + H + + + {\textstyle GH} + + are taken from an existing theory given by Tycho Brahe in his Progymnasmata, even though these values are not precisely correct, and the goal of the next part will be to determine a more accurate theory for the Earth's motion. The angles + + + + ∠ + I + H + E + + + {\textstyle \angle IHE} + + are determined by the latitude of the observations, and the angle + + + + I + G + H + + + {\textstyle IGH} + + is determined from the orbital inclination and the angle between Mars and the node. From this, the remaining sides can be determined, and the distances. By computing such distances, he obtained a lower and upper estimate for the eccentricity of Mars: + + + + 0.08 + + + {\displaystyle 0.08} + + – + + + + 0.09943 + + + {\displaystyle 0.09943} + +. The eccentricity found in the vicarious hypothesis is outside this range. +Kepler then examines another method for determining distances to Mars, by using observations of Mars when it is not at opposition and determining the longitude of Mars. The angle between the sun and Mars as viewed from Earth can be determined from observations. Tycho made many observations of Mars when it is not at opposition and determined the difference in ecliptic longitude between the sun and Mars in the sky. The angle between Mars and the Earth as viewed from the sun can be determined by calculating the heliocentric longitude of Mars from the vicarious hypothesis, and that of the Earth from Tycho's theory and taking the difference. And the distance from the Earth to the sun is given from Tycho's theory. Thus, the Earth, sun and Mars form a triangle, where two angles are known, and one side is given, the remaining sides and angles can be computed. In particular, we can determine the Earth-Mars distance. Computing these distances, Kepler once again finds an eccentricity closer to + + + + 0.09 + + + {\displaystyle 0.09} + +, half the value of the total eccentricity (sum of that of the equant plus that of the circle). + +Kepler repeats the calculation where he substituted the mean sun in place of the true sun, to show that exactly the same thing arises in such case. So, the hypothesis of the true sun cannot be at fault. As a final recourse, Kepler considers what would happen if we substituted bisected eccentricity into the vicarious hypothesis (i.e. let the eccentricity of the circle be half the total eccentricity), which is + + + + 0.09282 + + + {\textstyle 0.09282} + +. When he compares this model to the observations of oppositions, he finds the error now increases to 8 minutes of arc, which is greater than Tycho's observational error. He writes:Now, because they could not be disregarded, these eight minutes alone will lead us along a path to the reform of the whole of Astronomy, and they are the matter for a great part of this work.The inconsistency in determining the eccentricity means that at least one of the assumptions that went into constructing the vicarious hypothesis must be false: either the orbit is not circular, or there is no equant point a fixed distance away from the center of the circle. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-5.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-5.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9cc6230ba --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-5.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 6/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Part 3 === +In the third part, Kepler aims to determine an accurate theory for the motion of the Earth, which will be the steppingstone for determining a more accurate theory for Mars in the next section. In chapters 22-27, Kepler shows that the Earth does not move uniformly about the center of its orbit. The primary observations for determining the Earth's motion around the sun are direct observations of the sun; its ecliptic longitude as seen from the Earth is the opposite to that seen from the sun. Remarkably, uniform circular motion can match these observations to within an accuracy of one minute of arc, less than the accuracy of Tycho's observation. Tycho himself determined the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit based on his observations and the assumption of uniform circular motion to be + + + + 0.03584 + + + {\textstyle 0.03584} + +. Using the observations of Mars, Kepler finds several methods to show that the eccentricity of the Earth's orbit calculated, on the basis of uniform circular motion, cannot possibly be correct. One method that Kepler uses is based on the fact that after one complete orbit, Mars returns to exactly the same physical location. Since the orbital period of Mars is 687 days, we find observations of Mars that are spaced 687 days apart. If we assume the existence of a fixed point in space from which the motion of the Earth appears uniform, then the distance from Mars to that point is fixed (since the position of Mars is also fixed) . The angle between Earth and Mars as seen from the equant, can be computed from the Earth's mean anomaly and the fact that the observed angle from the equant changes at a uniform rate. The angle between the Mars and the equant as seen from Earth can be computed from the observed position of Mars, and the fact that this imaginary equant point would appear to move uniformly when viewed from Earth; we can therefore use the Earth's mean anomaly. For this purpose, Kepler makes use of Tycho's tables which are calculated from the sun's mean position. From a given distance, and two angles we can solve the triangle. From the observations Kepler shows that the distance from the Earth to the equant is not fixed. Therefore, if the Earth's orbit is circular, it cannot be centered on the point from which its motion is uniform. The equant is thus distinct from the center of the Earth's orbit. Kepler additionally uses various other constructions to show that the real eccentricity of the Earth's orbit is close to + + + + 0.018 + + + {\textstyle 0.018} + +, precisely half the value computed from the assumption of uniform circular motion. In chapter 28, Kepler shows a method to test the correctness of the hypothesis for the Earth's orbit. This is essentially the + + + + 687 + + + {\textstyle 687} + + days method in reverse. Compute the distance and angle to the Earth from our hypothesis. Use the observed angles of Mars, and the computed angles from our theory to make the same triangle, except this time the distance to the Earth is given, and we solve for the distance and the heliocentric longitude of Mars. If our hypothesis is correct, then for each observation, the calculated distance to Mars and heliocentric longitude must be exactly the same. This method also allows us to test the critical assumption that Mars really does return to the exact same position after one revolution in its orbit. In chapters 29-30, Kepler briefly mentions two other ways he had shown that the eccentricity of the Earth should be bisected. First he had measured the angular diameter of the sun in the winter (near perihelion) and summer (near aphelion) and computed the relative distances, which gives an eccentricity consistent with half of Tycho's value. He had also shown in his Mysterium Cosmographicum that the distances of his nested polyhedra hypothesis would match the observations better if he assumed the eccentricity is half what Tycho proposes. He then proceeds to construct the table for computing the Earth's position based on the eccentricity of 0.018. He admits, in constructing this table, the use of a non-circular orbit, but the theory for that is developed later on. In chapters 31-36, Kepler considers the reason for this bisection of the eccentricity. The bisection has been shown accurate for the Earth and Mars from the observations. The bisection is also used for the planets Jupiter and Saturn in all theories since Ptolemy. Likewise, Tycho Brahe had shown that this model works well for the moon too. When constructing a theory for Venus and Mercury, Copernicus had added a small epicycle to the orbit that had a period of revolution equal to the orbit of the Earth. Kepler shows that this epicycle can be removed if we bisect the eccentricities of Venus and Mercury as well. Thus the hypothesis of bisected eccentricity is valid for all planets and for the moon. Since this constitutes a universal law, valid for all planets, Kepler finds it necessary to seek the physical cause of this bisection. Kepler starts by computing the speed of the planet at aphelion and perihelion from this bisected eccentricity model; the result shows that the ratio of the speeds at these points is equal to the inverse ratio of the distances. From this, he introduces the hypothesis that the speed of the planet is inversely proportional to its distance from the sun. Kepler then argues this variation in speed must be the result of a force from the sun. To explain why each planet has a different speed than would otherwise be predicted from extending this inverse distance law to all the planets, Kepler postulates that each planet has its own resistance to the force generated by the sun (a concept similar to inertia). Finally, Kepler establishes magnetism as the likely cause for this force, because it has a similar property of a force weakening with distance. In addition to this, the existence of a magnetic field had recently been discovered for Earth. He therefore suggests the Earth's rotation causes the motion of the moon, and likewise, if the sun too rotates and has a magnetic field, this will be the cause of the planets motion. In chapter 37, Kepler briefly touches on the subject of Lunar theory. The orbit of the moon required two additional inequalities to explain its motion, these are evection and variation. Kepler argues that both these can be explained by the fact that the moon speeds up in its orbit when it forms a straight line with the Earth and sun. Thus, both the forces from the sun and Earth combine together to move the moon when it is aligned with them in this configuration. In chapters 38-39, Kepler gives an explanation for why the orbits of the planets are not concentric with the sun. He considers that each planet has its own magnetic force which pushes and pulls it away from the sun, depending on how its poles are oriented with respect to the sun. The physical line of reasoning given also hints at the possibility that the orbit is not circular. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-6.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-6.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..a2d85b568 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-6.md @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 7/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +In chapter 40, Kepler gives a method for computing the orbit of the Earth based on these physical hypotheses. Kepler notes the extreme difficulty that arises when trying to compute the speed of the planet as the distance is constantly changing. For this reason, he introduces a shortcut, inspired by Archimedes' method of computing pi. If we break the orbit up into little triangles drawn from the sun, then the distance the planet travels is given by the base of the triangle, and the distance from the sun is given by the height of the triangle. If we choose triangles that divide the planet's motion into equal units of time, then the triangles are shown to have equal area, because as the height decreases, the base must increase by the same amount, as the planet moves faster, and vice versa. Kepler therefore introduces his law of areas, equal areas correspond to equal times. To calculate the orbit from this, we define the mean anomaly as the time since planet has last reached aphelion divided by the orbital period times 360 degrees. The true anomaly is defined as the angle between the planet and aphelion as viewed from the sun, and eccentric anomaly is the same angle viewed from the center of the orbit. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-7.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-7.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d1d148d33 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-7.md @@ -0,0 +1,241 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 8/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +In the diagram above, + + + + A + + + {\textstyle A} + + is the sun and + + + + B + + + {\textstyle B} + + is the center of the circle; + + + + G + + + {\textstyle G} + + is aphelion and + + + + D + + + {\textstyle D} + + is the planet. The area of the sector + + + + G + A + D + + + {\textstyle GAD} + + is the area swept by the line drawn from the planet to the sun. From the area law, this is proportional to the time that the planet has traversed the segment + + + + G + D + + + {\textstyle GD} + + in its orbit, and therefore also the mean anomaly. Thus the area + + + + G + A + D + + + {\textstyle GAD} + + gives the mean anomaly. The eccentric anomaly is defined by the angle + + + + ∠ + G + B + D + + + {\textstyle \angle GBD} + +. Since the angle of a sector, centered on a circle, is always proportional to its area, we can also express this by the area + + + + G + B + D + + + {\textstyle GBD} + +. The relation between these two areas gives the relation between the mean anomaly (and therefore time) and eccentric anomaly. +From the diagram, it is clear that the mean anomaly is simply the eccentric anomaly plus the area of the triangle + + + + D + A + B + + + {\textstyle DAB} + +. The base of this triangle + + + + + + + A + B + + ¯ + + + + + {\textstyle {\overline {AB}}} + + is the eccentricity of the circle, and the height of the triangle is proportional to sine of the eccentric anomaly. This is the Kepler equation. If we write + + + + M + + + {\textstyle M} + + for the mean anomaly, + + + + E + + + {\textstyle E} + + for the eccentric anomaly, and + + + + e + + + {\textstyle e} + + for the eccentricity, then this can be written as: + + + + + M + = + E + + + e + sin + ⁡ + ( + E + ) + + + {\displaystyle M=E+e\sin(E)} + + +Kepler further shows that the true anomaly is given by the eccentric anomaly plus the angle + + + + ∠ + D + B + A + + + {\textstyle \angle DBA} + +. Kepler refers to the angle + + + + ∠ + D + B + A + + + {\textstyle \angle DBA} + + as the optical equation. For low eccentricities, this angle is approximately twice the area of the triangle + + + + D + B + A + + + {\textstyle DBA} + +. If we write the true anomaly as + + + + ϑ + + + {\textstyle \vartheta } + +, this gives the formula: + + + + + ϑ + ≈ + E + + + 2 + e + sin + ⁡ + ( + E + ) + + + {\displaystyle \vartheta \approx E+2e\sin(E)} + \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-8.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-8.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8d47ef457 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-8.md @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 9/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Part 4 === +In part 4, Kepler develops an accurate theory to account for the motion of Mars based on the observations and the physical hypotheses that were laid out in the previous section. +In chapters 41-44, Kepler proves that the orbit of Mars is not a circle. The procedure once again uses the fact that the Earth, sun and Mars form a triangle. The Earth-sun distance can now be calculated accurately from the theory developed in the previous section, and the heliocentric longitude of Mars is determined from the vicarious hypothesis. For any given observation of Mars, the position of Mars can now be plotted accurately using the following procedure: plot the position of Earth using the theory developed in the previous section. Then, draw a line extending from the sun in the direction given by the vicarious hypothesis. Draw a line from the Earth in the direction corresponding to the heliocentric longitude that Mars is observed. The intersection between these two lines is the position of Mars. Finally, a correction is made for the fact that Mars is not in the plane of the ecliptic when observed, by using the latitude determined from the sun. By plotting several points of Mars on its orbit, Kepler shows the path of Mars is smaller at the sides than the best fit circle. thus, the path is an oval. +In chapters 45-50, Kepler attempts to find the physical cause of deviation of the planet from a perfect circular path. He considers the following model: the magnetic rays from the rotating sun move the planet in a circular path. But the planet's own internal magnetic force causes it to move on a circle of its own, creating an epicycle. The motion of the planet on this epicycle is uniform, while the motion of the planet around the sun is non-uniform, its speed being given by the law of area. This motion should create an oval path. +Constructing this oval is extremely difficult however, so Kepler settles on another idea: compute the distances of the planet from its epicycle and use the vicarious hypothesis to determine the direction of the planet from the sun. The oval path that is constructed by this method is slightly wider at the perihelion than at aphelion, so this orbit is properly an egg shape. In order to make use of his law of areas, Kepler needs to determine the area of this egg shape, which is not a trivial problem. Kepler approximates the oval as an ellipse, noting that the area should not differ significantly from the oval. +When Kepler compares this model to the observations, however, he finds an error of 8 minutes of arc in predicted longitudes. This is the same error which was found in the bisected eccentricity model. However, where the bisected eccentricity predicted the planet ahead of its true position, the oval would predict it behind, so the errors were in the opposite direction. After rejecting various possible sources of error in his calculations, Kepler comes to the conclusion that the real path of the planet must lay halfway between bisected eccentricity model and the oval path. This also brings into question physical principles on which this hypothesis is based. +In chapters 51-55, Kepler takes several pairs of observations of Mars that are symmetric along the line of apsides. These observations confirm that the distances to Mars are the same on either side and thus confirms that the line of apsides drawn through the sun is correct, which confirms his physical hypothesis. By taking several of these observations, spaced 687 days apart, Kepler is able to adjust the parameters of Mars orbit until the distances match. Doing this allows him to find more accurate distances for Mars. But the observations also force him to question the accuracy of the vicarious hypothesis outside of opposition observations. So, Kepler takes observations of Mars close to opposition, where the vicarious hypothesis could be trusted. After adjusting the parameters of the orbit until the distances line up, he finds that the distances at the sides are exactly halfway between what is predicted by the oval and the bisected eccentricity model. +In chapters 56-60, Kepler tells the story of how he finally arrived at the correct path for the orbit of Mars. He had noticed that the maximum deviation of the true anomaly and the eccentric anomaly was + + + + + 5.3 + + ∘ + + + + + {\displaystyle 5.3^{\circ }} + +; he refers to this as the optical equation. The secant of this is + + + + 1.00429 + + + {\displaystyle 1.00429} + +, which represented an accurate fit to the deviation of Mars' path from a circle, which he had earlier determined from the observations to be about + + + + 0.43 + % + + + {\displaystyle 0.43\%} + +. He considers the possibility that the distances might be given by the secant of optical equation at other points in its orbit. When computing the numbers, he realized that he had seen them before in an earlier calculation which involved projecting the orbit of Mars on the diameter of an epicycle. +Thus, Kepler declares that the Mars moves as if it is oscillating on the diameter of an epicycle. He examines a possible physical mechanism that could cause such a thing, and he finds that the same mechanism he outlined in Chapter 39 works: the planets' magnetic force pushes or pulls depending on the orientation of its poles. This oscillating motion is shown to be proportional to + + + + cos + ⁡ + ( + E + ) + + + {\textstyle \cos(E)} + + , so that the radial distance from the sun is given by + + + + r + = + 1 + − + e + cos + ⁡ + ( + E + ) + + + {\textstyle r=1-e\cos(E)} + +, where + + + + E + + + {\textstyle E} + + is the eccentric anomaly, and + + + + e + + + {\textstyle e} + + is the eccentricity. What Kepler had just described here is essentially the formula for an ellipse in polar coordinates. However, when he attempted the construction, he made an error, resulting in a completely different orbit which did not match the observations. After returning to his method from earlier, he once again stumbled on the ellipse, only then did he realize his error. He writes: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-9.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-9.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ee924da9a --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova-9.md @@ -0,0 +1,115 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomia nova" +chunk: 10/11 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomia_nova" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:35.649868+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +I laid [the original equation] aside, and fell back on ellipses, believing that this was quite a different hypothesis, whereas the two, as I shall prove in the next chapter, are one in [sic] the same... Ah, what a foolish bird I have been! + +=== Part 5 === +In the final section, Kepler gives an accurate account of the ecliptic latitude of Mars. He also outlines a physical hypothesis to explain why the orbit of planets are not precisely in the same plane. +In chapters 61-62, Kepler determines the values for Mars' ascending and descending nodes. Using the distance to Earth and Mars computed from the previous section, and the observed geocentric latitude of Mars, Kepler is able to determine the heliocentric latitude of Mars at any point in its orbit. From this, Kepler determines each of the parameters using the same methods from chapters 11-14. For the ascending node he finds + + + + + 46 + + ∘ + + + 32 + + + + 1 + 2 + + + ′ + + + + {\textstyle 46^{\circ }32{\frac {1}{2}}'} + + and for the descending nodes + + + + + 226 + + ∘ + + + 32 + + + + 1 + 2 + + + ′ + + + + {\displaystyle 226^{\circ }32{\frac {1}{2}}'} + +. He also determines the orbital inclination to be + + + + + 1 + + ∘ + + + + 49 + ′ + + + + {\displaystyle 1^{\circ }49'} + +. +In chapter 63, Kepler gives a physical reason why the orbit of the planets are not in the same plane. He considers the idea that the rotation of the sun defines an invariable plane. All the planets are inclined at an angle to this plane, because the planets magnetic field are attracted to a fixed direction in space below this plane. +In chapter 64, Kepler shows that the parallax of Mars must be small. Had there been any noticeable parallax, it would have affected the apparent location of the ascending and descending nodes. But the measured values are exactly + + + + + 180 + + ∘ + + + + + {\displaystyle 180^{\circ }} + + apart. +In chapters 65-66, Kepler shows that the Mars does not reach closest to the Earth precisely at opposition, but the date of closest approach can be a few days before or after opposition. +In chapters 67-70, Kepler examines several questions relating to the long term behavior of the orbits of Earth and Mars, by comparing his observations with those from the time of Ptolemy. The imprecise nature of some of these observations, as well as the errors, makes it difficult to arrive at conclusive results at times. Some of these questions include: do the eccentricities of orbits change over time? or do the nodes precess at a non-uniform rate? + +== Kepler's laws == +The Astronomia nova records the discovery of the first two of the three principles known today as Kepler's laws of planetary motion, which are: + +That the planets move in elliptical orbits with the Sun at one focus. +That the speed of the planet changes at each moment such that the time between two positions is always proportional to the area swept out on the orbit between these positions. +Kepler discovered the "second law" before the first. He presented his second law in two different forms: In Chapter 32 he states that the speed of the planet varies inversely based upon its distance from the Sun, and therefore he could measure changes in position of the planet by adding up all the distance measures, or looking at the area along an orbital arc. This is his so-called "distance law". In Chapter 59, he states that a radius from the Sun to a planet sweeps out equal areas in equal times. This is his so-called "area law". +However, Kepler's "area-time principle" did not facilitate easy calculation of planetary positions. Kepler could divide up the orbit into an arbitrary number of parts, compute the planet's position for each one of these, and then refer all questions to a table, but he could not determine the position of the planet at each and every individual moment because the speed of the planet was always changing. This paradox, referred to as the "Kepler problem," prompted the development of calculus. +A decade after the publication of the Astronomia nova, Kepler discovered his "third law", published in his 1619 Harmonices Mundi (Harmonies of the world). He found that the ratio of the cube of the length of the semi-major axis of each planet's orbit, to the square of time of its orbital period, is the same for all planets. + +== Kepler's knowledge of gravity == + +In his introductory discussion of a moving earth, Kepler addressed the question of how the Earth could hold its parts together if it moved away from the center of the universe which, according to Aristotelian physics, was the place toward which all heavy bodies naturally moved. Kepler proposed an attractive force similar to magnetism, which may have been known by Newton. + +Gravity is a mutual corporeal disposition among kindred bodies to unite or join together; thus the earth attracts a stone much more than the stone seeks the earth. (The magnetic faculty is another example of this sort).... If two stones were set near one another in some place in the world outside the sphere of influence of a third kindred body, these stones, like two magnetic bodies, would come together in an intermediate place, each approaching the other by a space proportional to the bulk [moles] of the other.... For it follows that if the earth's power of attraction will be much more likely to extend to the moon and far beyond, and accordingly, that nothing that consists to any extent whatever of terrestrial material, carried up on high, ever escapes the grasp of this mighty power of attraction. +Kepler discusses the Moon's gravitational effect upon the tides as follows: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomicum_Caesareum-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomicum_Caesareum-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..075dafaa7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomicum_Caesareum-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "Astronomicum Caesareum" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomicum_Caesareum" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:36.856966+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Astronomicum Caesareum (Astronomy of the Caesars; also translated as The Emperor's Astronomy) is a book by Petrus Apianus first published in 1540. +Astronomicum was initially published in 1540. Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor, and his brother Ferdinand I, Holy Roman Emperor, both commissioned the work. It was printed at Apianus's press in Ingolstadt, Bavaria, and took eight years to produce. It expanded and changed when reprinted; the final version has 55 leaves. Apianus evidently changed his plans while producing a single edition. A volvelle in one version of Astronomicum has "an entirely irrelevant base of an astrolabe" underneath, suggesting that he considered creating one and then abandoned the idea. +Twenty-one of its 36 woodcuts are volvelles. Astronomicum's volvelles rely on a geocentric model of the universe. However, despite the false science on which they depended, knowledgeable readers could still use them to predict planetary movements. Nicolaus Copernicus published De revolutionibus orbium coelestium shortly after Astronomicum appeared, which began a transition to heliocentrism as the standard astronomical model. +Although other 16th-century books used volvelles, Astronomicum's are distinctive because they take precedence over the book's text, as opposed to serving as illustrations. According to Ronald Brashear and Daniel Lewis, Astronomicum is "really a scientific calculating instrument as much as a book". +A 1997 study reported that 111 copies of the book existed. Tycho Brahe bought one copy in 1599 which is in the collection of a library in Gotha, likely Forschungsbibliothek Gotha. + + +== Notes == + + +== Sources == +Brashear, Ronald; Lewis, Daniel (2001). Star Struck: One Thousand Years of the Art and Science of Astronomy. Huntington Library; University of Washington Press. ISBN 0-295-98097-4. OCLC 45393510. +Christianson, Scott (2012). 100 Diagrams that Changed the World: From the Earliest Cave Paintings to the Innovation of the iPod. Plume. ISBN 978-0-452-29877-4. OCLC 778419237. +Gingerich, Owen (1994). "Early Astronomical Books with Moving Parts". In Katz, William A. (ed.). A History of Book Illustration: 29 Points of View. Scarecrow Press. ISBN 0-8108-2742-5. OCLC 29595405. +Helfand, Jessica (2002). Reinventing the Wheel. Princeton Architectural Press. ISBN 1-56898-338-7. OCLC 48817585. + + +== External links == + Media related to Astronomicum Caesareum at Wikimedia Commons \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysics_for_People_in_a_Hurry-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysics_for_People_in_a_Hurry-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..09970f9dc --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysics_for_People_in_a_Hurry-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ +--- +title: "Astrophysics for People in a Hurry" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrophysics_for_People_in_a_Hurry" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:38.015967+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Astrophysics for People in a Hurry is a 2017 popular science book by Neil deGrasse Tyson, centering around a number of basic questions about the universe. Published on May 2, 2017, by W. W. Norton & Company, the book is a collection of Tyson's essays that appeared in Natural History magazine at various times from 1997 to 2007. + + +== Contents == +Neil deGrasse Tyson's Astrophysics for People in a Hurry is a popular introduction to the main concepts and issues of modern astrophysics. The author explains the origin and structure of the Universe, the force of gravity, light, dark matter and dark energy, about our place in the Cosmos and how we try to understand its laws. The book is written in a simple and lively language, using vivid analogies. It is intended for a wide range of readers who want to get a general idea of astrophysics without complex formulas and details. The book consists of 12 short chapters, based on essays published in Natural History magazine. + + +== Sales == +The book debuted at #1 on The New York Times Non-Fiction Best Seller list when it first appeared in May, 2017. It sold 48,416 copies in its first week, making it the second-most-purchased overall in the U.S. for that week (behind the children's fiction novel The Dark Prophecy). A year later, it remained in the top five and had sold in excess of one million copies. + + +== Reception == +In Kirkus Reviews, the reviewer praised Tyson's "down-to-earth wit" and stated that the book "shows once again [Tyson's] masterly skills at explaining complex scientific concepts in a lucid, readable fashion." +The book's accessible language is noted in a review in BBC Sky at Night magazine. The reviewer suggests that the reader who spends their time on Tyson's work, will have a good understanding of "every part of our known Universe, how it came to be and what still keeps physicists up at night". +Tyson was nominated for the Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Coelestis-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Coelestis-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..98722accb --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Coelestis-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +--- +title: "Atlas Coelestis" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Coelestis" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:39.210473+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Atlas Coelestis is a star atlas published posthumously in 1729, based on observations made by the First Astronomer Royal, John Flamsteed. +The Atlas – the largest that ever had been published and the first comprehensive telescopic star catalogue and companion celestial atlas – contains 26 maps of the major constellations visible from Greenwich, with drawings made in the Rococo style by James Thornhill. It also presents two planispheres designed by Abraham Sharp. + + +== History == + +The first stellar atlas based in telescopic observations, the Atlas Coelestis was published only ten years after the death of Flamsteed, by his widow, assisted by Joseph Crosthwait and Abraham Sharp. It was preceded by the opus "Stellarum inerrantium Catalogus Britannicus" (or simply "British Catalogue", published in 1725, with 2919 stars). +One of Flamsteed's main motivations to produce the Atlas, was to correct the representation of the figures of the constellations, as made by Bayer in his "Uranometria" (1603). Bayer represented the figures viewed from behind (not from the front, as was done since the time of Ptolemy), and these new positions contradicted the traditional star descriptions (i.e., Ptolemy's "star in the right shoulder" of Orion had become, in Bayer's rendering, the star in the left shoulder) and created unnecessary confusion. + +The publication enjoyed immediate success, becoming the standard reference for professional astronomers for nearly a century. Even so, three objections have been raised regarding it: the high price, great size (making it difficult to handle) and low artistic quality (many criticisms were made to the drawings by James Thornhill, particularly regarding the representation of Aquarius). +This led John Bevis to try to improve the Atlas. In 1745, he produced the "Uranographia Britannica", with smaller dimensions, updated with observations and more artistic pictures. However, this atlas was never officially published and at the present, there are only 16 known copies. + + +== The Atlas Fortin-Flamsteed == +Finally, the changes in the positions of stars (the original observations were made in the 1690s), led to an update made in 1776 by the French engineer Jean Nicolas Fortin, supervised by the astronomers Le Monnier and Messier, from the Royal Academy of Sciences in Paris. +The new version, called Atlas Fortin-Flamsteed, had 1/3 of the size of the original, but kept the same table structure. There is also some artistic retouching to some illustrations (mostly Andromeda, Virgo and Aquarius). Fortin called this the Second Edition because he regarded Flamsteed’s original as the First Edition. +The names of the constellations are in French (not in Latin) and the Atlas included some nebulae discovered after the death of Flamsteed. +In 1795, a third edition was published, produced by Pierre Méchain and Jérôme Lalande, with new constellations and many more nebulae. A Portuguese edition appeared in 1804, translated by the Portuguese astronomer and cartographer Francisco António Ciera (1763–1814). + + +== References == + + +== External links == + +"Atlas Coelestis". RareMaps.com. - scan of the 1st edition (1729) +"Atlas coelestis". National Library of Australia. Retrieved 8 May 2010. - full scan of the 2nd edition (1753) +"Atlas Céleste de Flamstéed". Utrecht University. - scan of the 3rd edition (1776) +Giangi Caglieris. "Flamsteed - Fortin Atlas Coeleste" (in English and Italian). Retrieved 8 May 2010. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Astronomy-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Astronomy-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e201fd166 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Astronomy-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ +--- +title: "Bad Astronomy" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_Astronomy" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:40.345989+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Bad Astronomy: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from Astrology to the Moon Landing "Hoax" is a non-fiction book by the American astronomer Phil Plait, who is also known as "the Bad Astronomer". The book was published in 2002 and deals with various misunderstandings about space and astronomy, such as sounds being audible in space (a misconception because in the vacuum of space, sound has no medium in which to propagate). +Plait's first book received generally favorable reviews within the academic and astronomy communities and was the first volume in the Bad Science series by John Wiley & Sons Publishing + + +== Overview == +Inspired by the author's web site, "Bad Astronomy", the book attempts to explore twenty-four common astronomical fallacies and explain the scientific consensus concerning these topics within the field of astronomy. +The book explains and corrects many ideas relating to space that, according to Plait, are mistaken but nevertheless often portrayed in popular movies. Plait also dedicates much of the book to debunking the idea of a Moon landing hoax and explains why astrology should not be taken seriously. A part of the book describes the Moon's tidal effects and explains the Coriolis effect, why the sky is blue, the Big Bang and other related topics. +Many of the book's topics and arguments also are found on Plait's page at the Slate magazine blog site, but Plait explores them in greater depth in the book. He states that the book is intended to debunk popular myths and also to describe science in an easily comprehensible way. + + +== Reception == +Tormod Guldvog writes in his review that "It is indeed a gem when it comes to teaching things about common astronomical phenomena. Plait discusses common ways bad astronomy is communicated, in the media, in the classroom, and perhaps, most of all, in our own minds." +Reviewing Bad Astronomy for the National Science Teachers Association, Deborah Teuscher, Director of Pike Planetarium, praised the work as "interesting, accurate, and fun to read," recommending the book as a resource for science teachers, scientifically interested lay persons, and high school and college students as a supplement to an astronomy unit. +Publishers Weekly gave a generally favorable review, stating of the planned John Wiley & Sons "Bad Science" series that "[i]f every entry in the series is as entertaining as Plait's, good science may have a fighting chance with the American public." +An April 2002 review for UniSci's "Daily University Science News" also praised Bad Astronomy as the "ideal accompaniment for International Astronomy Day (April 20)" and quoted the author, stating that it is "dangerous to be ignorant about science. Our lives and our livelihoods depend on it." +In an October 2002 review for Sky & Telescope, Bud Sadler praised Bad Astronomy for its humor, "easily understood explanations" and "simple demonstrations" to explain what he called "the most egregious examples of ill-informed astronomy." + + +== Content == + + +=== Bad Astronomy Begins at Home === +Part I of Bad Astronomy, "Bad Astronomy Begins at Home", focuses on examples of astronomical misconceptions that are typically associated with the household or classroom, including the effect of the equinox on an egg's ability to balance upright without falling onto its side, the Coriolis effect's rumored effect on direction of whirlpools in household plumbing, and astronomical misunderstandings inherent in common English idioms, such as "meteoric rise" and "dark side of the Moon". "Idiom's Delight", the chapter dealing with scientific inaccuracies that appear in everyday expressions, such as the phrase "light years ahead". + + +=== From the Earth to the Moon === +Part II of the book, "From the Earth to the Moon", focuses on Earth's orbit and atmosphere and the Moon, with particular emphasis on how photon scattering results in the sky appearing blue, the impact of axial tilt on seasons, the impact of the Moon's presence, and misconceptions regarding the "Moon Size Illusion", explaining why and how the Moon appears larger when closer to the horizon. + + +=== Skies at Night are Big and Bright === +Part III, "Skies at Night are Big and Bright", concentrates on the viewing of objects farther away than the radius of the Moon's orbit around Earth, including the optical "twinkle" effect when viewing some stars, the brightness and color of stars, observation of meteors and asteroids, and using astronomical observations to study the beginning of the universe. Plait's chapter on meteors and asteroids delves into terms and distinctions and explains, for example, "why small meteors are cold, not hot, when they hit the ground." + + +=== Artificial Intelligence === +Part IV, "Artificial Intelligence", attempts to tackle various conspiracy theories and alternate worldviews, including the so-called Moon Landing Hoax, Young-Earth Creationism, Immanuel Velikovsky's book Worlds in Collision (which asserts that a relatively young Venus was once a part of Jupiter), extraterrestrial claims regarding unidentified flying objects (UFOs), and astrology. In "Appalled at Apollo", the section devoted to Moon landing hoax conspiracy theories, Plait examines aspects of the hoax theory and compares its claims against basic laws of physics. Astronomical Society of the Pacific listed Chapter 17, "Appalled at Apollo", on a list of resources stating it was "good ammunition for debunking the notion that NASA never went to the Moon point by point." In the chapter "Misidentified Flying Objects", Plait discusses various ways that cameras sometimes distort images, which Plait writes are often responsible for examples of evidence presented by extraterrestrial UFO proponents. A chapter devoted to astrology explores the topic, explaining "why astrology doesn't work". + + +=== Beam Me Up === +Part V, "Beam Me Up", explores additional topics, such as common misconceptions regarding the Hubble Space Telescope and its funding, star-naming companies, and astronomy myths and inaccuracies perpetuated by Hollywood, providing "The Top-Ten Examples of Bad Astronomy in Major Motion Pictures". + + +== Publications == +Plait, Philip C. (1 March 2002). Bad Astronomy: Misconceptions and Misuses Revealed, from Astrology to the Moon Landing "Hoax". New York: Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-40976-2. OCLC 48885221. +Bad Astronomy was the first volume in the planned series Bad Science published by John Wiley & Sons. A second volume, Bad Medicine, by Christopher Wanjek, was published in 2003 and was the most recent in the series. +In 2008, Plait published a second book on astronomy, Death from the Skies, which explored the various ways in which the human race could be rendered extinct by astronomical phenomena. + + +== See also == +Death from the Skies + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Bad Astronomy at Open Library +Plait's Bad Astronomy blog at Slate.com +Sample chapter from publisher. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_(Singh_book)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_(Singh_book)-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e9889e783 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_(Singh_book)-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +--- +title: "Big Bang (Singh book)" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang_(Singh_book)" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:42.682757+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Big Bang: The most important scientific discovery of all time and why you need to know about it is a book written by Simon Singh and published in 2004 by Fourth Estate. +Big Bang chronicles the history and development of the Big Bang model of the universe, from the ancient Greek scientists who first measured the distance to the Sun to the 20th century detection of the cosmic radiation still echoing the dawn of time. +The book discusses how different theories of the universe evolved, along with a personal look at the people involved. + + +== Before Big Bang theories == +The book takes up how the inaccuracies of the theories of Copernicus and Galileo lead them to be dismissed. Copernicus and Galileo used false arguments to persuade people that the Earth went in circles around the Sun, and that the Sun was the center of the universe. Both these statements were alien to the public at the time, and are still alien to a modern public. Only the finally mathematically correct interpretation of Johannes Kepler made the theories accepted, within a single generation. As Singh points out, the old generation must die before a new theory can be accepted. + + +== The Big Bang theory evolves == +In parallel to the evolution of the Big Bang theory, the book tells the personal stories of the people who played a part in advancing it, both by hypothesis and by experiment. These include Albert Einstein, for his General Relativity, Alexander Alexandrovich Friedman for first discovering that this theory led to an expanding universe, Georges Lemaître who independently of Friedman discovered an expanding universe, and then concluded the theory must lead to an initial event of creation, which is the Big Bang theory we know today, Edwin Hubble for observing that the universe expanded, thereby confirming Friedman and Lemaître, George Gamow, Ralph Asher Alpher, Robert Herman, Martin Ryle, Arno Allan Penzias and Robert Woodrow Wilson, among many others. +Another theme of the book is the scientific method itself: how serendipity, curiosity, theory and observation come together to expand our understanding of the world. +Singh notes that Einstein initially dismissed the theory out of hand; such was his authority in the scientific community that none dared oppose him, thereby stifling research in this area for many years. However, when Hubble confirmed the theory, Einstein was quick to endorse both Lemaître and his theories. + + +== Reception == +William Grimes of The New York Times praised Singh's ability to retain the reader's entertainment and comprehension even whilst explaining difficult scientific concepts, through use of diagrams, writing and illustrations. He wrote that, "[m]ore than the history of a single theory, [Big Bang] is an argument for the scientific method and for the illuminating power of human reason." + + +== References == + + +== External links == +"Big Bang" web page at Simon Singh's site +Big Bang at GoogleBooks \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BnF,_Mélanges_de_Colbert_60-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BnF,_Mélanges_de_Colbert_60-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f3736b8b1 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BnF,_Mélanges_de_Colbert_60-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +--- +title: "BnF, Mélanges de Colbert 60" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BnF,_Mélanges_de_Colbert_60" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:46.404683+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Mélanges de Colbert 60 (Mel. Col. 60) is a medieval astronomical multiple-text manuscript preserved in the funds of Bibliothèque nationale de France. This manuscript was compiled, approximately, at the end of the 15th century, using different codicological units originating from the 14th and 15th century. +The main interest in the Mel. Col. 60 in the history of astronomy, are the different versions of the Oxford tables and John of Lignères' Tabule magne, which underlines the circulation of these famous alfonsine texts between continental Europe and the British Isles starting in the 14th century. Another peculiarity of this manuscript is that the canons and tables of the Tabule magne are conserved within the same codex, which is unusual for the transmission of this work + + +== History == +Little is known about the composition and provenance of Mel. Col. 60. It was composed around the end of the 15th century. However, the codex consists of several quires, some of which might be from the 14th century, while the others are from the 15th century. The manuscript is made partly of parchment, and partly of paper, which makes it easier for scholars to distinguish the quires of different provenance. +The identity of the compilator of Mel. Col. 60 remains unknown. There are at least two scribal hands that can be observed throughout the manuscript. For instance, the handwriting that copied John of Lignères' canon (starting on folio 34r) is different from one found on folios 42v or 43r, or from the one that has copied John of Mur's canon on folio 175r. + + +== Content == +Mel. Col. 60 is a type of astronomical manuscripts oriented towards practical use and containing various tables and canons that can assist in astronomical computations. The practical aim of Mel. Col. 60 is underlined by the high number of arithmetical tables, which show the compilator's interest in decimal numbers in particular. +The historical interest of the manuscript pertaining to alfonsine astronomy are different Oxford tables and John of Lignères' Tabule magne. However, Mel. Col. 60 contains other works, such as tables for mean motions of the luminaries and the planets (fol. 165r) or tables for conjunctions and oppositions from the year 1299 to 1525 (fol. 175r). +There are canons to the Tabulae permanentes by Firmin de Beauval and John of Murs that can be found on folio 175r. + + +=== Tabule magne === +John of Lignères. was one of the key figures in the history of the Alfonsine astronomy, to be precise of its Parisian period. His work Tabule magne, consisting of tables accompanied by canons, was composed between 1320 and 1325. Later, John of Lignères integrated Tabule magne into a larger collection of his works, along with the treatises on Saphea and on Equatorium. In the 14th and 15th centuries the text had been circulating around Europe, but most important is its transmission to England, along with the other alfonsine material. The canons to the Tabule magne have been most likely composed by John of Lignères by combining different types of sources; some seem to be using original and alternative approaches to certain computations, while the others seem to follow a more traditional approach + + +=== Oxford tables === +After flourishing in Paris during the 14th century, the Alfonsine tradition had made its way to the British Isles, which resulted, alongside other works, into the composition of so-called Oxford tables. Mel. Col. 60 begins with the Oxford tables: folios from 1v to 17r contain double argument tables for the Moon and the planets. +Further folios (63v–94r) contain Oxford tables (composed in 1348) attributed to William Batecombe, a 14th-century an English mathematician and astrologer, followed by the respective canons of the same authorship on folios 94v–96r. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bully_for_Brontosaurus-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bully_for_Brontosaurus-0.md index 9a5a0cd53..3466f7f3b 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bully_for_Brontosaurus-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bully_for_Brontosaurus-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bully_for_Brontosaurus" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:17:14.180307+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:02.081985+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_of_Eclipses-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_of_Eclipses-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6232774e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_of_Eclipses-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +--- +title: "Canon of Eclipses" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_of_Eclipses" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:48.727232+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Canon of Eclipses (German: Canon der Finsternisse), published in 1887 at the Imperial Academy of Sciences of Vienna by Theodor Ritter von Oppolzer, is a compilation of over 13000 (8000 solar and 5200 lunar) eclipses, including all solar and all umbral lunar eclipses between the years 1208 BC and 2161 CE. It was republished by Dover Books in 1962. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +1887 Original German edition at Internet Archive \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_(book)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_(book)-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..cdfd8f9ce --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_(book)-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +--- +title: "Comet (book)" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comet_(book)" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:51.078430+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Comet is a 1985 popular-science book by Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan. The authors describe the scientific nature of comets, as well as their varying roles and perceptions throughout history. The evolution of human understanding of comets is also detailed, and thinkers and astronomers such as Edmond Halley, Immanuel Kant, and William Huggins are discussed. +The publication of the first edition was months ahead of the 1986 appearance of Halley's Comet. A 1997 edition includes additional material. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f0ae0d4ef --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,40 @@ +--- +title: "Commentariolus" +chunk: 1/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:52.246082+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Commentariolus (Little Commentary) is Nicolaus Copernicus's brief outline of an early version of his revolutionary heliocentric theory of the universe. After further long development of his theory, Copernicus published the mature version in 1543 in his landmark work, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres). +Copernicus wrote the Commentariolus in Latin by 1514 and circulated copies to his friends and colleagues. It thus became known among Copernicus's contemporaries, though it was never printed during his lifetime. In 1533, Johann Albrecht Widmannstetter delivered a series of lectures in Rome outlining Copernicus' theory. Pope Clement VII and several Catholic cardinals heard the lectures and were interested in the theory. On 1 November 1536, Nikolaus von Schönberg, Archbishop of Capua and since the preceding year a cardinal, wrote to Copernicus from Rome and asked him for a copy of his writings "at the earliest possible moment". +Although copies of the Commentariolus circulated for a time after Copernicus's death, it subsequently lapsed into obscurity, and its previous existence remained known only indirectly, until a surviving manuscript copy was discovered and published in the second half of the nineteenth century. + +== Summary == +The Commentariolus is subdivided into eight sections (or chapters), of which all but the first bear brief descriptive titles. After a brief introduction, the first section states seven postulates from which Copernicus proposes to show that the apparent motion of the planets can be explained systematically. + +=== The seven postulates === +Celestial bodies do not all revolve around a single point. +The centre of the Earth is the centre of the lunar sphere—the orbit of the Moon around the Earth. +All the spheres rotate around the Sun, which is near the centre of the Universe. +The distance between the Earth and the Sun is an insignificant fraction of the distance from the Earth and the Sun to the stars. +The stars are immovable; their apparent daily motion is caused by the daily rotation of the Earth. +The Earth is moved in a sphere around the Sun, causing the apparent annual migration of the Sun; the Earth has more than one motion. +The Earth’s orbital motion around the Sun causes the seeming reverse in direction of the motions of the planets. +The remaining seven sections are titled, in order, De ordine orbium ("The order of the spheres"), De motibus qui circa solem apparent ("The apparent motions of the Sun"), Quod aequalitas motum non ad aequinoctia sed ad stellas fixas referatur ("Equal motion should be measured not by the equinoxes but by the fixed stars"), De Luna ("The Moon"), De tribus superioribus: Saturno, Jove et Marte ("The outer planets: Saturn, Jupiter and Mars"), De Venere ("Venus") and De Mercurio ("Mercury"). + +=== The order of the spheres === +In this section, the heavenly spheres are given in order from outermost to innermost. +The outermost sphere is that of the fixed stars, which remains perfectly stationary. Then follow those of Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Earth, Venus and Mercury, which each revolve about the Sun from west to east with successively shorter periods of revolution, Saturn's being between 29 and 30 years, Jupiter's between 11 and 12, Mars's between 2 and 3, Earth's exactly one, Venus's between 8 and 9 months, and Mercury's between 2 and 3 months. The Moon's sphere, however, revolves around the Earth in a period of one month, and moves with it around the Sun like an epicycle. + +=== The apparent motion of the Sun === +This section explains how the apparent motion of the Sun could arise from three separate motions of the Earth. The first motion is a uniform revolution, with a period of one year, from west to east along a circular orbit whose centre is offset from the Sun by 1/25 of the orbit's radius. +The second motion is the daily rotation about an axis which passes through the Earth's centre and is inclined at an angle of about 231⁄2° to the perpendicular to the plane of its orbit. +The third motion is a precession of the Earth's axis of rotation about an axis perpendicular to the plane of its orbit. Copernicus specified the rate of this precession with respect to the radial line from the Earth to the centre of its orbit as being slightly less than a year, with an implied direction as being from west to east. With respect to the fixed stars, this precession is very slow, and in the opposite direction—from east to west—and explains the phenomenon of the precession of the equinoxes. + +=== Equal motion should be measured not by the equinoxes but by the fixed stars === +Here Copernicus asserts that the motion of the equinoxes and celestial poles has not been uniform, and argues that consequently they should not be used to define the reference frame with respect to which the motions of the planets are measured, and that the periods of the various planetary motions are more accurately determinable if those motions are measured with respect to the fixed stars. He maintains that he had found the length of the sidereal year to have always been 365 days 6 hours and 10 minutes. + +=== The Moon === \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..a08f61c15 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +--- +title: "Commentariolus" +chunk: 2/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:52.246082+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Including the annual revolution around the Sun, which the Moon shares with the Earth in his system, +Copernicus explains the Moon's motion as composed of five independent motions. Its motion around the Earth lies in a plane which is inclined at an angle of 5° to the plane of the Earth's orbit, and which precesses from east to west around an axis perpendicular to that plane, with a period of between 18 and 19 years with respect to the fixed stars. The remaining three motions, which take place within this orbital plane, are depicted in the diagram to the right. The first of these is that of the first, and larger, of two epicycles, whose center (represented by the point e1 in the diagram) moves uniformly from west to east around the circumference of a deferent centred on the Earth (represented by point T in the diagram), with a period of one draconitic month. The centre of the second, smaller epicycle (represented by the point e2 in the diagram) moves uniformly from east to west around the circumference of the first so that the period of the angle β in the diagram is one anomalistic month. +The Moon itself, represented by the point M in the diagram, moves uniformly from west to east around the circumference of the second epicycle so that the period of the angle γ is half a synodic month. Copernicus states that whenever the point e1 lies on the line joining the Earth to the centre of its orbit (represented by the dotted line OTC in the diagram, of which only the point T here lies in the Moon's orbital plane), the Moon M will lie precisely between e1 and e2. However, this can occur only once every 19 years, when this line coincides with the line of nodes WTE. At other times it does not lie in the moon's orbital plane and the point e1 cannot therefore pass through it. In general, then, while the Moon will be close to conjunction or opposition to the Sun whenever it lies precisely between e1 and e2, these events will not be precisely simultaneous. +The ratio which Copernicus took as that for the relative lengths of the small epicycle, large epicycle and deferent is 4:19:180. + +=== The outer planets, Saturn, Jupiter and Mars === +The theories Copernicus gives in the Commentariolus for the motions of the outer planets all have the same general structure, and only differ in the values of the various parameters needed to specify their motions completely. Their orbits are not coplanar with that of the Earth, but do share its centre as their own common centre, and lie in planes that are only slightly inclined to the Earth's orbital plane. Unlike the Moon's orbital plane, those of the superior planets do not precess. Their inclinations to the Earth's orbital plane do oscillate, however, between the limits 0°10′ and 1°50′ for Mars, 1°15′ and 1°40′ for Jupiter, and 2°15′ and 2°40′ for Saturn. Although Copernicus supposes these oscillations to take place around the orbits' lines of nodes that he assumes to remain fixed, the mechanism he uses to model them does cause tiny oscillations in the lines of nodes as well. As Kepler later pointed out, the necessity for assuming oscillations in the inclinations of the outer planets' orbital planes is an artefact of Copernicus's having taken them as passing through the centre of the Earth's orbit. If he had taken them as passing through the Sun, he would not have needed to introduce these oscillations. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b33c50709 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +--- +title: "Commentariolus" +chunk: 3/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commentariolus" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:52.246082+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Like the Moon's motion, that of the outer planets, represented in the diagram to the right, is produced by a combination of a deferent and two epicycles. The centre of the first, and larger of the two epicycles, represented by the point e1 in the diagram, revolves uniformly from west to east around the circumference of a deferent whose centre is the centre of the Earth's orbit, represented by the point S in the diagram, with a period relative to the fixed stars as given in the section The order of the spheres above. +The centre of the second epicycle, represented by the point e2 in the diagram, revolves uniformly from east to west around the circumference of the first, with the same period relative to the radial line joining S to e1. As a consequence, the direction of the radial line joining e1 to e2 remains fixed relative to the fixed stars, parallel to the planet's line of apses EW, and the point e2 describes an eccentric circle whose radius is equal to that of the deferent, and whose centre, represented by the point O in the diagram, is offset from that of the deferent by the radius of the first epicycle. In his later work, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, Copernicus uses this eccentric circle directly, rather than representing it as a combination of a deferent and an epicycle. +The planet itself, represented by the point P in the diagram, revolves uniformly from west to east around the circumference of the second epicycle, whose radius is exactly one third of that of the first, at twice the rate of revolution of e1 about S. This device enabled Copernicus to dispense with the equant, a much-criticised feature of Claudius Ptolemy's theories for the motions of the outer planets. In a heliocentric version of Ptolemy's models, his equant would lie at the point Q in the diagram, offset along the line of apses EW from the point S by a distance one and a third times the radius of Copernicus's first epicycle. The centre of the planet's deferent, with the same radius as Copernicus's, would lie at the point C, mid-way between S and Q. The planet itself would lie at the point of intersection of this deferent with the line QP. While this point only coincides exactly with P whenever they are both at an apsis, the difference between their positions is always negligible in comparison with the inaccuracies inherent to both theories. +For the ratios of the radii of the outer planets' deferents to radius of the Earth, the Commentariolus gives 113⁄25 for Mars, 513⁄60 for Jupiter, and 97⁄30 for Saturn. For the ratios of the radii of their deferents to the radii of the larger of their epicycles, it gives 6138⁄167 for Mars, 12553⁄606 for Jupiter, and 11859⁄1181 for Saturn. + +=== Venus === +In the last two sections Copernicus talks about Venus and Mercury. The first has a system of circles and takes 9 months to complete a revolution. + +=== Mercury === +Mercury's orbit is harder than any of the other planets' to study because it is visible for only a few days a year. Mercury, just like Venus, has two epicycles, one greater than another. It takes almost three months to complete a revolution. + +== Notes == + +== References == + +=== Bibliography === +Bardi, A. (2024). Copernicus and Axiomatics. In: Sriraman, B. (eds) Handbook of the History and Philosophy of Mathematical Practice. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40846-5_110 +Copernicus, Nicolaus (1992), Czartoryski, Pawel (ed.), The manuscripts of Nicholas Copernicus' minor works; facsimiles, Krakow: Polish Academy of Sciences, ISBN 83-01-10562-3 +Dreyer, John Louis Emil (1890). Tycho Brahe; a picture of scientific life and work in the sixteenth century. Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black. +Gingerich, Owen (2004). The Book Nobody Read. London: William Heinemann. ISBN 0-434-01315-3. +Goddu, André (2010). Copernicus and the Aristotelian tradition. Leiden, Netherlands: Brill. ISBN 978-90-04-18107-6. +Koyré, Alexandre (1973). The Astronomical Revolution: Copernicus – Kepler – Borelli. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. ISBN 0-8014-0504-1. +Rosen, Edward (2004) [1939]. Three Copernican Treatises: The Commentariolus of Copernicus; The Letter against Werner; The Narratio Prima of Rheticus (Second Edition, Revised ed.). New York, NY: Dover Publications, Inc. +Swerdlow, Noel M. (December 1973), "The derivation and first draft of Copernicus's planetary theoryA translation of the Commentariolus with commentary.", Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 117 (6): 423–512 +Thoren, Victor E. (1990). The Lord of Uraniborg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-35158-8. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Evolution-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Evolution-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..115f6f9e6 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Evolution-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "Cosmic Evolution" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_Evolution" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:55.807812+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Cosmic Evolution: The Rise of Complexity in Nature (2001) is a book by Harvard astrophysicist Eric Chaisson. It examines cosmic evolution which includes the history of natural evolution from the Big Bang to the present from the perspective of the emerging multi-scientific discipline of Big History. It offers an explanation of why simple structures billions of years ago gave way to more complex structures, such as stars, planets, life, and human beings in complex civilizations. It is written for a general audience interested in science. + + +== Overview == +Chaisson argues that cosmic history can be examined from the perspective of energy flows. He analyzes the flows of energy through various objects and argues that these flows are relevant to understanding the relative complexity of these objects. He suggests that a key measure for scientific analysis should be energy per second per gram, termed "energy rate density," and that analysis using this yardstick can be used to explain not only human evolution but cosmic evolution. He sees energy as "work per unit time" which he equates with power, and shows how energy rate density in some structures has increased over time. For example, in Chaisson's view, the human brain uses a much greater amount of energy, relative to its size, than a galaxy. He suggests that energy lets us make "order out of disorder"; for example, an air conditioner, which draws current from an electric outlet, can turn a less-complex zone of lukewarm air into two more-complex zones of hot air and cold air, and in so doing, it reverses the disorder in a room. According to his view, organisms do much the same thing with energy but in a more complex way, by taking in food instead of electrons, to keep themselves from disintegrating and becoming less complex; he analyzes energy flows in not just organisms and society but in inanimate structures such as stars, galaxies, planets. +Chaisson notes that increases in complexity are consistent with the second law of thermodynamics; according to one reviewer, the second law might suggest that complexity should decrease with the universe "slouching toward disorder." However, Chaisson argues that complexity can increase because complex structures such as a star can "generate and sustain complexity by exporting enough disorder to its surrounding environment to more than makeup for its internal gains." From this perspective, Chaisson offers a definition of life as an "open, coherent, space-time structure maintained far from thermodynamic equilibrium by a flow of energy through it." +Reactions to Chaisson's book are generally positive, although different reviewers took issue with some of his points and writing style. Biologist Daniel W. McShea originally noted that Chaisson is "prone to using inflated language," but a decade later in another review of his work notes that "Chaisson offers data showing a trend in what he calls energy rate density ... over the history of life (and even over the much longer history of the universe), that's really saying something." Critic Stuart Kauffman found the book to be a "wonderful discussion." Critic Hillel Braude wrote "Cosmic Evolution draws from a rich scientific palette to paint a colorful explanatory model of the ascending complexity in nature." Critic Charles Seife wrote highly about Chaisson's book although he criticized Chaisson's definition of life as being "such a broad definition" that it becomes meaningless while acknowledging that Chaisson's analysis "gives the theory some numerical muscle." Many more excerpts from reviews of this book are collected here + + +== Choice of units == +Chaisson chose to use the obsolete cgs (centimeter, gram, second) system of measurement, rather than SI units as is standard current practice, for his calculations and numerical estimates - thus quoting energy in ergs (one ten-millionth of a Joule), also using calories, and sometimes kilocalories as alternative measures of energy. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Arrow of time graphic +Cosmic evolution web site (containing text, images, animations, movies, and hyperlinked references of interest to both non-scientists {Introductory Track} and professional scientists {Advanced Track}). \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_Repair_and_Mutagenesis-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_Repair_and_Mutagenesis-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d0e0c24b2 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_Repair_and_Mutagenesis-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +--- +title: "DNA Repair and Mutagenesis" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_Repair_and_Mutagenesis" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:30.549881+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +DNA Repair and Mutagenesis is a college-level textbook about DNA repair and mutagenesis written by Errol Friedberg, Graham Walker, Wolfram Siede, Richard D. Wood, and Roger Schultz. In its second edition as of 2009, DNA Repair and Mutagenesis contains over 1,000 pages, 10,000 references and 700 illustrations and has been described as "the most comprehensive book available in [the] field." + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_in_a_Haystack-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_in_a_Haystack-0.md index 42fe04a74..713158620 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_in_a_Haystack-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_in_a_Haystack-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_in_a_Haystack" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:17:31.991928+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:03.336326+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Little_Piggies-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Little_Piggies-0.md index e6f77bf25..deb31baff 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Little_Piggies-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Little_Piggies-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight_Little_Piggies" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:17:39.069878+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:04.512301+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia_of_Life_Support_Systems-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia_of_Life_Support_Systems-0.md index 8c164b2a7..9325f8fe4 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia_of_Life_Support_Systems-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia_of_Life_Support_Systems-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia_of_Life_Support_Systems" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:29:01.750521+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:34.193814+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ever_Since_Darwin-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ever_Since_Darwin-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..89df63b7f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ever_Since_Darwin-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +--- +title: "Ever Since Darwin" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ever_Since_Darwin" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:05.662577+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Ever Since Darwin is a 1977 book by the paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. Gould's first book of collected essays, it originated from his monthly column "This View of Life," published in Natural History magazine. Edwin Barber—who was then the editorial director for W. W. Norton & Company— encouraged Gould to produce a book. He soon commissioned Gould to write The Mismeasure of Man, but it was not until three years later, when Gould accumulated 33 columns, that it occurred to either of them that the Natural History columns should be published in a single volume. The collection of essays, written between 1973–1977, became a best-seller and propelled Gould to national prominence. + + +== Reviews == +James Gorman, "The History of a Theory", The New York Times, 20 November 1977. +Richard Dawkins, "Rejoicing in Multifarious Nature. Review of Ever Since Darwin by S. J. Gould", reprinted in The Devil's Chaplain: Selected Essays, Phoenix, 2003 (ISBN 978-0-7538-1750-6). + + +== External links == +W.W.Norton Promotional page + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_Infectious_Disease-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_Infectious_Disease-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6393e1e88 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_Infectious_Disease-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +--- +title: "Evolution of Infectious Disease" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_Infectious_Disease" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:35.384243+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Evolution of Infectious Disease is a 1993 book by the evolutionary biologist Paul W. Ewald. In this book, Ewald contests the traditional view that parasites should evolve toward benign coexistence with their hosts. He draws on various studies that contradict this dogma and asserts his theory based on fundamental evolutionary principles. This book provides one of the first in-depth presentations of insights from evolutionary biology on various fields in health science, including epidemiology and medicine. + + +== Infectious diseases == +Infectious disease are illnesses induced by another organism. Such diseases range from mild to severe cases. The onset of infectious disease can be induced by bacteria, viruses, fungi, and parasites. Several examples of infectious diseases are as follows: tuberculosis, chickenpox, mumps, meningitis, measles, and malaria. Infectious diseases can be obtained through many routes of transmission such as inhalation, open wounds, sores, ingestion, sexual intercourse, and insect bites. Author, Paul Ewald used his book to expound upon infectious diseases in humans and animals, explain various routes of transmission as well as epidemiology as a whole. Epidemiology is defined as the study of the onset, distribution, and control of diseases. Evolutionary epidemiology focuses on the distribution of infectious diseases whereas Darwinian epidemiology focuses on human beings as hosts of infectious diseases. To fully comprehend both aspects of epidemiology, it is necessary to understand how organisms induce these diseases as well as how infected organisms counteract. + + +== Evolution == +The extensive research about pathogens shows that they can evolve within a month, whereas animal hosts such as humans take centuries to make large evolutionary changes. Parasite virulence and host resistance are variables that strongly impact a pathogen's ability to replicate and be distributed to many hosts. Parasite virulence is the level of harm a host endures due to a virus, bacteria, or parasite. The way a host lives contributes heavily to how their body will react to pathogens. If an organism lives a moderately healthy lifestyle, including its diet, physical activity, and decreased stress, its chances of fighting off infectious diseases increase. +Host resistance pivots around how well a host's immune system can fight off a disease and rid their body of the pathogens. Although a healthy lifestyle can help a host, infectious diseases seem to evolve so quickly that a new generation of a disease may have emerged before scientists have the chance to make a vaccination for the first generation. Pathogens adapt to the medications and form a resistance to them which causes the new generations of pathogens to be more detrimental than the previous generations. After many generations have emerged, scientists must continuously form new vaccinations to combat the components of the disease that evolve every time a generation appears. + + +== Experimental data == +Two sets of experiments were performed which tested the correlation of pathogens and declining organism populations as well as zoonotic pathogens being associated with emerging infectious diseases. The first experiment focused solely on a pathogen's ability to decrease or completely wipe out a whole population of organisms. In this experiment, researchers used Daphnia magna as the host and six microparasites were vertically transmitted to the host. Researchers Ebert, Lipsitch, and Mangin found that while pathogens and parasites do cause a change in a population, they do not have the ability to destroy an entire population. The pathogens did however have an impact on the host's fertility. Some females involved in the experiment were unable to reproduce after being infected with the microparasites. +The second experiment focused more on zoonotic pathogens being correlated with emerging infectious diseases in humans. The researchers comprised a database with separate infectious species, infectious pathogens that cause disease in patients with abnormal immune systems, and pathogens that have only been found in one case of human disease. The researchers broke this database down into five portions which were viruses, bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and helminths. Direct contact, indirect contact, and vector borne were the routes of transmission used. They found that 1415 zoonotic pathogen diseases have been found in humans. + + +== See also == +Plague Time: The New Germ Theory of Disease - Ewald's follow-up book, in 2002 + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_Biology_(book)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_Biology_(book)-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6ae11f209 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_Biology_(book)-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +--- +title: "Evolutionary Biology (book)" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_Biology_(book)" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:36.555686+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Evolutionary Biology is a college-level evolutionary biology textbook written by Eli C. Minkoff that is 627 pages long. It was published in 1983 by Addison-Wesley. This is Minkoff's first foray into the world of college-level textbook authorship. The book contains an index and various biographical references. + + +== About the book == +The textbook Evolutionary Biology was written and published in 1983 during which Minkoff was the head of the Biology department at Bates College. The book is written in a format to which it could be used in an evolutionary biology 101 course. The book contains over 25 chapters, for example, "The Origin and Early Evolution of Life". + + +== Bibliography == +Eli C. Minkoff (1983). Evolutionary Biology. 1st Edition. Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-201-15890-6. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3a79bd9c6 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +--- +title: "Fertilisation of Orchids" +chunk: 1/9 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Fertilisation of Orchids is a book by English naturalist Charles Darwin published on 15 May 1862 under the full explanatory title On the Various Contrivances by Which British and Foreign Orchids Are Fertilised by Insects, and On the Good Effects of Intercrossing. Darwin's previous book, On the Origin of Species, had briefly mentioned evolutionary interactions between insects and the plants they fertilised, and this new idea was explored in detail. Field studies and practical scientific investigations that were initially a recreation for Darwin—a relief from the drudgery of writing—developed into enjoyable and challenging experiments. Aided in his work by his family, friends, and a wide circle of correspondents across Britain and worldwide, Darwin tapped into the contemporary vogue for growing exotic orchids. +The book was his first detailed demonstration of the power of natural selection, and explained how complex ecological relationships resulted in the coevolution of orchids and insects. The view has been expressed that the book led directly or indirectly to all modern work on coevolution and the evolution of extreme specialisation. It influenced botanists, and revived interest in the neglected idea that insects played a part in pollinating flowers. It opened up the new study areas of pollination research and reproductive ecology, directly related to Darwin's ideas on evolution, and supported his view that natural selection led to a variety of forms through the important benefits achieved by cross-fertilisation. Although the general public showed less interest and sales of the book were low, it established Darwin as a leading botanist. Orchids was the first in a series of books on his innovative investigations into plants. +The book describes how the relationship between insects and plants resulted in the beautiful and complex forms which natural theology attributed to a grand designer. By showing how practical adaptations develop from cumulative minor variations of parts of the flowers to suit new purposes, Darwin countered the prevailing view that beautiful organisms were the handiwork of a Creator. Darwin's painstaking observations, experiments, and detailed dissection of the flowers explained previously unknown features such as the puzzle of Catasetum, which had been thought to have three completely different species of flowers on the same plant. In addition, they produced testable predictions including his then-controversial proposal that the long nectary of Angraecum sesquipedale meant that there must be a moth with an equally long proboscis. This was confirmed in 1903 when Xanthopan morganii praedicta was found in Madagascar. + +== Background == +Charles Darwin grew up with an interest in natural history, and as a student at the University of Cambridge he became a pupil and close friend of botany professor John Stevens Henslow. The year he graduated, Darwin was given a supernumerary position as a gentleman naturalist and geologist on the second voyage of HMS Beagle, a trip that lasted five years. By the time he returned in October 1836, he had doubts about the doctrine that species were fixed and unchanging. Within months, experts informed him that specimens he had collected were separate species, not just varieties, and the patterns he saw inspired the inception of his theory of natural selection in 1838. Darwin began editing and publishing the expert reports, collected in the Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle, at the same time as writing a series of books on geology, the first of which was The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs. His "species work" was his "prime hobby", a background to this writing, but it evolved into an extensive research programme during the twenty years before he published his theory. + +=== Insect fertilisation of plants === +Darwin's speculations on the origin of species convinced him that cross-fertilisation played an important role in keeping specific forms consistent. He rejected the doctrine that the characteristics of a species were static, and was aware from animal husbandry that inbreeding could lead to changes, often deleterious. He thought that natural outbreeding through cross-fertilisation would keep wild species homogenous yet vigorous. Cross-fertilisation would confer an evolutionary advantage by spreading favourable changes throughout a reproductive community. His ideas were contrary to the common supposition that plants were usually self-fertilising, and so every summer Darwin investigated the contribution of insect pollination to the cross-pollination of flowers. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..30670e022 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "Fertilisation of Orchids" +chunk: 2/9 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +In the summer of 1841 Charles and Emma Darwin moved from the turmoil of London to the countryside, to Down House, a quiet former parsonage in the village of Downe. He wrote, "The flowers are here very beautiful". Darwin followed the recommendation of his friend, the leading botanist Robert Brown, and read Das entdeckte Geheimnis der Natur im Bau und in der Befruchtung der Blumen (The Secret of Nature in the Form and Fertilisation of Flowers Discovered). The little known book, published in 1793 by Christian Konrad Sprengel but never translated into English, introduced the idea that flowers were created by God to fulfill a teleological purpose: insects would act as "living brushes" to cross-fertilise plants in a symbiotic relationship. This functional view was rejected and mostly forgotten, as it contradicted the common belief that flowers had been created for beauty, and were generally self-fertilising. For Darwin, the concept of evolution gave new meaning to Sprengel's research into the mechanisms for cross-fertilisation. He welcomed its support for his supposition that cross-fertilisation in flowering plants tended to allow their offspring to avoid possible disadvantages resulting from self-fertilisation, and by 1845 he had verified many of Sprengel's observations. +A favourite walk took the Darwin family to a spot above the quiet Cudham valley, teeming with orchids including Cephalanthera, Neottia, fly orchids and musk orchids. They called this place "Orchis Bank", and the whole family became involved in Darwin's researches. Darwin observed orchids every summer, but in twenty years, only on two occasions (when he noticed butterflies "sucking O. pyramidalis and Gymnadenia") did he see insects visiting flowers. +In 1854, Darwin began to work full-time on the origin of species. He examined orchids and counted how often one or both pollinia (pollen masses) had been removed from their flowers, indicating that they had been visited by insects. He experimented with insect pollination to investigate whether, by cross-fertilising field crops such as Fabaceae, they would yield more vigorous offspring, and published letters about his inconclusive results in The Gardeners' Chronicle in 1857 and 1858. He next applied Sprengel's methods to empirical research on orchids. Despite delays caused by recurring illness, he made progress on writing his planned "Big Book" on evolution, but when Alfred Russel Wallace's letter prompted joint publication of both of their theories of natural selection in 1858, Darwin quickly wrote On the Origin of Species as an abstract of his theory, published on 22 November 1859. In this book, he gave credence to Sprengel's ideas on the advantages of "intercrossing", and noted: "Many of our orchidaceous plants absolutely require the visits of moths to remove their pollen masses and thus to fertilise them". He introduced his new concept, the process of coevolution, describing the co-adaptation of bumblebees and red clover, and speculating "how a flower and a bee might slowly become, either simultaneously or one after the other, modified and adapted in the most perfect manner to each other, by the continued preservation of individuals presenting mutual and slightly favourable deviations of structure". This was a theme he developed in his orchid book. + +== Botany as recreation == + +After On the Origin of Species was published, Darwin became involved in producing revised editions as well as working on Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication as the first part of his planned "Big Book". By the spring of 1860 he had tired of the grind of writing, and needed something fresh and interesting to study. During a family visit to relatives at Hartfield, he was searching for orchids when he noticed a sundew. He collected it and tried to feed it insects, thus beginning a long-term study of insectivorous plants. He investigated other botanical questions raised by his ideas of natural selection, including the advantages of sexual dimorphism in primulas, and the adaptive mechanisms that ensure cross-pollination in orchids. As an enthusiastic practical scientist, such investigations gave him a strong sense of personal enjoyment. He relished pitting his wits against nature, and following lucky hunches. His theory was a way of looking at the world, enabling him to find creative solutions to problems that traditional approaches could not solve. He later wrote, "I am like a gambler, & love a wild experiment." +Around the end of April 1860, Darwin discussed insect pollination with his friend Joseph Dalton Hooker, and mentioned the bee orchid. Darwin corresponded with Hooker's assistant Daniel Oliver, the senior curator at Kew Gardens, who became a follower of Darwin's ideas. At the start of June, Darwin wrote to The Gardeners' Chronicle asking for readers' observations on how bee or fly orchids were fertilised. His letter described the mechanisms for insect fertilisation he had discovered in common British orchids, and reported his experimental observations that pollen masses were removed from Orchis morio and Orchis mascula plants in the open, but left in their pouches in adjacent plants under a glass bell jar. He wrote to American botanist Asa Gray that he had been "so struck with admiration at the contrivances, that I have sent notice to Gardeners Chronicle", and made similar enquiries of other experts. +Darwin became engrossed in meticulous microscopic examination, tracing the complicated mechanisms of flowers that attracted insects by their nectar so that the insects transported pollen to cross-pollinate other plants, and on 19 July he told Hooker, "I am intensely interested on subject, just as at a game of chess." In September, he "dissected with the greatest interest" and wrote, "The contrivances for insect fertilisation in Orchids are multiform & truly wonderful & beautiful." By October, he had "a large mass of notes with many new facts", but set them aside "convinced that I ought to work on Variation & not amuse myself with interludes". + +=== Research and draft === \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7c446439f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "Fertilisation of Orchids" +chunk: 3/9 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +During 1861, botany became a preoccupation for Darwin, and his projects became serious scientific pursuits. He continued his study of orchids throughout the summer, writing to anyone who might be able to supply specimens he had not yet examined. Field naturalists, botanists, and country gentry sent specimens from across the British Isles. Darwin also tramped around the countryside with tin cans and biscuit boxes, collecting specimens which his gardeners potted up for him. His family joined in, and neighbours contributed to the research. As he had only a cold greenhouse, a friend on the other side of the village who had a hot-house allowed him to use that, and offered the services of his gardener to look after the delicate specimens. Darwin's aim was to show how the complex structures and life cycles of the plants could be explained by natural selection rather than by the handiwork of God; he saw the huge variety of flowers as a collection of ad hoc evolutionary adaptations. In June he described his examination of bee orchids as a passion, and his findings on insect fertilisation of orchids as "beautiful facts". +There were several replies to Darwin's enquiry in The Gardeners' Chronicle seeking evidence to support his idea that pollen masses attached themselves to a convenient place on an insect's back or head, usually its proboscis, to transport the pollen to another flower. One envelope appeared to be empty when it arrived at Down House, but when he looked further before discarding it he found several insect mouthparts with pollen masses attached. To help their daughter Henrietta convalesce from illness, the Darwins arranged to spend two months in Torquay. Darwin wrote: + +I have, owing to many interruptions, not been going on much with my regular work (though I have done the very heavy jobs of variation of Pigeons, Fowls, Ducks, Rabbits Dogs &c) but have been amusing myself with miscellaneous work.—I have been very lucky & have now examined almost every British Orchid fresh, & when at sea-side shall draw up rather long paper on the means of their fertilisation for Linn. Socy & I cannot fancy anything more perfect than the many curious contrivances. +He sought advice on obtaining the exotic South American Catasetum, to see it eject pollen masses, as "I am got intensely interested on subject & think I understand pretty well all the British species." They went to Torquay on 1 July, and Darwin began writing his orchid paper. By 10 August, he feared his paper would run "to 100 M.S. folio pages!!! The beauty of the adaptations of parts seems to me unparalleled ... I marvel often as I think over the diversity & perfection of the contrivances." + +The family returned to Downe on 27 August, and Darwin again wrote to the Gardeners' Chronicle appealing for assistance as he was "very anxious to examine a few exotic forms". His requests to the wealthy enthusiasts who had taken up the fashionable pursuit of growing rare orchids brought large numbers of specimens. These would be a test of his theory: previously aspects such as coloration of plants and animals had often been regarded as having no adaptive function. For example, Thomas Henry Huxley was strongly influenced by German idealism and in 1856 had asked if it was "to be supposed for a moment that the beauty of colour and outline ... are any good to the animals? ... Who has ever dreamed of finding an utilitarian purpose in the forms and colours of flowers ... ?" Darwin had, and in the orchids he tackled the most difficult case. His ideas would transform the way naturalists thought about coloration. +The completed Orchis paper came to 140 folio pages, and Darwin decided against presenting it at the Linnean Society of London, thinking of publishing a pamphlet instead. He offered the draft to John Murray who agreed to publish it as a book. Although Darwin feared a lack of public interest, he hoped it would serve to "illustrate how Natural History may be worked under the belief of the modification of Species". In discussions with Asa Gray about natural theology, he wrote that "it really seems to me incredibly monstrous to look at an orchid as created as we now see it. Every part reveals modification on modification." +As a popular and acceptable activity, botany had been taken up by many middle class ladies, and Darwin included these botany enthusiasts in his correspondence. On the recommendation of John Lindley, Darwin wrote to Lady Dorothy Nevill, who responded generously by sending numerous exotic orchids, and requested a signed photograph of him to hang in her sitting room next to portraits of her other notable friends, including Hooker. + +=== Linnean Society paper === \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..74f9b78a7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +--- +title: "Fertilisation of Orchids" +chunk: 4/9 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The orchid book was delayed because of illness, but Darwin continued to "look at it as a hobby-horse, which has given me great pleasure to ride". He was particularly astounded by the long spur of the Angraecum sesquipedale flowers, one of the orchids sent by the distinguished horticulturist James Bateman, and wrote to Hooker "Good Heavens what insect can suck it[?]" +By November, a specimen of the exotic South American Catasetum orchid Hooker had given to Darwin had shown its "truly marvellous" mechanism, by which it shot out a pollinium at any insect touching a part of the flower "with sticky gland always foremost". This plant had astonished botanists in 1836 when Robert Hermann Schomburgk stated that he had seen one plant growing three distinct flowers which usually grew separately and had wrongly been categorised as three distinct genera, namely Catasetum tridentatum, Monachanthus viridis, and Myanthus barbatus. John Lindley had remarked that "such cases shake to the foundation all our ideas of the stability of genera and species." One of Darwin's correspondents told of delight at growing a beautiful specimen of Myanthus barbatus imported from Demerara, then dismay when the plant flowered the next year as a simple Catasetum. +In view of this interest, Darwin prepared a paper on Catasetum as an extract from his forthcoming book, which was read to the Linnean Society of London on 3 April 1862. Darwin solved the puzzle by showing that the three flowers were the male, female, and hermaphrodite forms of a single species, but as they differed so much from each other, they had been classified as different genera. + +=== Publication === +Darwin sent the incomplete manuscript to his publisher John Murray on 9 February 1862, while he was still working on the last chapter. Although anxious that the book might not sell, he could "say with confidence that the M.S. contains many new & very curious facts & conclusions". When the book was printed, he sent out presentation copies to all the individuals and societies who had helped him with his investigations, and to eminent botanists in Britain and abroad for review. +On 15 May 1862 the book was published under the full title of On the Various Contrivances by Which British and Foreign Orchids Are Fertilised by Insects, and On the Good Effects of Intercrossing. In August, Darwin was "well contented with the sale of 768 copies; I shd. hope & expect that the remainder will ultimately be sold", but the book sold slowly and less than 2,000 copies of the first edition were printed. An expanded edition translated into French was published in Paris in 1870, and in 1877 Murray brought out a revised and expanded second edition, with the shortened title The Various Contrivances by Which Orchids Are Fertilised by Insects. This was also published by D. Appleton & Company of New York in 1877, and a German translation was published in the same year. Despite being well praised by botanists, only about 6,000 copies of the English editions had been sold by 1900. + +== Content == +Darwin set out a detailed study of common descent with modifications by expanding on the theme of coevolution between local populations of insects and flowering plants that he had briefly discussed in On the Origin of Species. He examined numerous ways in which orchids vary, showing how they had diverged and developed specialised pollen-dispersal mechanisms. The intricate morphology and anatomy of each flower was carefully described. Apparently trivial details were examined in relation to natural selection to demonstrate how slight variations in similar structures of closely related flowers led to specialised modifications that provided various pollinators (insects) with different ways to cross-fertilise. The mass of descriptive detail was a great achievement, but the result is demanding to read. +In the introduction, Darwin explained his aim of meeting complaints that detailed support for his theory was lacking in On the Origin of Species. He chose orchids for his subject as "amongst the most singular and most modified forms in the vegetable kingdom" in the hope of inspiring work on other species, and felt that "the study of organic beings may be as interesting to an observer who is fully convinced that the structure of each is due to secondary laws, as to one who views every trifling detail of structure as the result of the direct interposition of the Creator." He gave due credit to previous authors who had described the agency of insects in fertilising orchids, and all who had helped him. + +=== British orchids === + +In the first chapter Darwin described the British orchids he had studied, giving detailed explanations of their various mechanisms for transferring pollen to insects. The first mechanism described is that of Orchis mascula, which serves as an introduction to the explanation of other Orchidaceae. In the upper part of the flower a petal shelters the male organ which has two packages of pollen grains, held together by thin elastic threads. These pollen masses stand side by side and have stalks down to adhesive balls in a cup which keeps them moist and sticky. When an insect lands on the large projecting lower petal, the labellum, and pushes its head and proboscis into the centre of the flower and down to the nectary, it breaks the cup and the adhesive balls attach the pollen masses to the front of the insect. As the insect flies off, each stalk rotates the pollen mass downwards and forwards so that when the insect lands on another flower the pollen masses attached to the insect pass under the male organ and leave pollen on the female organ, achieving cross fertilisation. Darwin envisaged: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-4.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-4.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..40c92bbd0 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-4.md @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +--- +title: "Fertilisation of Orchids" +chunk: 5/9 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +A poet might imagine, that whilst the pollinia are borne from flower to flower through the air, adhering to a moth's body, they voluntarily and eagerly place themselves, in each case, in that exact position in which alone they can hope to gain their wish and perpetuate their race. +This is followed by descriptions of the differences in the mechanisms of several other orchids. In Orchis pyramidalis, the adhesive balls are combined into a strap or saddle shape, which curls round the thin proboscis of a moth or butterfly to attach to it the pair of pollen masses, illustrated in the book by figure 4 showing a moth's head with seven pairs of pollen masses attached to its proboscis. + +While the bee orchid showed adaptation for self-fertilisation, its mechanism also enabled occasional cross-fertilisation, creating the biological diversity that Darwin felt was needed for vigorous survival, which could not be provided by self-fertilisation. As an example of "how beautifully everything is contrived", Darwin described how he had found that in Spiranthes flowers the pollen is ready for collection before access is open for the female organ to receive pollen. At Torquay he had watched bees visiting spires of these flowers, starting at the bottom of the spire and working their way up to the topmost flowers. He speculated that if bees moved from top to top of the spires, the pollen clusters they collected from the most recently opened flowers would be wasted as the topmost flowers on the next spike would not be ready to receive pollen. A bee starting at the lowest flowers on the first spire it visited would continue up until it reached flowers that still had their pollen masses to attach to the bee, then would fly to the mature lower flowers on another plant, and fertilise them. By this co-ordinated process, the bee would add "to her store of honey" while perpetuating the flowers "which will yield honey to future generations of bees". + +=== Exotic orchids === + +The book moves on to the various foreign orchids Darwin had received from others. His experiments showed that the "astonishing length" of the 111⁄2 inch (290 mm) long nectary hanging from Angraecum sesquipedale flowers implied the need for an as yet unknown moth with a proboscis 10–11 inches (250–280 millimetres) long to pollinate these flowers in Madagascar. He viewed this as the outcome of a coevolutionary race, writing that "there has been a race in gaining length between the nectary of the Angræcum and the proboscis of certain moths". This wastefulness is familiar in modern terms as the idea of an evolutionary arms race, but was disturbing to biologists of the time who believed that adaptations were the outcome of benevolent divine purpose. +Darwin described "the most remarkable of all Orchids", Catasetum, and showed how in these flowers, "as throughout nature, pre-existing structures and capacities [had been] utilised for new purposes". He explained the mechanism in which the pollen masses of the pollinium were connected by a bent stalk or pedicel to a sticky disc kept moist at the back of the flower. When an insect touched an "antenna" projecting from the back of the flower, this released the bent pedicel which sprang straight and fired the pollinium, sticky disc first, at the insect. In experiments, Darwin had imitated this action using a whalebone spring. He vividly illustrated how the flower ejected the pollinium with considerable force: "I touched the antennæ of C. callosum whilst holding the flower at about a yard's distance from the window, and the pollinium hit the pane of glass, and adhered to the smooth vertical surface by its adhesive disc." \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-5.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-5.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9eaae7954 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-5.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +--- +title: "Fertilisation of Orchids" +chunk: 6/9 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Final chapter === +Darwin noted that the essential nectar, secreted to attract insects, seemed also in some cases to act as an excretion: "It is in perfect accordance with the scheme of nature, as worked out by natural selection, that matter excreted to free the system from superfluous or injuring substances should be utilised for purposes of the highest importance." Homologies of the flowers of orchids showed them all to be based on "fifteen groups of vessels, arranged three within three, in alternating order". He disparaged the idea that this was an "ideal type" fixed by the Omnipotent Creator, but attributed it instead to its "descent from some monocotyledonous plant, which, like so many other plants of the same division, possessed fifteen organs, arranged alternately three within three in five whorls; and that the now wonderfully changed structure of the flower is due to a long course of slow modification,—each modification having been preserved which was useful to each plant, during the incessant changes to which the organic and the inorganic world has been exposed". +Describing the final end state of the whole flower cycle as the production of seed, he set out a simple experiment in which he took a ripe seed capsule and arranged the seeds in a line, then counted the seeds in one-tenth of an inch (2.5 mm). By multiplication he found that each plant produced enough seeds to plant 1-acre (4,000 m2) of ground, and the great-grandchildren of a single plant could "carpet the entire surface of the land throughout the globe" if unchecked. +In conclusion, he felt that the book had "shown that Orchids exhibit an almost endless diversity of beautiful adaptations. When this or that part has been spoken of as contrived for some special purpose, it must not be supposed that it was originally always formed for this sole purpose. The regular course of events seems to be, that a part which originally served for one purpose, by slow changes becomes adapted for widely different purposes." +He was almost exasperated by the inventiveness of forms in nature; "In my examination of Orchids, hardly any fact has so much struck me as the endless diversity of structure,—the prodigality of resources,—for gaining the very same end, namely, the fertilisation of one flower by the pollen of another." His focus on detail was justified, as "The use of each trifling detail of structure is far from a barren search to those who believe in natural selection." The "contrivances and beautiful adaptations" slowly acquired through slight variations, subjected to natural selection "under the complex and ever-varying conditions of life", far transcended the most fertile imagination. The mechanisms to transport the pollen of one flower or of one plant to another flower or plant underlined the importance of cross-fertilisation: "For may we not further infer as probable, in accordance with the belief of the vast majority of the breeders of our domestic productions, that marriage between near relatives is likewise in some way injurious,—that some unknown great good is derived from the union of individuals which have been kept distinct for many generations?" + +== Reception == + +Botanists responded favourably to the book immediately on its publication. Hooker told Darwin that the book showed him to be "out of sight the best Physiological observer & experimenter that Botany ever saw", and was glad to note that two leading traditional botanists had accepted the concept of evolution; "Bentham & Oliver are quite struck up in a heap with your book & delighted beyond expression". Daniel Oliver thought it "very extraordinary", and even Darwin's old beetle-hunting rival Charles Babington, by then professor of botany at the University of Cambridge and inclined to oppose natural selection, called it "exceedingly interesting and valuable ... highly satisfactory in all respects. The results are most curious and the skill shown in discovering them equally so." George Bentham praised its value in opening "a new field for observing the wonderful provisions of Nature ... a new and unexpected track to guide us in the explanation of phenomena which had before that appeared so irreconcilable with the ordinary prevision and method shown in the organised world." +The book's success in botanical circles was enhanced following Bentham's public endorsement. In his presidential address to the Linnean Society on 24 May 1862, Bentham praised the book as exemplifying the biological method, and said that it had nearly overcome his opposition to the Origin. In his address in 1863 he stated that "Mr Darwin has shown how changes may take place", and described it as "an unimpeachable example of a legitimate hypothesis" in compliance with John Stuart Mill's scientific method. This endorsement favourably influenced Miles Joseph Berkeley, Charles Victor Naudin, Alphonse Pyramus de Candolle, Jean Louis Quatrefages, and Charles Daubeny. +In June 1862, Darwin welcomed favourable reviews in the press and wrote to Hooker; "Well my orchis-book is a success (but I do not know whether it sells) after cursing my folly in writing it". He told his publisher, "The Botanists praise my Orchid-book to the skies", and to Asa Gray he said, "I am fairly astonished at the success of my book with botanists." Darwin's geologist friend Charles Lyell gave it enthusiastic praise: "next to the Origin, as the most valuable of all Darwin's works." However, the book attracted little attention from the general public, and in September Darwin told his cousin Fox, "Hardly any one not a botanist, except yourself, as far as I know, has cared for it." The book baffled a general public more interested in controversy over gorillas and cavemen. There were some reviews in gardening magazines, but few natural philosophers or zoologists noticed the book, and hardly any learned appraisals appeared. + +=== Theological responses === \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-6.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-6.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ab526eda0 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-6.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +--- +title: "Fertilisation of Orchids" +chunk: 7/9 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Although the book contradicted the prevailing natural theology and its teleological approach to design in nature, the Saturday Review thought that it would avoid the angry polemics aroused by On the Origin of Species. The Literary Churchman welcomed "Mr. Darwin's expression of admiration at the contrivances in orchids", only complaining that it was too indirect a way of saying "O Lord, how manifold are Thy works!" (Psalm 104:24) Darwin regarded these theological views as irritating misunderstandings, but wrote to Asa Gray describing his approach as a "flank movement on the enemy". By showing that the "wonderful contrivances" of the orchid have discoverable evolutionary histories, Darwin was countering claims by natural theologians that the organisms were examples of the perfect work of the Creator. +There was considerable controversy surrounding Darwin's prediction that a moth would be found in Madagascar with a long proboscis matching the nectary of Angraecum sesquipedale. An anonymous article in the Edinburgh Review of October 1862 by George Campbell, 8th Duke of Argyll, argued that Darwin's wording implied purpose, and concluded that "We know, too, that these purposes and ideas are not our own, but the ideas and purposes of Another." He considered Darwin's explanations the "most unsatisfactory conjectures", and raised obscure metaphysical objections while supporting a kind of creative evolutionism. Emma Darwin thought that although Argyll was "quite opposed" to Darwin's views, "he praises the Orchids in such an enthusiastic way that he will do it a good turn". Darwin was delighted to find that a well written article "smashing" Argyll's review was by one of Darwin's own nephews. +Argyll went on in his 1867 book The Reign of Law to cleverly ridicule Darwin's ideas, particularly the prediction of a moth in Madagascar with a proboscis 10–11 inches (250–280 millimetres) long. He believed that adaptations showed divine purpose, not a mindless evolutionary arms race. In his response Creation by Law later that year, Alfred Russel Wallace produced a detailed explanation of how the nectary could have evolved through natural selection, and stated that he had carefully measured moths in the British Museum, finding that the proboscis of Macrosila cluentius from South America was 9+1⁄4 inches (230 mm) long, and the proboscis of Macrosila morganii from tropical Africa (since renamed Xanthopan morganii) was 7+1⁄2 inches (190 mm) long. An enquiry raised in 1873 was answered by Darwin's friend Hermann Müller, who stated that his brother Fritz Müller had caught a sphinx moth in Brazil with a proboscis nearly 10 inches (250 mm) long. Darwin's anticipation was fully met in 1903, when a subspecies of Xanthopan morganii was found in Madagascar with a proboscis about 12 inches (300 mm) long, and was named Xanthopan morganii praedicta to celebrate this verification of a testable prediction made by Darwin on the basis of his theory of natural selection. + +== Influence == +Michael Ghiselin has expressed the view that all studies of coevolution follow directly or indirectly from Darwin's orchid book, which was also the origin of all work on the evolution of extreme specialisation. Its publication led almost immediately to research by many other naturalists into specialisation and coevolution, in some cases analysing other taxa. In his autobiography, Darwin modestly recalled how this work had revived interest in Christian Konrad Sprengel's neglected ideas: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-7.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-7.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..839f2cacb --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-7.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +--- +title: "Fertilisation of Orchids" +chunk: 8/9 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +For some years before 1862 I had specially attended to the fertilisation of our British orchids; and it seemed to me the best plan to prepare as complete a treatise on this group of plants as well as I could, rather than to utilise the great mass of matter which I had slowly collected with respect to other plants. My resolve proved a wise one; for since the appearance of my book, a surprising number of papers and separate works on the fertilisation of all kinds of flowers have appeared; and these are far better done than I could possibly have effected. The merits of poor old Sprengel, so long overlooked, are now fully recognised many years after his death. +Among the many prominent biologists who began research on coevolution, Hermann Müller was particularly interested in the evolutionary sequence in which insects and flowers became adapted to each other. Like Darwin, he began with the premise that flowers were adapted to ensure cross-fertilisation, and added his own premise that most insects were not "limited by hereditary instinct to particular flowers". On this basis, he developed the view that specialisation develops from the need for flowers to attract pollinating insects (without making access too easy for non-pollinators), and from the evolution of pollinators to adapt to changes in the location of rewards such as nectar. He found that alpine flowers tended to be visited by bees at lower altitudes, and by butterflies at higher altitudes, beginning research on the idea that plants at different altitudes were specialised for different pollinators. By comparing related plant species that he thought had diverged in form from a common ancestor, and testing whether they were visited by butterflies or bees, he was the first to use a combination of morphological and ecological approaches to understand patterns in the evolution of interactions and specialisation. His brother Fritz Müller used similar methods when studying mimicry in Brazil. The early development of ideas on specialisation and coevolution became increasingly focused on the problem of mimicry; Henry Walter Bates had initially raised this issue in a paper read to the Linnean Society of London in December 1861 in Darwin's presence, and published in November 1862. +Others basing their studies of reproductive ecology on Darwin's evolutionary approach included Friedrich Hildebrand and Severin Axell in Europe, Asa Gray and Charles Robertson in North America. In Italy, Federigo Delpino adopted the theory of descent but like Sprengel had a teleological approach and explained the mechanisms of flowers by the intervention of a "psychovitalistic intelligence". Delpino classified flowers on the basis of the pollinators they attracted, and coined many of the terms still in use such as pollination syndrome and ornithophily. There was an enormous increase in knowledge during this period. In 1874, Asa Gray paid tribute to Darwin's work on orchids for explaining "all these and other extraordinary structures, as well as of the arrangement of blossoms in general, and even the very meaning and need of sexual propagation". He credited Darwin with establishing the understanding that "Nature abhors close fertilization". +By the end of the 19th century, there were so many uncritical and unproven speculations about floral mechanisms that floral ecology became discredited. In the 1920s, it was revived with further developments in detailed analyses of insects' senses, led by researchers Frederic Clements, Karl von Frisch and others. Their experiments resulted in new information, including the discovery that some insects have ultraviolet vision, and findings involving bee learning and communication. Modern floral ecology has been reinvigorated by its relevance for evolutionary studies. + +== Further research by Darwin == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-8.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-8.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bc91306cf --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids-8.md @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +--- +title: "Fertilisation of Orchids" +chunk: 9/9 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fertilisation_of_Orchids" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:38.882356+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Darwin had "found the study of orchids eminently useful in showing me how nearly all parts of the flower are coadapted for fertilisation by insects, & therefore the result of n. selection,—even most trifling details of structure". His own interest in orchids and in fertilisation of plants by insects continued. Darwin had been given the use of a hot-house at The Rookery on the other side of the village, and at the end of 1862 he was persuaded by this neighbour's helpful gardener to have his own built at Down House as an extension to the existing cold lean-to greenhouse. The gardener drew up plans, and Darwin investigated stoves and ventilation devices. When it was completed in February 1863 he asked Hooker for some plants from Kew Gardens, writing "I long to stock it, just like a school-boy", and sent his butler with a cart. When over 160 different plants were delivered, Darwin made apologetic remarks about depleting the national collection. He told Hooker "You cannot imagine what pleasure your plants give me ... Henrietta & I go & gloat over them." Darwin's life was changed by having a warm hothouse to spend time in before his walk round the Sandwalk, and in the 1870s he had several more hothouses built. The children later remembered this routine and the gardeners attending to Darwin's experimental plants, as well as the way that Darwin used simple equipment for his experiments, dissecting and measuring plants and seeds. +A chance observation "thoroughly aroused" Darwin's attention to a surprising decrease in vigour of the offspring of Linaria vulgaris following only one instance of self-fertilisation, and after eleven years of experimental work he published The Effects of Cross and Self Fertilisation in the Vegetable Kingdom in 1876 as "a complement to the 'Fertilisation of Orchids,' because it shows how important are the results of cross-fertilisation which are ensured by the mechanisms described in that book." He told a friend "I cannot endure doing nothing", and resumed his work on orchids, assisted in his research by his son Francis Darwin. He corresponded about orchids with Fritz Müller, and almost completely rewrote the book with a considerable amount of new material, much of which was contributed by Müller. The revised edition was published in 1877. +Francis Darwin described it as characteristic that his father delighted in the observations that preceded the publication of Fertilisation of Orchids, not the applause which followed it. He quoted one of his father's last letters about orchids, written in 1880: + +They are wonderful creatures, these Orchids, and I sometimes think with a glow of pleasure, when I remember making out some little point in their method of fertilisation. + +== Commemoration of Darwin's work on orchids == +Kent Wildlife Trust manages Downe Bank, which is near Down House and was a favourite place of the Darwin family, who called it 'Orchis Bank' because of the many wild orchids which grew there. It is now part of the 'Downe Bank and High Elms' Site of Special Scientific Interest. Darwin's observations of local orchids and their insect pollinators gave him the evidence for co-evolution which provided the basis for the Fertilisation of Orchids." Experts have identified "Orchis Bank" as the species-rich setting encapsulated in the closing paragraph of On the Origin of Species, in which Darwin wrote: + +It is interesting to contemplate an entangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent on each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us. +Darwin's home and its surroundings, including specifically "Orchis Bank", have been called his landscape laboratory, and together were nominated in January 2009 for designation as a World Heritage Site. The bid was made by a partnership led by the London Borough of Bromley, which now includes Downe. It was included in the 39 proposed properties, but was not in the 21 new sites selected for the list. +The influence of Darwin's work was commemorated in the Smithsonian Institution's 15th Annual Orchid Show, Orchids Through Darwin's Eyes, 24 January to 26 April 2009. + +== See also == +Pollination of orchids + +== Notes == + +== References == + +== External links == + +The Complete Works of Charles Darwin Online gives online access to Darwin's writings: see "Darwin Online: Fertilisation of Orchids". Retrieved 31 July 2009. for links to English, French and German editions of the book. +The Darwin Correspondence Project is the source used for letters, published online following their publication in print as explained in Darwin Correspondence Project » The Correspondence of Charles Darwin. See also Correspondence of Charles Darwin. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_Virology-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_Virology-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bc34280ad --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_Virology-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +--- +title: "Fields Virology" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fields_Virology" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:40.085413+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Fields Virology is an English-language virology textbook, originally it was published in two volumes and edited by Bernard N. Fields. The first edition in 1985 was called Virology, but from the second edition, the book's title was changed to Fields Virology. The book is widely regarded as an influential work on the subject and is cited as the "bible of virology" by many virologists. +Fields was the senior editor for the first three editions of the textbook. After his death in 1995, subsequent editions have retained his name in the title. The sixth edition was published in 2013 by Wolters Kluwer under the Lippincott Williams & Wilkins imprint and it was edited by David M. Knipe and Peter M. Howley. +Volume 1 (of 4) of the seventh edition was published in 2020. The fourth volume including ebook was published in June 2023. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figments_of_Reality-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figments_of_Reality-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c73056056 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figments_of_Reality-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "Figments of Reality" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Figments_of_Reality" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:41.241633+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Figments of Reality: The Evolution of the Curious Mind (1997) is a book about the evolution of the intelligent and conscious human mind by biologist Jack Cohen and mathematician Ian Stewart. + + +== Overview == +In this book Cohen and Stewart give their ideas on how the sentient human being evolved. Various chapters discuss scientific and +philosophical ideas such as emergence and chaos, free will, perception versus reality, objectivity versus subjectivity, self-awareness, the ego and id, groupthink, and extelligence. A theme is that the traditional reductionist approach of trying to understand things as interaction of simpler things can not alone explain such complex concepts as intelligence or culture. To better understand them one has to consider also the context in which they have evolved and the fact that the evolution is a recursive process, often changing the context so that previously unseen evolutionary paths became available. The authors claim that intelligence is an inevitable result of letting evolution progress for long enough. +Topics are illustrated with humorous science fiction snippets dealing with a hypothetical alien intelligence, the Zarathustrians, whom Cohen and Stewart use as metaphors of the human mind itself, an alternative evolution story, and various philosophical concepts. + + +== References == +Jack Cohen and Ian Stewart: Figments of Reality: The Evolution of the Curious Mind, Cambridge University Press, 1997, ISBN 0-521-57155-3 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_House b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Full_House new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e69de29bb diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzz b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzz new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e69de29bb diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God-Apes_and_Fossil_Men-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God-Apes_and_Fossil_Men-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..423e8acd9 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God-Apes_and_Fossil_Men-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +--- +title: "God-Apes and Fossil Men" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God-Apes_and_Fossil_Men" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:43.516783+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +God-Apes and Fossil Men is a book on paleoanthropology in the Indian subcontinent by Kenneth A.R. Kennedy (Ann Arbor, 2000). The book is a detailed study of the history of Indian paleoanthropology and of the fossil record of prehistoric people of the Indian Subcontinent. + + +== Contents == +The fifth chapter is about the prehistoric God-Apes of the Siwalik hills. Other chapters describe the fossil hominids of the Pleistocene. The Mesolithic skeletal record is also described, and the last chapters treat the Harappan civilization and the Megalith builders. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Publisher announcement +Review by Lynne A. Schepartz \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Natured-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Natured-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0c1a0b1e0 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Natured-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +--- +title: "Good Natured" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Natured" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:44.657322+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Good Natured is a book by primatologist Frans de Waal on animal behavior and the evolution of ethics. + + +== Publishing history == +The book was published in 1996 by Harvard University Press under the full title Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals. Much of the book details observations of primate behavior, especially that of chimpanzees and bonobos. On the final page, he concludes: + +We seem to be reaching a point at which science can wrest morality from the hands of philosophers. That this is already happening—albeit largely at a theoretical level—is evident from recent books by, among others, Richard D. Alexander, Robert Frank, James Q. Wilson, and Robert Wright (journalist). The occasional disagreements within this budding field are far outweighed by the shared belief that evolution needs to be part of any satisfactory explanation of morality. … It takes up space in our heads, it reaches out to fellow human beings, and it is as much a part of what we are as the tendencies that it holds in check. + + +== Notes == + + +== References == +Frans, de Waal (1996). Good Natured: The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals. London: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-35660-8. + + +== External links == +Good Natured at the Harvard University Press +Review by Elena Madison Archived 2006-10-12 at the Wayback Machine +Review by William C. McGrew \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grossology_(book_series)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grossology_(book_series)-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e10bcfafe --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grossology_(book_series)-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ +--- +title: "Grossology (book series)" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grossology_(book_series)" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:46.945712+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Grossology (ISBN 0-201-40964-X) is a non-fiction children's book written by Sylvia Branzei and published by Price Stern Sloan in 1992. It is a frank, thorough, yet light-hearted examination of various unappealing bodily functions and medical conditions. The topics are organized into three categories: “Slimy Mushy Oozy Gross Things,” (vomit, diarrhea, urine, acne, blisters, etc.); “Crusty Scaly Gross Things,” (dandruff, tooth decay, etc.); and “Stinky Smelly Gross Things,” (halitosis, flatulence, etc.). The text is also accompanied by many humorous illustrations, which were provided by Jack Keely. +Grossology spawned several sequels, most notably Animal Grossology (ISBN 0-201-95994-1) and Grossology Begins at Home (ISBN 0-201-95993-3), both written and illustrated by Branzei and Keely. Animal Grossology, published in 1996, is an exploration of various organisms that either produce or consume unappealing substances. It is divided into four sections: “Vomit Munchers” (flies, starfish, etc.); “Blood Slurpers” (leeches, ticks, etc.); “Slime Makers” (hagfish, slime mold, sea cucumbers, etc.); and “Dookie Lovers” (tapeworms, dung beetles, etc.). Grossology Begins at Home, published in 1997, focuses on the hidden germs and unseen pests that thrive in a typical house. One of the highlights of this book is a chapter on Defect Action Levels, the acceptable amounts of animal contaminants and insect parts that can be found in foods. The book also teaches children how to grow their own bacteria. +Grossology has also inspired two CD-ROMs (Grossology: The Science of Really Gross Things (1997) and Virtual Grossology (1998)), a highly popular traveling exhibition, and a children's television series. + + +== See also == + +Barf-O-Rama +Slimeballs + + +== References == + + +== External links == +The Grossology Touring Edutainment Exhibit (archived) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulp b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulp new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e69de29bb diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hen's_Teeth_and_Horse's_Toes-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hen's_Teeth_and_Horse's_Toes-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..fd3ef33b3 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hen's_Teeth_and_Horse's_Toes-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +--- +title: "Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hen's_Teeth_and_Horse's_Toes" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:10.294802+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes (1983) is Stephen Jay Gould's third volume of collected essays reprinted from his monthly columns for Natural History magazine titled "This View of Life". +Three essays appeared elsewhere. "Evolution as Fact and Theory" first appeared in Discover magazine in May 1981; "Phyletic size decrease in Hershey bars" appeared in C. J. Rubins's Junk Food, 1980; and his "Reply to Critics", was written specifically for this volume as a commentary upon criticism of essay 16, "The Piltdown Conspiracy". + + +== Awards == +The book was awarded the 1983 Phi Beta Kappa Award for Science from the Phi Beta Kappa Society. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Steven Rose, "And Zebra Stripes and Chocolate Bars", The New York Times, 8 May 1983, section 7, page 3. +Richard Dawkins, "The Art of the Developable. Review of Pluto's Republic by Peter Medawar and Hen's Teeth and Horse's Toes by Stephen Jay Gould", reprinted in The Devil's Chaplain: Selected Essays, Phoenix, 2003 (ISBN 978-0-7538-1750-6). +W. W. Norton's promotional page \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_the_Snake_Lost_Its_Legs-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_the_Snake_Lost_Its_Legs-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..fa482b6d5 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_the_Snake_Lost_Its_Legs-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +--- +title: "How the Snake Lost Its Legs" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_the_Snake_Lost_Its_Legs" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:51.528717+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +How the Snake Lost Its Legs: Curious Tales from the Frontier of Evo-Devo is a 2014 book on evolutionary developmental biology by Lewis I. Held, Jr. The title pays homage to Rudyard Kipling's Just So Stories, but the "tales" are strictly scientific, explaining how a wide range of animal features evolved, in molecular detail. The book has been admired by other biologists as both accurate and accessible. + + +== Context == + +Lewis Irving Held, Jr. is a professor of developmental genetics at Texas Tech University. His laboratory is known for its research on pattern formation in the fruit fly embryo. His books on evolutionary developmental biology (evo-devo) include Imaginal Discs: The Genetic and Cellular Logic of Pattern Formation (2002), Quirks of Human Anatomy: An Evo-Devo Look at the Human Body (2009), and Deep Homology? Uncanny Similarities of Humans and Flies Uncovered by Evo-Devo (2017). In Held's view, Quirks, Snake, and Deep Homology form a trilogy on evo-devo. + + +== Book == + + +=== Contents === +How the Snake Lost Its Legs is ostensibly organised into six chapters, but in effect into three parts. The first chapter serves as an introduction and overview. The next four chapters provide what Held calls "the meatier aspects of evo-devo" with "many gristly facts" to chew over and "many tough lessons" to digest. The sixth, he writes, offers "tastier treats". +The first chapter introduces "the first two-sided animal", the urbilaterian which lived some 600 million years ago. Held calls the discovery that every bilaterally symmetric animal's body is shaped by the same set of genes "evo-devo's greatest revelation". That group of animals includes nematodes, annelids, molluscs and echinoderms, among other phyla. He explains, with detailed diagrams of arthropod and chordate development and a brief, richly-cited but conversational text, how that symmetry is produced. + +The next four chapters are on the fly, the butterfly, the snake, and the cheetah. Each consists of three to eight sections named in the style of Rudyard Kipling's Just So Stories, with titles like "How the butterfly got its spots" or "How the snake elongated its body", though a couple of sections use "Why?" rather than "How?", as in "Why the fly twirls his penis" (it rotates during embryonic development under the control of different genes). In these chapters, Held explains the mechanics of evolutionary developmental biology, complete with accounts of what genes such as hox, hedgehog, and engrailed do to shape bodies. +The third part is a single chapter providing "An evo-devo bestiary," a long list of stories, such as "How the turtle got its shell", "How the vampire bat reinvented running", "How the quetzal got its crest", and "How the firefly got its flashlight". These are Just So only in name, since each one is reliably cited to recent research rather than an author's whimsy. Since by this point the reader has been introduced to the core elements of the evo-devo gene toolkit, Held makes each section brief, 50 stories in 32 pages, and minimally technical: he discusses what the evo-devo system achieves in terms of each animal's structures and organs, ecology and behaviour. +The main text is supported by an accurate glossary and thorough index. Glossary terms are printed in boldface in the text, a helpful feature, while the glossary, like the text, is cited to the key research papers on which the book is based. The book thus provides a wide overview of evo-devo, with guidance on how to read more deeply on any chosen aspect. + + +=== Publication === + +The book was published by Cambridge University Press as a paperback in 2014 (ISBN 978-1-107-62139-8). The main text is 148 pages, with an 8-page glossary of evo-devo, and over 2500 references taking up 122 pages. +It is illustrated with monochrome diagrams, drawings and photographs in the text, and 8 pages of colour photographs. Held created the diagrams and drawings. + + +== Reception == +The taxonomist Marc Srour writes that Held must be commended for not oversimplifying evo-devo, since, "The need to combine precise genetic and developmental labwork with phylogenetic systematics and homology inference means that simplifying the whole ordeal for a lay audience is extremely tricky." Srour sets the book alongside those of Stephen Jay Gould and Sean B. Carroll's Endless Forms Most Beautiful as a showcase of evo-devo. He writes that Held has "give[n] us a readable, in-depth look at evo-devo and all the questions it can answer, from the important, to the fascinating, to the weird/cool facts you can repeat whenever you're at the pub. It's accessible to non-biologists and laymen, useful for teachers and undergrads, and ... researcher[s]." + +The evolutionary biologist Larry Flammer "warns" readers that when they look at the pictures or study Held's diagrams, they, "will be captivated by the full-page captions, and probably drawn into the effort to really understand what is happening. The graphics do, indeed, help immensely to do this." Flammer notes, too, that many of the "nuts and bolts of evolution, deeper than just natural selection" are on display in the book, revealing, "precisely what genetic/physiological mechanisms are being selected for". +The molecular biologist Arnaud Martin observes that, "As children, we have all wondered about 'the How and the Why' of animal features, and if you are reading this it is in fact quite possible that a similar inquisitiveness still burns within you. The tone of How the Snake Lost its Legs finds its roots in the famous Just So Stories of Rudyard Kipling by tickling this curiosity with the formulaic How the leopard/elephant/camel got its spots/trunk/hump. Held's ability to captivate the reader's imagination compares to the mischievousness of Kipling's pourquoi stories," but the reader, "is also encouraged to extrapolate from general principles by the constant reminder that animals use a conserved set of developmental genes to construct their bodies." Martin finds evo-devo fascinating, "inherently colorful and well placed to fulfill the dual goal of etiological myths: explaining origins and causes while also stirring imagination and awe. Overall, the latest opus by Lewis Held Jr. fits that niche nicely, and shines by its ability to span essential concepts and empirical work with enough rhetoric[al] punch. It is accessible to most readers with a light background in biology", though not as suitable for "the [university] classroom as Held's Quirks of Human Anatomy." + + +== See also == +Endless Forms Most Beautiful (Sean B. Carroll, 2005) + + +== Notes == + + +== References == + + +== Sources == +Held, Lewis Irving (2014). How the Snake Lost its Legs : Curious Tales from the Frontier of Evo-Devo. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-62139-8. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Biology_(book)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Biology_(book)-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3e689e08e --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Biology_(book)-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +--- +title: "Human Biology (book)" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Biology_(book)" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:52.702095+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Human Biology is a basic biology textbook published in 1993 by Jones & Bartlett Learning. It has been recognized as a "good introductory text" for students without a strong scientific background. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Human Biology \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Have_Landed-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Have_Landed-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..5634d4f6a --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Have_Landed-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +--- +title: "I Have Landed" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Have_Landed" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:11.495790+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +I Have Landed (2002) is the 10th and final volume of collected essays by the Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. The essays were culled from his monthly column "This View of Life" in Natural History magazine, to which Gould contributed for 27 years. The book deals, in typically discursive fashion, with themes familiar to Gould's writing: evolution and its teaching, science biography, probabilities and common sense. +The series of consecutive essays began in 1974, ending in January 2001 with the title essay "I have landed." The title refers to the very first words his grandfather Papa Joe wrote as he arrived on Ellis Island, New York as a newly arrived Hungarian immigrant, September 11, 1901. +In I Have Landed, Gould examines Isabelle Duncan's writings in 1860, in which she tried to reconcile the Biblical creation story and geography. He also provides an analysis of Johann Friedrich Blumenbach's classification of humans into five races. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +A Grand Finale - by Robin McKie, The Observer. +Review of I Have Landed +Book review - by Jim Walker \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunstformen_der_Natur-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunstformen_der_Natur-0.md index e8241f33c..eb11618e0 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunstformen_der_Natur-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunstformen_der_Natur-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kunstformen_der_Natur" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:30:00.723589+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:53.932600+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo's_Mountain_of_Clams_and_the_Diet_of_Worms-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo's_Mountain_of_Clams_and_the_Diet_of_Worms-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..55c4d252d --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo's_Mountain_of_Clams_and_the_Diet_of_Worms-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +--- +title: "Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo's_Mountain_of_Clams_and_the_Diet_of_Worms" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:12.674176+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Leonardo's Mountain of Clams and the Diet of Worms (1998) is the eighth volume of collected essays by the Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. This collection focuses on what Gould calls "humanistic natural history". +The essays were culled from his monthly column "The View of Life" in Natural History magazine, to which Gould contributed for 27 years. The book deals, in typically discursive fashion, with themes familiar to Gould's writing: evolution and its teaching, science biography, probabilities and common sense. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Book Review: by Jacqueline Boone, New York Times +The Royal Road of Science: by Bryan Appleyard, Spectator +Book review: by Jim Sullivan, Humanist +Review by Graham Brack, Renaissance +Book Review by Jim Walker +Book summary: by Ryan Robinson +Profile Page (with introduction) - Unofficial Stephen Jay Gould Archive \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Vélins_du_Roi-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Vélins_du_Roi-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..782803b51 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Vélins_du_Roi-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +--- +title: "Les Vélins du Roi" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Vélins_du_Roi" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:50.015233+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Les Vélins du Roi (The King's Vellums) is a collection of 6984 paintings of plants and animals started in 1631 to document specimens from the royal garden and animal collection. Foremost illustrators contributed to the codex during the reigns of Louis XIII, Louis XIV and Louis XV, and the codex was finally entrusted to the Muséum national d'histoire naturelle in 1793, where it still is. According to Ernest Hamy, the Muséum has a "collection of flowers painted by Jean Le Roy de la Boissière", 1610, consisting of 44 watercolour-illuminated vellums, 39 cm × 29 cm; reference Ms 2224) acquired for the Muséum in 1888 by Joseph Deniker. These pages are “sometimes decorated on one side only, and sometimes on both sides, with very fine paintings representing flowers, insects, etc.”. Le Roy devotes some twenty pages to tulips (including several wild tulips), presents a few fruits (including tomatoes and red peppers), and adds a few insects and snails here and there. A smaller vellum (31.1 cm by 20.2 cm) depicting an iris made in Poitiers (where Le Roy lived) in 1608 by one Van Kuyk, a pupil of van Kessel appears in the Cleveland Museum of Art which presents it as a page from a florilegium commissioned by Le Roy in 1608 and illustrated by several artists, perhaps including himself. Hamy recalls that Le Roy's talent was celebrated by the poet and apothecary Paul Contant, who said: "Du Sieur de la Boissière, Architas Poitevin, / Timanthe sans égal, dont la dextre savante, / fait tout ce que nature à notre œil représente (Jardin poétique, p. 83). In the same article, Hamy mentions Daniel Rabel, painter, engraver, miniaturist and botanist. From 1618, Rabel painted his Suite de fleurs (1624, referred to on Gallica as a Collection of flowers and insects drawn and painted in miniature on vellum.). The volume contains one hundred vellums, 239 painted images of plants (mainly tulips, but also anemones, narcissi and yucca) and 32 of insects. The work entered the royal collections in 1783. 1622 saw the publication of Theatrum florae In quo ex toto orbe selecti mirabiles venustiores ac praecipui flores tanquam ab ipsus deae sinu proferuntur: 69 engraved plates of flowers and insects. Some of the plates were illuminated. According to Hamy, the same collection was presented to the public in 1627, attributed to Pierre Firens (the king's engraver and embroiderer), then in 1633 to Pierre Mariette (Jean Mariette's grand-father). Although the Suite was published later, it seems that the engravings were based on the miniatures. It seems that the museum also has six vellum prints dated 1631 and 1632 that could be by Daniel Rabel ('Tulipe panachée flamboyante' and 'Colombine de Chartres', etc. Colombine is an old word for aquilegia). The painter-miniaturist Nicolas Robert worked for Gaston, Duke of Orléans (brother of King Louis XIII) from 1631, after the miniatures he painted for the famous Guirlande de Julie (1641) had made him famous. The Prince, who had no doubt employed Rabel, took him into his service to produce miniatures on vellum after the plants grown in the Jardin du Luxembourg, then (1645) in the garden of the Château of Blois where Gaston had founded a botanic garden (and an aviary) and cultivated a wealth of rare plants. The director of the gardens, Scottish botanist Robert Morison, is believed to have inspired Robert to illustrate the resident plants. Gaston of Orléans died in 1660, bequeathing his collections (cabinet of curiosities, medals, antiques, vellums) to his nephew, Louis XIV, who lodged them at the Jardin des Plantes in Paris. Colbert encouraged Louis to continue making what became the King's vellum collection. In 1664, Nicolas Robert obtained a new position, that of ‘Peintre ordinaire du Roy pour la miniature’. From then on, he used as models the plants indicated to him by the naturalists of the (created in 1626) and the birds of the Royal Menagerie of Versailles (His successors went to the Ménagerie du Jardin des Plantes when it was created in 1794). We owe him more than 700 miniatures on vellum, nearly 500 of which have plants as their subject. The vellum miniatures are held by the Museum, and the printed ones by the Bibliothèque Nationale (including a Recueil de plantes et de fleurs dessinnées (sic) à la sanguine). He also contributed to the Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire des plantes (with Abraham Bosse for the engraving). On his death, he was succeeded by Louis de Chastillon who, in addition to his artistic work, was a draughtsman for the French Academy of Sciences. He worked with a number of medical doctors and, in botany, with Guy de La Brosse, Denis Dodart and Robert. Jean-Baptiste Massé studied under him. Jacques Bailly was Robert's pupil and assistant for miniature painting and engraving. Robert's successors as painters of the plants in the royal botanical garden were Jean Joubert (1643-1707), who was assisted by Claude Aubriet. Aubriet had previously accompanied Joseph Pitton de Tournefort (1656-1708) to the Middle East; Tournefort commissioned him to illustrate his celebrated Elemens de Botanique (Paris, 1694) (and the new enlarged edition, Institutiones rei herbariae, 1700). Aubriet also provided the illustrations for the 1727 edition of Sébastien Vaillant's Botanicon parisiense (1723). Françoise Basseporte was a pupil of Aubriet, whom she succeeded in 1743. She taught floral miniature painting to the daughters of Louis XV. Among her pupils were Marie Marguerite Bihéron and Pierre-Joseph Redouté, who was also a pupil of Gerard van Spaendonck (1746-1822), who, born in the Netherlands and arriving in Paris in 1769, became miniaturist at the court of Louis XVI in 1774 and Basseporte's successor in 1780. He enriched the King's vellum collection with more than fifty works. In 1793, he was appointed to the chair of natural iconography at the newly created Muséum national d'histoire naturelle: it was to train miniaturist painters, now specialised in botany or zoology and recruited by competition; their works now had an explicitly scientific purpose. He was also responsible for the 'Fleurs Dessinees d'apres Nature' (1801), 24 plates engraved by Charles Ruotte for student painters. He also illustrated the 'Annales du Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle' (20 volumes, from 1802 to 1813) and painted flower still lifes. He, of course, had many students: Pierre Antoine Poiteau, Jean Henri Jaume Saint-Hilaire, Antoine Chazal, Henriëtte Geertruida Knip, Jan Frans van Dael, Piat Joseph Sauvage, Charlotte Eustace Sophie de Fuligny-Damas, and especially Pancrace Bessa and the Redouté brothers. Pierre-Joseph Redouté, nicknamed 'the Raphael of flowers', was Marie-Antoinette's painter, worked at the Muséum, went to Kew Gardens, returned to draw for the Academy of Sciences, became Joséphine de Beauharnais's painter, then gave drawing lessons at the Muséum. We are indebted to him for a large number of first-class works. Of particular note is a catalogue of flowers, Description des plantes nouvelles et peu connues, cultivées dans le jardin de J. M. Cels. Avec figures, showing exotic plants cultivated by the gardener Cels. The author is the botanist Étienne Pierre Ventenat. One of P-J Redouté's students was Henriette Vincent. In the preface to Les Roses, Redouté briefly reviews the history of botanical illustration since antiquity. He then concentrates on the history of the depiction of roses. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Vélins_du_Roi-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Vélins_du_Roi-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..a9fb60ce5 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Vélins_du_Roi-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +--- +title: "Les Vélins du Roi" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Vélins_du_Roi" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:50.015233+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Henri-Joseph Redouté (1766-1852) was a painter at the Muséum, then took part in the Commission des Sciences et des Arts during the "Expedition to Egypt", in the company of botanists such as Ernest Coquebert de Monbret, Hippolyte Nectoux and Raffeneau-Delile - the latter being responsible for the botanical plates in the Description de l'Égypte, illustrated with engravings taken from Redouté's watercolours on Bristol paper. [Pancrace Bessa (1772-1846) succeeded Henri Redouté as painter at the Natural History Museum in 1823. Ange-Louis-Guillaume Le Sourd de Beauregard (Paris, 17 April 1800 – 1886), a pupil of van Spaendonck and a painter of flowers, also became a professor of iconography in 1841. We can also mention Adèle Riché; Jean Saturnin Abeille de Fontaine (born in Paris in 1721, the son of Joseph Abeille); Édouard Maubert (1806-1879), who specialised in botanical and horticultural illustrations; Alfred Riocreux (1820-1912), a painter at the Manufacture Royale de Porcelaine at Sèvres, he drew for Gustave Thuret, algologist, whom he accompanied to Cherbourg (around 1844-45). He bequeathed many vellums to the Muséum from 1849 to 1857. Charles-Émile Cuisin was a pupil of Horace Lecoq de Boisbaudran: Atlas de la flore des environs de Paris by Ernest Cosson and Germain de Saint-Pierre, illustrations by Germain de Saint-Pierre, Riocreux and Cuisin; two African floras (one by Georges Révoil, the other by Émile Auguste Joseph De Wildeman and Théophile Alexis Durand). The vellum collection slowed down towards the middle of the 19th century and then stopped, only to resume a century later (Marie-Pierre Le Sellin is the latest contributor). See the digitised vellums on the Muséum's site: [7]. In the column on the left, look for "Collection d'images" and click on "Collection des vélins du Muséum national d'histoire naturelle (54)" +In 2016 the firm of Citadelles & Mazenod published a 624-page volume depicting 800 of the plates from the collection. + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_about_mushrooms-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_about_mushrooms-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0ae0f224d --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_about_mushrooms-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,91 @@ +--- +title: "List of books about mushrooms" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_about_mushrooms" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:55.034027+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +This is a list of published books about mushrooms and mycology, including their history in relation to man, their identification, their usage as food and medicine, and their ecology. + +== Identification guides == +These are larger works that may be hard to take on a hike but help with in depth identification after mushroom hunting. + +Kuo, Michael (2005). Morels. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0472030361. +Pacioni, Giovanni (1981). Simon and Schuster's Guide to Mushrooms. New York: Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-0671428495. +Stamets, Paul (1978). Psilocybe Mushrooms & Their Allies. Seattle Berkeley, Calif: Homestead Book Co. Distributed nationally by And/Or Press. ISBN 0-930180-03-8. +Stamets, Paul (1996). Psilocybin Mushrooms of the World: An Identification Guide. Berkeley, Calif: Ten Speed Press. ISBN 0-89815-839-7. + +=== Europe === +These are identification guides relevant only to Europe. + +Bondartsev, A.S. (1971). The Polyporaceae of the European USSR and Caucasia. Jerusalem, Israel: Program for Scientific Translations. OCLC 204648. +Breitenbach, J (1984). Fungi of Switzerland. Mad River Press. ISBN 978-0916422479. +Kavina, Karel (1934). Atlas des Champignons de l'Europe (in French). Praha: Chez les éditeurs. OCLC 3065296.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) +Lange, Jakob (1983). Guide des Champignons (in French). Neuchâtel: Delachaux et Niestle. ISBN 9782603004692. +Lange, Morten (1967). Notes on the Macromycetes of Northern Norway (Acta Borealia, A. Scientia No. 23). Tromsø, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. +Skirgiełło, Alina (1975). Fungi: Basidiomycetes, Boletales (Gryzyby). Warsaw, Poland: The Foreign Scientific Publications Dept. of the National Center for Scientific, Technical and Economic Information. OCLC 3073155. +Sterry, Paul (1991). Fungi of Britain and Northern Europe. London: Chancellor. ISBN 978-1851528103. +Buczacki, Stefan (2012). Collins Fungi Guide. HarperCollins. ISBN 9780007466481. +Thompson, Peter (2013). Ascomycetes in Colour: Found and Photographed in Mainland Britain. Great Britain: Xlibris Corporation. ISBN 978-1479747559. + +=== North America === +These are identification guides relevant only to North America. Below are sections detailing specific regions of North America, such as the Southeastern United States and the Pacific Northwest. + +Bessette, Alan (2016). Boletes of Eastern North America. Syracuse, New York: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0815610748. +Bessette, Alan (2009). Milk Mushrooms of North America: A Field Identification Guide to the Genus Lactarius. Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0815632290. +Bessette, Alan (2010). North American Boletes: A Color Guide to the Fleshy Pored Mushrooms. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0815632443. +Bessette, Alan (2013). Tricholomas of North America: A Mushroom Field Guide. Austin: University of Texas Press. ISBN 9780292742345. +Bessette, Alan (2012). Waxcap Mushrooms of Eastern North America. Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0815632689. +Beug, Michael (2014). Ascomycete Fungi of North America: A Mushroom Reference Guide. Austin: University of Texas Press. ISBN 978-0292742338. +Kerrigan, Richard (2016). Agaricus of North America. Bronx, New York, USA: New York Botanical Garden. ISBN 978-0-89327-536-5. +Miller, Orson (2006). North American Mushrooms: A Field Guide to Edible and Inedible Fungi. Guilford, Conn: Falcon Guide. ISBN 9780762731091. +Phillips, Roger (2005). Mushrooms & Other Fungi of North America. Buffalo, NY: Firefly Books. ISBN 9781554071159. + +==== Alaska ==== +Laursen, Gary (2009). Common Interior Alaska Cryptogams: Fungi, Lichenicolous Fungi, Lichenized Fungi, Slime Molds, Mosses, and Liverworts. Fairbanks, Alaska: University of Alaska Press. ISBN 978-1602230583. + +==== Northeastern United States ==== +These are identification guides relevant to the Northeastern United States. + +Baroni, Timothy (2017). Mushrooms of the Northeastern United States and Eastern Canada. Portland, Oregon: Timber Press. ISBN 978-1604696349. +Barron, George (2015). Mushrooms of Northeast North America. Vancouver, BC: Partners Publishing. ISBN 978-1772130003. +Bessette, Alan (2006). Common Edible and Poisonous Mushrooms of New York. Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0815608486. +Bessette, Alan (1997). Mushrooms of Northeastern North America. Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0815603887. +Bessette, Arleen (2001). Mushrooms of Cape Cod and the National Seashore. Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0815606888. +Binion, Denise (2008). Macrofungi Associated With Oaks of Eastern North America. Morgantown: West Virginia University Press. ISBN 978-1933202365. +Russell, Bill (2006). Field Guide to Wild Mushrooms of Pennsylvania and the Mid-Atlantic. University Park, Pa: Pennsylvania State University Press. ISBN 978-0271028910. + +==== Midwestern United States ==== +These are identification guides relevant to the Midwestern United States. + +Kauffman, C. H. (1971). The Gilled Mushrooms (Agaricaceae) of Michigan and the Great Lakes Region. New York: Dover Publications. ISBN 9780486223964. +Kuo, Michael (2014). Mushrooms of the Midwest. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. ISBN 978-0252079764. +McFarland, Joe (2009). Edible Wild Mushrooms of Illinois & Surrounding States: A Field-to-Kitchen Guide. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. ISBN 978-0252076435. +Stone, Maxine (2010). Missouri's Wild Mushrooms: A Guide to Hunting, Identifying and Cooking the State's Most Common Mushrooms. Jefferson City, MO: Missouri Department of Conservation. ISBN 978-1887247740. + +==== Pacific Northwest ==== +These are identification guides focused on mushrooms found in the Pacific Northwest. + +Arora, David (1986). Mushrooms Demystified: A Comprehensive Guide to the Fleshy Fungi. Berkeley: Ten Speed Press. ISBN 978-0898151695. +Desjardin, Dennis (2015). California Mushrooms: The Comprehensive Identification Guide. Portland, Oregon: Timber Press. ISBN 978-1604693539. +McKenny, Margaret (1987). The New Savory Wild Mushroom. Seattle: University of Washington Press. ISBN 978-0295964805. +Siegel, Noah (2016). Mushrooms of the Redwood Coast: A Comprehensive Guide to the Fungi of Coastal Northern California. Berkeley: Ten Speed Press. ISBN 978-1607748175. +Trudell, Steve (2009). Mushrooms of the Pacific Northwest. Portland, Or: Timber Press. ISBN 978-0881929355. + +==== Southwestern United States ==== +These are identification guides relevant to the Southwestern United States. + +States, Jack (1990). Mushrooms and Truffles of the Southwest. Tucson, AZ.: The University of Arizona Press. ISBN 978-0816511921. + +==== Southeastern United States ==== +These are guides relevant to the Southeastern United States. + +Bessette, Alan (2019). Mushrooms of the Gulf Coast States. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. ISBN 978-1-4773-1815-7. +Bessette, Alan (2007). Mushrooms of the Southeastern United States. Syracuse, N.Y: Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0815631125. +Kimbrough, James (2000). Common Florida Mushrooms. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida, Extension Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. ISBN 978-0916287306. +Metzler, Susan (1992). Texas Mushrooms : A Field Guide. Austin: University of Texas Press. ISBN 978-0292751262. +Roody, William (2003). Mushrooms of West Virginia and the Central Appalachians. Lexington, Kentucky: University Press of Kentucky. ISBN 9780813128139. +Weber, Nancy (1985). A Field Guide to Southern Mushrooms. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0472856152. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_about_mushrooms-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_about_mushrooms-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7512695a3 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_about_mushrooms-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@ +--- +title: "List of books about mushrooms" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_books_about_mushrooms" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:55.034027+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Field guides === +These are identification guides small enough to take with you while mushroom hunting or on a hike. + +Arora, David (1991). All That the Rain Promises and More...: A Hip Pocket Guide to Western Mushrooms. Berkeley: Ten Speed Press. ISBN 978-0-89815-388-0. +Marrone, Teresa (2016). Mushrooms of the Northeast: A Simple Guide to Common Mushrooms. Cambridge, MN: Adventure Publications. ISBN 978-1591935919. +Marrone, Teresa (2014). Mushrooms of the Upper Midwest: A Simple Guide to Common Mushrooms. Cambridge, Minnesota: Adventure Publications, Inc. ISBN 978-1591934172. +Lincoff, Gary (1981). National Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Mushrooms. New York: Knopf Distributed by Random House. ISBN 978-0394519920. +Smith, Alexander and Weber, Nancy (1980). The Mushroom Hunter's Field Guide. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0-472-85610-7. +Russel, Bill. (2006). Field Guide to Wild Mushrooms of Pennsylvania and the Mid-Atlantic. University Park, PA. University of Pennsylvania Press. ISBN 0-271-02891-2. + +== Cultivation == +These are books about growing mushrooms and fungiculture. + +Cotter, Tradd (2014). Organic Mushroom Farming and Mycoremediation: Simple to Advanced and Experimental Techniques for Indoor and Outdoor Cultivation. White River Junction, Vermont: Chelsea Green Publishing. ISBN 978-1603584555. +Oss, O. T. (1991). Psilocybin: Magic Mushroom Grower's Guide: A Handbook for Psilocybin Enthusiasts. San Francisco, Calif: Quick American Pub. ISBN 978-0932551061. +Stamets, Paul (2000). Growing Gourmet and Medicinal Mushrooms: Shokuyō Oyobi Yakuyō Kinoko No Saibai. Berkeley, Calif: Ten Speed Press. ISBN 1-58008-175-4. +Stamets, Paul (1983). The Mushroom Cultivator: A Practical Guide to Growing Mushrooms at Home. Olympia, Wash. Seattle, Wa: Agarikon Press Western distribution by Homestead Book Co. ISBN 0-9610798-0-0. + +== Fungal biology == +These are books about mycology and fungal biology. + +Deacon, J. W. (2006). Fungal Biology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. ISBN 978-1405130660. +Kendrick, Bryce (2000). The Fifth Kingdom. Newburyport MA: Focus Pub. ISBN 978-1585100224. +Petersen, Jens (2012). The Kingdom of Fungi. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0691157542. +Webster, John (2007). Introduction to Fungi. Cambridge, UK New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0521014830. + +== Ecology == +These are books related to the intersection of fungi and ecology, such as mycoremediation. + +Gulden, Gro (1992). Macromycetes and Air Pollution: Mycocoenological Studies in Three Oligotrophic Spruce Forests in Europe. Berlin: J. Cramer. ISBN 9783443590451. +McCoy, Peter (2016). Radical Mycology: A Treatise on Seeing & Working With Fungi. Portland, Oregon: Chthaeus Press. ISBN 978-0986399602. +Sheldrake, Merlin (2020). Entangled Life: How Fungi Make Our Worlds, Change Our Minds & Shape Our Futures. New York: Random House. ISBN 9780525510314. +Stamets, Paul (2005). Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World. Berkeley, Calif: Ten Speed Press. ISBN 978-1-58008-579-3. +Varma, Ajit (2013). Symbiotic Fungi: Principles and Practice. Berlin: Springer Berlin. ISBN 978-3642260278. + +== Food == +These are books that explore mushrooms and fungi from the perspective of food and food science, e.g. books that explore the chemical and nutritional compositions of edible mushrooms, or books of recipes specializing in using wild mushrooms. + +Fischer, David (1992). Edible Wild Mushrooms of North America: A Field-to-Kitchen Guide. Austin: University of Texas Press. ISBN 978-0292720800. +Johnston, Ruth (2012). The Art of Cooking Morels. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0-472-11784-0. +Kalač, Pavel (2016). Edible Mushrooms: Chemical Composition and Nutritional Value. London Wall, UK: Elsevier, AP. ISBN 978-0128044551. +Kuo, Michael (2007). 100 Edible Mushrooms. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 978-0-472-03126-9. +Samson, Robert (2007). Food Mycology: A Multifaceted Approach to Fungi and Food. Boca Raton: CRC Press. ISBN 9780849398186. + +== Health == +These are books concerned with the health benefits of medicinal mushrooms. + +Stamets, Paul (2002). MycoMedicinals: An Informational Treatise on Mushrooms. Olympia: MycoMedia. ISBN 0-9637971-9-0. + +== History == +Allegro, John (2009). The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross: A Study of the Nature and Origins of Christianity Within the Fertility Cults of the Ancient Near East. Place of publication not identified: Gnostic Media Research & Pub. ISBN 978-0982556276. +Letcher, Andy (2008). Shroom: A Cultural History of the Magic Mushroom. New York: HarperCollins. ISBN 978-0060828295. +Money, Nicholas P. (2004). Mr. Bloomfield's Orchard: The Mysterious World of Mushrooms, Molds, and Mycologists. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195171587. + +== Catalogs == +These are books that don't act primarily as an identification guides but rather as catalogs, e.g. as a book of images of mushrooms with brief descriptions, or as a book listing species for a specific area without identifying information, etc. + +Roberts, Peter (2011). The Book of Fungi: A Life-Size Guide to Six Hundred Species From Around the World. Chicago London: The University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0226721170. + +== Dictionaries and glossaries == +These are books that define some of the technical jargon used within the field of mycology. + +Ainsworth, G. C. (2008). Ainsworth & Bisby's Dictionary of the Fungi. Wallingford, Oxon, UK: CABI. ISBN 9780851998268. +Snell, Walter (1971). A Glossary of Mycology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674354517. + +== See also == +List of mycologists + +== References == + +== External links == +Cumberland Mycological Society Book Reviews +Asheville Mushroom Club Book List +/r/mycology's list of books and resources \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0d2922eb3 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +--- +title: "Louis du Preez" +chunk: 1/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:32.941961+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Louis Heyns Du Preez (born 9 July 1962) is a South African professor of zoology who specialises in parasitology and herpetology at the North-West University. Du Preez is best known for his research on South African frog species, writing a widely used wildlife guide for the frogs of Southern Africa, and contributions to global parasitology with special focus studies on polystome worms. His contributions to polystome research have led to a recently discovered Malagasy frog species, Blommersia dupreezi, being named in his honour. + +== Biography == +Du Preez grew up in Ficksburg and started his tertiary education at the University of the Free State located in the same province he was brought up. In 1986 he obtained his Master of Science degree with the thesis titled 'Polystoma australis (Monogenea): aspekte van ontwikkeling en gedrag wat betrekking het op rekrutering en vestiging'. +From 1989 to 1990 he was a school teacher in Bloemfontein. From 1991 to 1993 he was Head of the Department of Herpetology at the National Museum in Bloemfontein. In 1994 he obtained a PhD degree from the University of the Free State with a thesis titled 'Study of factors influencing the nature and extent of host-specificity among polystomatids (Polystomatidae: Monogenoidea) parasitic in Anura of southern Africa' under the mentorship of Dawid Kok. Du Preez then progressed to being the Senior Lecturer of Zoology at the University of the Free State from 1996 to 2000. From 2001 to 2004 he was appointed associate professor. In 2002 he established the African Amphibian Research Conservation Group and was later promoted Full Professor of Zoology in 2005 at North-West University. In 2011 du Preez was elected Chair of the Zoology Department at North-West University. +Throughout his career he has conducted research in several countries across the world including France, United States, Nigeria, Brazil and China. He is a member of the Zoological Society of Southern Africa, the Herpetological Association of Africa, the Suid-Afrikaanse Akademie vir Wetenskap en Kuns, the Parasitological Association of Southern Africa and the Microscopy Association of Africa. + +== Publications == +Louis du Preez published several books and over 100 scientific articles. In addition to several parasite, frog, and reptile species that are new to science, du Preez's species descriptions include the frog species Breviceps carruthersi and Breviceps passmorei from the Rain Frog family (Brevicipitidae), and Hyperolius howelli from the Reed Frog family (Hyperoliidae). + +=== Books === +Field guide and key to the frogs & toads of the Free State, 1996 (ISBN 978-0-86886-549-2) +Field Guide to the frogs and toads of the Vredefort Dome World Heritage Site, 2006 (ISBN 978-1-86822-517-0) +Bios: an integrated approach to life sciences teaching and learning, 2007 (ISBN 978-1-920140-06-9) +A complete guide to the frogs of Southern Africa, 2009; 2015 (ISBN 978-1-77007-446-0) +Frogs and frogging in South Africa, 2011 (ISBN 978-1-77007-914-4) +Turtle Polystomes of the world: Neopolystoma, Polystomoidella & Polystomoides, 2011 (ISBN 978-3-639-36517-7) +A Bilingual Field Guide to the Frogs of Zululand (or Isiqondiso Sasefilidini Esindimimbili Ngamaxoxo AkwelaKwaZulu in IsiZulu), 2017 (ISBN 978-1-928224-19-8) +Frogs of Southern Africa: a complete guide, 2017 (ISBN 978-1-77584-636-9) + +=== Scientific publications === +Source: + +Du Preez, Louis H., and Dawid J. Kok. "Syntopic occurrence of new species of Polystoma and Metapolystoma (Monogenea: Polystomatidae) in Ptychadena porosissima in South Africa." Systematic Parasitology 22.2 (1992): 141–150. doi:10.1007/BF00009606 +Du Preez, Louis H., and Dawid J. Kok. "Supporting experimental evidence of host specificity among southern African polystomes (Polystomatidae: Monogenea)." Parasitology Research 83 (1997): 558–562. doi:10.1007/s004360050297 +Du Preez, LH, and L. H. S. Lim. "Neopolystoma liewi sp. n.(Monogenea: Polystomatidae) from the eye of the Malayan box turtle (Cuora amboinensis)." Folia Parasitologica 47.1 (2000): 11–15. https://folia.paru.cas.cz/pdfs/fol/2000/01/03.pdf +Verneau, Olivier, et al. "A view of early vertebrate evolution inferred from the phylogeny of polystome parasites (Monogenea: Polystomatidae)." Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 269.1490 (2002): 535–543. doi:10.1098/rspb.2001.1899 +Weldon, Ché, et al. "Origin of the amphibian chytrid fungus." Emerging Infectious Diseases 10.12 (2004): 2100. doi:10.3201/eid1012.030804 +Du Preez, Louis H., and Milton F. Maritz. "Demonstrating morphometric protocols using polystome marginal hooklet measurements." Systematic Parasitology 63.1 (2006): 1–15. doi:10.1007/s11230-005-5496-5 +Mendelson III, Joseph R., et al. "Confronting amphibian declines and extinctions." Science 313.5783 (2006): 48–48. doi:10.1126/science.1128396 +Andreone, Franco, et al. "The challenge of conserving amphibian megadiversity in Madagascar." PLOS Biology 6.5 (2008): e118. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0060118 +Du Preez, Louis H., et al. "Reproduction, larval growth, and reproductive development in African clawed frogs (Xenopus laevis) exposed to atrazine." Chemosphere 71.3 (2008): 546–552. doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.09.051 +Petzold, Alice, et al. "A revision of African helmeted terrapins (Testudines: Pelomedusidae: Pelomedusa), with descriptions of six new species." Zootaxa 3795.5 (2014): 523–548. doi:10.11646/zootaxa.3795.5.2 +Meyer, Leon, et al. "Parasite host-switching from the invasive American red-eared slider, Trachemys scripta elegans, to the native Mediterranean pond turtle, Mauremys leprosa, in natural environments." Aquatic Invasions 10.1 (2015): 79–91. doi:10.3391/ai.2015.10.1.08 +Du Preez, Louis H., and Michelle Van Rooyen. "A new polystomatid (Monogenea, Polystomatidae) from the mouth of the North American freshwater turtle Pseudemys nelsoni." ZooKeys 539 (2015): 1. doi:10.3897/zookeys.539.6108 +Du Preez, Louis H., and Olivier Verneau. "Eye to eye: classification of conjunctival sac polystomes (Monogenea: Polystomatidae) revisited with the description of three new genera Apaloneotrema ng, Aussietrema ng and Fornixtrema ng." Parasitology Research 119.12 (2020): 4017–4031. doi:10.1007/s00436-020-06888-w +Du Preez, Louis Heyns, Marcus Vinícius Domingues, and Olivier Verneau. "Classification of pleurodire polystomes (Platyhelminthes, Monogenea, Polystomatidae) revisited with the description of two new genera from the Australian and Neotropical Realms." International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife 19 (2022): 180–186. doi:10.1016/j.ijppaw.2022.09.004 +Landman, Willem, et al. "Metapolystoma ohlerianum n. sp.(Monogenea: Polystomatidae) from Aglyptodactylus madagascariensis (Anura: Mantellidae)." Acta Parasitologica (2023): 1–15. doi:10.1007/s11686-023-00668-z +Verneau, Olivier, Gerald R. Johnston, and Louis Du Preez. "A quantum leap in the evolution of platyhelminths: Host-switching from turtles to hippopotamuses illustrated from a phylogenetic meta-analysis of polystomes (Monogenea, Polystomatidae)." International Journal for Parasitology 53.5–6 (2023): 317–325. doi:10.1016/j.ijpara.2023.03.001 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..68bdadc15 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ +--- +title: "Louis du Preez" +chunk: 2/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:32.941961+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Species descriptions === +Du Preez has described or contributed to the description of at least 24 polystome species, 8 polystome genera, and more than 10 other non-polystome parasite species that have frogs or reptiles as their hosts. In herpetology, du Preez has described or contributed to the description of at least 20 new frog species and 6 reptile species. + +==== Amphibians ==== +Breviceps carruthersi Du Preez, Netherlands, and Minter, 2017 +Breviceps passmorei Minter, Netherlands, and Du Preez, 2017 +Gephyromantis cornucopia Miralles, Köhler, Glaw, Wollenberg Valero, Crottini, Rosa, Du Preez, Gehring, Vieites, Ratsoavina, and Vences, 2023 +Gephyromantis feomborona Miralles, Köhler, Glaw, Wollenberg Valero, Crottini, Rosa, Du Preez, Gehring, Vieites, Ratsoavina, and Vences, 2023 +Gephyromantis fiharimpe Vences, Köhler, Crottini, Hofreiter, Hutter, Du Preez, Preick, Rakotoarison, Rancilhac, Raselimanana, Rosa, Scherz, and Glaw, 2022 +Gephyromantis kremenae Miralles, Köhler, Glaw, Wollenberg Valero, Crottini, Rosa, Du Preez, Gehring, Vieites, Ratsoavina, and Vences, 2023 +Gephyromantis mafifeo Miralles, Köhler, Glaw, Wollenberg Valero, Crottini, Rosa, Du Preez, Gehring, Vieites, Ratsoavina, and Vences, 2023 +Gephyromantis matsilo Vences, Köhler, Crottini, Hofreiter, Hutter, Du Preez, Preick, Rakotoarison, Rancilhac, Raselimanana, Rosa, Scherz, and Glaw, 2022 +Gephyromantis mitsinjo Miralles, Köhler, Glaw, Wollenberg Valero, Crottini, Rosa, Du Preez, Gehring, Vieites, Ratsoavina, and Vences, 2023 +Gephyromantis oelkrugi Vences, Köhler, Crottini, Hofreiter, Hutter, Du Preez, Preick, Rakotoarison, Rancilhac, Raselimanana, Rosa, Scherz, and Glaw, 2022 +Gephyromantis portonae Vences, Köhler, Crottini, Hofreiter, Hutter, Du Preez, Preick, Rakotoarison, Rancilhac, Raselimanana, Rosa, Scherz, and Glaw, 2022 +Gephyromantis pedronoi Vences, Köhler, Andreone, Craul, Crottini, Du Preez, Preick, Rancilhac, Rödel, Scherz, Streicher, Hofreiter, and Glaw, 2021 +Gephyromantis sergei Miralles, Köhler, Glaw, Wollenberg Valero, Crottini, Rosa, Du Preez, Gehring, Vieites, Ratsoavina, and Vences, 2023 +Hyperolius friedemanni Mercurio and Rödel in Channing, Hillers, Lötters, Rödel, Schick, Conradie, Rödder, Mercurio, Wagner, Dehling, Du Preez, Kielgast, and Burger, 2013 +Hyperolius howelli Du Preez and Channing, 2013 +Hyperolius inyangae Channing in Channing, Hillers, Lötters, Rödel, Schick, Conradie, Rödder, Mercurio, Wagner, Dehling, Du Preez, Kielgast, and Burger, 2013 +Hyperolius jacobseni Channing in Channing, Hillers, Lötters, Rödel, Schick, Conradie, Rödder, Mercurio, Wagner, Dehling, Du Preez, Kielgast, and Burger, 2013 +Hyperolius lupiroensis Channing in Channing, Hillers, Lötters, Rödel, Schick, Conradie, Rödder, Mercurio, Wagner, Dehling, Du Preez, Kielgast, and Burger, 2013 +Hyperolius rwandae Dehling, Sinsch, Rodel, and Channing in Channing, Hillers, Lötters, Rödel, Schick, Conradie, Rödder, Mercurio, Wagner, Dehling, Du Preez, Kielgast, and Burger, 2013 +Tomopterna adiastola Channing and Du Preez, 2020 + +==== Reptiles ==== +Pelomedusa barbata Petzold, Vargas-Ramírez, Kehlmaier, Vamberger, Branch, Du Preez, Hofmeyr, Meyer, Schleicher, Široký, and Fritz, 2014 +Pelomedusa kobe Petzold, Vargas-Ramírez, Kehlmaier, Vamberger, Branch, Du Preez, Hofmeyr, Meyer, Schleicher, Široký & Fritz, 2014 +Pelomedusa neumanni Petzold, Vargas-Ramírez, Kehlmaier, Vamberger, Branch, Du Preez, Hofmeyr, Meyer, Schleicher, Široký & Fritz, 2014 +Pelomedusa schweinfurthi Petzold, Vargas-Ramírez, Kehlmaier, Vamberger, Branch, Du Preez, Hofmeyr, Meyer, Schleicher, Široký & Fritz, 2014 +Pelomedusa somalica Petzold, Vargas-Ramírez, Kehlmaier, Vamberger, Branch, Du Preez, Hofmeyr, Meyer, Schleicher, Široký & Fritz, 2014 +Pelomedusa variabilis Petzold, Vargas-Ramírez, Kehlmaier, Vamberger, Branch, Du Preez, Hofmeyr, Meyer, Schleicher, Široký & Fritz, 2014 + +==== Nematodes ==== +Amphibiophilus bialatus Svitin, Kuzmin, Harnoster & Du Preez, 2020 +Amphibiophilus mooiensis Svitin & Du Preez, 2018 +Camallanus sodwanaensis Svitin, Truter, Kudlai, Smit & Du Preez, 2019 +Cosmocerca daly Harnoster, du Preez & Svitin, 2022 +Cosmocerca monicae Harnoster, du Preez & Svitin, 2022 +Cosmocerca makhadoensis Harnoster, du Preez & Svitin, 2022 +Pseudocapillaria (Ichthyocapillaria) bumpi Svitin, Bullard, Dutton, Netherlands, Syrota, Verneau & du Preez, 2021 +Serpinema cayennense Harmoster, Svitin & Du Preez, 2019 +Rhabdias delangei Kuzmin, Svitin, Harnoster & du Preez, 2020 +Rhabdias blommersiae Kuzmin, Junker, du Preez & Bain, 2013 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..837fc2790 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,68 @@ +--- +title: "Louis du Preez" +chunk: 3/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_du_Preez" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:32.941961+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +==== Flatworms ==== +Aussietrema queenslandense (Pichelin, 1995) Du Preez & Verneau, 2020 +Aussietrema spratti (Pichelin, 1995) Du Preez & Verneau, 2020 +Emoleptalea mozambiquensis Curran, Dutton, Warren, du Preez & Bullard, 2021 +Eupolystoma namibiense Du Preez, 2015 +Fornixtrema elizabethae (Platt, 2000) Du Preez & Verneau, 2020 +Fornixtrema guianense (Du Preez, Badets, Héritier & Verneau, 2017) Du Preez & Verneau, 1920 +Fornixtrema liewi (Du Preez & Lim, 2000) Du Preez & Verneau, 2020 +Fornixtrema grossi (Du Preez & Morrison, 2012) Du Preez & Verneau, 2020 +Fornixtrema palpebrae (Strelkov, 1950) Du Preez & Verneau, 2020 +Fornixtrema scorpioides (Du Preez, Badets, Héritier & Verneau, 2017) Du Preez & Verneau, 2020 +Indopolystoma hakgalense (Crusz & Ching, 1975) Chaabane, Verneau & Du Preez, 2019 +Indopolystoma indicum (Diengdoh & Tandon, 1991) Chaabane, Verneau & Du Preez, 2019 +Indopolystoma parvum Chaabane, Verneau & Du Preez, 2019 +Indopolystoma viridi Chaabane, Verneau & Du Preez, 2019 +Indopolystoma zuoi (Shen, Wang & Fan, 2013) Chaabane, Verneau & Du Preez, 2019 +Manotrema brasiliensis (Viera, Novelli, Sousa & SouzaLima, 2008) du Preez, Domingues & Verneau, 2022 +Manotrema fuquesi (Mañe-Garzón & Gil, 1962) du Preez, Domingues & Verneau, 2022 +Manotrema uruguayensis (Mañe-Garzón & Gil, 1961) du Preez, Domingues & Verneau, 2022 +Metapolystoma ansuanum Landman, Verneau, Raharivololoniaina & Du Preez, 2021 +Metapolystoma falcatum Landman, Verneau, Raharivololoniaina & Du Preez, 2021 +Metapolystoma multiova Landman, Verneau, Raharivololoniaina & Du Preez, 2021 +Metapolystoma ohlerianum Landman, Verneau, Vences & Du Preez, 2023 +Metapolystoma porosissimae Du Preez & Kok, 1992 +Metapolystoma theroni Landman, Verneau, Raharivololoniaina & Du Preez, 2021 +Metapolystoma vencesi Landman, Verneau, Raharivololoniaina & Du Preez, 2021 +Nanopolystoma brayi Du Preez, Wilkinson & Huyse, 2008 +Nanopolystoma lynchi Du Preez, Wilkinson & Huyse, 2008 +Nanopolystoma tinsleyi Du Preez, Badets & Verneau, 2014 +Pleurodirotrema chelodinae (MacCallum, 1918) du Preez, Domingues & Verneau, 2022 +Pleurodirotrema macleayi (Rohde, 1984) du Preez, Domingues & Verneau, 2022 +Pleurodirotrema novaeguineae (Fairfax, 1990) du Preez, Domingues & Verneau, 2022 +Polystoma goeldii Sales, Du Preez, Verneau & Domingues, 2022 +Polystoma knoffi Du Preez & Domingues, 2019 +Polystoma okomuensis Aisien, Du Preez & Imasuen, 2010 +Polystoma testimagnum Du Preez & Kok, 1993 +Polystoma travassosi Du Preez & Domingues, 2019 +Polystomoides cayensis (Du Preez, Badets, Héritier & Verneau, 2017) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 +Polystomoides aspidonectis (MacCallum, 1919) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 +Polystomoides cayensis (Du Preez, Badets, Héritier & Verneau, 2017) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 +Polystomoides cyclovitellum (Caballero, Zerecero & Grocott, 1957) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 +Polystomoides domitilae (Caballero, 1938) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 +Polystomoides euzeti (Combes & Ktari, 1976) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 +Polystomoides orbiculare (Stunkard, 1916) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 +Polystomoides rugosa (MacCallum, 1918) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 +Polystomoides scriptanus Héritier, Verneau, Smith, Coetzer & Du Preez, 2017 +Polystomoides soredensis Héritier, Verneau, Smith, Coetzer & Du Preez, 2017 +Polystomoides terrapenis (Harwood, 1932) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 +Uteropolystomoides multifalx (Stunkard, 1924) Chaabane, Du Preez, Johnston & Verneau, 2022 + +== Awards == +1994: W.O. Neitz medal for the best dissertation in parasitology by the Parasitological Association of Southern Africa. + +== References == + +== External links == +Profile on Namibiana +Publications by Louis du Preez at ResearchGate \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_Biology-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_Biology-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..137a8d27f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_Biology-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ +--- +title: "Mathematical Biology" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematical_Biology" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:56.209611+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Mathematical Biology is a two-part monograph on mathematical biology first published in 1989 by the applied mathematician James D. Murray. It is considered to be a classic in the field and sweeping in scope. + + +== Part I: An Introduction == +Part I of Mathematical Biology covers population dynamics, reaction kinetics, oscillating reactions, and reaction-diffusion equations. + +Chapter 1: Continuous Population Models for Single Species +Chapter 2: Discrete Population Models for a Single Species +Chapter 3: Models for Interacting Populations +Chapter 4: Temperature-Dependent Sex Determination (TSD) +Chapter 5: Modelling the Dynamics of Marital Interaction: Divorce Prediction and Marriage Repair +Chapter 6: Reaction Kinetics +Chapter 7: Biological Oscillators and Switches +Chapter 8: BZ Oscillating Reactions +Chapter 9: Perturbed and Coupled Oscillators and Black Holes +Chapter 10: Dynamics of Infectious Diseases +Chapter 11: Reaction Diffusion, Chemotaxis, and Nonlocal Mechanisms +Chapter 12: Oscillator-Generated Wave Phenomena +Chapter 13: Biological Waves: Single-Species Models +Chapter 14: Use and Abuse of Fractals + + +== Part II: Spatial Models and Biomedical Applications == +Part II of Mathematical Biology focuses on pattern formation and applications of reaction-diffusion equations. Topics include: predator-prey interactions, chemotaxis, wound healing, epidemic models, and morphogenesis. + +Chapter 1: Multi-Species Waves and Practical Applications +Chapter 2: Spatial Pattern Formation with Reaction Diffusion Systems +Chapter 3: Animal Coat Patterns and Other Practical Applications of Reaction Diffusion Mechanisms +Chapter 4: Pattern Formation on Growing Domains: Alligators and Snakes +Chapter 5: Bacterial Patterns and Chemotaxis +Chapter 6: Mechanical Theory for Generating Pattern and Form in Development +Chapter 7: Evolution, Morphogenetic Laws, Developmental Constraints and Teratologies +Chapter 8: A Mechanical Theory of Vascular Network Formation +Chapter 9: Epidermal Wound Healing +Chapter 10: Dermal Wound Healing +Chapter 11: Growth and Control of Brain Tumours +Chapter 12: Neural Models of Pattern Formation +Chapter 13: Geographic Spread and Control of Epidemics +Chapter 14: Wolf Territoriality, Wolf-Deer Interaction and Survival + + +== Impact == +Since its initial publication, the monograph has come to be seen as a highly influential work in the field of mathematical biology. It serves as the essential text for most high level mathematical biology courses around the world, and is credited with transforming the field from a niche subject into a standard research area of applied mathematics. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Mathematical Biology I: An Introduction +Mathematical Biology II: Spatial Models and Biomedical Applications \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men,_Microscopes,_and_Living_Things-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men,_Microscopes,_and_Living_Things-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..93f9add99 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men,_Microscopes,_and_Living_Things-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +--- +title: "Men, Microscopes, and Living Things" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men,_Microscopes,_and_Living_Things" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:59.007480+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Men, Microscopes, and Living Things is a children's book written by the American author Katherine Shippen and illustrated by Anthony Ravielli. The book was first published in 1955 and is a 1956 Newbery Honor recipient. + + +== Overview == +Shippen traces the history of biological thought beginning with Aristotle and followed by Pliny, Linnaeus, Cuvier, Lamarck, Darwin, and several others. The book is 190 pages including a 7-page index. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamorphosis_of_Plants-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamorphosis_of_Plants-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..208f923b6 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamorphosis_of_Plants-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +--- +title: "Metamorphosis of Plants" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metamorphosis_of_Plants" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:01.366960+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Versuch die Metamorphose der Pflanzen zu erklären, known in English as Metamorphosis of Plants, was published by German poet and philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe in 1790. In this work, Goethe essentially discovered the (serially) homologous nature of leaf organs in plants, from cotyledons, to photosynthetic leaves, to the petals of a flower. Although Sir Richard Owen, the British vertebrate anatomist, is generally credited with first articulating a definition of the word "homology" (in 1843), it is clear that Goethe had already arrived at a sophisticated view of homology and transformation (within an idealist morphological perspective) more than fifty years earlier. + + +== See also == +Goethean science +Phyllody +Teratology + + +== External links == +Metamorphosis of Plants (poem) in English +Versuch die Metamorphose der Pflanzen zu Erklären (Gotha, 1790) +The Metamorphosis of Plants, by Zemplén Gábor \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micrographia-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micrographia-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b01668c90 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micrographia-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ +--- +title: "Micrographia" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micrographia" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:02.549383+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Micrographia: or Some Physiological Descriptions of Minute Bodies Made by Magnifying Glasses. With Observations and Inquiries Thereupon is a historically significant book by Robert Hooke about his observations through various lenses. It was the first book to include illustrations of insects and plants as seen through microscopes. +Published in January 1665, the first major publication of the Royal Society, it became the first scientific best-seller, inspiring a wide public interest in the new science of microscopy. The book originated the biological term "cell". + + +== Observations == +Hooke most famously describes a fly's eye and a plant cell (where he coined that term because plant cells, which are walled, reminded him of the cells of a monastery). Known for its spectacular copperplate of the miniature world, particularly its fold-out plates of insects, the text itself reinforces the tremendous power of the new microscope. The plates of insects fold out to be larger than the large folio itself, the engraving of the louse in particular folding out to four times the size of the book. Although the book is best known for demonstrating the power of the microscope, Micrographia also describes distant planetary bodies, the wave theory of light, the organic origin of fossils, and other philosophical and scientific interests of its author. +Hooke also selected several objects of human origin; among these objects were the jagged edge of a honed razor and the point of a needle, seeming blunt under the microscope. His goal may well have been to contrast the flawed products of mankind with the perfection of nature (and hence, in the spirit of the times, of biblical creation). + + +== Reception == +Published under the aegis of the Royal Society, the popularity of the book helped further the society's image and mission of being England's leading scientific organization. Micrographia's illustrations of the miniature world captured the public's imagination in a radically new way; Samuel Pepys called it "the most ingenious book that ever I read in my life". + + +== Methods == +In 2007, Janice Neri, a professor of art history and visual culture, studied Hooke's artistic influences and processes with the help of some newly rediscovered notes and drawings that appear to show some of his work leading up to Micrographia. She observes, "Hooke's use of the term "schema" to identify his plates indicates that he approached his images in a diagrammatic manner and implies the study or visual dissection of the objects portrayed." Identifying Hooke's schema as 'organization tools', she emphasizes: + +Hooke built up his images from numerous observations made from multiple vantage points, under varying lighting conditions, and with lenses of differing powers. Similarly, his specimens required a great deal of manipulation and preparation in order to make them visible through the microscope. +Additionally: "Hooke often enclosed the objects he presented within a round frame, thus offering viewers an evocation of the experience of looking through the lens of a microscope." + + +== Bibliography == +Robert Hooke. Micrographia: or, Some physiological descriptions of minute bodies made by magnifying glasses. London: J. Martyn and J. Allestry, 1665. (first edition). + + +== References == + + +== External links == + +Engraved copperplate illustrations from a first edition of Micrographia: or Some physiological descriptions of minute bodies made by magnifying glasses. With observations and inquiries thereupon (all images freely available for download in a variety of formats from the Science History Institute's Digital Collections) +Project Gutenberg Micrographia text +Turning the Pages - virtual copy of the book from the National Library of Medicine +Micrographia - full digital facsimile at Linda Hall Library +Transcribing the Hooke Folio Archived 23 October 2011 at the Wayback Machine +Micrographia at the Internet Archive + Micrographia public domain audiobook at LibriVox \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microscopical_researches_into_the_accordance_in_the_structure_and_growth_of_animals_and_plants-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microscopical_researches_into_the_accordance_in_the_structure_and_growth_of_animals_and_plants-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..a58b5236d --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microscopical_researches_into_the_accordance_in_the_structure_and_growth_of_animals_and_plants-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ +--- +title: "Microscopical researches into the accordance in the structure and growth of animals and plants" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microscopical_researches_into_the_accordance_in_the_structure_and_growth_of_animals_and_plants" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:03.689055+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Microscopical researches into the accordance in the structure and growth of animals and plants is a famous treatise by Theodor Schwann published in 1839 which officially formulated the basis of the cell theory. The original title was Mikroskopische Untersuchungen über die Uebereinstimmung in der Struktur und dem Wachsthum der Thiere und Pflanzen. The book has been called "a conspicuous milestone in nineteenth century biology" by Karl Sudhoff and "epoch making" By Francis Münzer. +The book, originally published in German, was translated to English in 1847 by Henry Spencer Smith in an edition that also contained the treatise Phytogenesis, by Matthias Schleiden. +Besides the theoretical work, that Schwann called a "philosophical" section of general anatomy, Schwann provided several plates with drawings of cells and tissues and discussions of observations of other microscopists. + + +== Cell theory == +Schwann dedicated a chapter of the treatise to explicitly formulate the cell theory, stating that ("the elementary parts of all tissues are formed of cells” and that “there is one universal principle of development for the elementary parts of organisms... and this principle is in the formation of cells" (Henry Smith's translation, 1847). His book had the goal to prove via observations that the cell theory put forth for plants by Matthias Schleiden was equally valid for animals. + + +== Schwann cell == + +The book is credited with the first description of what would later be called Schwann cell, a type of glial cell. The description of the cells was evident from passages such as: + +Some, however, appear to remain for a longer period; occasionally, although rarely, a cell-nucleui is here and there seen upon the side of a nerve (the white substance of which is completely developed), lying in the pale border, which surrounds the white substance. Fig. 9,c and d, exhibits them from the nervus vagus of a calf. +and + +Pl. 4, fig. 6 represents a portion of the ischiatic, and fig.7, of the brachial nerve of such a foetus. We observe a palish, and very minutely-granulated cord, which, in consequence of certain longitudinal shadings, such as the delineation exhibits, presents the appearance of a coarse fibrous structure. Round or for the most part oval corpuscles, which are immediately recognized as cell-nuclei, and which sometimes also contain one or two nucleoli, are generally seen in the course of these shaded parts,throughout the entire thickness of the cord. + + +== Metabolism == +The book is also credited with the introduction of the term "metabolism" for the following quote in the chapter "Theory of Cells": + +The question, then, as to the fundamental power of organised bodies resolves itself into that of the fundamental powers of the individual cells.”… These phenomena may be arranged in two natural groups: first, those which relate to the combination of molecules to form a cell; secondly, those which result from chemical changes either in the component particles of the cell itself or in the surrounding cytoblastema, and may be called metabolic phenomena (implying that which is liable to occasion or suffer change) + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monad_to_Man-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monad_to_Man-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3537d48a0 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monad_to_Man-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +--- +title: "Monad to Man" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monad_to_Man" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:06.056642+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Monad to Man: the concept of progress in evolutionary biology is a 1996 book about the longstanding idea that evolution is progressive by the philosopher of biology Michael Ruse. It analyses the connection between ideas of progress in culture generally and its application in evolutionary biology. + + +== Summary == +Ruse surveys the attitude to progress throughout the history of biology, exploring the connections between the idea of progress and the belief that evolution is progressive (orthogenesis). He argues that from early nineteenth century speculation, Charles Darwin came to suggest that natural selection drove species to "a higher stage of perfection", jumping from relative to absolute progress. In this, Ruse argues, he was followed by many later biologists. Ruse interviews well-known evolutionary biologists such as Ernst Mayr, John Maynard Smith, Stephen Jay Gould, and E. O. Wilson, and both reports their views and gives his own opinion of how progressionist they were. + + +== Illustrations == +The book is illustrated with photographs of the major figures, such as Henry Fairfield Osborn and Sewall Wright, and a few drawings such as of the titanothere, an animal used by Osborn to illustrate "orthogenetic evolution beyond the adaptive optimum" There are a few diagrams such as William Bateson's schematic "phylogeny", a proposed tree of life for some invertebrate animals. + + +== Publication history == +Monad to Man was first published by Harvard University Press with cloth covers in 1996. They produced the first paperback edition in 2009. + + +== Reception == + +Makarand Paranjape, in an "introductory essay" for The International Society for Science and Religion, notes that Ruse was a "key witness" in the 1982 court case which decided that the attempt by Arkansas to ban the teaching of evolution in schools was unconstitutional. Paranjape writes that Ruse argues that evolutionary biology has been an immature science "for much of its 150 year history", because it has been tied to the Enlightenment's idea of progress. He suggests that Ruse is "unapologetically, even unreflexively Euro-centric", leaving out non-Western thinkers like Sri Aurobindo, and notes that Ruse ends by predicting that "Progress will continue to dog evolutionary theory" because as Ruse explains, the belief of evolutionists in scientific Progress [with a capital P] is so readily transferred into "a belief in organic progress". +The philosopher of science Ron Amundson, reviewing the book for The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, notes that Ruse thanks E. O. Wilson for urging him "to write a really big book", and quotes Peter J. Bowler as calling it "an important book on the status of evolutionism that will almost certainly become embroiled in controversy". Amundson observes that Ruse claims that evolutionary biology has nearly always been seen as only doubtfully a professional scientific discipline, and that Ruse's thesis is that this is because it has always been tied to "culturally biased concepts of progress". Whether this is actually "bad" is, suggests Amundson, almost irrelevant as long as biologists have thought it so, but since normative (value) judgements such as of progress cannot be derived from observation they are from a methodological point of view not part of science. All the same, he argues, Ruse is an analytic and empiricist philosopher, not at all social-constructivist. Amundson finds Ruse's handling of the morphological traditions "less satisfactory" than of the adaptationist, Darwinian traditions, and doubts whether Richard Owen was a social progressionist just because he was influenced by Naturphilosophie. He compares Ruse unfavourably with Betty Smocovitis's "obsessive concern with historiography", and calls Ruse's writing style "bluff, unselfconscious, and opinionated" and finds Ruse sarcastic, "scarcely a neutral observer". On the other hand, he notes, Ruse is completely open about when he is "sensing" (guessing) something. Amundson concludes that Ruse has certainly shown that evolution and progress "have been closely linked", and his narrative of the people and ideas "rich and compelling", but finds Ruse's claim that biology has been shaped by biologists's embarrassment at this connection debatable. +The biologist and philosopher Michael Ghiselin notes that biologists agree that there is progress in biology and in technology, and that anatomists "do not seem too unhappy with the idea" of something much like that sort of progress in evolution, but that biologists have had trouble finding a theory of progress that did not lead into problems with ideology and "bad metaphysics". He criticises Ruse for "politically correct" "academic bigotry", disagrees with Ruse's narrative about phylogenetics, and accuses him of "completely ignor[ing] recent work such as by Carl Woese, "neglect[ing] data" that contradict his thesis. Ironically, in Ghiselin's view, Ruse's own epistemological ideal for science relies on the idea of Progress. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkeyluv-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkeyluv-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c913a0d1a --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkeyluv-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +--- +title: "Monkeyluv" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkeyluv" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:07.210910+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Monkeyluv: And Other Essays on Our Lives as Animals is a 2005 non-fiction book by Robert Sapolsky. It collects eighteen essays on biological topics previously published by Sapolsky in various magazines, with additional notes and three section introductions. It has been reviewed in The New York Times, Kirkus Reviews, and New Scientist. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monographiae_Biologicae-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monographiae_Biologicae-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bb785079e --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monographiae_Biologicae-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "Monographiae Biologicae" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monographiae_Biologicae" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:08.355110+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Monographiae Biologicae (ISSN 0077-0639) is a scholarly scientific literature review series, consisting of monographs published by Kluwer Academic Publishers, an imprint of Springer Science+Business Media. The series subject area generally covers ecology, zoology, and biology. More specifically, the book series covers the biogeography of continental areas, including whole continents; differentiated stand-alone ecosystems such as islands, island groups, mountains or mountain chains; aquatic or marine ecosystems such as coastal systems, mangroves, coral reefs, and other related ecosystems. Fresh water environments are also included in this series such as major river basins, lakes, and groups of lakes. +Taxonomic studies include the main groups of animals, plants, fungi and the comparative ecology of major biomes. +The series continues Physiologia comparata et oecologia, (ISSN 0369-8637). + + +== Abstracting and indexing == +This series is indexed by the following services: + +Bibliography of agriculture (USDA) +Biological Abstracts +Chemical Abstracts Service +GeoRef + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Official website \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycelium_Running-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycelium_Running-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..99cc746c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycelium_Running-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "Mycelium Running" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mycelium_Running" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:10.759280+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Mycelium Running: How Mushrooms Can Help Save the World is the sixth book written by American mycologist Paul Stamets. +In Mycelium Running (Ten Speed Press 2005), Stamets explores the use and applications of fungi in bioremediation—a practice called mycoremediation. Stamets details methods of termite and ant control using nontoxic mycelia, and describes how certain fungi may be able to neutralize anthrax, nerve gas, and smallpox. He includes the following with regard to the mycelium: + +Is this the largest organism in the world? This 2,400-acre (9.7 km2) site in eastern Oregon had a contiguous growth of mycelium before logging roads cut through it. Estimated at 1,665 football fields in size and 2,200 years old, this one fungus has killed the forest above it several times over, and in so doing has built deeper soil layers that allow the growth of ever-larger stands of trees. Mushroom-forming forest fungi are unique in that their mycelial mats can achieve such massive proportions. + + +== See also == +List of books about mushrooms + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naples_Dioscurides-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naples_Dioscurides-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..62bb3de00 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naples_Dioscurides-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +--- +title: "Naples Dioscurides" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naples_Dioscurides" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:11.878971+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Naples Dioscurides, in the Biblioteca Nazionale, Naples (MS Suppl. gr. 28), is an early 7th-century secular illuminated manuscript Greek herbal. The book has 172 folios and a page size of 29.7 x 14 cm (11 11/16 x 5 1/2 inches) and the text is a redaction of De Materia Medica by the 1st century Greek military physician Dioscorides, with descriptions of plants and their medicinal uses. Unlike De Materia Medica, the text is arranged alphabetically by plant. +The patron who commissioned it and the craftsmen who worked on the manuscript have not been identified. The style of Greek script used in the manuscript indicates that it was probably written in Byzantine-ruled southern Italy, where ancient Greek cultural traditions remained strong, although it is not known exactly where it was produced. +The codex derives independently from the same model as the Vienna Dioscurides, which was created ca. 512 for a Byzantine princess, but differs from it significantly. Additionally, in the Naples manuscript, the illustrations occupy the top half of each folio, rather than being full page miniatures as in the Vienna Dioscurides. The script is somewhat rough and uneven, and the painting style of the miniatures less precise and naturalistic than the Vienna manuscript, indicating a certain falling-off in standards. + +== History == + +=== Origin === +The Naples Dioscurides is derived from the first-century manuscript De Materia Medica, written by Pedanius Dioscorides, a Greek physician in the Roman army. De Materia Medica was an encyclopedia focused on medicines that could be derived from herbs, plants, minerals, and animals. It was widely distributed throughout the ancient Mediterranean, and remained in use for centuries. Despite the fall of the Western Roman Empire, its Eastern counterpart remained strong, keeping the traditions of Rome alive. By the time of the writing of the Naples Dioscurides, the manuscript had remained popular amongst the Byzantines and the newly powerful Islamic Empires. The secular subject of De Materia Medica kept the overall Christianization of Europe from significantly affecting the manuscript. Art historians can study the original De Materia Medica through medieval manuscripts (though the Naples Dioscurides is not an exact copy). +De Materia Medica was still a highly influential manuscript, and by the seventh century, was still being widely read by the Byzantine Empire and their satellite states. One of these states, the Duchy of Naples, retained a Greek-influenced culture. The population spoke and wrote in Greek, a reference to Naples's roots as an Ancient Greek colony. + +=== Attribution === +The scribe and the illuminator behind the Naples Dioscurides are lost to history. What is known is quite limited, though this is common with many manuscripts. Art historians believe the manuscript was manufactured in Italy, around the beginning of the early seventh century. However, its geographical origin in Italy is unclear, though likely an area of Italy strongly influenced by Byzantium. The manuscript is written in Ancient Greek, which was still a language spoken in the Duchy of Naples. + +=== Provenance === +For several centuries, the Naples Dioscurides was held at the Augustine monastery, San Giovanni a Carbonara in the Kingdom of Naples. +Marginal notes indicate that the manuscript had contact with the medical school at Salerno in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. +The manuscript was taken to Vienna in 1718 by the Holy Roman Empire, which controlled the Kingdom of Naples following the Treaty of Rastatt of 1714. The Naples Dioscurides was then housed in the Viennese Court Library, owned by the ruling Habsburg Dynasty. +The Naples Dioscurides was preserved at the Viennese Court Library for 200 years, and was returned to Naples in 1919. The manuscript was returned to the Kingdom of Italy by the Austro-Hungarian monarch following the peace talks of World War I. It was returned to the Biblioteca Nazionale, where it is kept today. +The Naples Dioscurides was exhibited at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in a show entitled, "Byzantium and Islam: Age of Transition," from March 12, 2012- July 8, 2012. +A luxurious facsimile has been published by Salerno Editrice, Rome, in collaboration with Akademische Druck of Graz, Austria, publishers of a comparable facsimile of the Vienna Dioscurides. + +== Description == + +The Naples Dioscurides comprises 172 folios with an approximate page size of 29.7 x 14 cm (11 11/16 x 5 1/2 inches). Not all folios are exactly the same size. The medium of the Naples Dioscurides is ink and parchment on vellum. The arrangement of the manuscript differs from the original De Materia Medica heavily. Whereas the De Materia Medica features plants, animals, and minerals, the Naples Dioscurides only features plants. It should also be noted that instead of five volumes, the Naples Dioscurides is only one. Unlike other Dioscurides, the Naples Dioscurides lists plants in alphabetical order, more in keeping with the format of a manual than the original. The plant descriptions are recorded below the illustration in two or three rather narrow columns, recalling the arrangement the earliest scroll version of the work would have had, before the codex form became near-universal. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naples_Dioscurides-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naples_Dioscurides-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..1c19c0230 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naples_Dioscurides-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +--- +title: "Naples Dioscurides" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naples_Dioscurides" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:11.878971+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Composition === +The composition of the Naples Dioscurides differs greatly from its predecessor, De Materia Medica, and its contemporary, the Vienna Dioscurides. The Vienna Dioscurides is closer to the original text than the Naples Dioscurides. It also predates the Naples Dioscurides by one hundred years. The Vienna Dioscurides retains descriptions of animal and mineral medicine. It also differs in that it includes references to Pedanius Dioscorides through two author portraits, which are absent on the Naples Dioscurides. In fact, other copies of the Dioscurides are all much closer to the original, with only the Naples example as the outlier. Another major difference between the manuscripts is the way they are illustrated. The Naples Dioscurides features illustrations that take up one-half to two-thirds of the page. The uses of the plants are written underneath. The illustrations of the Vienna Dioscurides are full page illustrations, in contrast. +A possible reason why the Naples Dioscurides only features plant information may lie with its intended use. Rather than focus on wonderfully illustrated pictures and artistic value, as the Vienna Dioscurides does, the Naples Dioscurides may have had a more practical purpose. A competing explanation for the manuscript states that it was intended as a manual rather than a gift or as part of a royal collection. This theory has some weight to it, given the fact that its sister manuscript, the Vienna Dioscurides, was manufactured for a Byzantine princess and was housed in a royal library. The Vienna Dioscurides is more richly illustrated and decorated compared to the Naples Dioscurides. The images of the Naples Dioscurides were painted naturalistically in contrast to the images of the Vienna Dioscurides. In contrast, the Naples Dioscurides was housed in a monastery, where it most likely would have served a practical purpose as a plant guide for monks. The manuscript may also have been used in the education of doctors, as marginal notes indicate that it was loaned to the Medical School of Salerno.Director of the Royal Botanic Garden, Kew, Sir Arthur Hill noted the fact that some copies of the Dioscurides held by monasteries were still actively used by the nineteenth century. With this in mind, it would appear that the Naples Dioscurides most likely served a practical purpose as a book to be read and used, rather than as a gift for royalty. + +== Gallery == + +== Notes == + +== References == +Crinelli, Lorenzo. Treasures from Italy's Great Libraries. New York, The Vendome Press, 1997. +Dioscorides, Pedanius. "Of Medical Substances". Library of Congress World Digital Library Collection. Retrieved 2023-05-19. +Hill, Arthur. "Preface" in Turrill, William Bertram. "A contribution to the botany of Athos Peninsula." Bulletin of Miscellaneous Information (Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew) 1937.4 (1937): 197. +Janick, Jules and Kim E. Hummer. "The 1500th Anniversary (512-2012) of the Juliana Anicia Codex: An Illustrated Dioscoridean Recension. Chronica horticulturae. 52(3) 2012 pp. 9-15 +Kiilerich, Bente (2001). "The Image of Anicia Juliana in the Vienna Dioscurides: Flattery or Appropriation of Imperial Imagery?". Symbolae Osloenses. 76 (1): 169–190. doi:10.1080/003976701753388012. ISSN 0039-7679. S2CID 161294966. +“The Naples Dioscurides, The Met.” Metmuseum.org, 2012, www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/477160. +Scans of the manuscript: https://www.loc.gov/item/2021667873/ +Weitzmann, Kurt, ed., Age of spirituality: late antique and early Christian art, third to seventh century, no. 180, 1979, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, ISBN 9780870991790; full text available online from The Metropolitan Museum of Art Libraries \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalnyckeln_till_Sveriges_flora_och_fauna-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalnyckeln_till_Sveriges_flora_och_fauna-0.md index 177da1013..d7325419f 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalnyckeln_till_Sveriges_flora_och_fauna-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalnyckeln_till_Sveriges_flora_och_fauna-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalnyckeln_till_Sveriges_flora_och_fauna" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:29:22.981340+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:13.113610+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Obsessions-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Obsessions-0.md index 159c11e10..0f800382d 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Obsessions-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Obsessions-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Obsessions" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:18:55.801628+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:14.320712+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..512be5fbc --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +--- +title: "Neural Darwinism" +chunk: 1/8 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:16.671366+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Neural Darwinism is a biological, and more specifically Darwinian and selectionist, approach to understanding global brain function, originally proposed by American biologist, researcher and Nobel-Prize recipient Gerald Maurice Edelman (July 1, 1929 – May 17, 2014). Edelman's 1987 book Neural Darwinism introduced the public to the theory of neuronal group selection (TNGS), a theory that attempts to explain global brain function. +TNGS (also referred to as the theory of neural Darwinism) has roots going back to Edelman and Mountcastle's 1978 book, The Mindful Brain – Cortical Organization and the Group-selective Theory of Higher Brain Function, which describes the columnar structure of the cortical groups within the neocortex, and argues for selective processes operating among degenerate primary repertoires of neuronal groups. The development of neural Darwinism was deeply influenced by work in the fields of immunology, embryology, and neuroscience, as well as Edelman's methodological commitment to the idea of selection as the unifying foundation of the biological sciences. + +== Introduction to neural Darwinism == +Neural Darwinism is really the neural part of the natural philosophical and explanatory framework Edelman employs for much of his work – Somatic selective systems. Neural Darwinism is the backdrop for a comprehensive set of biological hypotheses and theories Edelman, and his team, devised that seek to reconcile vertebrate and mammalian neural morphology, the facts of developmental and evolutionary biology, and the theory of natural selection into a detailed model of real-time neural and cognitive function that is biological in its orientation. It is built from the bottom-up utilizing the variation that shows up in nature. This is in contrast to computational and algorithmic approaches that view variation as noise in a system of logic circuits with point-to-point connectivity. +The book, Neural Darwinism – The Theory of Neuronal Group Selection (1987), is the first in a trilogy of books that Edelman wrote to delineate the scope and breadth of his ideas on how a biological theory of consciousness and animal body plan evolution could be developed in a bottom-up fashion. In accordance with principles of population biology and Darwin's theory of natural selection – as opposed to the top-down algorithmic and computational approaches that dominated a nascent cognitive psychology at the time. +The other two volumes are Topobiology – An Introduction to Molecular Embryology (1988) with its morpho-regulatory hypothesis of animal body plan development and evolutionary diversification via differential expression of cell surface molecules during development; and The Remembered Present – A Biological Theory of Consciousness (1989) – a novel biological approach to understanding the role and function of "consciousness" and its relation to cognition and behavioral physiology. +Edelman would write four more books for the general lay public, explaining his ideas surrounding how the brain works and consciousness arises from the physical organization of the brain and body – Bright Air, Brilliant Fire – On the Matter of the Mind (1992), A Universe of Consciousness – How Matter Becomes Imagination (2000) with Giulio Tononi, Wider Than The Sky – The Phenomenal Gift of Consciousness (2004), and Second Nature – Brain Science and Human Knowledge (2006). +Neural Darwinism is an exploration of biological thought and philosophy as well as fundamental science; Edelman being well-versed in the history of science, natural philosophy & medicine, as well as robotics, cybernetics, computing & artificial intelligence. In the course of laying out the case for neural Darwinism, or more properly TNGS, Edelman delineates a set of concepts for rethinking the problem of nervous system organization and function – all-the-while, demanding a rigorously scientific criteria for building the foundation of a properly Darwinian, and therefore biological, explanation of neural function, perception, cognition, and global brain function capable of supporting primary and higher-order consciousness. + +== Population thinking – somatic selective systems == + +Edelman was inspired by the successes of fellow Nobel laureate Frank MacFarlane Burnet and his clonal selection theory (CST) of acquired antigen immunity by differential amplification of pre-existing variation within the finite pool of lymphocytes in the immune system. The population of variant lymphocytes within the body mirrored the variant populations of organisms in the ecology. Pre-existing diversity is the engine of adaption in the evolution of populations. + +"It is clear from both evolutionary and immunological theory that in facing an unknown future, the fundamental requirement for successful adaption is preexisting diversity". – Gerald M. Edelman (1978) +Edelman recognizes the explanatory range of Burnet's utilization of Darwinian principles in describing the operations of the immune system - and, generalizes the process to all cell populations of the organism. He also comes to view the problem as one of recognition and memory from a biological perspective, where the distinction and preservation of self vs. non-self is vital to organismal integrity. +Neural Darwinism, as TNGS, is a theory of neuronal group selection that retools the fundamental concepts of Darwin and Burnet's theoretical approach. Neural Darwinism describes the development and evolution of the mammalian brain and its functioning by extending the Darwinian paradigm into the body and nervous system. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9ac4511be --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +--- +title: "Neural Darwinism" +chunk: 2/8 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:16.671366+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Antibodies and NCAM – the emerging understanding of somatic selective systems === +Edelman was a medical researcher, physical chemist, immunologist, and aspiring neuroscientist when he was awarded the 1972 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (shared with Rodney Porter of Great Britain). Edelman's part of the prize was for his work revealing the chemical structure of the vertebrate antibody by cleaving the covalent disulfide bridges that join the component chain fragments together, revealing a pair of two-domain light chains and four-domain heavy chains. Subsequent analysis revealed the terminal domains of both chains to be variable domains responsible for antigen recognition. +The work of Porter and Edelman revealed the molecular and genetic foundations underpinning how antibody diversity was generated within the immune system. Their work supported earlier ideas about pre-existing diversity in the immune system put forward by the pioneering Danish immunologist Niels K. Jerne (December 23, 1911 – October 7, 1994); as well as supporting the work of Frank MacFarlane Burnet describing how lymphocytes capable of binding to specific foreign antigens are differentially amplified by clonal multiplication of the selected preexisting variants following antigen discovery. +Edelman would draw inspiration from the mechano-chemical aspects of antigen/antibody/lymphocyte interaction in relation to recognition of self-nonself; the degenerate population of lymphocytes in their physiological context; and the bio-theoretical foundations of this work in Darwinian terms. +By 1974, Edelman felt that immunology was firmly established on solid theoretical grounds descriptively, was ready for quantitative experimentation, and could be an ideal model for exploring evolutionary selection processes within an observable time period. +His studies of immune system interactions developed in him an awareness of the importance of the cell surface and the membrane-embedded molecular mechanisms of interactions with other cells and substrates. Edelman would go on to develop his ideas of topobiology around these mechanisms – and, their genetic and epigenetic regulation under the environmental conditions. +During a foray into molecular embryology and neuroscience, in 1975, Edelman and his team went on to isolate the first neural cell-adhesion molecule (N-CAM), one of the many molecules that hold the animal nervous system together. N-CAM turned out to be an important molecule in guiding the development and differentiation of neuronal groups in the nervous system and brain during embryogenesis. To the amazement of Edelman, genetic sequencing revealed that N-CAM was the ancestor of the vertebrate antibody produced in the aftermath of a set of whole genome duplication events at the origin of vertebrates that gave rise to the entire super-family of immunoglobulin genes. +Edelman reasoned that the N-CAM molecule which is used for self-self recognition and adherence between neurons in the nervous system gave rise to their evolutionary descendants, the antibodies, who evolved self-nonself recognition via antigen-adherence at the origins of the vertebrate antibody-based immune system. If clonal selection was the way the immune system worked, perhaps it was ancestral and more general – and, operating in the embryo and nervous system. + +=== Variation in biological systems – degeneracy, complexity, robustness, and evolvability === + +Degeneracy, and its relationship to variation, is a key concept in neural Darwinism. The more we deviate from an ideal form, the more we are tempted to describe the deviations as imperfections. Edelman, on the other hand, explicitly acknowledges the structural and dynamic variability of the nervous system. He likes to contrast the differences between redundancy in an engineered system and degeneracy in a biological system. He proceeds to demonstrate how the "noise" of the computational and algorithmic approach is actually beneficial to a somatic selective system by providing a wide, and degenerate, array of potential recognition elements. +Edelman's argument is that in an engineered system, + +a known problem is confronted +a logical solution is devised +an artifice is constructed to implement the resolution to the problem +To insure the robustness of the solution, critical components are replicated as exact copies. Redundancy provides a fail-safe backup in the event of catastrophic failure of an essential component but it is the same response to the same problem once the substitution has been made. +If the problem is predictable and known ahead of time, redundancy works optimally. But biological systems face an open and unpredictable arena of spacetime events of which they have no foreknowledge of. In this arena, redundancy fails - a response might be designed to the wrong problem. +Variation fuels degeneracy; degeneracy provides somatic selective systems with more than one way to solve a problem and the propensity to reuse a solution on other problems. This property of degeneracy makes the system more adaptively robust in the face of unforeseen contingencies: When one particular solution fails unexpectedly, there are other unaffected pathways that can be engaged in pursuit of the same end. Early on, Edelman spends considerable time contrasting degeneracy vs. redundancy, bottom-up vs. top-down processes, and selectionist vs. instructionist explanations of biological phenomena. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..fa1b9bd09 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +--- +title: "Neural Darwinism" +chunk: 3/8 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:16.671366+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Rejection of computational models, codes, and point-to-point wiring === +Edelman was well aware of the earlier debate in immunology between the instructionists, who believed the lymphocytes of the immune system learned or was instructed about the antigen and then devised a response; and the selectionists, who believed that the lymphocytes already contained the response to the antigen within the existing population that was differentially amplified within the population upon contact with the antigen. And, he was well aware that the selectionist had the evidence on their side. +Edelman's theoretical approach in Neural Darwinism was conceived of in opposition to top-down algorithmic, computational, and instructionist approaches to explaining neural function. Edelman seeks to turn the problems of that paradigm to advantage instead; thereby highlighting the difference between bottom-up processes like we see in biology vis a vis top-down processes like we see in engineering algorithms. He sees neurons as living organisms working in cooperative and competitive ways within their local ecology and rejects models that see the brain in terms of computer chips or logic gates in an algorithmically organized machine. +Edelman's commitment to the Darwinian underpinnings of biology, his emerging understanding of the evolutionary relationships between the two molecules he had worked with, and his background in immunology lead him to become increasingly critical and dissatisfied with attempts to describe the operation of the nervous system and brain in computational or algorithmic terms. +Edelman explicitly rejects computational approaches to explaining biology as non-biological. Edelman acknowledges that there is a conservation of phylogenetic organization and structure within the vertebrate nervous system, but also points out that locally natural diversity, variation and degeneracy abound. This variation within the nervous system is disruptive for theories based upon strict point-to-point connectivity, computation, or logical circuits based upon codes. Attempts to understand this noise present difficulties for top-down algorithmic approaches – and, deny the fundamental facts of the biological nature of the problem. +Edelman perceived that the problematic and annoying noise of the computational circuit-logic paradigm could be reinterpreted from a population biology perspective – where that variation in the signal or architecture was actually the engine of ingenuity and robustness from a selectionist perspective. + +== Completing Darwin's program – the problems of evolutionary and developmental morphology == +In Topobiology, Edelman reflects upon Darwin's search for the connections between morphology and embryology in his theory of natural selection. He identifies four unresolved problems in the development and evolution of morphology that Darwin thought important: + +Explaining the finite number of body plans manifested since the Precambrian. +Explaining large-scale morphological changes over relatively short periods of geological time. +Understanding body size and the basis of allometry. +How adaptive fitness can explain selection that leads to emergence of complex body structures. +Later, In Bright Air, Brilliant Fire, Edelman describes what he calls Darwin's Program for obtaining a complete understanding of the rules of behavior and form in evolutionary biology. He identifies four necessary requirements: + +An account of the effects of heredity on behavior – and behavior, on heredity. +An account of how selection influences behavior – and, how behavior influences selection. +An account of how behavior is enabled and constrained by morphology. +An account of how morphogenesis occurs in development and evolution. +It is important to notice that these requirements are not directly stated in terms of genes, but heredity instead. This is understandable considering that Darwin himself appears to not be directly aware of the importance Mendelian genetics. Things had changed by the early 1900s, the Neodarwinian synthesis had unified the population biology of Mendelian inheritance with Darwinian natural selection. By the 1940s, the theories had been shown to be mutually consistent and coherent with paleontology and comparative morphology. The theory came to be known as the modern synthesis on the basis of the title of the 1942 book Evolution: The Modern Synthesis by Julian Huxley. +The modern synthesis really took off with the discovery of the structural basis of heredity in the form of DNA. The modern synthesis was greatly accelerated and expanded with the rise of the genomic sciences, molecular biology, as well as, advances in computational techniques and the power to model population dynamics. But, for evolutionary-developmental biologists, there was something very important missing... – and, that was the incorporation of one of the founding branches of biology, embryology. A clear understanding of the pathway from germ to zygote to embryo to juvenile and adult was the missing component of the synthesis. Edelman, and his team, were positioned in time and space to fully capitalize on these technical developments and scientific challenges – as his research progressed deeper and deeper into the cellular and molecular underpinnings of the neurophysiological aspects of behavior and cognition from a Darwinian perspective. +Edelman reinterprets the goals of "Darwin's program" in terms of the modern understanding about genes, molecular biology, and other sciences that weren't available to Darwin. One of his goals is reconciling the relationships between genes in a population (genome) which lie in the germ line (sperm, egg, and fertilized egg); and the individuals in a population who develop degenerate phenotypes (soma) as they transform from an embryo into an adult who will eventually procreate if adaptive. Selection acts on phenotypes (soma), but evolution occurs within the species genome (germ). +Edelman follows the work of the highly influential American geneticist and evolutionary biologist Richard Lewontin (March 29, 1929 – July 4, 2021), drawing particular inspiration from his 1974 book, The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. Edelman, like Lewontin, seeks a complete description of the transformations (T) that take us from: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b9995481c --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ +--- +title: "Neural Darwinism" +chunk: 4/8 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:16.671366+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Genome-germ (zygotes) – the paternal and maternal gene contributions are recombined in the fertilized egg, along with the maternal endowment of proteins, and mRNAs, and other developmental components, but the individuals newly formed diploid genetic complement is not in control of the zygote yet; it needs to be activated, or bootstrapped, into the zygotes ongoing maternally-inherited metabolism and physiology. Shortly after recombination the zygote proceeds through transformation (T1) to the point where genetic control of the zygote has been handed off to the individual, +Phenotype-soma (embryo) – the embryo, which transforms (T2) according to the rules that govern the relationship between the genes, cellular behavior, and the epigenetic contingencies of nature, into +Phenotype-soma (adult) – an adult, who procreates (T3) with another individual to bring together a new genetic recombination by each introducing a gamete in the form of +Genome-germ (gametes) – sperm and egg, which contain the haploid genetic contribution of each parent which is transformed (T4)... +Genome-germ (zygotes) -into a diploid set genes in a fertilized egg, soon to be a newly individual zygote . +Lewontin's exploration of these transformations between genomic and phenotypic spaces was in terms of key selection pressures that sculpt the organism over geological evolutionary time scales; but, Edelmans approach is more mechanical, and in the here and now – focusing on the genetically constrained mechano-chemistry of the selection processes that guide epigenetic behaviors on the part of cells within the embryo and adult over developmental time. + +== Mechano-chemistry, mesenchyme, and epithelia – CAMs & SAMs in morphoregulatory spacetime == + +Edelman's isolation of NCAM lead him to theorize on the role of cell adhesion molecules (CAMs) and substrate adhesion molecules (SAMs) in the formation of the animal bodyplan in both realtime and over evolutionary time. Topobiology is primarily dedicated to this issue that is foundational to the understanding of neural Darwinism and the formation of the primary repertoire of TNGS. +In his regulator hypothesis, Edelman hypothesizes about the role of cell surface molecules in embryogenesis and how shifting expression of these molecules in time and place within the embryo can guide the development of pattern. Later, he will expand the hypothesis into the morpho-regulatory hypothesis. He describes the embryonic cell populations as either organized as mesenchyme or epetheilia. +Edelman characterizes the two population types as follows: + +Epithelia – a population of cells that are organized into coherent tissues, that have well established CAM patterns; as well as a stable pattern of substrate adhesion between the cells and the extracellular matrix. +Mesenchyme – a population of cells that are loosely associated and migratory, that have retracted (or localized) their CAM and SAM molecules such that they can follow homophilic and heterophilic gradients within other cell populations of the embryo. +He envisages a CAM, and SAM, driven cycle where cell populations transform back and forth between mesenchyme and epithelia via epithelial-mesenchymal transformations, as the development of the embryo proceeds through to the fetal stage. The expression of the CAMs and SAMs is under genetic control, but the distribution of these molecules on the cell membrane and extracellular matrix is historically contingent upon epigenetic events, serving as one of the primary bases for generating pre-existing diversity within the nervous system and other tissues. + +=== The developmental genetic question === +There are many developmental questions to be considered, but Edelman is able to succinctly summarize the problem in a way that will show a clear explanatory path forward for him. The developmental genetic question defines the problem – and, the theoretical approach for him. + +"How does a one-dimensional genetic code specify a three-dimensional animal?" – Gerald M. Edelman, from the glossary of Topobiology +By 1984, Edelman would be ready to answer this question and combine it with his earlier ideas on degeneracy and somatic selection in the nervous system. Edelman would revisit this issue in Topobiology and combine it with an evolutionary approach, seeking a comprehensive theory of body plan formation and evolution. + +=== The regulator hypothesis === +In 1984, Edelman published his regulator hypothesis of CAM and SAM action in the development and evolution of the animal body plan. +Edelman would reiterate this hypothesis in his Neural Darwinism book in support of the mechanisms for degenerate neuronal group formation in the primary repertoire. The regulator hypothesis was primarily concerned with the action of CAMs. He would later expand the hypothesis in Topobiology to include a much more diverse and inclusive set of morphoregulatory molecules. + +=== The evolutionary question === +Edelman realized that in order to truly complete Darwin's program, he would need to link the developmental question to the larger issues of evolutionary biology. + +"How is an answer to the developmental genetic question (q.v.) reconciled with the relatively rapid changes in form occurring in relatively short evolutionary times?" – Gerald M. Edelman, from the glossary of Topobiology + +=== The morphoregulator hypothesis === +Shortly after publishing his regulator hypothesis, Edelman expanded his vision of pattern formation during embryogenesis - and, sought to link it to a broader evolutionary framework. His first and foremost goal is to answer the developmental genetic question followed by the evolutionary question in a clear, consistent, and coherent manner. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-4.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-4.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f569e492a --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-4.md @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +--- +title: "Neural Darwinism" +chunk: 5/8 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:16.671366+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== TNGS – the theory of neuronal group selection == +Edelman's motivation for developing the theory of neuronal group selection (TNGS) was to resolve "a number of apparent inconsistencies in our knowledge of the development, anatomy, and physiological function of the central nervous system." A pressing issue for Edelman was explaining perceptual categorization without reference to a central observing homunculus or "assuming that the world is prearranged in an informational fashion." +To free himself of the demands, requirements, and contradictions of information processing model; Edelman proposes that perceptual categorization operates by the selection of neuronal groups organized into variant networks that are differentially amplified of their responses in conjunction with hedonic feedback over the course of experience, from within a massive population of neuronal groups being confronted by a chaotic array of sensory input of differing degrees of significance and relevance to the organism. +Edelman outright rejects the notion of a homunculus, describing it as a "close cousin of the developmental electrician and the neural decoder", artifacts of the observer-centralized top-down design logic of information processing approaches. Edelman properly points out that "it is probably a safe guess that most neurobiologists would view the homunculus as well as dualist solutions (Popper and Eccles 1981) to the problems of subjective report as being beyond scientific consideration." + +=== Necessary criteria for a selectionist theory of higher brain function === +Edelman's first theoretical contribution to neural Darwinism came in 1978, when he proposed his group selection and phasic reentrant signalling. Edelman lays out five necessary requirements that a biological theory of higher brain function must satisfy. + +The theory should be consistent with the fields of embryology, neuroanatomy, and neurophysiology. +The theory should account for learning and memory, and temporal recall in a distributed system. +The theory should account how memory is updated on the basis of realtime experience. +The theory should account for how higher brain systems mediate experience and action. +The theory should account for the necessary, if not sufficient, conditions for the emergence of awareness. + +=== Organization of the TNGS theory === +Neural Darwinism organizes the explanation of TNGS into three parts – somatic selection, epigenetic mechanisms, and global functions. The first two parts are concerned with how variation emerges through the interaction of genetic and epigenetic events at the cellular level in response to events occurring at the level of the developing animal nervous system. The third part attempts to build a temporally coherent model of globally unitary cognitive function and behavior that emerges from the bottom up through the interactions of the neuronal groups in real-time. +Edelman organized key ideas of the TNGS theory into three main tenets: + +Primary repertoire – developmental formation and selection of neuronal groups; +Secondary repertoire – behavioral and experiential selection leading to changes in the strength of connections between synaptic populations that bind together neuronal groups; +Reentrant signaling – the synchronous entrainment of reciprocally connected neuronal groups within sensorimotor maps into ensembles of coherent global activity. +The primary repertoire is formed during the period from the beginning of neurulation to the end of apoptosis. The secondary repertoire extends over the period synaptogenesis and myelination, but will continue to demonstrate developmental plasticity throughout life, albeit in a diminished fashion compared to early development. +The two repertoires deal with the issue of the relationship between genetic and epigenetic processes in determining the overall architecture of the neuroanatomy – seeking to reconcile nature, nurture, and variability in the forming the final phenotype of any individual nervous system. +There is no point-to-point wiring that carries a neural code through a computational logic circuit that delivers the result to the brain because + +firstly, the evidence does not lend support to such notion in a manner that is not problematic, +secondly, the noise in the system is too great for a neural code to be coherent, +and third, the genes can only contribute to, and constrain, developmental processes; not determine them in all their details. +Variation is the inevitable outcome of developmental dynamics. +Reentrant signalling is an attempt to explain how "coherent temporal correlations of the responses of sensory receptor sheets, motor ensembles, and interacting neuronal groups in different brain regions occur". + +==== Primary repertoire- developmental selection ==== +The first tenet of TNGS concerns events that are embryonic and run up to the neonatal period. This part of the theory attempts to account for the unique anatomical diversification of the brain even between genetically identical individuals. The first tenet proposes the development of a primary repertoire of degenerate neuronal groups with diverse anatomical connections are established via the historical contingencies of the primary processes of development. It seeks to provide an explanation of how the diversity of neuronal group phenotypes emerge from the organism's genotype via genetic and epigenetic influences that manifest themselves mechano-chemically at the cell surface and determine connectivity. +Edelman list the following as vital to the formation of the primary repertoire of neuronal groups but, also contributing to their anatomical diversification and variation: + +Cell division – there are repeated rounds of cell division in the formation of neuronal populations +Cell death – there is extensive amounts of pre-programmed cell death that occurs via apoptosis within the neuronal populations. +Process extension and elimination – the exploratory probing of the embryonic environment by developing neurons involve process extension and elimination as the neurons detect molecular gradients on neighboring cell surface membranes and the substrate of the extracellular matrix. +CAM & SAM action – the mechanochemistry of cell and surface adhesion molecules plays a key role in the migration and connectivity of neurons as they form neuronal groups within the overall distributed population. +Two key questions with respect to this issue that Edelman is seeking to answer "in terms of developmental genetic and epigenetic events" are: + +"How does a one-dimensional genetic code specify a three-dimensional animal?" +"How is the answer to this question consistent with the possibility of relatively rapid morphological change in relatively short periods of evolutionary time?" \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-5.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-5.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..183d0cb61 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-5.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +--- +title: "Neural Darwinism" +chunk: 6/8 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:16.671366+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +==== Secondary repertoire – experiential selection ==== +The second tenet of TNGS regards postnatal events that govern the development of a secondary repertoire of synaptic connectivity between higher-order populations of neuronal groups whose formation is driven by behavioral or experiential selection acting on synaptic populations within and between neuronal groups. Edelman's notion of the secondary repertoire heavily borrows from work of Jean-Pierre Changeux, and his associates Philippe Courrège and Antoine Danchin – and, their theory of selective stabilization of synapses. + +===== Synaptic modification ===== +Once the basic variegated anatomical structure of the primary repertoire of neuronal groups is laid down, it is more or less fixed. But given the numerous and diverse collection of neuronal group networks, there are bound to be functionally equivalent albeit anatomically non-isomorphic neuronal groups and networks capable of responding to certain sensory input. This creates a competitive environment where neuronal groups proficient in their responses to certain inputs are "differentially amplified" through the enhancement of the synaptic efficacies of the selected neuronal group network. This leads to an increased probability that the same network will respond to similar or identical signals at a future time. This occurs through the strengthening of neuron-to-neuron synapses. These adjustments allow for neural plasticity along a fairly quick timetable. + +==== Reentry ==== + +The third, and final, tenet of TNGS is reentry. Reentrant signalling "is based on the existence of reciprocally connected neural maps." These topobiological maps maintain and coordinate the real-time responses of multiple responding secondary repertoire networks, both unimodal and multimodal – and their reciprocal reentrant connections allow them to "maintain and sustain the spatiotemporal continuity in response to real-world signals." +The last part of the theory attempts to explain how we experience spatiotemporal consistency in our interaction with environmental stimuli. Edelman called it "reentry" and proposes a model of reentrant signaling whereby a disjunctive, multimodal sampling of the same stimulus event correlated in time that make possible sustained physiological entrainment of distributed neuronal groups into temporally stable global behavioral units of action or perception. Put another way, multiple neuronal groups can be used to sample a given stimulus set in parallel and communicate between these disjunctive groups with incurred latency. + +== The extended theory of neuronal group selection – the dynamic core hypothesis == +In the aftermath of his publication of Neural Darwinism, Edelman continued to develop and extend his TNGS theory as well as his regulator hypothesis. Edelman would deal with the morphological issues in Topobiology and begin to extend the TNGS theory in The Remembered Present. Periodically over the intervening years, Edelman would release a new update on his theory and the progress made. +In The Remembered Present, Edelman would observe that the mammalian central nervous system seemed to have two distinct morphologically organized systems – one the limbic-brain stem system which is primarily dedicated to "appetitive, consumatory, and defensive behavior"; The other system is the highly reentrant thalamocortical system, consisting of the thalamus along with the "primary and secondary sensory areas and association cortex" which are "linked strongly to exteroceptors and is closely and extensively mapped in a polymodal fashion." + +=== The limbic-brain stem system – the interior world of signals === +The neural anatomy of the hedonic feedback system resides in the brain stem, autonomic, endocrine, and limbic systems. This system communicates its evaluation of the visceral state to the rest of the central nervous system. Edelman calls this system the limbic-brain stem system. + +=== The thalamocortical system - the exterior world of signals === +The thalamus is the gateway to the neocortex for all senses except olfactory. The spinothalamic tracts bring sensory information from the periphery to the thalamus, where multimodal sensory information is integrated and triggers the fast response subcortical reflexive motor responses via the amygdala, basal ganglia, hypothalamus and brainstem centers. Simultaneously, each sensory modality is also being sent to the cortex in parallel, for higher-order reflective analysis, multimodal sensorimotor association, and the engagement of the slow modulatory response that will fine-tune the subcortical reflexes. + +=== The cortical appendages – the organs of succession === +In The Remembered Present, Edelman acknowledges the limits of his TNGS theory to model the temporal succession dynamics of motor behavior and memory. His early attempts at replication automata proved inadequate to the task of explaining the realtime sequencing and integration of the neuronal group interactions with other systems of the organism. "Neither the original theory nor simulated recognition automata deal in satisfactory detail with the successive ordering of events in time mediated by the several major brain components that contribute to memory, particularly as it relates to consciousness." This problem lead him to focus on what he called the organs of succession; the cerebellum, basal ganglia, and hippocampus. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-6.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-6.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bdecc297c --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-6.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +--- +title: "Neural Darwinism" +chunk: 7/8 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:16.671366+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Reception == +An early review of the book Neural Darwinism in The New York Review of Books by Israel Rosenfield invited a lively response on the part of the neurosciences community. Edelman's views would be seen as an attack on the dominant paradigm of computational algorithms in cognitive psychology and computational neuroscience – inviting criticism from many corners. +There would be copious complaints about the language difficulty. Some would see Edelman coming across as arrogant, or an interloper into the field of neuroscience, from neighboring molecular biology. There were legitimate arguments raised as to how much experimental and observational data had been gathered in support of the theory at that time. Or, if the theory was even original or not. +But more often, rather than dealing with Edelman's critique of computational approaches, the criticism would be centered around whether Edelman's system was a truly proper Darwinian explanation. Nonetheless, Neural Darwinism, both the book and the concept, received fairly broad critical acclaim. +One of the most famous critiques of Neural Darwinism would be the 1989 critical review by Francis Crick, Neural Edelmanism. Francis Crick based his criticism on the basis that neuronal groups are instructed by the environment rather than undergoing blind variation. In 1988, the neurophysiologist William Calvin had proposed true replication in the brain, whereas Edelman opposed the idea of true replicators in the brain. Stephen Smoliar published another review in 1989. +England, and its neuroscience community, would have to rely on bootleg copies of the book until 1990, but once the book arrived on English shores, the British social commentator and neuroscientist Steven Rose was quick to offer both praise and criticism of its ideas, writing style, presumptions and conclusions. The New York Times writer George Johnson published "Evolution Between the Ears", a critical review of Gerald Edelman's 1992 book Brilliant Air, Brilliant Fire. In 2014, John Horgan wrote to Gerald Edelman in Scientific American, highlighting both his arrogance, brilliance, and idiosyncratic approach to science. +It has been suggested by Chase Herrmann-Pillath that Friedrich Hayek had earlier proposed a similar idea in his book The Sensory Order: An Inquiry into the Foundations of Theoretical Psychology, published in 1952. Other leading proponents of a selectionist proposals include Jean-Pierre Changeux (1973, 1985), Daniel Dennett, and Linda B. Smith. Reviews of Edelman's work would continue to be published as his ideas spread. +A recent review by Fernando, Szathmary and Husbands explains why Edelman's neural Darwinism is not Darwinian because it does not contain units of evolution as defined by John Maynard Smith. It is selectionist in that it satisfies the Price equation, but there is no mechanism in Edelman's theory that explains how information can be transferred between neuronal groups. A recent theory called evolutionary neurodynamics being developed by Eors Szathmary and Chrisantha Fernando has proposed several means by which true replication may take place in the brain. +These neuronal models have been extended by Fernando in a later paper. In the most recent model, three plasticity mechanisms i) multiplicative STDP, ii) LTD, and iii) Heterosynaptic competition, are responsible for copying of connectivity patterns from one part of the brain to another. Exactly the same plasticity rules can explain experimental data for how infants do causal learning in the experiments conducted by Alison Gopnik. It has also been shown that by adding Hebbian learning to neuronal replicators the power of neuronal evolutionary computation may actually be greater than natural selection in organisms. + +== See also == + +== Notes == + +== Citations == + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-7.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-7.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..61f93950b --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism-7.md @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ +--- +title: "Neural Darwinism" +chunk: 8/8 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_Darwinism" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:16.671366+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Burnet, Frank MacFarlane; Medawar, Peter Brian (1960). "The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1960". NobelPrize.org. +Calvin, William (June 24, 1988). "Neural Darwinism: The Theory of Neuronal Group Selection". Science. +Changeux, Jean-Pierre (1985). Neuronal Man – The Biology of Mind. Translated by Laurence Carey. Pantheon Books, New York. ISBN 0-394-53692-4. +Changeux, Jean-Pierre; Courrège, Philippe; Danchin, Antoine (1973). "A theory of the epigenesis of neural networks by selective stabilization of synapses". Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 70 (10): 2974–2978. Bibcode:1973PNAS...70.2974C. doi:10.1073/pnas.70.10.2974. PMC 427150. PMID 4517949. +Crick, Francis (1989). "Neural Edelmanism". Trends Neurosci. 12 (7): 240–248. doi:10.1016/0166-2236(89)90019-2. PMID 2475933. S2CID 3947768. +Darwin, Charles (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. D. Appleton and Company, New York, 1869. +Darwin, Charles (1872). The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals – with a preface by Konrad Lorentz. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London, 1965. ISBN 0-226-13656-6. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) +Darwin, Charles (1887). The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809–1882. With the Original Omissions Restored. Edited and with Appendix and Notes by his Granddaughter Nora Barlow. W.W. Norton & Company, 1969. ISBN 0-393-00487-2. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) +Dehal, Paramvir; Boore, Jeffrey L. (2005-09-06). "Two Rounds of Whole Genome Duplication in the Ancestral Vertebrate". PLOS Biology. 3 (10): e314. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030314. ISSN 1545-7885. PMC 1197285. PMID 16128622. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1972). Jan Lindsten (ed.). Antibody Structure and Molecular Immunology (In: Nobel Lectures, Physiology or Medicine 1971-1980). World Scientific Publishing Co., Singapore 1992. ISBN 978-9810207915. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1974). Gerald M. Edelman (ed.). Origins and Mechanisms of Specificity in Clonal Selection (In: Cellular Selection and Regulation in the Immune Response). Vol. 29. Raven Press, New York 1974. ISBN 0-911216-71-5. {{cite book}}: |journal= ignored (help) +Edelman, Gerald M. (1992b). "Molecular Recognition in the Immune and Nervous Systems". In Worden, F.G.; Swazey, J.P.; Adelman, G. (eds.). The Neurosciences: Paths of Discovery, I. Boston: I. Birkhäuser (published 1990). pp. 65–74. doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-6817-5_4. ISBN 978-1-4684-6817-5. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1984). "Cell adhesion and morphogenesis: The regulator hypothesis" (PDF). Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 81 (5): 1460–1464. Bibcode:1984PNAS...81.1460E. doi:10.1073/pnas.81.5.1460. PMC 344856. PMID 6584892. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1987a). "CAMs and Igs: cell adhesion and the evolutionary origins of immunity". Immunological Reviews. 100: 11–45. doi:10.1111/j.1600-065x.1987.tb00526.x. PMID 3326819. S2CID 24972419. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1987b). Neural Darwinism – The Theory of Neuronal Group Selection. Basic Books, New York. ISBN 0-465-04934-6. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1988). Topobiology – An Introduction to Molecular Embryology. Basic Books, New York. ISBN 978-0-465-08653-5. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1989). The Remembered Present – A Biological Theory of Consciousness. Basic Books, New York. ISBN 0-465-06910-X. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1992). Bright Air, Brilliant Fire – On the Matter of the Mind. Basic Books, Inc. ISBN 0-465-05245-2. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1993). "Neural Darwinism: selection and reentrant signaling in higher brain function" (PDF). Neuron. 10 (2): 115–25. doi:10.1016/0896-6273(93)90304-a. PMID 8094962. S2CID 8001773. +Edelman, Gerald M. (1998). GM. Edelman; J-P Changuex (eds.). Building A Picture of the Brain (In: The Brain). Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, London and New York 2000. ISBN 978-0-7658-0717-5. +Edelman, Gerald M. (2004). Wider Than The Sky – The Phenomenal Gift of Consciousness. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-10761-6. +Edelman, Gerald M. (2006). Second Nature – Brain Science and Human Knowledge. Yale University Press. ISBN 978-0-300-12594-8. +Edelman, Gerald M.; Gally, Joseph A. (2001). "Degeneracy and Complexity in Biological Systems". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA. 98 (24): 13763–13768. Bibcode:2001PNAS...9813763E. doi:10.1073/pnas.231499798. PMC 61115. PMID 11698650. +Edelman, Gerald M.; Gally, Joseph A. (2013). "Reentry: a key mechanism for integration of brain function". Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience. 7 (63): 63. doi:10.3389/fnint.2013.00063. PMC 3753453. PMID 23986665. +Edelman, Gerald M.; Porter, Rodney R. (1972). "The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 1972". NobelPrize.org. +Edelman, Gerald M.; Tononi, Giulio (2000). A Universe of Consciousness – How Matter Becomes Imagination. Basic Books, Inc. ISBN 978-0-465-01377-7. +Eriksson, Peter S.; et al. (1998). "Neurogenesis in the Adult Human Hippocampus". Nature Medicine. 4 (11): 1313–1317. Bibcode:1998NatMe...4.1313E. doi:10.1038/3305. PMID 9809557. +Fernando, C.; Karishma, K.K.; Szathmáry, E. (2008). "Copying and Evolution of Neuronal Topology". PLOS ONE. 3 (11): 3775. Bibcode:2008PLoSO...3.3775F. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003775. PMC 2582483. PMID 19020662. +Fernando, C.; Goldstein, R.; Szathmáry, E. (2010). "The Neuronal Replicator Hypothesis". Neural Computation. 22 (11): 2809–2857. doi:10.1162/NECO_a_00031. PMID 20804380. S2CID 17940175. +Fernando, C.; Szathmáry, E.; Husbands, P. (2012). "Selectionist and evolutionary approaches to brain function: a critical appraisal". Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience. 6 (24): 24. doi:10.3389/fncom.2012.00024. PMC 3337445. PMID 22557963. +Fernando, C. (2013). "From Blickets to Synapses: Inferring Temporal Causal Networks by Observation". Cognitive Science. 37 (8): 1426–1470. doi:10.1111/cogs.12073. PMID 23957457. +Hayek, F.A. (1952). The Sensory Order: An Inquiry into the Foundations of Theoretical Psychology. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. ISBN 0-226-32094-4. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) +Herrmann-Pillath, Carsten (2006-12-10). "The Brain, Its Sensory Order and the Evolutionary Concept of Mind, On Hayek's Contribution to Evolutionary Epistemology". Journal of Social and Evolutionary Systems. 15 (2): 145–187. doi:10.1016/1061-7361(92)90003-v. SSRN 950592. +Hill, Charlotte; Wang, YYihua (2020). "The importance of epithelial-mesenchymal transition and autophagy in cancer drug resistance". Cancer Drug Resistance. 3 (1): 38–47. doi:10.20517/cdr.2019.75. PMC 7100899. PMID 32226927. +Horgan, John (May 22, 2014). "My Testy Encounter with the Late, Great Gerald Edelman". Scientific American. Retrieved April 30, 2021. +Huttenlocher, P.R. (1990). "Morphometric study of human cerebral cortical development". Neuropsychologia. 28 (6): 517–527. doi:10.1016/0028-3932(90)90031-i. PMID 2203993. S2CID 45697561. +Huxley, Julian (1942). Evolution: The Modern Synthesis. London, G. Allen & Unwin ltd. +Johnson, George (April 19, 1992). "Evolution Between the Ears". New York Times. +Lewontin, Richard C. (1974). The Genetic Basis of Evolutionary Change. Columbia University Press. ISBN 0231033923. +Mountcastle, Vernon Benjamin; Edelman, Gerald M. (1978). The Mindful Brain – Cortical Organization and the Group-selective Theory of Higher Brain Function. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-55007-9. +Rose, Steven (June 9, 1990). "Review: Darwin on the brain". www.newscientist.com. New Scientist. Retrieved 18 April 2021. +Rosenfield, Israel (October 9, 1986). "Neural Darwinism: A New Approach to Memory and Perception". The New York Review of Books. 33 (15). Retrieved April 27, 2021. +Smoliar, Stephen W. (1989). "Review of G.M. Edelman (book review)". In William J. Clancey; Stephen W. Smoliar; Mark Stefik (eds.). Contemplating minds: a forum for artificial intelligence. MIT Press (published 1996). pp. 431–446. ISBN 978-0-262-53119-1. (originally published in Artificial Intelligence 39 (1989) 121–139.) +"In Memoriam: Gerald Edelman (1929–2014)". News & Views - Vol 14, Issue 17. The Scripps Research Institute (TSRI). June 2, 2014. Retrieved July 21, 2021. +Tononi, Giulio; Sporns, Olaf; Edelman, Gerald M. (1999). "Measures of degeneracy and redundancy in biological networks". PNAS. 96 (6): 3257–3262. Bibcode:1999PNAS...96.3257T. doi:10.1073/pnas.96.6.3257. PMC 15929. PMID 10077671. +Young, J.Z.; Ayala, Francisco J.; Szentagothai, J. (March 12, 1987). "Neural Darwinism: An Exchange (reply by Israel Rosenfield)". The New York Review of Books. 34 (4). Retrieved April 27, 2021. + +== Further reading == +How Brains Think: Evolving Intelligence, Then and Now by William H. Calvin +Neurogenesis in the Adult Human Brain + +== External links == +The Complete Work of Charles Darwin Online +Wikiversity – Neuroscience +Wikiversity – Fundamentals of Neuroscience +Wikiversity – Introduction to Non-Genetic Darwinism +Webpage of William Calvin +Webpage of Daniel Dennett +Webpage of Chrisantha Fernando \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bae2297d7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +--- +title: "Not in Our Genes" +chunk: 1/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:17.915639+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Not in Our Genes: Biology, Ideology and Human Nature is a 1984 book by the evolutionary geneticist Richard Lewontin, the neurobiologist Steven Rose, and the psychologist Leon Kamin, in which the authors criticize sociobiology and genetic determinism and advocate a socialist society. Its themes include the relationship between biology and society, the nature versus nurture debate, and the intersection of science and ideology. +The book formed part of a larger campaign against sociobiology. Its authors were praised for their criticism of IQ testing and were complimented by some for their critique of sociobiology. However, they have been criticized for misrepresenting the views of scientists such as the biologist E. O. Wilson and the ethologist Richard Dawkins, for using “determinism” and “reductionism” simply as terms of abuse, and for the influence of Marxism on their views. Critics have seen its authors' conclusions as political rather than scientific. + +== Summary == +Lewontin, Rose and Kamin identify themselves as "respectively an evolutionary geneticist, a neurobiologist, and a psychologist." They criticize biological determinism and reductionism, and state that they share a commitment to the creation of a socialist society and a recognition that "a critical science is an integral part of the struggle to create that society". Their understanding of science draws on ideas suggested by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels and developed by Marxist scholars in the 1930s. They also draw on the ideas of the Marxist philosopher György Lukács, as put forward in History and Class Consciousness (1923), as well as the ideas of the Marxist philosopher Ágnes Heller and the communist revolutionary Mao Zedong. They discuss and criticize the views of authors such as E. O. Wilson, Richard Dawkins, and Donald Symons. They criticize Wilson's Sociobiology: The New Synthesis (1975). They maintain that, like some other sociobiologists, Symons maintains that "the manifest trait is not itself coded by genes, but that a potential is coded and the trait only arises when the appropriate environmental cue is given." In their view, "Despite its superficial appearance of dependence on environment, this model is completely genetically determined, independent of the environment." They write that Symons' arguments in The Evolution of Human Sexuality (1979) provide examples "of how sociobiological theory can explain anything, no matter how contradictory, by a little mental gymnastics". + +== Publication history == +Not in Our Genes was first published by Pantheon Books in 1984. Later that year it was published by Pelican Books. In 1990, it was published by Penguin Books. + +== Reception == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f7a97405f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +--- +title: "Not in Our Genes" +chunk: 2/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:17.915639+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Mainstream media === +Not in Our Genes received positive reviews from the columnist Gene Lyons in Newsweek and the paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould in The New York Review of Books, a mixed review from the philosopher Philip Kitcher in The New York Times Book Review, and negative reviews from the anthropologist Melvin Konner in Natural History and the biologist Patrick Bateson and the ethologist Richard Dawkins (whom they criticized) in New Scientist. The editors of New Scientist noted that the book would "inevitably attract either extreme criticism or glowing praise" depending on the reviewer's stance on sociobiology, and that they published two reviews to help encourage debate, having approached Dawkins "for the opposition" and Bateson, "who feels that the attack on genetic determinism is justified." The book was reviewed by the psychologist Sandra Scarr in American Scientist, Nathaniel S. Lehrman in The Humanist, and in The Wilson Quarterly and Science News. +Lyons described the book as a "spirited, if often repetitive, demolition of sociobiology's pretensions", adding that its authors' arguments were "made doubly impressive" by their "analysis of how the economic determinism of what they call '“vulgar” Marxism' and the spinelessness of 'sociological relativism' have contributed to a climate in which the speculations of sociobiology have found a hearing." +Gould described the book as "important and timely". He credited the authors with exposing the fallacies of biological determinism, and presenting a view of human behavior beyond the nature versus nurture controversy. However, he believed that they failed to show the "fatal and debilitating flaws" in research on schizophrenia. He agreed that "interactionism is also based on deep fallacies and cultural biases that play into the hands of biological determinism", showing that it is guilty of "reductionism". +Kitcher described the book as "informative, entertaining, lucid, forceful, frequently witty, occasionally unfair, sometimes intemperate, never dull". He praised their discussion of intelligence, of sex differences and the use of drugs and surgery to modify behavior. He was less convinced by their discussion of schizophrenia, writing that in it their "policy of treating their opponents as patsies begins to seem unjustified". +Konner believed that the authors provided an "acceptable review of the dismal historical record of abuse of ideas in behavioral genetics" but that this history had received better discussions. He criticized them for ignoring similar abuses under left-wing systems. He accused them of falsely attributing a belief in "heredity privilege" to advocates of IQ testing, employing tactics such as guilt through association, providing misleading discussions of issues in psychiatry and neurology, and criticizing sociobiology on the basis of the weakest studies in the field and popular journalism. He considered Wilson's discussion of the development of behavior in Sociobiology more sophisticated than that of Lewontin et al. He called the book "unfortunate", writing that its authors "offer little, except for pious hand-wringing and 'dialectical' rhetoric, that might help us to grapple with the great unanswered questions of our behavior and experience, normal and abnormal." +Bateson accused the authors of making it easy for themselves to criticize the genetic analysis of behavior by focusing on its weakest advocates, though their "counter-rhetoric" was "brilliant" and sometimes "illuminating." He praised their discussion of measuring intelligence, writing that it was clear and "merciless" in its "exposure of poor method." He credited them with making a strong case against genetic explanations of both differences in IQ and schizophrenia, but thought their conclusions about both issues non-definitive and disputable. He found their criticism of ethology and sociobiology distorted by personal biases, writing that errors by some sociobiologists did not make it right to dismiss the field altogether. He noted that they ignored developments in the field that corrected some of Wilson's mistakes. He wrote that the belief that animals have a tendency not to mate with individuals familiar from early life is (contrary to earlier assertions) evidence-based. In Bateson's view, the value of their work was undermined by poor scholarship and bad arguments, and errors made in discussing his field forced him to wonder about the value of the rest of their work. Though agreeing with them about the interaction between the social and physical environment, he accused them of wrongly suggesting that this was novel, when it was doubtful whether anyone actually believed in the form of interactionism they criticized. He predicted that most scientists would simply disregard their book. +Dawkins accused the authors of promoting a "bizarre conspiracy theory of science" that suggested that sociobiology was a response to 1960s student activism, and of wrongly using quotations from non-sociobiologists such as the Conservative politician Patrick Jenkin and representatives of the British National Front and the French Nouvelle Droite as though they represented sociobiology. He described their claim that sociobiologists believed in genetic determinism as a "simple lie", and wrote that they employed the term "biological determinism" without having a clear idea of what they meant by it, and used "determinist" and "reductionist" simply as terms of abuse. He argued that biologists practice an appropriate form of "reductionism" that explains complex wholes in terms of their parts, and never practice the form of "reductionism" criticized by Lewontin et al., which supposes that "the properties of a complex whole are simply the sum of those same properties in the parts". He maintained that the anthropologists Marshall Sahlins and Sherwood Washburn, praised by the authors for their criticism of sociobiology, were both guilty of elementary misunderstandings of kin selection; that Lewontin should have realized this; and that their "dialectical biology" involved ideas similar to those of Bateson and Dawkins himself. He attributed the positive reviews of the book from liberals to its authors' opposition to racism. Though he believed that its chapters on "IQ testing and similar topics" had some value, he concluded that the book was poorly written and "silly, pretentious, obscurantist and mendacious". One of the authors threatened to sue Dawkins for insinuating in his review that they were comparable to the discredited psychologist Cyril Burt for their dedication to ideology over facts. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e30a852a9 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +--- +title: "Not in Our Genes" +chunk: 3/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:17.915639+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Academic journals === +Not in Our Genes received positive reviews from the biologist Peter Medawar in Nature, the geneticist Alan Emery in Trends in Neurosciences, and T. Benton in The Sociological Review, the biologist Franz M. Wuketits in the Journal of Social and Biological Structures, and a mixed review from the anthropologist Vernon Reynolds in Ethnic and Racial Studies. The book was also reviewed by Howard L. Kaye in Society. +Medawar described the book as a well-written and "in the main convincing rebuttal of a variety of determinist ideologies that have come to acquire the status of a public nuisance in biology and sociology." He endorsed its authors' criticism of IQ testing and their argument that determinism is an expression of conservative ideology. However, he was less satisfied by their criticism of reductionism, writing that despite its shortcomings reductive analysis was "the most successful research stratagem ever devised in science." He argued that it was also the way of understanding the world that made it easiest to see how it could be changed, something left-wing writers such as the authors of Not in Our Genes should appreciate. Emery welcomed the book as a refreshing attempt to create a more balanced view of the relevance of genetics to human behavior. +Benton described the book as an "immense achievement", accessible to a large audience. He admired the historical survey of biological determinism and reductionism and the philosophical discussion of their dialectical alternative, and praised their discussions of IQ testing, biological determinist defences of patriarchy, psychiatry, schizophrenia, and sociobiology. He believed that they exposed the logical and conceptual problems of measuring intelligence and identifying schizophrenia as a unitary disorder, as well as problems in the methodologies of heritability studies, including the assumption that "the determinants of any characteristic can be analysed as of two, separable kinds, heredity and environment, and that it makes sense to ask what proportion of each went into the making of the particular characteristic." He wrote that they dealt "selectively (and probably appropriately) with the work of Wilson and Dawkins". However, he believed that they did not have a fully developed alternative to biological and cultural determinism, questioned whether they had a view different from cultural determinism, and noted that while they treated sociobiology as a form of genetic determinism, the main sociobiological writers had become "more sophisticated and qualified in their assumptions." He criticized them for using quotations selectively to argue that sociobiology is still an unqualified form of genetic determinism, and for equating "biological determinism and political reaction", noting that religious fundamentalists wanted to outlaw the teaching of evolutionary theory, and some progressive thinkers accepted that biological processes shape personality. +Wuketits described the book as "concise and well written", and "more provocative than anything else written in opposition to genetic determinism and its ideological interpretation" because of its identification of sociobiology with the New Right. He considered it mistaken to view sociobiology as only an "ideological program", writing that it was primarily a scientific discipline. He expressed regret that the book would give readers not familiar with the scientific background to sociobiology the impression that it is "nothing but a dangerous pseudoscientific ideology." +Reynolds argued that because the authors dismissed biological approaches to understanding human nature, they invalidated their own claims about human nature, reducing them from scientific to political statements. He maintained instead that a single "committed political position" cannot be used to criticize science, and that determining to what extent scientific claims are political requires consideration of all political positions. He wrote that the authors provided a dubious description of science, making it sound like a "right wing political movement", noting that their credentials as scientists suggested that their politicized view of science was incorrect. However, he considered them right to claim that the arguments of sociobiology were only "speculative suggestions" and that it was unfortunate if "the fascist right" adopted them as "scientific validation of its ideology", and that some scientific work, such as "IQ testing", is politicized science, and credited them with showing that "a good many branches of the science of human nature all revolve around the problem of inequality" and "mostly validate it." \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bd3cfad39 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +--- +title: "Not in Our Genes" +chunk: 4/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_in_Our_Genes" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:17.915639+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Criticism == +The psychologist David P. Barash criticized Lewontin et al. for unfairly linking sociobiology with "racist eugenics and misguided Social Darwinism." Dawkins accused the authors of misquoting his comment on genes, "they created us, body and mind", by altering "created" to "control". He maintained that genes do not control people in the way that "genetic determinism" suggests and accused Lewontin et al. of failing to understand that genes can "exert a statistical influence on human behavior" but that "this influence can be modified, overridden or reversed by other influences." +The biologist Dean Hamer described Not in Our Genes as "a political rather than a scientific book". He expressed his disagreement with its politics. Nevertheless, Hamer commented that it taught him that the genetics of behavior is an emotionally and politically charged topic, especially where it concerns sexuality, and helped motivate him to change fields from metallothionein research to the genetics of homosexuality. The philosopher Daniel Dennett criticized Lewontin et al.′s account of reductionism, calling it "idiosyncratic". He also criticized their claim that memes involve a Cartesian view of the mind, arguing that memes are "a key (central but optional) ingredient in the best alternatives to Cartesian models", and accused them of being willing to use unscrupulous tactics to criticize people they considered determinists. +The author Richard Webster considered Not in Our Genes, "more subtle and valuable than the Marxism which frequently informs it". Rose commented that he and his co-authors in the book presented a critique of reductionism that was "systematic and based upon a coherent philosophical and political analysis which sees modern science as the inheritor of nineteenth-century mechanical materialism, itself tightly linked ideologically to a particular phase of the development of industrial capitalism." Writing with the sociologist Hilary Rose, he noted that Not in Our Genes was one of a number of books that criticized sociobiology. Hilary Rose suggested that Not in Our Genes had been misread by critics, and credited its authors with offering "an alternative theory to biological determinism more robust than the rather weak concept of interaction between nature and nurture". +The historian of science Roger Smith described Not in Our Genes as an accessible critique of sociobiology. The psychologist Steven Pinker criticized Lewontin et al. for engaging in "innuendos about Donald Symons's sex life" and misquoting Dawkins. +The sociologist Ullica Segerstråle suggested that Not in Our Genes, along with Gould's anti-sociobiological essays in Natural History, represented the height of the "critical attack" on sociobiology from its opponents. She noted that the book admitted that some critics of sociobiology wanted a socialist society. According to Segerstråle, Rose threatened to sue Dawkins for libel for his review; the evolutionary biologist W. D. Hamilton and other scientists made efforts to protect Dawkins, including seeking help from Segerstråle. She suggested that Rose's reaction to Dawkins's review may have been influenced by the fact that New Scientist had expected Dawkins to write a negative and Bateson a positive review for the magazine, while both reviews were negative. +The behavioral ecologist John Alcock argued that while Lewontin et al. were correct to maintain that no genes for social behavior had been identified as of 1984, it was nevertheless clear that thousands of genes are expressed in human brain cells and must be relevant to human behavior. Pinker accused Lewontin et al. of using words such as "determinism" and "reductionism" as "vague terms of abuse", and of misrepresenting scientists such as Wilson and Dawkins, falsely ascribing ridiculous beliefs to them. He saw them and other critics of "determinism" as misusing the term by using it to refer to the idea that people simply have a tendency to behave in a certain fashion. Pinker endorsed Dawkins's review. He noted that Lewontin and Rose were both "reductionist biologists", and attributed their rejection of the idea of human nature to their Marxism. + +== See also == +Marxist philosophy +Socialism + +== References == + +=== Bibliography === +Books + +Journals + +== External links == +Critical review in New Scientist by Richard Dawkins. +Positive review in Nature by Sir Peter Medawar. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Moths_and_Men-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Moths_and_Men-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..800be48a7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Moths_and_Men-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "Of Moths and Men" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Moths_and_Men" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:19.077244+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Of Moths and Men is a book by journalist Judith Hooper about the Oxford University ecological genetics school led by E.B. Ford. The book specifically concerns Bernard Kettlewell's experiments on the peppered moth which were intended as experimental validation of evolution. She highlights supposed problems with the methodology of Kettlewell's experiments and suggests that these issues could invalidate the results obtained, ignoring or disparaging evidence supporting natural selection while repeatedly implying that Kettlewell and his colleagues committed fraud or made careless errors. +Subject matter experts have described the book as presenting a "conspiracy theory" with "errors, misrepresentations, misinterpretations and falsehoods". The evolutionary biologist Michael Majerus spent the last 7 years of his life systematically repeating Kettlewell's experiments, demonstrating that Kettlewell had in fact been correct. + + +== Allegations of poor experimental practice == +In the book, Hooper alleges multiple flaws in experimental methodology, including gluing the moths in place on parts of trees where they would not naturally settle, feeding birds heavily enough to condition them to expect feeding at that point, artificially boosting recapture rates, altering experiments (unconsciously) to favour the expected outcome, and errors in statistical analysis. + + +== Rebuttals by experts == + +The book was described as well-written in reviews in the mainstream press, but severely criticised in scientific publications. +The historian of biology David Rudge has carefully reexamined the records upon which Hooper's argument is based. He concluded that her historical research had been poor, and that she had shown fundamental misunderstandings about the nature of science. +Writing in Nature in 2002, the evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne attacked Hooper's "flimsy conspiracy theory [of] ambitious scientists who will ignore the truth for the sake of fame and recognition [by which] she unfairly smears a brilliant naturalist". +In Science, Bruce S. Grant, also writing in 2002, critically summarised the book's content. In his view it had failed to distinguish evidence (showing that natural selection occurs) from mechanism (how it operates). He stated that there was an enormous amount of evidence for "changes in allele frequency in peppered moth populations" for which natural selection was the only explanation. He wrote that "What it delivers is a quasi-scientific assessment of the evidence for natural selection in the peppered moth (Biston betularia), much of which is cast in doubt by the author's relentless suspicion of fraud". +The geneticist Bryan Clarke, who had worked alongside Bernard Kettlewell at Oxford, described Hooper's book as "a treasury of insinuations worthy of an unscrupulous newspaper". +The entomologist and expert on peppered moth evolution Michael Majerus described the book as "littered with errors, misrepresentations, misinterpretations and falsehoods". He spent the last 7 years of his life on research, systematically refuting Hooper's claims. Much of the work was published posthumously, the data being reviewed by a team of evolutionary biologists, leading to a vindication of Kettlewell's findings, the re-establishment of his reputation, and the restoration of the peppered moth as an exemplar of Darwinian evolution. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Human_Nature-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Human_Nature-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..cf4096b3c --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Human_Nature-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +--- +title: "On Human Nature" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Human_Nature" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:20.293240+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +On Human Nature (1978; second edition 2004) is a book by the biologist E. O. Wilson, in which the author attempts to explain human nature and society through sociobiology. Wilson argues that evolution has left its traces on characteristics such as generosity, self-sacrifice, worship and the use of sex for pleasure, and proposes a sociobiological explanation of homosexuality. +He attempts to complete the Darwinian revolution by bringing biological thought into social sciences and humanities. Wilson describes On Human Nature as a sequel to his earlier books The Insect Societies (1971) and Sociobiology: The New Synthesis (1975). +The book won the Pulitzer Prize in 1979. + +== Summary == + +=== 2004 Preface === +The conundrum of human nature, as I and a few others saw it in 1978, can be solved only if scientific explanations embrace both the how (neurosciences) and why (evolutionary biology) of brain action, with the two axes of explanation fitted together. In The Insect Societies (1971), I proposed that a coherent branch of biology might be constructed from a synthesis of social behavior and population biology. In 1975 I expanded the conception of the discipline outlined to include vertebrate animals. The result was Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, a double-column, 697-page account of theory based on an encyclopedic review of all known social organisms. In a 1989 poll the officers and fellows of the international Animal Behavior Society ranked it the most important book on animal behavior of all time. Many scientists and others believed it would have been better if I had stopped before the last chapter on Homo sapiens. There could not have been a worse time than the mid-1970s for the inauguration of human sociobiology. The Vietnam War had created a student protest movement of the revolutionary left. Race was a radioactive issue. Talk of the inheritance of IQ and human behavior were punishable offenses. The blank-slate interpretation of the brain sheltered the social sciences and humanities from the storms of biology and vouchsafed their independence as two of the three great branches of learning. In the popular media, sociobiology came to mean the theory that human behavior is determined by genes. The final chapter of Sociobiology should have been a book-length exposition. + +=== Chapter 1. Dilemmas === +As a species we have no particular place to go. Human emotional responses have been programmed to a substantial degree by natural selection over thousands of generations but which should be obeyed and which ones might be better curtailed? And how do the different disciplines that explore human nature interact? Those working at a lower level often assume that those at a higher level should eventually be reformulated in their own terms: they form an antidiscipline for the next level, but with the passage of time they become fully complementary. Reduction is only half the scientific process: the recognition of novel emergent phenomena is as important. + +=== Chapter 2. Heredity === +Sociobiology is a hybrid discipline that incorporates knowledge from ethology to derive the principles of the biological properties of entire societies. It attempts to view humanity simultaneously with an array of other social experiments. Societies are not infinitely malleable. We share certain traits with the majority of great apes and monkeys, however less with birds or rodents. And there are a huge number of social traits that occur in every human society. He examines the similarities and differences with chimpanzees in more detail. He then discusses the incest taboo (cultural) with possible underlying genetic explanations. There is no reason to suppose that all genetic variability for behavior has been exhausted. In fact the opposite is true. The chapter concludes with a discussion of identical twin studies and possible racial differences. + +=== Chapter 3. Development === +Is the wiring diagram of the brain of a newborn baby an all-purpose device, adaptable through learning to any mode of social existence as those who believe in a tabula rasa assume? Does sociobiology imply that development is deterministic, producing insect-like behavior? His view is that genetic factors act as a set of biases in development, nudging it one way or another with a potentially large cumulative change. He comments on Chomsky's view of grammar and Skinner's of learning, and prefers Piaget’s approach. The mind isn't a tabula rasa but rather an autonomous decision-making instrument. + +=== Chapter 4. Emergence === +The threat to our free will is that someone may be able to calculate exactly how our brain works. But the extraordinary complexity and difficulty of exact measurement may mean that that is never the case. The cardinal mystery of neurobiology is not self-love or dreams of immortality, but intentionality. The compromise between Russian dolls and vitalism lies in recognizing plans, or schemata. These can create patterns in the mind that aren't altogether present in reality and can form the physical basis of will. Yet our behavior is determined in a weaker sense: we can make broad predictions with confidence. Cultural evolution is Lamarckian and much faster than Darwinian. But culture cannot diverge too far from its biological base. For example, slavery has existed in much of history but humans ultimately refuse to act like slave ants. We need to bear in mind the typical behaviors of people in the last few million years. But with the emergence of Homo sapiens, brain size increase leveled off being replaced by cultural expansion. + +=== Chapter 5. Aggression === +Humans are innately aggressive. Even the most peaceful tribes have a more violent past and probably future. But the Freudian concept of an innate aggressive drive, adapted by Konrad Lorenz, is incorrect. Wilson identifies seven types of situation in which aggression occurs, such as territorialism. But people are also capable of learning from their mistakes and changing, as happened to the Maoris in New Zealand. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Human_Nature-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Human_Nature-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e1772e64b --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Human_Nature-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ +--- +title: "On Human Nature" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Human_Nature" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:20.293240+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Chapter 6. Sex === +Sex has evolved because it creates diversity which can cope with a changing environment. The differing roles of the two sexes creates a conflict of interest which varies between species. But how far are the observed cultural differences innate or environmental? Some indication is given by considering the effects of hormone treatments during pregnancy and the equal treatment in the kibbutz movement. The theoreticians of Judaism and Christianity have misinterpreted the biological significance of sex, with the insistence that its primary role is procreation, and particularly in its treatment of homosexuals. Homosexuality is common in many species and may be normal in a biological sense as a form of bonding. + +=== Chapter 7. Altruism === +Human cultures value highly those who pay the “ultimate sacrifice”, more than most mammal species and only outperformed by the social insects where kin selection reigns. One needs to distinguish this from “soft-core” altruism where the giver expects something in return. Hard-core altruism is the enemy of civilization. But in humans soft-core altruism has been carried to elaborate extremes. Loyalty to close kin is emotionally important but doesn't always override other issues. + +=== Chapter 8. Religion === +Religion is one of the major categories of behavior undeniably unique to the human species and is above all the process by which individuals are persuaded to subordinate their immediate self-interest to the interests of the group. There is myth: the narratives by which the tribe's special place in the world is explained in rational terms consistent with the listener's understanding of the physical world. Much of contemporary intellectual and political strife is due to the conflict between three great mythologies: Marxism, traditional religion, and scientific materialism. + +=== Chapter 9. Hope === +Which of those mythologies gives us hope for the future? He accepts that the humanisms of Huxley, Pauli and others have achieved less than their purpose. But he still looks to the Promethean spirit of science as a cause of hope. + +== Reception == +The biologist Jerry Coyne accused Wilson of trying to use evolutionary psychology to control social science and social policy in The New Republic, arguing that On Human Nature was similar in this respect to Wilson's subsequent book Consilience (1998) and to the biologist Randy Thornhill and the anthropologist Craig Palmer's A Natural History of Rape (2000). +Bryan Walsh in 2011 named On Human Nature as one of the "100 best and most influential" books written in English since 1923 in Time. He considered Wilson's "real achievement" to be to "show how a sociobiological view of humanity could still have grandeur." The computer scientist Paul Brown in 2018 stated in Skeptical Inquirer that On Human Nature is "still brimful with ideas and insights about who we are, how we got here, and how to get wherever we want to go." +On Human Nature was discussed by Gregory Hanlon in the Journal of Interdisciplinary History. Hanlon credited Wilson with helping to establish that human behavior could not be understood solely in terms of "learned cultural values", that the behavioral sciences could help to explain "the interpersonal actions in past societies." He compared the book to the ethnologist Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt's Human Ethology (1989) and the historian Daniel Lord Smail's Deep History and the Brain (2008). +The anthropologist Sarah Blaffer Hrdy argued that a reading of On Human Nature refutes the accusation that Wilson aims to use sociobiology to reinforce traditional sex roles. The philosopher Roger Scruton criticized Wilson's sociobiological explanations of human social behavior, arguing that because of Wilson's "polemical purpose" he was forced to oversimplify the facts. However, he granted that sociobiological explanations of the sort favored by Wilson might possibly be correct. The anthropologist Donald E. Brown commented that he at first failed to read Wilson's book because his views were still conditioned by the "sociocultural perspectives" in which he had been trained. However, Brown concluded that "sociobiologists might be more convincing if they confined their explanations to universals rather than attempting to show that virtually everything that humans do somehow maximizes their reproductive success." +Science writers John Gribbin and Mary Gribbin described On Human Nature as an "accessible account of the application of sociobiology to people". The sociologist Ullica Segerstråle described On Human Nature as essentially a development of Wilson's earlier ideas. She commented that, unlike opponents of sociobiology, Wilson saw it as having liberal political implications, and tried to develop these suggestions in On Human Nature. The psychologist David P. Barash and Ilona A. Barash called On Human Nature, "A wide-ranging, thoughtful, and controversial classic of human sociobiology". +On Human Nature won a 1979 Pulitzer Prize. + +== See also == +Biology and sexual orientation +On Aggression +The Two Cultures +The Social Conquest of Earth + +== References == + +=== Bibliography === +Books + +Journals + +Online articles + +== External links == +Description of the book at Harvard University Press +On Human Nature at Open Library \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c7dcca955 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ +--- +title: "On the Beginning of Human History" +chunk: 1/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:21.440279+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +On the Beginning of Human History (Problems of Paleopsychology) is a philosophical and natural-scientific treatise by Soviet historian Boris Fyodorovich Porshnev, dedicated to the problems of anthropogenesis. The initial concept for a book on human prehistory dates back to 1924, although Porshnev directly addressed the topic of the emergence of Homo sapiens in the 1950s in connection with his interest in troglodytidae and the issue of the "snowman". After 1968, the researcher's work was entirely devoted to writing and publishing On the Beginning of Human History, which he considered the main research work of his life. +The book presents a complex interdisciplinary study at the intersection of physical anthropology, evolutionary psychology, sociology, philosophy of history, and other disciplines. The "beginning" highlighted in the title was, in the author's view, is a key to the entire complex of sciences about human society and the individual within society, creating a research program. For Porshnev, there was a fundamental distinction between humans and all other animals (an "evolutionary gap"), rooted in creativity, which is absent in any animal, even in rudimentary form. +B. F. Porshnev's theory of anthropogenesis centers on the “individual-to-individual” model of interaction rather than the “individual-to-environment” approach. He traced the emergence of human communication, consciousness, and creativity from physiological mechanisms of animal interaction, arguing that human labor originated among Tertiary-period troglodytids—corpse-eating scavengers who accidentally mastered fire while processing bones. Their evolving behavior led to intra-species hunting and eventually to the ecological divergence that produced Homo neanderthalensis. Porshnev's monograph, completed in 1972, was initially censored for revising Marxist interpretations of human evolution and published in abridged form in 1974; restored editions appeared from the 1990s onward. His hypothesis, criticized for speculative reasoning and reliance on limited evidence —especially regarding Neanderthals' role— has not been widely accepted. Yet, scholars such as Galin Tihanov regard Porshnev's fusion of psychology and history as one of the most original contributions to Soviet humanistic thought in the late 20th century. + +== General idea == +B. F. Porshnev's monograph is structured as an "enfilade of chapters", in the introduction of which the author outlined the purpose of his work and its place in his own scholarship. He emphasized the problem of identifying the "beginning" of humanity and human history, as it remains unclear what exactly is meant by "beginning" in a general philosophical sense: Porshnev placed the "individual to individual" model at the center of his research. The primary focus of the book is the study of the transformation of animals into humans from the psychology and the physiology of higher nervous activity's perspective. He develops a reinterpretation of Russian and foreign scholars associated with the I. Pavlov's (theory of the second signal system), A. Ukhtomsky's (dominance theory), L. Vygotsky's (model of child consciousness development), and A. Wallon's schools. Porshnev also drew on the ideas of semantic paleontology by N. Ya. Marr. + +A detailed examination of anthropogenesis within the context of evolutionary theory serves as the starting point for his arguments. The researcher primarily posited that humans could not have gradually emerged directly within the natural environment — the difference between animals and Homo sapiens is too vast. Porshnev asserted the existence of a "Cartesian abyss", a gap between hominids and Homo sapiens; this approach opposed evolutionary views that suggest the transition from animal to human was gradua.l The author's main task was to explain the process of human emergence and resolve the fundamental antinomy: the irreducibility of social to biological, while simultaneously acknowledging that the origins of the social lie solely in the biological. Porshnev termed his field of study "paleopsychology". + +== Main aspects == +Building on Friedrich Engels' ideas, B. F. Porshnev identified "troglodytids" —upright primates "no longer animals, but not yet humans"— as pivotal to human origins. He excluded australopithecines, archanthropes, and paleoanthropes from true hominids, viewing even Cro-Magnons as incomplete humans. Central was troglodytids' hypersuggestibility, unique to them and absent in animals or modern humans, with brain size playing a secondary role. +Troglodytids scavenged brains and marrow from predator kills using primitive tools due to weak dentition; later tools enabled adelphophagy (intraspecies cannibalism). Fire was accidentally discovered during tool-making on plant bedding and eventually harnessed after initial resistance. Imitative tendencies drove speech via "signal displacement," linking signals to sensory analyzers. Proto-speech evolved from context-specific gestures to sign-based communication, foundational to abstract human language. +Late Tertiary ecological shifts forced larger groups, heightening hypersuggestibility risks and prompting interdictive signals (prohibitive commands via imitation). Territorial clashes developed protective inhibition, enabling suggestibility resistance. Per Porshnev, hominid interactions weakened hypersuggestibility through actions, gestures, and sounds, protecting against external influences. Speech emerged as a social mechanism—both means and expression of human relations—simultaneously with society formation. This produced humans with symbolic speech, reduced suggestibility (yet retaining adult imitation until cognitive maturity), and thinking initially reactive to interactions, not reflecting the material world. +Aphasias (speech disorders) reveal the early Homo sapiens second signal system. Second-signal interactions divide into interdictive/suggestive phases, aligning with Vygotsky's view of higher functions as internalized social relations. Suggestion internalizes relationships, enabling self-regulation via "addressing oneself"—the core unit of speech-thinking. Dyplastia (thinking's elementary contradiction) expresses primal "us-them" social dynamics. + +=== Interaction of paleo- and neoanthropes === \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..a1c1e4933 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@ +--- +title: "On the Beginning of Human History" +chunk: 2/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:21.440279+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +According to Porshnev, ancient humans and troglodytids in a shared environment led to the strengthening of inhibition and prohibition mechanisms — modern humans and Neanderthals coexisted within a single community, with individuals of the former species serving as the primary food source for troglodytes, that led to the establishment of human sacrifices and initiation rituals imitating death in human culture. +B. F. Porshnev theorized that gender relations among neoanthropes, including promiscuity, arose from the need to feed paleoanthropes by sacrificing part of their own population. Females produced many offspring, but a large share —likely males— was killed for this purpose. Surviving males formed isolated "provider" groups that "ransomed" neoanthrope young through hunting yields. +These biological value differences between male and female neoanthropes, combined with an induced killing instinct, fostered war as a exclusively male pursuit. Wars occurred only among neoanthrope groups, with a taboo against paleoanthropes. The hypothesis described constant separation of females and young from adult males due to hunting mobility demands, preventing reunions. Other males temporarily joined female groups during migrations. Neoanthropes lacked a fixed family structure, instead forming transient associations across groups. +Porshnev linked the emergence of cultural prohibitions (interdictions) to their inherent exceptions, rooted in the physiology of suggestion—a mechanism for inhibiting all but one action. This gave rise to human speech and cultural norms. Analyzing ancient prohibitions, he identified three main groups: + +Prohibition on killing one's own kind: Stemming from the paleo-neoanthrope divergence, it initially barred eating humans killed by other humans (unlike those dying naturally), extending untouchability from the dead to the living via rituals like ochre smearing and decorations. Later, killing was restricted to ranged weapons, explaining primitive war rules where "rule-compliant" kills allowed consumption. +Prohibition on touching certain objects or actions: Reflected in Paleolithic art, which Porshnev saw as precursors to writing (echoing N. Ya. Marr), with images predating verbal thought. Earliest marks (lines, handprints) were traces of counter-suggestion. +Sexual prohibitions: The oldest was the incest taboo (mother-son, then siblings), granting preferential rights to outsider males in the "shuffling herd." This sparked conflicts with resident young males, resolved by segregating the latter into separate groups with barriers, fostering exogamy. +According to Porshnev, early religious notions of "good" and "bad" deities also arose during the divergence — selection of neoanthropes among paleoanthropes. Images of deities (proto-deities) and various forms of "evil spirits" reflect the paleoanthrope, with whom modern humans had to interact for a long time, as well as specific features of this interaction. The more ancient these images, the more they contain literal physical traits and behavioral characteristics of the real "living" paleoanthrope. + +=== Prolonged coexistence of paleo- and neoanthropes === + +Neoanthrope divergence drove global expansion, as modern humans fled paleoanthropes that preyed on them or neoanthrope groups in symbiosis with Neanderthals. Porshnev attributed this dispersal to mutual intolerance among neoanthropes, not resource-seeking. Upon reaching remote regions like the Americas and Australia, populations overlapped, prompting returns to occupied lands. Divergence persisted through endogamy; today's races and ethnic groups extend this process, serving new adaptive roles. +According to Porshnev, paleoanthropes that survived their peak did not disappear entirely, as evidenced not only by mythology but also by historical sources. He believed there were numerous archaeological findings showing that Neanderthaloid creatures with their stone industry coexisted at the same sites as Cro-Magnons. Some paleoanthropes survived into the Neolithic and Bronze Age. Porshnev argued that accounts from ancient authors (Herodotus, Plutarch, Pomponius Mela, Pliny the Elder) about rare encounters with "satyrs" and "fauns" reflected the existence of paleoanthropes on the fringes of the known world at the time. +Porshnev paid particular attention to the representations in Zoroastrianism, which he viewed as an example of a source reflecting the memory of the ancient interaction between paleo- and neoanthropes. He suggested taking literally the information in the Avesta about daevas, considered by Zoroastrians as living beings. It is possible that as late as the 6th–5th centuries BCE, constant contact with relict paleoanthropes-daevas was maintained through the slaughter of large numbers of livestock for them and their taming by "sorcerers" (shamans). The Zoroastrian custom of leaving a deceased body to be torn apart by birds and beasts is also linked to ancient times, including as a means of feeding "their" paleoanthropes. +Porshnev considered the last representatives of relict paleoanthropes to be creatures described by naturalists of the 17th–18th centuries, including Nicolaes Tulp. Carl Linnaeus in the first edition of his System of Nature (1735, Leiden) also reserved a place for Homo troglodytes, described based on reports from Dutch naturalists. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3e22fdfd5 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +--- +title: "On the Beginning of Human History" +chunk: 3/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Beginning_of_Human_History" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:21.440279+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Theory's origin and development == +At the time of writing On the Origin of Human History, B. F. Porshnev was internationally recognized as a specialist in 17th-century French history, though in the USSR he was often seen as a dogmatic Marxist-Leninist or mocked for his yeti research. Porshnev described his interests in the following way:For many years, I have heard caste-based reproaches: why am I dealing with this range of issues when my direct specialty is the history of 17th–18th century Europe? I take this opportunity to correct the misunderstanding: the science of the origin of human history—and, above all, paleopsychology—is my main specialty. If, in addition to this, I have devoted considerable time in my life to history, as well as philosophy, sociology, and political economy, this in no way discredits me in the aforementioned primary field of my research. But the questions of prehistory arise for me in aspects that my colleagues in related specialties do not study.Porshnev dated the concept to the mid-1920s (or 1924 in drafts), envisioning a trilogy with On the Origin… as the middle volume, though archives show the plan solidified in the mid-1960s amid his publications on ancient humans. 1930s manuscripts outlined "primitive" behavior as alien to animal instincts or human consciousness, later framed in On the Origin… as "two inversions" transforming animal nature into history-making. He first presented publicly in 1956 at Moscow State University's Institute of Anthropology, building on physiology and psychology; influences included the 1952 Historia mundi review (with Vasily Struve) and Soviet World History (1955), contrasting European views with Friedrich Engels' theories. +In 1955, Teshik-Tash cave studies led Porshnev to conclude paleoanthropes scavenged leopard kills, sparking yeti hypotheses of relict Neanderthals; his 1958 USSR Academy commission bid failed, souring ties with anthropologists. A 1961–1962 report (published 1962 in Voprosy Filosofii) critiqued silos in biological, psychological, and socio-historical sciences. At the 1964 International Congress, he introduced a socio-psychological anthropogenesis emphasizing paleo- vs. neoanthropes and "us vs. them" origins. His 1966 Social Psychology and History and 1969 chapter explored human-troglodyte relations; 1967–1968 talks and a 1969 article revised Engels on labor, positing "suggestion" as the human-animal psychic divide, core to his trilogy. +Post-1968, Porshnev focused on the monograph. A 1970 Mysl contract for 27 sheets yielded a 35-sheet manuscript by year's end, requiring cuts; three chapters were removed before May 1972 typesetting. Reviewers struggled with the holistic concept. In September 1972, new editor V. P. Kopyrin chaired an Academy of Social Sciences discussion, contrasting Porshnev's views with Marxist classics, canceling publication and dismantling typeset. Porshnev died November 26, 1972. In 1973, proofs went to the USSR Academy's Institute of Psychology; supporter Lyudmila Antsyferova clashed with Kopyrin over anti-Marxism claims. A collective review by Khachik Momdzhyan and Sergei Tokarev became the preface; Kopyrin approved if Chapter 8 was revised. The book appeared in fall 1974. + +== Reviews and critics == +Historian G. Tihanov praised B. F. Porshnev for integrating history and paleopsychology, historicizing humankind's foundation in Soviet historiography. Despite adhering to Marxist materialism, Porshnev's concept of suggestion as a driver of history transcended dogma, presenting human history as a clash of suggestions and counter-suggestions rather than class struggle. Tihanov viewed Porshnev's work as a significant intellectual achievement amidst Soviet Marxism's decline. +The 1974 edition of Porshnev's On the Beginning of Human History included a review noting its unconventional views. Critics Kh. Momdzhyan, S. Tokarev, and L. Antsyferova appreciated Porshnev's method but cautioned against over-absolutizing ideas. A. A. Leontiev's 1975 review lauded the philosophical grounding of Porshnev's anthropogenesis but criticized his conflation of communication and speech, oversimplification of conscious purpose, and reliance on certain psychological concepts. +In 1980, Yakov Roginsky reviewed Porshnev's On the Beginning of Human History, focusing on its anthropological claims. He acknowledged Porshnev's engaging style but disputed his classification of early hominids as animals and his denial of their hunting practices, citing evidence of primate hunting. Roginsky also criticized Porshnev's redefinition of biological taxonomy and lack of focus on evolutionary morphology, though he praised his bold synthesis of diverse fields. +In foreign academic circles, Porshnev's theories (particularly on Neanderthal survival) were discussed in Current Anthropology between 1976 and 1979. I. Burtsev and D. Bayanov supported his ideas, while G. Strasenburg refuted claims of Neanderthal coexistence with humans, citing inconsistencies in historical evidence. A 1979 Slovak review of Porshnev's book mainly summarized its content without deep critique. + +== Notes == + +== References == + +== Bibliography == +Vite, O. T. (2003). "Tvorcheskoe nasledie B. F. Porshneva i ego sovremennoe znachenie" [The Creative Legacy of B. F. Porshnev and Its Contemporary Significance]. Almanakh «Vostok» (in Russian). + +== External links == +Volkov E. N. (2004-10-22). "V nachale bylo ne slovo — nachalom byla suggestiya. Zabytye prozreniya B. F. Porshneva i nekotorye mezhkontseptualnye psikhologicheskie i sotsiologicheskie paralleli" [In the Beginning Was Not the Word — The Beginning Was Suggestion. Forgotten Insights of B. F. Porshnev and Some Interconceptual Psychological and Sociological Parallels]. KORNI (COURSE): proekt i tekhnologiya. Retrieved 2016-01-19.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: deprecated archival service (link) +Porshnev B. F. (2003-11-08). "O nachale chelovecheskoy istorii (problemy paleopsikhologii). — Moscow: Mysl, Glavnaya redaktsiya sotsialno-ekonomicheskoy literatury, 1974" [On the Beginning of Human History (Problems of Paleopsychology). — Moscow: Mysl, Main Editorial Office of Socio-Economic Literature, 1974]. Fond sodeystviya razvitiyu psikhicheskoy kultury (Kiev). Retrieved 2016-01-19.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: deprecated archival service (link) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Movements_and_Habits_of_Climbing_Plants-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Movements_and_Habits_of_Climbing_Plants-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0a9e77471 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Movements_and_Habits_of_Climbing_Plants-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +--- +title: "On the Movements and Habits of Climbing Plants" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Movements_and_Habits_of_Climbing_Plants" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:22.574346+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +On the Movements and Habits of Climbing Plants is a book by Charles Darwin first printed in book form in 1875 by John Murray. Originally, the text appeared as an essay in the 9th volume of the Journal of the Linnean Society, therefore the first edition in book form is actually called the ‘second edition, revised.’ Illustrations were drawn by Charles Darwin’s son, George Darwin. +Following the 1859 publication of Origin of Species Darwin set out to produce evidence for his theory of natural selection. Initially Darwin spent much time in studying plants to achieve this aim. This book stands second in line to his first work on plants, On the various contrivances by which British and foreign orchids are fertilised by insects. (1862) +This work is subdivided into chapters concentrating on a particular type of climber which he divided into four main classes but Darwin, in this volume, concentrates on the two main classes, the twining plants and the leaf climbers (divided into two sub-divisions: leaf climbers and tendril bearers) +The following comprise the chapters: +1. Twining plants +2. Leaf climbers +3 & 4.Tendril bearers +5. Hook and Root climbers. + + +== Context == +Inspired by reading an 1858 short paper by his friend Asa Gray on the movements of tendrils, Darwin set up experiments to explore the development of so many kinds of climbing plants in an evolutionary context. The concept of the power of movement in plants (‘spontaneous revolutions of the stems...’ p. 1) had already been observed as he acknowledges in the first chapter. His conclusions in his last plant book, The Power of Movement in Plants are key here: i.e. that circumnutation (the process that creates the circular or elliptical movement of the stem and tips of plants) was central in the development of multitudes of adaptations to the environment and thus resulting in an immense variety of plants. The climbing habit evolved from this basic power of movement. +Darwin conducted, in his own words, "observations, founded on the examination of above a hundred widely distinct living species." This, he maintained, "contain sufficient novelty to justify me publishing them." + + +== Conclusions == +The spontaneous revolving habit of stems and tips has evolved in many plant groups in order to obtain light and/or support. Darwin in his conclusion explores the reasons for why these adaptations might have taken place, in what ways they may have been advantageous. For instance, an increased ability to hold on to support (by twining) will be beneficial in windy environments. In tall and dense forests, twining plants would probably succeed better with minor expenditure of organic matter. All this evolved due to an inherent ability to respond to their ‘wants’ by moving. (p. 202). Darwin states: "It has often been vaguely asserted that plants are distinguished from animals by not having the power of movement. It should rather be said that plants acquire and display this power only when it is of some advantage to them; this being of comparatively rare occurrence, as they are affixed to the ground, and food is brought to them by the air and rain." (p. 206). + + +== References == + +Gribbin, John; White, Michael (1995). Darwin: A life in Science. Simon & Schuster UK Ltd. ISBN 978-1-84739-149-0. +Darwin, Charles (1875). On the Movements and Habits of Climbing Plants. John Murray, London. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontogeny_and_Phylogeny-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontogeny_and_Phylogeny-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..01545c000 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontogeny_and_Phylogeny-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +--- +title: "Ontogeny and Phylogeny" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontogeny_and_Phylogeny" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:16.301562+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Ontogeny and Phylogeny is a 1977 book on evolution by Stephen Jay Gould, in which he explores the relationship between embryonic development (ontogeny) and biological evolution (phylogeny). Unlike his many popular books of essays, it was a technical book, and over the following decades it was influential in stimulating research into heterochrony (changes in the timing of embryonic development), which had been neglected since Ernst Haeckel's theory that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny had been largely discredited. This helped to create the field of evolutionary developmental biology. + +== Context == +Ontogeny and Phylogeny is Stephen Jay Gould's first technical book. He wrote that Ernst Mayr had suggested in passing that he write a book on development. Gould stated he "only began it as a practice run to learn the style of lengthy exposition before embarking on my magnum opus about macroevolution." This later work was published in 2002 as The Structure of Evolutionary Theory. + +== Book == + +=== Publication === +The book was published in 1977 by the Belknap Press of the Harvard University Press. + +=== Summary === +The first half of the book explores Ernst Haeckel's biogenetic law (recapitulation)—the discredited idea that embryonic developmental stages replay the evolutionary transitions of adult forms of an organism's past descendants—and how this idea influenced thinking in biology, theology, and psychology. Gould begins with the ancient Greek philosopher Anaximander, showing that the ideas formed a tradition leading to the French naturalist Charles Bonnet. Gould describes the recapitulationists in the 19th century, from the German Lorenz Oken and Johann Friedrich Meckel to the French Étienne Serres. The book examines the criticism of the theory by the Baltic German Karl Ernst von Baer and the Swiss-American Louis Agassiz, and relates 19th century phylogeny to Charles Darwin's 1859 theory of evolution, Haeckel's approach, and neo-Lamarckism. A chapter examines the pervasive influence of recapitulationism on such subjects as criminal anthropology, racism, attitudes to child development and primary schooling, and to Freudian psychoanalysis. +The second half of the book details how modern concepts such as heterochrony (changes in developmental timing) and neoteny (the retardation of developmental expression or growth rates) influence macroevolution (major evolutionary transitions). Gould examines the ecological and evolutionary significance of heterochrony, with an analysis of its effect on insect metamorphosis and neoteny in amphibians. He ends by considering theories of neoteny in human evolution, including Louis Bolk's so-called fetalization theory. + +== Reception == + +=== Contemporary === + +The herpetologist David B. Wake, in Paleobiology, wrote that the topic was "at once so obviously important and so intrinsically difficult" that few people would tackle it. The parallelism that Haeckel noted between ontogeny and phylogeny was, Wake observed, a strong argument for evolution, but hardly anyone dared to discuss it. He called the book very good, and predicted that it would set the stage for "endless research", but found it also in a way unsatisfying, using "undigested theory from ecology to explain what is, as yet, unexplainable. Summing up, Wake calls the book "erudite, important, provocative, and controversial", but noted that it could have been much shorter. +The embryologist Søren Løvtrup, in Systematic Zoology, noted that the book had two objectives, unexceptionably to gain practice, and "more dubious[ly]", to show that "in spite of the collapse of Haeckel's biogenetic law, the subject of parallels between ontogenesis and phylogenesis is still of importance to biology". In Løvtrup's view, this was because Haeckel's law had been refuted except where evolution had by chance happened to add to the end of development. Gould had little new to report, as people knew half a century earlier that development could be modified at other stages; the book was "a great disappointment." Haeckel could "of course be of historical interest" but Gould had chosen not to research Haeckel's influence. Work on "wrong theories" represented, Løvtrup wrote, "a terrible waste of effort and time, and block[ed] further progress." \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontogeny_and_Phylogeny-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontogeny_and_Phylogeny-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d69f95d47 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontogeny_and_Phylogeny-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ +--- +title: "Ontogeny and Phylogeny" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontogeny_and_Phylogeny" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:16.301562+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The anthropologist C. Loring Brace, in American Anthropologist, noted that two years earlier, E. O. Wilson's Sociobiology had with "woeful ignorance" strayed into anthropology, and Wilson's "bright young colleague" Gould had now done the same thing, possibly making trouble for years to come. Gould was "a wonderful writer, literate, erudite, gracefully witty, and gifted with the ability to present difficult material in a straightforward and easily readable fashion." +The bulk of the book was fine, though of no interest to anthropologists. But the tenth chapter, "Retardation and Neoteny in Human Evolution", would "mislead a great many people" who would be unable to make an informed judgement about its conclusions. Gould "turns out to be just as much of a teleologist and progressivist as the scholars of previous generations whom he appraises so effectively. He notes that we associate 'cute' features with mammals of higher intelligence, features that show 'the common traits of babyhood: relatively large eyes, short face, smooth features, bulbous cranium. The presence of this complex in advanced adult mammals argues for neoteny' (Gould p. 350)." In Brace's view, "Gould's main thesis founders between the Scylla of mosaic evolution and the Charybdis of Darwinian theory." Brace concluded that Gould had provided "nothing more useful than the vision that human form can be understood by regarding 'man' as an overgrown retarded child." +James Gorman, in The New York Times, wrote that the book was rich but not easy to read; it was primarily for biologists, with long and precise arguments in technical language; a simpler account of the same topic was to be found in Gould's essay "Ever Since Darwin". Gorman called the book scholarly, entertaining and informative, expressed "with clarity and wit". +The zoologist A. J. Cain, in Nature, called it "a superb analysis of the use of ontogenetic analogy, the controversies over ontogeny and phylogeny, and the classification of the different processes observable in comparing different ontogenies." It was a "massive book", in Cain's view excellently illustrated with often surprising examples, covering both the history and a functional interpretation of heterochrony. Cain found it refreshing to find someone who had a good word for Ernst Haeckel, and who did not "treat Charles Bonnet as a stupid monomaniac" but who brought out the relationship "between acquired characters and recapitulation in the work of the American neo-Lamarckians". + +=== Retrospective === + +The evolutionary biologists Kenneth McNamara and Michael McKinney stated in 2005 that of all the books that Gould wrote in his career, "the one with the most impact is probably Ontogeny and Phylogeny ... to say that this work is a hallmark in this area of evolutionary theory would be an understatement. It proved to be the catalyst for much of the future work in the field, and to a large degree was the inspiration for the modern field of evolutionary developmental biology. Gould's hope was to show that the relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny is fundamental to evolution, and at its heart is a simple premise—that variations in the timing and rate of development provide the raw material upon which natural selection can operate." +M. Elizabeth Barnes, in The Embryo Project Encyclopedia, looking back at the book in 2014, writes that it became widely cited in evolutionary and developmental biology, encouraging research on acceleration and retardation of development (forms of heterochrony), and investigation of paedomorphosis in human evolution. Barnes notes that "along with other work by Gould, such as 'The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm' [the book] is often credited for influencing the rise of a biological approach called evolutionary developmental biology or evo-devo, which worked to integrate evolutionary and developmental biology." + +== Notes == + +== References == + +== External links == +Harvard University Press page +Online text from Stanford University +Book preview – Google Books \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origination_of_Organismal_Form-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origination_of_Organismal_Form-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..373274782 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origination_of_Organismal_Form-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +--- +title: "Origination of Organismal Form" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origination_of_Organismal_Form" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:24.926590+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Origination of Organismal Form: Beyond the Gene in Developmental and Evolutionary Biology is an anthology published in 2003 edited by Gerd B. Müller and Stuart A. Newman. The book is the outcome of the 4th Altenberg Workshop in Theoretical Biology on "Origins of Organismal Form: Beyond the Gene Paradigm", hosted in 1999 at the Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition Research. It has been cited over 200 times and has a major influence on extended evolutionary synthesis research. + + +== Description of the book == +The book explores the multiple factors that may have been responsible for the origination of biological form in multicellular life. These biological forms include limbs, segmented structures, and different body symmetries. +It explores why the basic body plans of nearly all multicellular life arose in the relatively short time span of the Cambrian Explosion. The authors focus on physical factors (structuralism) other than changes in an organism's genome that may have caused multicellular life to form new structures. These physical factors include differential adhesion of cells and feedback oscillations between cells. +The book also presents recent experimental results that examine how the same embryonic tissues or tumor cells can be coaxed into forming dramatically different structures under different environmental conditions. +One of the goals of the book is to stimulate research that may lead to a more comprehensive theory of evolution. It is frequently cited as foundational to the development of the extended evolutionary synthesis. + + +== List of contributions == +Origination of Organismal Form: The Forgotten Cause in Evolutionary Theory, Gerd B. Müller and Stuart A. Newman +The Cambrian "Explosion" of Metazoans, Simon Conway Morris +Convergence and Homoplasy in the Evolution of Organismal Form, Pat Willmer +Homology:The Evolution of Morphological Organization, Gerd B. Müller +Only Details Determine, Roy J. Britten +The Reactive Genome, Scott F. Gilbert +Tissue Specificity: Structural Cues Allow Diverse Phenotypes from a Constant Genotype, Mina J. Bissell, I. Saira Mian, Derek Radisky and Eva Turley +Genes, Cell Behavior, and the Evolution of Form, Ellen Larsen +Cell Adhesive Interactions and Tissue Self-Organization, Malcolm Steinberg +Gradients, Diffusion, and Genes in Pattern Formation, H. Frederik Nijhout +A Biochemical Oscillator Linked to Vertebrate Segmentation, Olivier Pourquié +Organization through Intra-Inter Dynamics, Kunihiko Kaneko +From Physics to Development: The Evolution of Morphogenetic Mechanisms, Stuart A. Newman +Phenotypic Plasticity and Evolution by Genetic Assimilation, Vidyanand Nanjundiah +Genetic and Epigenetic Factors in the Origin of the Tetrapod Limb, Günter P. Wagner and Chi-hua Chiu +Epigenesis and Evolution of Brains: From Embryonic Divisions to Functional Systems, Georg F. Striedter +Boundary Constraints for the Emergence of Form, Diego Rasskin-Gutman + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Dictionary_of_Biology-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Dictionary_of_Biology-0.md index d029b0aee..14f6d79bc 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Dictionary_of_Biology-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Dictionary_of_Biology-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_Dictionary_of_Biology" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T07:16:08.292222+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:26.175388+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite_Rex-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite_Rex-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0b5e52490 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite_Rex-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +--- +title: "Parasite Rex" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite_Rex" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:27.343842+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Parasite Rex: Inside the Bizarre World of Nature's Most Dangerous Creatures is a nonfiction book by Carl Zimmer that was published by Free Press in 2000. The book discusses the history of parasites on Earth and how the field and study of parasitology formed, along with a look at the most dangerous parasites ever found in nature. A special paperback edition was released in March 2011 for the tenth anniversary of the book's publishing, including a new epilogue written by Zimmer. Signed bookplates were also given to fans that sent in a photo of themselves with a copy of the special edition. +The cover of Parasite Rex includes a scanning electron microscope image of a tick as the focus, along with illustrations in the centerfold of parasites and topics discussed in the book. + + +== Content == +The book begins by discussing the history of parasites in human knowledge, from the earliest writings about them in ancient cultures, up through modern times. The focus comes to rest extensively on the views and experiments conducted by scientists in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, such as those done by Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, Japetus Steenstrup, Friedrich Küchenmeister, and Ray Lankester. Among them, Leeuwenhoek was the first to ever physically view cells through a microscope, Steenstrup was the first to explain and confirm the multiple stages and life cycles of parasites that are different from most other living organisms, and Küchenmeister, through his religious beliefs and his views on every creature having a place in the natural order, denied the ideas of his time and proved that all parasites are a part of active evolutionary niches and not biological dead ends by conducting morally ambiguous experiments on prisoners. Lankester is given a specific focus and repeated discussion throughout the book due to his belief that parasites are examples of degenerative evolution, especially in regards to Sacculina, and Zimmer's repeated refutation of this idea. +Several chapters are taken to discuss various types of parasites and how they infect and control their hosts, along with the biochemistry involved in their take-over or evasion of their host's immune system, eventually leading to their dispersal into their next form and life cycle. An extended time is also given on the workings of immunology and how the immune systems of living beings respond to parasite infection, along with the methods that bodily functions use to counteract and potentially kill invading microorganisms. Woven into this discussion are several specific sites that Zimmer visited during his writing of Parasite Rex and the scientists he worked with to understand different biosystems and all the parasites that live within them, including human sleeping sickness infections in Sudan from the tsetse fly, the parasites of frogs in Costa Rica, primarily showcased by filarial worms that infect humans and a variety of species, and the USDA National Parasite Collection based out of Maryland. +The final chapters focus on an overall effect parasites have had on the evolution of life and the theory that it is due to parasitic infection that sexual reproduction evolved to become dominant, in contrast to previous asexual reproduction methods, due to the increased genetic variety and thus potential parasitic resistance that this would confer. This research was showcased by W. D. Hamilton and his theories on the evolution of sex, along with the Red Queen hypothesis and the idea of an evolutionary arms race between parasites and their hosts. Zimmer then discusses a final time the wide variety of parasites that evolved to have humans as their primary hosts and our attempts through scientific advancement to eradicate them. The closing chapter considers the positive benefits of parasites and how humans have used them to improve agriculture and medical technology, but also how ill-considered usage of parasites could also destroy various habitats by having them act as invasive species. In the end, Zimmer ponders whether humanity counts as a parasite on the planet and what the effects of this relationship could be. + + +== Style and tone == +In a review for Science, Albert O. Bush pointed out how Zimmer creates a writing style that is written with "clarity, conviction, and seemingly without prejudice" and that while the "purist will find the odd mistakes, oversights, and minor errors of fact", these are "insignificant" and do not remove from Parasite Rex's "overall quality or, more importantly, its focus and take-home message." + + +== Reception == +The New York Times' Kevin Padian praised the book and Zimmer's writing, saying that it showcases him as "fine a science essayist as we have" and that the importance of this book rests "not only in its accessible presentation of the new science of evolutionary parasitology but in its thoughtful treatment of the global strategies and policies that scientists, health workers and governments will have to consider in order to manage parasites in the future". Publishers Weekly called the book an "exemplary work of popular science" and one of the "most fascinating works" of its kind, while also being "its most disgusting". Margaret Henderson, writing for the Library Journal, recommended the book for placement in all libraries, saying that the book "makes parasitology interesting and accessible to anyone". Writing in the Quarterly Review of Biology, May Berenbaum describes Parasite Rex as a "remarkable book" that is "unique in its focus and is extremely readable" and earns the reviewer's "respect and recommendation" for being able to discuss the life cycles of lancet flukes and the Red Queen hypothesis properly in a single book. Joe Eaton in the Whole Earth Review categorized Parasite Rex as "one of those books that change the way you see the world" due to how it shows that ecosystems are largely made up of the parasites that the individual organisms carry. A review in The American Biology Teacher by Donald A. Lawrence labeled the book as a "splendid overview of current knowledge about parasites" and praised the extensive Notes, Literature Cited, and Index sections. The newsletter editor for the American Society of Parasitologists, Scott Lyell Gardner, congratulated the book for bringing the field of parasitology into the public view, saying that how Zimmer "presents parasites in the “ugh” and “oooh” mode, in addition to trying to show how parasitologists actually ply our trade" helps to provide interest into the subject. BlueSci writer Harriet Allison summed up the book as one where Zimmer "manages to weave just enough easily understandable science into each chapter in order to create an engrossing and squirm-inducing story that will have you hooked until the end". Kirkus Reviews stated its acclaim for the "vivid detail" given to the lifestyles of parasites, calling the book an "eye-opening perspective on biology, ecology, and medicine" and "well worth reading". + + +== See also == + +Microcosm: E. coli and the New Science of Life +Veterinary parasitology +Conservation biology of parasites + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Parasite Rex on Carl Zimmer's website +Parasite Rex on the Simon & Schuster, Publisher website \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterns_of_Sexual_Behavior-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterns_of_Sexual_Behavior-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..a46d1c15d --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterns_of_Sexual_Behavior-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ +--- +title: "Patterns of Sexual Behavior" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patterns_of_Sexual_Behavior" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:28.484178+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Patterns of Sexual Behavior is a 1951 book by anthropologist Clellan S. Ford and ethologist Frank A. Beach, in which the authors integrate information about human sexual behavior from different cultures, and include detailed comparisons across animal species, with particular emphasis on primates. The book received positive reviews and has been called a classic. It provided the foundation for the later research of Masters and Johnson. + + +== Summary == +Ford and Beach employ a "cross-cultural correlational method" in exploring sexual behavior, a statistical approach suitable for distinguishing behavioral trends and making generalizations. They integrate information from 191 cultures: 47 from Oceania, 28 from Eurasia, 33 from Africa, 57 from North America, and 26 from South America. Much of their data was collected in the Human Relations Area Files, a cross-institutional organization co-founded by Ford. They offer information on such topics as "sexual positions, length (time) of intercourse, locations for intercourse, orgasm experiences, types of foreplay, courting behaviors, frequencies of intercourse [and] methods of attracting a partner." They cover homosexuality in both humans and other animals, citing evidence of accepted homosexual behavior in 49 of the 76 cultures for which the relevant data were available. Ford and Beach conclude that there is a "basic mammalian capacity" for same-sex behavior. + + +== Publication history == +Patterns of Sexual Behavior was originally published by Harper & Brothers, New York in 1951. The following year, the work was reprinted (under the title Patterns of Sexual Behaviour) by Eyre and Spottiswoode in London. Metheun published a reprint of the 1951 Harper & Row edition in 1965. + + +== Reception == + + +=== Scientific and academic journals === +Patterns of Sexual Behavior received positive reviews from Allan R. Holmberg in the American Sociological Review and Abraham Stone in Marriage and Family Living, and was later discussed by the anthropologist George Murdock in American Anthropologist. +Holmberg described the book as well-written, and credited Ford and Beach with placing "the study of sex in a broad scientific perspective" by presenting and analyzing "an enormous body of data" on sexual behavior in both humans and non-human animals and placing it in cross-cultural, evolutionary, and physiological perspectives. He described their efforts as having "important theoretical, methodological, and practical implications" and believed they showed the merits of a "cross-disciplinary approach to the problems of human behavior." He complimented them for statistically documenting sexual practices and attitudes, and contributing important material on masturbation and homosexuality, suggesting the existence of "an inherent biological tendency toward such activities." He believed their book deserved to be widely read and predicted that it would have a "healthy impact on attitudes toward sex" and encourage further research by social scientists. However, he criticized them for providing insufficient discussion of "the symbolic aspects of sexual behavior". +Stone credited Ford and Beach with examining both biological and social influences on sex, thereby providing an "essential perspective" on human sexual behavior. Though he considered their use of the term "sex behavior" to refer exclusively to "behavior involving stimulation and excitation of the sexual organ" to be narrow, he believed they dealt "in great detail with a great many aspects of sex conduct and sex contact" and provided a "very full presentation of sex behavior from the point of view of anatomy and physiology". +Murdock described the book as a "classic" of its field. + + +=== Evaluations in books === +Anne Bolin and Patricia Whelehan identified Patterns of Sexual Behavior as a book that was highly influential in the study of sexual behavior in Perspectives on Human Sexuality (1999). They wrote that it provided the intellectual foundation for the later research of Masters and Johnson. Andrew Paul Lyons and Harriet Lyons argued Irregular Connections: A History of Anthropology and Sexuality (2004) that Patterns of Sexual Behavior was comprehensive for its time but nevertheless contained a number of self-imposed limitations. Its authors limited their definition of sexual behavior to "behavior involving stimulation and excitation of the sexual organs," and made no attempt to explore sexual symbolism. While acknowledging that their study might have implications for psychology and psychoanalysis, they felt themselves unqualified to explore specific questions pertaining to this field. They claimed to make no judgements of moral value, though their study is considered supportive of sexual relativism. Lyons and Lyons credited them with "making homosexual behavior more visible and more acceptable within the culture of its time." +The anthropologist Peter B. Gray and Justin R. Garcia described Patterns of Sexual Behavior as similar to their work Evolution and Human Sexual Behavior (2013) in its objectives; however, they also considered it dated. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phycologia_Australica-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phycologia_Australica-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..27854012f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phycologia_Australica-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +--- +title: "Phycologia Australica" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phycologia_Australica" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:29.655199+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Phycologia Australica, written by William Henry Harvey, is one of the most important 19th-century works on phycology, the study of algae. +The work, published in five volumes between 1858 and 1863, is the result of Harvey's extensive collecting along the Australian shores during a three-year sabbatical. By the time Harvey set foot in Western Australia, he had already established himself as a leading phycologist, having published several large works on algae from the British Isles, northern America as well as the Southern Ocean (Nereis Australica). The fact that Harvey travelled the globe on several occasions and collected the seaweeds which he described himself in his later publications, set him apart from most of his contemporaries who relied for the most part on specimens collected by others. In addition, Harvey's zest for work meant he pressed sometimes over 700 specimens in a single day, which were distributed to his colleagues a set of Australian algae. Upon his return to Trinity College in Dublin, Harvey embarked on a mission: the illustration and description of over 300 species of Australian algae, for which he earned the title "father of Australian Phycology". +The dedications and specific epithets of the species commemorate his friend George Clifton, of Fremantle, who assisted Harvey as a collector. + + +== References == + +Harvey, W.H. 1858. Phycologia australica Vol. 1. London. Pp. [i]-xi + v-viii [Index], pls. I-LX. +Harvey, W.H. 1859. Phycologia australica Vol. 2. London. viii pp., pls. LXI-CXX. +Harvey, W.H. 1860. Phycologia australica Vol. 3. London. viii pp., pls. CXXI-CLXXX. +Harvey, W.H. 1862. Phycologia australica Vol. 4. London. viii pp., pls. CLXXXI-CCXL. +Harvey, W.H. 1863. Phycologia australica Vol. 5. London. Pp. [i]-x + v-lxxiii [Synoptic catalogue], pls. CCXLI-CCC. + + +== External links == +Digitized copy of Phycologia australica Vol. 1-5 with metadata connections to the Encyclopedia of Life website at Biodiversity Heritage Library +Searchable database of Phycologia Australica Archived 2017-02-02 at the Wayback Machine \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiologus-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiologus-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6113b39f9 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiologus-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +--- +title: "Physiologus" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiologus" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:30.874377+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Physiologus (Greek: Φυσιολόγος) is a didactic Christian text written or compiled in Greek by an unknown author in Alexandria. Its composition has been traditionally dated to the 2nd century AD by readers who saw parallels with writings of Clement of Alexandria, who is asserted to have known the text, though Alan Scott has made a case for a date at the end of the 3rd or in the 4th century. The Physiologus consists of descriptions of animals, birds, and fantastic creatures, sometimes stones and plants, provided with moral content. Each animal is described, and an anecdote follows, from which the moral and symbolic qualities of the animal are derived. Manuscripts are often, but not always, given illustrations, often lavish. +The book was translated into Armenian in 5th century, into Latin by the early 6th century or possibly even by the mid-4th century and into Ethiopic and Syriac, then into many European and Middle-Eastern languages, and many illuminated manuscript copies such as the Bern Physiologus survive. It retained its influence over ideas of the "meaning" of animals in Europe for over a thousand years. It was a predecessor of bestiaries (books of beasts). Medieval poetical literature is full of allusions that can be traced to the Physiologus tradition; the text also exerted great influence on the symbolism of medieval ecclesiastical art: symbols like those of the phoenix rising from its ashes and the pelican feeding her young with her own blood are still well-known. + +== Allegorical stories == +The story is told of the lion whose cubs are born dead and receive life when the old lion breathes upon them, and of the phoenix which burns itself to death and rises on the third day from the ashes; both are taken as types of Christ. The unicorn also which only permits itself to be captured in the lap of a pure virgin is a type of the Incarnation; the pelican that sheds its own blood in order to sprinkle its dead young, so that they may live again, is a type of the salvation of mankind by the death of Christ on the Cross. This motif is known as the Pelican in her Piety. +Some allegories set forth the deceptive enticements of the Devil and his defeat by Christ; others present qualities as examples to be imitated or avoided. + +== Attributions == +The conventional title Physiologus was because the author introduces his stories from natural history with the phrase: "the physiologus says", that is, "the naturalist says", "the natural philosophers, the authorities for natural history say," a term derived from Greek φύσις (physis, "nature") and λόγος (logos, “word”). +In later centuries it was ascribed to various celebrated Fathers, especially Epiphanius, Basil of Caesarea, and St. Peter of Alexandria. +The assertion that the method of the Physiologus presupposes the allegorical exegesis developed by Origen is not correct; the so-called Letter of Barnabas offers, before Origen, a sufficient model, not only for the general character of the Physiologus but also for many of its details. It can hardly be asserted that the later recensions, in which the Greek text has been preserved, present even in the best and oldest manuscripts a perfectly reliable transcription of the original, especially as this was an anonymous and popular treatise. + +== Early history == +About the year 400 the Physiologus was translated from Greek into Latin. In the 5th century into Ethiopic [edited by Fritz Hommel with a German translation (Leipzig, 1877), revised German translation in Romanische Forschungen, V, 13-36]; into Armenian [edited by Pitra in Spicilegium Solesmense, III, 374–90; French translation by Cahier in Nouveaux Mélanges d'archéologie, d'histoire et de littérature (Paris, 1874)] (see also the recent edition: Gohar Muradyan, Physiologus. The Greek And Armenian Versions With a Study of Translation Technique, Leuven–Dudley MA: Peeters, 2005 [Hebrew University Armenian Studies 6]); into Syriac [edited by Tychsen, Physiologus Syrus (Rostock, 1795), a later Syriac and an Arabic version edited by Land in Anecdota Syriaca, IV (Leyden, 1875)]. An Old Slavic (Old Bulgarian) translation was made in the 10th century [edited by Karneyev, Materialy i zametki po literaturnoj istorii Fiziologa, Sankt Peterburg, 1890]. +Epiphanius used Physiologus in his Panarion and from his time numerous further quotations and references to the Physiologus in the Greek and the Latin Church Fathers show that it was one of the most generally known works of Christian Late Antiquity. Various translations and revisions were current in the Middle Ages. The earliest translation into Latin was followed by various recensions, among them the Sayings of St. John Chrysostom on the natures of beasts, A metrical Latin Physiologus was written in the 11th century by a certain Theobaldus, and printed by Morris in An Old English Miscellany (1872), 201 sqq.; it also appears among the works of Hildebertus Cenomanensis in Pat.Lat., CLXXI, 1217–24. To these should be added the literature of the bestiaries, in which the material of the Physiologus was used; the Tractatus de bestiis et alius rebus, often misattributed to Hugo of St. Victor, and the Speculum naturale of Vincent of Beauvais. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiologus-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiologus-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..643f8821f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiologus-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +--- +title: "Physiologus" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physiologus" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:30.874377+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Translations == +The Physiologus had an impact on neighboring literatures: medieval translations into Latin, Armenian, Georgian, Slavic, Syriac, Coptic, and Ethiopic are known. +Translations and adaptations from the Latin introduced the "Physiologus" into almost all the languages of Western Europe. An Old High German (Alemannic) translation was written in Hirsau in c. 1070 (ed. Müllenhoff and Scherer in Denkmäler deutscher Poesie und Prosa No. LXXXI); a later translation (12th century) has been edited by Friedrich Lauchert in Geschichte des Physiologus (pp. 280–99); and a rhymed version appears in Karajan, Deutsche Sprachdenkmale des XII. Jahrhunderts (pp. 73–106), both based on the Latin text known as Dicta Chrysostomi. Fragments of a 9th-century metrical Anglo-Saxon Physiologus are extant (ed. Thorpe in Codex Exoniensis pp. 335–67, Grein in Bibliothek der angelsächsischen Poesie I, 223-8). +About the middle of the 13th century there appeared a Middle English metrical Bestiary, an adaptation of the Latin Physiologus Theobaldi; this has been edited by Wright and Halliwell in Reliquiæ antiquæ (I, 208-27), also by Morris in An Old English Miscellany (1-25). There is an Icelandic Physiologus preserved in two fragmentary redactions from around 1200. +In the 12th and 13th centuries there appeared the Bestiaires of Philippe de Thaun, a metrical Old French version, edited by Thomas Wright in Popular Treatises on Science Written during the Middle Ages (74-131), and by Walberg (Lund and Paris, 1900); that by Guillaume, clerk of Normandy, called Bestiare divin, and edited by Cahier in his Mélanges d'archéologie (II-IV), also edited by Hippeau (Caen, 1852), and by Reinsch (Leipzig, 1890); the Bestiare de Gervaise, edited by Paul Meyer in Romania (I, 420-42); the Bestiare in prose of Pierre le Picard, edited by Cahier in Mélanges (II-IV). +An adaptation is found in the old Waldensian literature, and has been edited by Alfons Mayer in Romanische Forschungen (V, 392 sqq.). As to the Italian bestiaries, a Tuscan-Venetian Bestiarius has been edited (Goldstaub and Wendriner, Ein tosco-venezianischer Bestiarius, Halle, 1892). Extracts from the Physiologus in Provençal have been edited by Bartsch, Provenzalisches Lesebuch (162-66). The Physiologus survived in the literatures of Eastern Europe in books on animals written in Middle Greek, among the Slavs to whom it came from the Byzantine (translations of the so-called Byzantinian redaction were made in Middle Bulgarian in the 13th-14th century; they were edited in 2011 by Ana Stoykova in an electronic edition, see reference), and in a Romanian translation from a Slavic original (edited by Moses Gaster with an Italian translation in Archivio glottologico italiano, X, 273-304). + +== The manuscript tradition == +Modern study of Physiologus can be said to have begun with Francesco Sbordone's edition, 1936, which established three traditions in the surviving manuscripts of the text, a "primitive" tradition, a Byzantine one and a pseudo-Basil tradition. Ben Perry showed that a manuscript Sbordone had missed, at the Morgan Library, was the oldest extant Greek version, a late 10th-century manuscript from Grottaferrata. Anna Dorofeeva has argued that the numerous early Latin Physiologus manuscripts can be seen as evidence for an 'encyclopedic drive' amongst early medieval monastic writing centres. + +== Contents == +The order and naming of these section headings pertain to the Curley (1979) translation. + +== See also == + +List of illuminated manuscripts +Naturalis Historia + +== Notes == + +== References == + +=== Translations === +Francis Carmody (1953). Physiologus: The Very Ancient Book of Beasts, Plants and Stones. San Francisco: The Book Club of California. +A. S. Cook (1921). The Old English Physiologus. Yale Studies in English. Vol. 63. New Haven: Yale University Press. Only three chapters: "The Panther," "The Whale (Asp-Turtle)," and "The Partridge." +James Carlill (1924). "Physiologus". In William Rose (ed.). The Epic of the Beast. Broadway Translations. Edinburgh: George Routledge & Sons. +Michael J. Curley (1979). Physiologus. Austin: University of Texas Press. OCLC 1150939489. First translation into English of the Latin versions of Physiologus as established by Francis Carmody. +Emil Peters (1921). Friedrich Würzbach (ed.). Der Physiologus (in German). München: Musarionverlag. Translation from the Greek. +Christian Schröder (2005). Der Millstätter Physiologus: Text, Übersetzung, Kommentar. Würzburger Beiträge zur deutschen Philologie (in German). Vol. 24. Würzburg: Königshausen & Neumann. Also published as Schröder's dissertation at Würzburg University (2004). +T. H. White: The Bestiary: The Book of Beasts New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1954, 4/1960 +Arnaud Zucker (2005). Physiologos: Le bestiaire des bestiaires. Series Atopia (in French). Jérôme Millon. ISBN 9782841371716. Translation from the Greek. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_Time b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_Time new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e69de29bb diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Aspects_of_Life-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Aspects_of_Life-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ceaeb5326 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Aspects_of_Life-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +--- +title: "Quantum Aspects of Life" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Aspects_of_Life" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:33.191007+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Quantum Aspects of Life, a book published in 2008 with a foreword by Roger Penrose, explores the open question of the role of quantum mechanics at molecular scales of relevance to biology. It contains chapters written by various world experts from a 2003 symposium and includes two debates from 2003 to 2004, giving rise to a mix of both sceptical and sympathetic viewpoints. The book addresses questions of quantum physics, biophysics, nanoscience, quantum chemistry, mathematical biology, complexity theory, and philosophy that are inspired by the 1944 seminal book What Is Life? by Erwin Schrödinger. + + +== Contents == +Foreword by Roger Penrose +Section 1: Emergence and Complexity + +Chapter 1: "A Quantum Origin of Life?" by Paul C. W. Davies +Chapter 2: "Quantum Mechanics and Emergence" by Seth Lloyd +Section 2: Quantum Mechanisms in Biology + +Chapter 3: "Quantum Coherence and the Search for the First Replicator" by Jim Al-Khalili and Johnjoe McFadden +Chapter 4: "Ultrafast Quantum Dynamics in Photosynthesis" by Alexandra Olaya-Castro, Francesca Fassioli Olsen, Chiu Fan Lee, and Neil F. Johnson +Chapter 5: "Modeling Quantum Decoherence in Biomolecules" by Jacques Bothma, Joel Gilmore, and Ross H. McKenzie +Section 3: The Biological Evidence + +Chapter 6: "Molecular Evolution: A Role for Quantum Mechanics in the Dynamics of Molecular Machines that Read and Write DNA" by Anita Goel +Chapter 7: "Memory Depends on the Cytoskeleton, but is it Quantum?" by Andreas Mershin and Dimitri V. Nanopoulos +Chapter 8: "Quantum Metabolism and Allometric Scaling Relations in Biology" by Lloyd Demetrius +Chapter 9: "Spectroscopy of the Genetic Code" by Jim D. Bashford and Peter D. Jarvis +Chapter 10: "Towards Understanding the Origin of Genetic Languages" by Apoorva D. Patel +Section 4: Artificial Quantum Life + +Chapter 11: "Can Arbitrary Quantum Systems Undergo Self-Replication?" by Arun K. Pati and Samuel L. Braunstein +Chapter 12: "A Semi-Quantum Version of the Game of Life" by Adrian P. Flitney and Derek Abbott +Chapter 13: "Evolutionary Stability in Quantum Games" by Azhar Iqbal and Taksu Cheon +Chapter 14: "Quantum Transmemetic Intelligence" by Edward W. Piotrowski and Jan Sładkowski +Section 5: The Debate + +Chapter 15: "Dreams versus Reality: Plenary Debate Session on Quantum Computing" For panel: Carlton M. Caves, Daniel Lidar, Howard Brandt, Alexander R. Hamilton; Against panel: David K. Ferry, Julio Gea-Banacloche, Sergey M. Bezrukov, Laszlo B. Kish; Debate chair: Charles R. Doering; Transcript Editor: Derek Abbott. +Chapter 16: "Plenary Debate: Quantum Effects in Biology: Trivial or Not?" For panel: Paul C. W. Davies, Stuart Hameroff, Anton Zeilinger, Derek Abbott; Against panel: Jens Eisert, Howard M. Wiseman, Sergey M. Bezrukov, Hans Frauenfelder; Debate chair: Julio Gea-Banacloche; Transcript Editor: Derek Abbott. +Chapter 17: "Non-trivial Quantum Effects in Biology: A Skeptical Physicist's View" Howard M. Wiseman and Jens Eisert +Chapter 18: "That's Life! — The Geometry of π Electron Clouds" Stuart Hameroff + + +== See also == +Quantum biology + + +== References == +Kibble, Tom (December 2010). "Book Review: 'Quantum Aspects of Life' Edited by Derek Abbott, Paul C. W. Davies and Arun K. Pati". International Journal of Quantum Information. 08 (8): 1427–1432. doi:10.1142/S0219749910006939. +McClintock, Peter V.E. (January 2011). "Quantum aspects of life". Contemporary Physics. 52 (1): 71–73. Bibcode:2011ConPh..52...71M. doi:10.1080/00107514.2010.524806. S2CID 29174319. +Rinaldi, Andrea (January 2012). "When life gets physical: Quantum effects in selected biological systems have been confirmed experimentally, but how widespread is their role remains unclear". EMBO Reports. 13 (1): 24–27. doi:10.1038/embor.2011.236. PMC 3246260. PMID 22173031. + + +== External links == +Book's homepage at ICP \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questioning_the_Millennium-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questioning_the_Millennium-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9e1ad2efe --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questioning_the_Millennium-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +--- +title: "Questioning the Millennium" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Questioning_the_Millennium" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:18.626227+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Questioning the Millennium is a 1997 book by the paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould that deals with the definition and calculation of the millennium, and its meaning in Western culture. New York Times reviewer Robert Eisner described it as a "slim and attractive meditation," which touches upon calendrics, Biblical exegesis, millennial cults, and includes "a charming essay on a young autistic man whose amazing ability to calculate instantly which day of the week coincided with any date mentioned over many centuries". Gould reveals that this young man was his autistic son, Jesse. +Michiko Kakutani wrote that while not one of Gould's more important books, Questioning the Millennium "beguiles and entertains, even as it teaches us to reconsider our preconceptions about the natural world." Kakutani noted that its subject was much broader than simply the millennium, encompassing the human love for order and regularity. + + +== References == + + +== Multimedia == +"Questioning the Millennium" - interview with Gould on Charlie Rose +"Questioning the Millenium" - interview with Gould on All Things Considered + + +== External links == +Questioning the Millennium - by Stephen Jay Gould +"The First Day of the Rest of Our Life" - by Stephen Jay Gould +"Redefining the Millennium: From Sacred Showdowns to Current Countdowns" - by Stephen Jay Gould +"Dousing Diminutive Dennis's Debate (or DDDD=2000)" - by Stephen Jay Gould +"Today Is the Day" - by Stephen Jay Gould +"Fall in the House of Ussher" - by Stephen Jay Gould +Random House promotional page \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e69de29bb diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocks_of_Ages-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocks_of_Ages-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9e1075b37 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocks_of_Ages-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +--- +title: "Rocks of Ages" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocks_of_Ages" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:19.826529+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Rocks of Ages: Science and Religion in the Fullness of Life is a 1999 book about the relationship between science and religion by the Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. First published by Ballantine Books, it was reprinted by Vintage Books. The book is a volume in the series The Library of Contemporary Thought. + + +== Summary == +Gould addresses the conflict between secular scientists and religious believers who question or deny scientific theory when it is in discrepancy with religious teachings on the origin and nature of the natural world. Borrowing a term from the Catholic Church, Gould describes science and religion as each comprise a separate magisterium of human understanding. Science defines the natural world, and religion the moral world. If each realm is separate, then according to Gould, they are not in conflict. He calls this the principle of non-overlapping magisteria, abbreviated NOMA. + + +== Reception == +The book has been reviewed extensively, and commented on by both sides of the conflict he addresses. + + +== See also == +Intelligent design +Richard Dawkins +Moral Landscape + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Rocks of Ages at Ballantine Books website \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiff b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiff new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e69de29bb diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_4_Percent_Universe-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_4_Percent_Universe-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b37e7cc3f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_4_Percent_Universe-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@ +--- +title: "The 4 Percent Universe" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_4_Percent_Universe" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:26.202392+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The 4 Percent Universe: Dark Matter, Dark Energy, and the Race to Discover the Rest of Reality is a nonfiction book by writer and professor Richard Panek and published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt on January 10, 2011. +In October 2011, the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Saul Perlmutter, Brian Schmidt, and Adam Riess, three of the main figures discussed in the book for the primary discovery that is the topic of The 4 Percent Universe. + + +== Content == +The book's namesake comes from the scientific confusion over how ordinary matter makes up only four percent of the mass–energy in the universe, with the rest consisting of mysterious dark matter and dark energy that are both invisible and almost impossible to detect. It is due to dark matter that galaxies are able to keep their shape, with the mass of dark matter creating enough gravitational force to hold the stars that make up a galaxy together. Dark energy, however, is a substance or force responsible for the accelerating expansion of the universe over time. +The significant focus of The 4 Percent Universe is on the developments of astronomical science in the 20th century, including the formation of the expanding universe theory by Edwin Hubble in the 1930s. This model, when used in conjunction with Albert Einstein's general relativity helped in the creation of the Big Bang model and the later discovery of the cosmic background radiation in the 1960s. In following this history, Panek also discusses the flaws and missing pieces in the theories and the quest by two major scientific groups to discover the reason for the expansion of the universe not matching the models as expected. The book discusses the science behind the idea of dark matter being made up of weakly interacting massive particles and how scientists tried to determine the existence of dark energy from the 1990s and onward. The two groups involved in this research were the Supernova Cosmology Project headed by Saul Perlmutter and the High-Z Supernova Search Team headed by Brian Schmidt, both of which were involved in pioneering the use of Type Ia supernovae as standard candles for determining the variation in the universe's rate of expansion over its history, which in turn allows prediction of its future expansion. + + +== Style == +Salon's Laura Miller described Panek and his writing style as a "wondrously clear explicator of some thorny concepts". Writing a review for Science News magazine, Ron Cowen commented that Panek "writes eloquently about the mind-bending search for meaning in a universe dominated by stuff no one can see", while he also "weaves together concepts from particle physics, relativity, quantum mechanics and cosmology with personal portraits of astronomers". Andrew I. Oakes wrote in The Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada that the book's "logical approach to storytelling and its clear writing style foster a very manageable and entertaining read". + + +== Critical reception == +Kirkus Reviews described the book as having "vivid sketches of scientists, lucid explanations of their work and revealing descriptions of the often stormy rivalry that led to this scientific revolution, usually a media cliché, but not in this case." Choice magazine reviewer C. G. Wood rated the work as "highly recommended" and noted that while Panek "does not shortchange the science", the book mainly "concentrates on the personalities of those involved in the highly personal and sometimes bitter rivalry". The convoluted nature and number of scientists, organizations, and events involved in the book's topic is pointed out by Carl Zimmer in writing for The Washington Post, who stated that "Panek's passion for the mysteries of dark matter and dark energy wins the day" and that the premise "succeeds because he recognizes that he's writing not just about red shifts and supernovae, but about people". In a special for The Dallas Morning News, author Fred Bortz commended how Panek takes the complicated scientific nature of the book's topic and "weaves that science into a compelling narrative of a quest full of technological challenges, unexpected turns and expected human rivalries over high stakes, including perhaps a future Nobel Prize." +Jonathan L. Feng in a review for Scientific American pointed out that Panek has "a talent for elucidating difficult concepts" and that the book is "fun reading" thanks to his writing style and use of language, but notes that some spelling errors and inaccurate terminology and scientific name usage mars the otherwise perfect "significant accomplishment" that the book itself is. Samantha Nelson for The A.V. Club rated the book a C−, lamenting how Panek is able to describe scientific material in an understandable manner, but that the science is "bogged down by Panek's focus on the teams researching cosmology", finally noting that the "people behind the scientific discoveries deserve credit, but the science should still be the star of the book." + + +== See also == +Dark matter in fiction +Exotic matter +Mirror matter +Negative mass +Quintessence (physics) +Scalar field dark matter +Self-interacting dark matter +Unparticle physics +Quintessence: The Search for Missing Mass in the Universe + + +== References == + + +== Further reading == +Lea, Richard (March 18, 2011). "The 4% Universe by Richard Panek – review". The Guardian. Retrieved December 10, 2014. +"The 4% Universe: Dark Matter, Dark Energy, and the Race to Discover the Rest of Reaiity". Publishers Weekly. 257 (48). PWxyz LLC: 42. December 6, 2010. Retrieved December 10, 2014. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_50_Most_Extreme_Places_in_Our_Solar_System-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_50_Most_Extreme_Places_in_Our_Solar_System-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..35b50acea --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_50_Most_Extreme_Places_in_Our_Solar_System-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@ +--- +title: "The 50 Most Extreme Places in Our Solar System" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_50_Most_Extreme_Places_in_Our_Solar_System" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:27.363954+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The 50 Most Extreme Places in Our Solar System is a science book by David Baker, professor of physics at Austin College and Todd Ratcliff, a planetary geophysicist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The book explores the most extreme environments found across the Solar System, from the tallest peaks and deepest valleys to the hottest and coldest places. It was published to provide insights into the diverse conditions present within the Solar System and to highlight the extremes that can exist on other planets and moons. + + +== Content Detail == +The book is divided into several chapters, each detailing a specific "extreme" location within the Solar System. These locations are selected based on their unique physical characteristics and their scientific interest. The authors utilize data and images from various space missions and telescopes to illustrate the conditions of these extreme sites. Each chapter explains the formation, discovery, and importance of these locations in the broader context of planetary science and astronomy. + +Valles Marineris on Mars: The largest canyon in the Solar System, Valles Marineris stretches over 4,000 km long and reaches depths of up to 7 km. The authors explore its geological formation and discuss its comparison to Earth’s Grand Canyon. +Io’s Volcanoes: Jupiter's moon Io is the most volcanically active body in the Solar System. The book delves into how tidal forces from Jupiter cause this volcanic activity and what it might tell us about geological processes elsewhere. +The Surface of Venus: Known for its extreme temperatures and atmospheric pressure, Venus is often described as Earth's "evil twin." The authors explain the greenhouse effect gone to extremes and its implications for planetary habitability + + +== Authors == + + +=== David Baker === +David Baker is a professor of physics at Austin College, with a focus on planetary science. His research interests include the study of planetary atmospheres and geophysical phenomena across the solar system. Baker has contributed to numerous publications in the field of astronomy and is known for his ability to translate complex scientific concepts into accessible information for students and the general public. + + +=== Todd Ratcliff === +Todd Ratcliff is a planetary geophysicist who has worked extensively on analyzing data from space missions. His expertise includes the study of planetary geology and the internal structures of moons and planets. Ratcliff's work has helped in understanding the seismic and geological activities of celestial bodies within our solar system. + + +== Translations == +The book is currently available in two translations with a third in progress. + +German Extreme Orte +Korean Extreme Space +Japanese + + +== Awards and reviews == +Reviews have been positive including being awarded Honorable Mention in Cosmology and Astronomy in the 2010 PROSE Awards and named an Outstanding University Press Book for Public and Secondary School Libraries by the Association of American University Presses. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Official website \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..07239ea46 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@ +--- +title: "The Assayer" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:34.439118+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Assayer (Italian: Il saggiatore) is a book by Galileo Galilei, published in Rome in October 1623. It is generally considered to be one of the pioneering works of the scientific method, first broaching the idea that the book of nature is to be read with mathematical tools rather than those of scholastic philosophy, as generally held at the time. Despite the retroactive acclaim given to Galileo’s theory of knowledge, the empirical claim conjectured in the book — that comets and their observed properties are the product of optical phenomena — is incorrect. + +== Background – Galileo vs. Grassi on comets == + +In 1619, Galileo became embroiled in a controversy with Father Orazio Grassi, professor of mathematics at the Jesuit Collegio Romano. It began as a dispute over the nature of comets, but by the time Galileo had published The Assayer, his last salvo in the dispute, it had become a much wider controversy over the very nature of science itself. + +=== An Astronomical Disputation === +The debate between Galileo and Grassi started in early 1619, when Father Grassi anonymously published the pamphlet, An Astronomical Disputation on the Three Comets of the Year 1618 (Disputatio astronomica de tribus cometis anni MDCXVIII), which discussed the nature of a comet that had appeared late in November of the previous year. Grassi concluded that the comet was a fiery, celestial body that had moved along a segment of a great circle at a constant distance from the earth, and since it moved in the sky more slowly than the Moon, it must be farther away than the Moon. + +==== Tychonic system ==== +Grassi adopted Tycho Brahe's Tychonic system, in which the other planets of the Solar System orbit around the Sun, which, in turn, orbits around the Earth. In his Disputatio Grassi referenced many of Galileo's observations, such as the surface of the Moon and the phases of Venus, without mentioning him. Grassi argued from the apparent absence of observable parallax that comets move beyond the Moon. Galileo never explicitly stated that comets are an illusion, but merely wondered if they are real or an optical illusion. + +=== Discourse on Comets === + +Grassi's arguments and conclusions were criticised in a subsequent pamphlet, Discourse on Comets, published under the name of one of Galileo's disciples, a Florentine lawyer named Mario Guiducci, although it had been largely written by Galileo himself. Galileo and Guiducci offered no definitive theory of their own on the nature of comets, although they did present some tentative conjectures that are now known to be mistaken. (The correct approach to the study of comets had been proposed at the time by Tycho Brahe.) In its opening passage, Galileo and Guiducci's Discourse gratuitously insulted the Jesuit Christoph Scheiner, and various uncomplimentary remarks about the professors of the Collegio Romano were scattered throughout the work. + +=== The Astronomical and Philosophical Balance === +The Jesuits were offended, and Grassi soon replied with a polemical tract of his own, The Astronomical and Philosophical Balance (Libra astronomica ac philosophica), under the pseudonym Lothario Sarsio Sigensano, purporting to be one of his own pupils. + +=== The Assayer === +The Assayer was Galileo's devastating reply to the Astronomical Balance. It has been widely recognized as a masterpiece of polemical literature, in which "Sarsi's" arguments are subjected to withering scorn. It was greeted with wide acclaim, and particularly pleased the new pope, Urban VIII, to whom it had been dedicated. In Rome, in the previous decade, Barberini, the future Urban VIII, had come down on the side of Galileo and the Lincean Academy. +Galileo's dispute with Grassi permanently alienated many Jesuits, and Galileo and his friends were convinced that they were responsible for bringing about his later condemnation, although supporting evidence for this is not conclusive. + +== Science, mathematics, and philosophy == + +In 1616 Galileo may have been silenced on Copernicanism. In 1623 his supporter and friend, Cardinal Maffeo Barberini, a former patron of the Accademia dei Lincei and uncle of future Cardinal Francesco Barberini, became Pope Urban VIII. The election of Barberini seemed to assure Galileo of support at the highest level in the Church. A visit to Rome confirmed this. The Assayer is a milestone in the history of science: here Galileo describes the scientific method, which was quite a revolution at the time. +The title page of The Assayer shows the crest of the Barberini family, featuring three busy bees. In The Assayer, Galileo weighs the astronomical views of a Jesuit, Orazio Grassi, and finds them wanting. The book was dedicated to the new pope. The title page also shows that Urban VIII employed a member of the Lynx, Cesarini, at a high level in the papal service. This book was edited and published by members of the Lynx. +In The Assayer Galileo mainly criticized Grassi's method of inquiry, heavily biased by his religious belief and based on ipse dixit, rather than his hypothesis on comets. Furthermore, he insisted that natural philosophy (i.e. physics) should be mathematical. According to the title page, he was the philosopher (i.e. physicist) of the Grand Duke of Tuscany, not merely the mathematician. Natural philosophy (physics) spans the gamut from processes of generation and growth (represented by a plant) to the physical structure of the universe, represented by the cosmic cross-section. Mathematics, on the other hand, is symbolized by telescopes, and an astrolabe. + +=== The language of science === +The Assayer contains Galileo's famous statement that mathematics is the language of science. Only through mathematics can one achieve lasting truth in physics. Those who neglect mathematics wander endlessly in a dark labyrinth. From the book: \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..07b154b23 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +--- +title: "The Assayer" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Assayer" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:34.439118+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Philosophy [i.e. natural philosophy] is written in this grand book—I mean the Universe—which stands continually open to our gaze, but it cannot be understood unless one first learns to comprehend the language and interpret the characters in which it is written. It is written in the language of mathematics, and its characters are triangles, circles, and other geometrical figures, without which it is humanly impossible to understand a single word of it; without these, one is wandering around in a dark labyrinth. +Galileo used a sarcastic and witty tone throughout the essay. The book was read with delight at the dinner table by Urban VIII. In 1620 Maffeo Barberini wrote a poem entitled Adulatio Perniciosa in Galileo's honor. An official, Giovanni di Guevara, said that The Assayer was free from any unorthodoxy. + +=== Perceived vs. real phenomena === + +In The Assayer Galileo described heat as an artifact of our minds. He wrote that heat, pressure, smell and other phenomena perceived by our senses are apparent properties only, caused by the movement of particles, which is a real phenomenon. Galileo also theorized that senses such as smell and taste are made possible by the release of tiny particles from their host substances, which was correct but not proven until later.... about the proposition “motion is the cause of heat”... I suspect that people in general have a concept of this which is very remote from the truth. For they believe that heat is a real phenomenon, or property ... which actually resides in the material by which we feel ourselves warmed.Whenever I conceive any ... corporeal substance, I immediately ... think of it as ... having this or that shape; as being large or small ... and in some specific place at any given time; as being in motion or at rest; as touching or not touching some other body; and as being one in number, or few, or many. From these conditions I cannot separate such a substance by any stretch of my imagination. But that it must be white or red, bitter or sweet, noisy or silent, and of sweet or foul odor, my mind does not feel compelled ... Without the senses ... reason ... would probably never arrive at qualities like these. Hence I think that tastes, odors, colors, and so on are no more than mere names so far as the object in which we place them is concerned, and that they reside only in the consciousness. Hence if the living creature were removed, all these qualities would be ... annihilated.Those minute particles ... may enter by our nostrils and strike upon some small protuberances which are the instrument of smelling; here likewise their touch ... is received to our like or dislike according as they have this or that shape, are fast or slow, and are numerous or few. + +== See also == +Book of Nature + +== References == + +=== Citations === + +=== References === +Alexander, A. (2014). Infinitesimal: How a Dangerous Mathematical Theory Shaped the Modern World. Scientific American / Farrar, Straus and Giroux. +Blackwell, R. J. (2006). Behind the Scenes at Galileo's Trial. University of Notre Dame Press. +Drake, Stillman (1957). "Introduction: Fourth part". In Drake, S. (ed.). Discoveries and opinions of Galileo (PDF). Doubleday Anchor Books. +Drake, S. (1960). "Introduction". In Drake, S.; O'Malley, C. D. (eds.). The controversy on the comets of 1618. University of Pennsylvania Press. JSTOR j.ctv4v327m. +Drake, S. (1978). Galileo at work: His scientific biography. University of Chicago Press. +Fermi, Laura (1961). The Story of Atomic Energy. New York: Random House. LCCN 61007589. OCLC 1406822. +Galilei, G. (1957) [1623]. "The Assayer". In Drake, S. (ed.). Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo (PDF). Doubleday. +Galilei, G. (1960) [1623]. "Il Saggiatore" [The Assayer]. In Stillman Drake; C. D. O'Malley (eds.). The Controversy on the Comets of 1618 (in Italian). University of Pennsylvania Press. +Grassi, H. (1960a). "On the three comets of the year 1618". In Drake, S.; O'Malley, C. D. (eds.). The controversy on the comets of 1618. University of Pennsylvania Press. JSTOR j.ctv4v327m. +Grassi, H. (1960b). "The astronomical and philosophical balance (pp. 67–132)". In Drake, S.; O'Malley, C. D. (eds.). The controversy on the comets of 1618. University of Pennsylvania Press. JSTOR j.ctv4v327m. +Guiducci, M. (1960) [1619]. "Discourse on the comets". In Drake, S.; O'Malley, C. D. (eds.). The controversy on the comets of 1618. University of Pennsylvania Press. JSTOR j.ctv4v327m. +Pietro Redondi, Galileo eretico, 1983; Galileo: Heretic (transl: Raymond Rosenthal) Princeton University Press 1987 (reprint 1989 ISBN 0-691-02426-X); Penguin 1988 (reprint 1990 ISBN 0-14-012541-8) +Sharratt, M. (1994). Galileo: Decisive innovator. Cambridge University Press. +Wallace, William A. (1991). Galileo, the Jesuits and the Medieval Aristotle. + +== External links == +PDF version of the abridged text of The Assayer - Stanford University +Galileo, Selections from The Assayer - Princeton University \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Splash_(book)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Splash_(book)-0.md index 7d80d34f8..a48695a05 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Splash_(book)-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Splash_(book)-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_Splash_(book)" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:17:04.759921+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:43.920954+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_and_Death_of_the_Sun-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_and_Death_of_the_Sun-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..4db51d299 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_and_Death_of_the_Sun-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +--- +title: "The Birth and Death of the Sun" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Birth_and_Death_of_the_Sun" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:45.172530+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Birth and Death of the Sun is a popular science book by theoretical physicist and cosmologist George Gamow, first published in 1940, exploring atomic chemistry, stellar evolution, and cosmology. The book is illustrated by Gamow. It was revised in 1952. + + +== Reception == +Critical reception has been positive. In February 1941, Gerard F. W. Mulders gave a favorable review for The Birth and Death of the Sun, writing that "[i]t gives authentic information in nontechnical language from which mathematical formulae have been completely eliminated. The entertaining presentation of the most modern developments in physics and astrophysics, the sparkling humor, and the original drawings and graphs will be enjoyed by scientist and amateur alike." +In April 2015, physicist and Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg included The Birth and Death of the Sun in a personal list of "the 13 best science books for the general reader". + + +== See also == +Formation and evolution of the Solar System + + +== References == + + +== External links == +The Birth and Death of the Sun at the Internet Archive \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..38803837b --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "The Case for Mars" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:49.896282+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Case for Mars: The Plan to Settle the Red Planet and Why We Must is a nonfiction science book by Robert Zubrin, first published in 1996, and revised and updated in 2011. +The book details Zubrin's Mars Direct plan to make the first human landing on Mars. The plan focuses on keeping costs down by making use of automated systems and available materials on Mars to manufacture the return journey's fuel in situ. The book also reveals possible Mars colony designs and weighs the prospects for a colony's material self-sufficiency and for the terraforming of Mars. + +== Mars Direct == + +The Mars Direct plan was originally detailed by Zubrin and David Baker in 1990. The Case for Mars is, according to Zubrin, a comprehensive condensation for laymen of many years' work and research. Chapters 1 and 4 deal primarily with Mars Direct. + +== Colonization == +For Robert Zubrin, the attractiveness of Mars Direct does not rest on a single cost-effective mission. He envisions a series of regular Martian missions with the ultimate goal of colonization, which he details in the seventh through ninth chapters. As initial explorers leave hab-structures on the planet, subsequent missions become easier to undertake. +Large mall like structures buried in regolith, pressurized habitats would be the first step toward human settlement; the book suggests they can be built as Roman-style atria on the surface and then be buried with regolith, with easily produced Martian brick. During and after this initial phase of habitat construction, hard-plastic radiation- and abrasion-resistant geodesic domes could be deployed on the surface for eventual habitation and crop growth. Nascent industry would begin using indigenous resources: the manufacture of plastics, ceramics and glass. +The larger work of terraforming requires an initial phase of global warming to release atmosphere from the regolith and to create a water cycle. Three methods of global warming are described in the work and, Zubrin suggests, are probably best deployed in tandem: orbital mirrors to heat the surface; factories on the surface to pump halocarbons such as perfluromethane into the atmosphere; and the seeding of bacteria which can metabolize water, nitrogen and carbon to produce ammonia and methane (these would aid in global warming). While the work of warming Mars is on-going, true colonization can begin. +The Case for Mars acknowledges that any Martian colony will be partially Earth-dependent for centuries. However, it suggests that Mars may be a profitable place for two reasons. First, it may contain concentrated supplies of metals of equal or greater value to silver which have not been subjected to millennia of human scavenging and may be sold on Earth for profit. Secondly, the concentration of deuterium – a possible fuel for commercial nuclear fusion – is five times greater on Mars. Humans emigrating to Mars thus have an assured industry and the planet will be a magnet for settlers as wage costs will be high. The book asserts that “the labor shortage that will prevail on Mars will drive Martian civilization toward both technological and social advances.” + +== Wider considerations == +While detailing the exploration and colonization, The Case for Mars also addresses a number of attendant scientific and political factors. + +=== Risks confronted === +The fifth chapter analyzes various risks that putatively rule out a long-term human presence on Mars. Zubrin dismisses the idea that radiation and zero-gravity are unduly hazardous. He claims that cancer rates do increase for astronauts who have spent extensive time in space, but only marginally. Similarly, while zero-gravity presents challenges, “near total recovery of musculature and immune system occurs after reentry and reconditioning to a one-gravity environment.” Furthermore, since his plan has the spacecraft spinning at the end of a long tether to create artificial gravity, worries about zero gravity do not apply to this mission in any case. Back-contamination – humans acquiring and spreading Martian viruses – is described as "just plain nuts", because there are no host organisms on Mars for disease organisms to have evolved. +In the same chapter, Zubrin decisively denounces and rejects suggestions that the Moon should be used as waypoint to Mars or as a training area. It is ultimately much easier to journey to Mars from low Earth orbit than from the Moon and using the latter as a staging point is a pointless diversion of resources. While the Moon may superficially appear a good place to perfect Mars exploration and habitation techniques, the two bodies are radically different. The Moon has no atmosphere, no analogous geology and a much greater temperature range and rotational period. Antarctica or desert areas of Earth provide much better training grounds at lesser cost. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f1650989c --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ +--- +title: "The Case for Mars" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Case_for_Mars" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:49.896282+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Viability === +In the third and tenth chapters, The Case for Mars addresses the politics and costs of the ideas described. The authors argue that the colonization of Mars is a logical extension of the settlement of North America. They envision a frontier society, providing opportunities for innovation and social experimentation. +Zubrin suggests three models to provide the will and capital to drive Mars exploration forward: the J.F.K. model, in which a far-sighted U.S. leader provides the funding and mobilizes national public opinion around the idea; the Sagan model, in which international co-operation is the driving force; and the Gingrich approach, which emphasizes incentives and even prizes for private sector actors who take on research and development tasks. In keeping with the third idea, Zubrin describes twelve challenges that address various aspects of the exploration program. A monetary prize – from five hundred million to twenty billion dollars – is offered to companies who successfully complete the challenges. +The prize-based approach to hardware development has emerged within the private aeronautics community, though not yet on the scale envisioned by Zubrin. Ventures such as the Ansari X-Prize and Robert Bigelow's America's Space Prize seek low-cost spaceflight development through private enterprise, and crucially, for the attainment of very specific predetermined goals in order to win the prizes. +The underlying political and economic problems of raising sufficient capital for terraforming using halocarbon emissions has been critiqued by John Hickman. + +== Translations == +In 1997, a Polish translation of the book was published under the title Czas Marsa: dlaczego i w jaki sposób musimy skolonizować Czerwoną Planetę (The age of Mars: why and how must we colonize the Red Planet) (ISBN 8371800371). +In 2017, a Russian translation of the book was published under the title of Курс на Марс (On Course for Mars) (ISBN 978-5-699-75295-9). + +== See also == +Mars Society – Advocacy group for Mars exploration +Colonization of Mars – Proposed concepts for human settlements on Mars +Human mission to Mars – Proposed concepts +Mars exploration +Mars One – Defunct foundation and company that promoted Mars colonization +Mars to Stay – Mars colonization architecture proposing no return vehicles +Inspiration Mars – Defunct, proposed a crewed flyby missionPages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets +List of crewed Mars mission plans +The Millennial Project by space advocate Marshall Savage +Mining the Sky by space advocate John S. Lewis +Engines of Creation by nanotechnologist and space advocate K. Eric Drexler +The High Frontier: Human Colonies in Space by space advocate Gerard O'Neill + +== References == + +== External links == +Mars Direct +Spaceviews book review +For a critical review see: Papercuts Issue Forty-Six, November 2001 +For a view which concentrates on the financing of such a venture, see: Journal of Evolution and Technology +Mars Society web site +Italian Mars Society web site +The Case for Mars at Open Library \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conquest_of_Space-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conquest_of_Space-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..82e27fe26 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conquest_of_Space-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +--- +title: "The Conquest of Space" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Conquest_of_Space" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:53.403477+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Conquest of Space is a 1949 speculative science book written by Willy Ley and illustrated by Chesley Bonestell. The book contains a portfolio of paintings by Bonestell depicting the possible future exploration of the Solar System, with explanatory text by Ley. Most of the 58 illustrations by Bonestell in Conquest, were previously published in color, in popular magazines. + + +== Influences on fiction == +Some of Bonestell's designs inspired the look of George Pal's 1955 science fiction movie Conquest of Space, which also takes its title from the book, but uses it as a framework on which to hang a melodramatic plot. +Bonestell's illustrations of the Moon in The Conquest of Space were used by Hergé as a basis for his illustrations of the lunar surface in his 1952–53 The Adventures of Tintin comic, Explorers on the Moon. +Arthur C. Clarke was also an admirer of The Conquest of Space; in his novel 2001: A Space Odyssey, Clarke refers to Saturn's moon Iapetus as "Japetus" due to that being the spelling used by Ley in The Conquest of Space. +Larry Niven's 1967 short story "The Soft Weapon" is set on a planet around Beta Lyrae; Niven's description of Beta Lyrae is actually a meticulous retelling of the details of Bonestell's painting rather than any kind of portrayal of the Beta Lyrae system itself, which is now understood to look quite different. + + +== References == + + +=== Notes === + + +=== Bibliography === \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cosmic_Connection-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cosmic_Connection-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..87de828b6 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cosmic_Connection-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +--- +title: "The Cosmic Connection" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cosmic_Connection" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:54.624992+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Cosmic Connection: An Extraterrestrial Perspective is a book by the astronomer Carl Sagan, produced by Jerome Agel. It was originally published in 1973; an expanded edition with contributions from Freeman Dyson, David Morrison, and Ann Druyan was published in 2000 under the title Carl Sagan's Cosmic Connection. The book contains artwork by Jon Lomberg and other artists. The book was listed as number thirteen in a list of the "25 Greatest Science Books of All Time" by Discover Magazine in 2006. + + +== Summary == +Sagan covers several topics, and focuses mainly on the possibility of extraterrestrial intelligence, the likelihood of the existence of more advanced civilizations, and their distribution in the local galaxy, and in the universe. He describes the hypothetical opinions of more advanced intelligences and their views of the Earth, as well as communication with mankind. He also discusses the popularity of UFO sightings and attempts mathematically to portray the probability of such events. Sagan also discusses his view of astrology as a pseudoscience. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Cambridge catalogue listing \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Double_Helix-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Double_Helix-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9bf829295 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Double_Helix-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ +--- +title: "The Double Helix" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Double_Helix" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:31.737265+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA is an autobiographical account of the discovery of the double helix structure of DNA written by James D. Watson and published in 1968. It has earned both critical and public praise, along with continuing controversy about credit for the Nobel award and attitudes towards female scientists at the time of the discovery. + +== Significance == +Watson was an American molecular biologist, geneticist and zoologist, best known as one of the co-discoverers of the structure of DNA in 1953 with Francis Crick. +In 1998, the Modern Library placed The Double Helix at number 7 on its list of the 100 best nonfiction books of the 20th century. In 2012, The Double Helix was named as one of the 88 "Books That Shaped America" by the Library of Congress. +Since its publication, The Double Helix has been a controversial account. Although it was originally slated to be published by Harvard University Press, Watson's home university, Harvard dropped the arrangement after protestations from Francis Crick and Maurice Wilkins, co-discoverers of the structure of DNA, and it was published instead by Atheneum in the United States and Weidenfeld & Nicolson in the UK. +The intimate first-person memoir about scientific discovery was unusual for its time. The book has been hailed for its highly personal view of scientific work, and has been criticised as caring only about the glory of priority, with critics claiming that Watson was willing to appropriate data from others surreptitiously in order to obtain it. It has also been criticized as being disagreeably sexist towards Rosalind Franklin, another participant in the discovery, who was deceased by the time Watson's book was written. +The events described in the book were dramatized in a BBC television program Life Story (known as The Race for the Double Helix in the U.S.). + +== Criticism == + +A 1980 Norton Critical Edition of The Double Helix edited by Gunther Stent, analyzed the events surrounding its initial publication. It presents a selection of both positive and negative reviews of the book, by such figures as Philip Morrison, Richard Lewontin, Alex Comfort, Jacob Bronowski, and more in-depth analyses by Peter Medawar, Robert K. Merton, and Andre Lwoff. Erwin Chargaff declined permission to reprint his unsympathetic review from the March 29, 1968, issue of Science, but letters in response from Max Perutz, Maurice Wilkins, and Watson are printed. Also included are retrospectives from a 1974 edition of Nature written by Francis Crick and Linus Pauling, and an analysis of Franklin's work by her student Aaron Klug. The Norton edition concludes with the 1953 papers on DNA structure as published in Nature. +In the book Rosalind Franklin and DNA, author Anne Sayre is very critical of Watson's account. She claims that Watson's book did not give a balanced description of Rosalind Franklin and the nature of her interactions with Maurice Wilkins at King's College, London. Sayre's book raises doubts about the ethics of how Watson and Crick used some of Franklin's results and whether adequate credit was given to her. Watson had very limited contact with Franklin during the time she worked on DNA. By providing more information about Franklin's life than was included in Watson's book, it was possible for Sayre to provide a different perspective on the role Franklin played in Watson and Crick's discovery of the double helix structure of DNA. (See: King's College London DNA Controversy.) +In the book's preface, Watson explains that he is describing his impressions at the time of the events, and not at the time he wrote the book. In the epilogue Watson writes; "Since my initial impressions about [Franklin], both scientific and personal (as recorded in the early pages of this book) were often wrong I want to say something here about her achievements." He goes on to describe her superb work, and, despite this, the enormous barriers she faced as a woman in the field of science. He also acknowledged that it took years to overcome their bickering before he could appreciate Franklin's generosity and integrity. + +== An annotated and illustrated edition == +An annotated and illustrated version of the book, edited by Alex Gann and Jan Witkowski, was published in November 2012 by Simon & Schuster in association with Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. The new edition coincided with the fiftieth anniversary of the award of the 1962 Nobel Prize for physiology or medicine to Francis Crick, James D. Watson and Maurice Wilkins. It contains over three hundred annotations on the events and characters portrayed, with facsimile letters and contemporary photographs, many previously unpublished. Their sources include newly discovered correspondence from Crick, the papers of Franklin, Pauling, and Wilkins, and they include a chapter dropped from the original edition that described Watson's holiday in the Italian Alps in 1952. The edition was favorably reviewed in The New York Times by Nicholas Wade who commented, "anyone seeking to understand modern biology and genomics could do much worse than start with the discovery of the structure of DNA, on which almost everything else is based. This edition includes several appendices, including letters by Crick and Watson giving the first account of the discovery, a previously unpublished chapter, an account of the controversy surrounding the publication, and the unsympathetic review by the late Erwin Chargaff from the March 29, 1968, issue of Science, which he previously declined permission to reprint in the 1980 Norton Critical Edition of The Double Helix edited by Gunther Stent. +The book does not include the four press cuttings from the News Chronicle, Varsity and The New York Times (2) of May and June 1953 regarding the discovery of the structure of DNA, and Crick's letter of 13th April 1967 is incomplete. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Double_Helix-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Double_Helix-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..bcc2f109a --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Double_Helix-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +--- +title: "The Double Helix" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Double_Helix" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:31.737265+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Film adaptation == +In 1987, the memoir was adapted as a 107-minute television docudrama called Life Story for the BBC, airing on Horizon, the long-running British documentary television series on BBC Two that covers science and philosophy. The script was written by William Nicholson, and it was produced and directed by Mick Jackson. Jeff Goldblum starred as Watson, with Tim Pigott-Smith as Francis Crick, Juliet Stevenson as Rosalind Franklin, and Alan Howard as Maurice Wilkins. +The film won several awards in the UK and U.S., including the 1988 BAFTA TV Award as the Best Single Drama. + +== Notes == + +== References == +James D. Watson, The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA (1968), Atheneum, 1980, ISBN 0-689-70602-2, OCLC 6197022 +James D. Watson, The Annotated and Illustrated Double Helix, edited by Alexander Gann and Jan Witkowski (2012) Simon & Schuster, ISBN 978-1-4767-1549-0. +James D. Watson, The Double Helix: A Personal Account of the Discovery of the Structure of DNA (1980 Norton Critical Edition), editor Gunther Stent, W.W. Norton, ISBN 0-393-95075-1. +Maddox, Brenda (2002). Rosalind Franklin: the dark lady of DNA. HarperCollins. ISBN 0-393-32044-8. +Sayre, Anne. Rosalind Franklin and DNA (1975), New York: W.W. Norton and Company, ISBN 0-393-32044-8 +Wilkins, Maurice, The Third Man of the Double Helix: The Autobiography (2003), Oxford U Press, ISBN 0-19-860665-6 + +== External links == +[1] Interview with editors of the Annotated and Illustrated edition, 2012 +Photos of the first edition of The Double Helix +A Reader's Guide to The Double Helix, 2009 by Kenneth R. Miller, a biology professor at Brown University +Resource Page for The Double Helix used in Biology 20, The Foundations of Living Systems, a course at Brown University +[2] 'DNA Pioneer James Watson Reveals Helix Story Was Almost Never Told,' Robin McKie, The Observer, 8 December 2012 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Facts_of_Life_(Darlington_book)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Facts_of_Life_(Darlington_book)-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..84911b3a7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Facts_of_Life_(Darlington_book)-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +--- +title: "The Facts of Life (Darlington book)" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Facts_of_Life_(Darlington_book)" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:37.656653+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Facts of Life is a book published in 1953 by C. D. Darlington of the subject of race, heredity and evolution. Darlington was a major contributor to the field of genetics around the time of the modern synthesis. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Flamingo's_Smile-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Flamingo's_Smile-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f861fe74f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Flamingo's_Smile-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +--- +title: "The Flamingo's Smile" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Flamingo's_Smile" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:06.828166+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Flamingo's Smile: Reflections in Natural History, published in 1985, is the fourth volume of collected essays from evolutionary biologist and well-known science writer Stephen Jay Gould. +The essays were culled from his monthly column The View of Life in Natural History magazine, to which Gould contributed for more than two decades. The book deals, in typically discursive fashion, with themes familiar to Gould's writing: evolution and its teaching, science biography, probabilities and common sense. +The title essay, "The Flamingo's Smile", discusses changes in morphology arising as a consequence of behavior, as illustrated by the beak and tongue of the flamingo. Topics discussed in other essays include SETI, the extinction of the dinosaurs, the Omphalos hypothesis, and the importance of taxonomy. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Quammen, David (22 September 1985). "Evolution and the .400 Hitter". The New York Times. Retrieved 25 September 2012. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Goodness_Paradox-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Goodness_Paradox-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..33d3b3b11 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Goodness_Paradox-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "The Goodness Paradox" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Goodness_Paradox" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:45.807693+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Goodness Paradox: The Strange Relationship Between Virtue and Violence in Human Evolution is a book by British primatologist Richard Wrangham. +Wrangham argues that humans have domesticated themselves by a process of self-selection similar to the selective breeding of foxes described by Dmitry Belyayev, a theory first proposed by Johann Friedrich Blumenbach in the early 1800s. Charles Darwin disagreed, as have most evolutionary biologists since. +According to paleoanthropologist John D. Hawks, Wrangham follows scholars including Kenneth A. Dodge in dividing human aggression into two types. The first type, "reactive aggression", is when individuals attack in response to provocation. The second type, "proactive aggression", is planned, premeditated, and involves deliberate tactical strikes. To explain his idea, Wrangham invited readers to imagine a commercial airline flight. Other primates crowded into such a space would react by, in Hawks' words, "ripping one another limb from limb". Humans do not because they have a comparatively very low tendency to reactive aggression. Proactive aggression, by contrast, is so highly developed in humans that we must put elaborate security measures in place to prevent others from carrying out plans to bring the plane down. +Wrangham offers a new perspective on a topic that has been investigated notably by Konrad Lorenz and Erich Fromm, whose research is briefly acknowledged. + + +== See also == +The Better Angels of Our Nature + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Growth_of_Biological_Thought-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Growth_of_Biological_Thought-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..66c088aa7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Growth_of_Biological_Thought-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +--- +title: "The Growth of Biological Thought" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Growth_of_Biological_Thought" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:48.130829+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Growth of Biological Thought: Diversity, Evolution, and Inheritance is a book written by Ernst Mayr, first published in 1982 by Belknap Press and is as much a book of philosophy and history as it is of biology. +It is a sweeping, academic study of the first 2,400 years of the science of biology. It focuses largely on how the philosophical assumptions of biologists influenced and limited their understanding. It includes many important general observations about the role of philosophy in scientific inquiry and the place of biology amongst the sciences. + + +== Reception == +Horace Freeland Judson praised the book for its extremely extensive coverage which he likened to an encyclopaedia. He commended the book for examining through the lens of evolution the discipline whose central theory is the theory of evolution, writing that it "turns the scholarly component of Darwinian method reflexively onto the evolution of the very disciplines that make up evolutionary theory". + + +== References == + + +== External links == +The Growth of Biological Thought - Google Books \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c6bc37a5b --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ +--- +title: "The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Magister's Pox" +chunk: 1/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:09.168207+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Magister's Pox is a posthumous volume by Stephen Jay Gould released in 2003 exploring the historically complex relationship between the sciences and the humanities in a scholarly discourse. +Employing the Greek proverb about the crafty cunning fox that devises many strategies versus the persistent hedgehog who knows one effective strategy, Gould offers a study of the division between the two ways of knowing, attempting to debunk the commonly assumed inextricable conflict between science and the arts as the two falsely opposed realms of the pursuit of knowledge. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..40809c121 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +--- +title: "The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Magister's Pox" +chunk: 2/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:09.168207+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Four historical periods == +Gould prefers to focus on the commonalities between the humanities and the sciences, such as creative thinking and the psychology of transcendence and discovery. He discusses four historic periods in which the supposed Science wars have been characterized falsely. In each case, the strategy for either side has been to portray centrist members of the opposing camp with radical minority views of extremist strawmen, so as to easily defeat these misrepresentations of otherwise-rational mainstream arguments. He stresses the dangers of presenting cut and dried dichotomies, such as good vs. bad or spirit vs. matter, or focusing on polar positions within continuous ranges of actions, methods, discourse and beliefs. The first period is represented by the leaders of the Scientific Revolution in the seventeenth century, the vast majority of whom had sincere religious convictions. Atheism was extremely rare among these scholars. In the Renaissance, which preceded the period under consideration, scholars focused on the recovery of lost knowledge with an associated reverence for the Ancients. Renaissance compendiums of knowledge did not necessarily discriminate between truth and fiction. Both were domains of human opinion and thought regarded as noteworthy, especially when associated with authoritative classical sources, and distinguishing differences between fact and opinion was not always valued above providing readers with complete documentation. Leaders of the Scientific Revolution, being the new kids on the block with respect to the established scholastics, were forced to emphasize the value of their enterprise in order to receive resources or merit for their investigations. This meant contrasting their methods and goals with that of the established scholars. They did meet with resistance, but many of the religious scholars accepted the newly discovered knowledge of the Scientific Revolution as valid. Gould refers to some of the Roman Catholic clergy in Galileo's day that valued the new methods. He also cites theologian Reverend Thomas Burnet, whose 1680 Sacred Theory of the Earth argued that God created a clockwork world with physical laws that did not require miracles or tampering with. Isaac Newton, who accepted God's occasional intervention, criticized Burnet for not recognizing God's option for miracles. Gould cites John Ray's preface in 1678 to The Ornithology of Francis Willughby, which stated that their scientific treatise did not pay undue attention to literary style, instead utilizing methods of direct observation and validation of factual accuracy, in contrast to Renaissance compendia. Such statements of worth were necessary to receive recognition for progress in scientific methodology, but were not made to denigrate the humanities. Statements such as Isaac Newton's less than original "If I have seen further, it is by standing on the shoulders of giants." was recognition not only of other previous leaders in the Scientific Revolution, but of the Ancients who provided foundations in the sciences and humanities. Gould cites George Hakewill, Archdeacon of Surrey's 1628 essay in defense of Modernist convictions. There Hakewill argues against both the common belief that the Universe was in constant decay and the Renaissance portrayal of Ancients as superior to Moderns. Moderns were traditionally depicted in architecture and other arts even prior to the seventeenth century as dwarfs on the shoulders of Ancient giants. Hakewill stated "we are all of one stature, save that we are lifted up somewhat higher by their means". Gould argues that "nearly all founders of the Scientific Revolution revered the great sources of Antiquity. ...The ranks of the Modernists did not include only the new scientific scholars, but also encompassed many prominent intellectuals from literary and other humanistic callings, including the theologian Hakewell." +Gould's stage two is the misrepresentation of late nineteenth century's rationalism vs. religion conflict. Gould cites J.W. Draper's 1874 History of the Conflict Between Science and Religion and Andrew Dickson White's 1896 A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom as representative of the period. He describes Draper's work as describing the Roman Catholic religion as incompatible with science while the liberal American Protestantism was compatible with science. White wrote that scientific investigation was good for genuine religion. Gould cites his own book, Rocks of Ages as evidence for the independence of the non-overlapping magisteria (NOMA) of science and religion, and repeats that book's argument (which he does not claim to be the first to pen) that "Science tries to record and explain the factual character of the natural world, whereas religion struggles with spiritual and ethical questions about the meaning and proper conduct of our lives. The facts of nature simply cannot dictate correct moral behavior or spiritual meaning." He cites J. B. Russel's 1991 Inventing the Flat Earth as showing that some supporters of the science vs. religion model misrepresent historical religious advocates. One example is the caricatures of Spanish scholars as theologians arguing against Columbus that the world was flat, when in reality they were arguing actually that the circumference of the known spherical world was much larger than Columbus was assuming. Gould also refers to the misrepresentation of Galileo's trial as unjust though it was a result of Galileo's conscious undiplomatic ridiculing of the Pope's position in the Copernican debate. The third period is represented by the C. P. Snow's 1959 Rede Lecture, The Two Cultures, and his later reevaluation and concessions with respect to the initial presentation. Snow's initial assumption is that the salvation of underdeveloped countries depends solely on the import, training and development of scientists and engineers in order for +these countries to rise economically and eliminate disparities peaceably by the year 2000. Gould argues that Snow reverses his position in 1963 with The Two Cultures: A Second Look and acknowledges that the original motivating assumption of "dichotomous parsing of intellectual life into contrarian literary and scientific camps" was not a true representation and Snow was sorry for having failed to recognize a third culture in the continuous spectrum of intellectual life. The fourth period poses the postmodern relativists against the scientific realists or "postmodern" scholars in the humanities and social-science departments of American Universities... against researchers in the conventional science departments of the same institutions." The booty being funding, power, ownership of concepts or factual truth, accolades for progress, and influence. He argues that most readings of the Sokal affair misinterpret the carelessness of individual editors of the Social Text (for not having consulted an expert in physics to "peer review" Alan Sokal's article) as a condemnation of the entire field of science studies. He goes on to argue that the science wars are without true combatants in that the vast majority of working scientists are generally too busy and unconcerned to read current valid contributions to science studies, or even to read recognized leaders in the field from the previous generation, such as Thomas Kuhn or Karl Popper. Most of Gould's contacts with colleagues revealed that they were unaware of the science war debate. This, he believes is detrimental to the working professional scientist, who would benefit from constructive criticism and insightful analysis originating outside of the sciences, and from gaining a historical perspective of their profession. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8a563a408 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +--- +title: "The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Magister's Pox" +chunk: 3/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:09.168207+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +He also argued that most social critics and historians of science that he was aware of were not pure relativists, and agreed that there is an external reality that may be scientifically modeled with associated benefits of acquired knowledge and applications. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3c59a52d1 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Magister's Pox" +chunk: 4/4 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hedgehog,_the_Fox,_and_the_Magister's_Pox" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:09.168207+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Analysis of Consilience: The Unity Of Knowledge == +Gould includes an analysis of E. O. Wilson's book Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge within the larger scope of his recommendations for a confederation of the physical sciences and humanities. He also provides an exegesis of texts participating in the development of the word consilience within a larger historical context of the concept's inception by Reverend William Whewell, who also is said to have coined the term scientist to refer to Mary Somerville in an anonymous 1834 review of her publication in the Quarterly Review, titled On the Connexion of the Physical Sciences. +Gould proclaims William Whewell to be "the first modernist with joint command of both history and philosophy in the analysis of science" (Whewell being best known for his 1837 History of the Inductive Sciences and for his 1840 The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, Founded Upon Their History.). Gould also reminds the reader that he revived Whewell's concept of consilience in print, prior to Wilson. +Gould reproves Wilson's program of reductionism by utilizing two main arguments based upon the emergence and contingency or randomness found in some complex, nonlinear or non-additive systems. He indicates that there exist new entities, properties, and interactions that emerge in some complex systems which cannot be predicted from knowledge of properties of the components, or of laws governing at the level of those components alone. Thus reductionism can only fail in attempts to model, explain, or describe such systems, and we must search for and depend upon new emergent principles embedded in higher, more complex levels. He also indicates that the historical contingency in some systems may cause effects that do not necessarily strictly follow a single path from identified causes and therefore may require narrative methods drawn from historical analysis and the humanities rather that classical deductive mathematical formulas prescribing necessarily linear consequences. He highlights evolution by natural selection as a primary example of how entities such as ourselves are not a necessary, but rather a contingent product, "we have preferred to think of Homo sapiens not only as something special (which I surely do not deny), but also as something ordained, necessary, or at the very least, predictable from some form of general process... But if Homo sapiens represents more of a contingent and improbable fact of history than an apotheosis of a predictable tendency, then our peculiarities, even though they be universal within our species, remain more within the narrative realm of the sciences of historical contingency than within the traditional, and potentially reductionist, domain of repeated and predictable natural phenomenon generated by laws of nature." +Gould goes on to portray Wilson's extension (and according to him, a misleading divergent extension) of the original meaning behind Whewell's concept of "consilience of inductions" into a philosophy of all consuming reductionism in diametric opposition to Whewell's, and as an inapt attempt to subsume the independent humanities. He shows Whewell's consilience to be a literal "jumping together" in the mind of diverse facts or phenomenon initially appearing as unrelated and that such simplification and unification under the higher generality of only one theory merits the classification as probable truth and deserves further investigation and testing. But Gould stresses that Whewell defended steadfastly, the separate and independent domains or magisteria, in particular the independence of theology and ethics, citing Whewell's 1833 Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Natural Theology. Therein, Whewell defends realms of human pursuit beyond and outside of the physical sciences that are true and consistent with any truths of science, and stem from one creation and God, but are based upon different foundations and methodologies. Gould extends this defense to the humanities in general and argues that a union of equals allying the sciences and humanities requires independence and mutual respect, not a hierarchy in which the humanities are subsumed under a reductionist framework of physical science. + +== See also == +Conflict thesis +Relationship between religion and science +The Hedgehog and the Fox by Isaiah Berlin +The Two Cultures by C. P. Snow + +== References == + +== External links == +Reviews +The Mismeasure of Science – by Michael Ruse, Natural History +Book review by Michael Dirda, The Washington Post, April 6, 2003, Page BW15 +Books in brief by Christine Kenneally, The New York Times, June 15, 2003 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lying_Stones_of_Marrakech-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lying_Stones_of_Marrakech-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..99612f95d --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lying_Stones_of_Marrakech-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +--- +title: "The Lying Stones of Marrakech" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lying_Stones_of_Marrakech" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:13.894106+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Lying Stones of Marrakech (2000) is the ninth volume of collected essays by the Harvard paleontologist, Stephen Jay Gould. +The essays were culled from his monthly column "The View of Life" in Natural History magazine, to which Gould contributed for nearly 30 years. The book addresses themes familiar to Gould's writing, including evolution and its teaching, science biography, probability, and iconoclasm. + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Book review - by Christine Kenneally, The New York Times +A Gouldian Valediction, Almost - by Henry Gee, Nature +Essay Summaries - by Lawrence N. Goeller +Book review - by Jim Walker +Book excerpt - Random House Press +Profile Page (with introduction) - Unofficial Stephen Jay Gould Archive +Video interview about the book - Charlie Rose \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mathematics_of_Life-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mathematics_of_Life-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..55ce1fae0 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mathematics_of_Life-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +--- +title: "The Mathematics of Life" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mathematics_of_Life" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:30:57.378085+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Mathematics of Life is a 2011 popular science book by mathematician Ian Stewart, on the increasing role of mathematics in biology. + + +== Overview == +Stewart discusses the mathematics behind such topics as population growth, speciation, brain function, chaos theory, game theory, networking, symmetry, and animal coloration, with little recourse to equations. He identifies six revolutions which modernized biology: + +The invention of the microscope +A systematic means of classifying species +Evidence of evolution +The expansion of the field of genetics +The discovery of the structure of DNA +The application of new mathematics to biology + + +== Reception == +Writer Alex Bellos described The Mathematics of Life as "a testament to the versatility of maths and how it is shaping our understanding of the world." Kirkus Reviews called the book "an ingenious overview of biology with emphasis on mathematical ideas—stimulating but requiring careful reading despite the lack of equations." A review in Notices of the American Mathematical Society noted that the book "does an admirable job of unfolding the mathematics undergirding so much of the research being carried out today in the many fields that comprise the subject of biology." +Mathematician and science writer Keith Devlin criticized the book, writing that "readers of the author's many general-audience books on mathematics may be surprised to find themselves at times frustrated by his latest outing, which is marred by overlapping and often repetitious passages." + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mentality_of_Apes-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mentality_of_Apes-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..94fa3e8e0 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mentality_of_Apes-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +--- +title: "The Mentality of Apes" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mentality_of_Apes" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:00.215109+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Intelligenzprüfungen an Menschenaffen (literally translated: Intelligence tests on great apes) is a book by Wolfgang Köhler published in 1921. The English version called "The Mentality of Apes", translated by Ella Winter, was published in 1925. +With the book Köhler showed that chimpanzees could solve problems by insight. The importance of this work was to show there is no absolute dividing line between the human species and their nearest living relative, at least in this respect. The insights of Köhler's book had a profound and lasting impact on studies in psychology, primatology, creativity and many other fields. + +== Context == +Before Köhler's work, the field of comparative psychology was revolutionised by Charles Darwin, proposing evolutionary continuity between humans and other animals. In the 19th century Darwin wrote about the possible reasoning abilities of animals. In the early 20th century, further influential research was among others published by Edward Thorndike, who investigated learning abilities of apes and other animals. The Thorndiken view explained animal intelligence with stimulus-response associations, limiting animal learning to trial and error learning. At the same time Robert Yerkes, studying animals' intelligence and Leonard Hobhouse, who described sudden problem-solving abilities in monkeys, opposed these proposals of Thorndike. Hobhouse's experimental results were in favour of apes being able to learn by imitation. Together with a broader shift in the perception of animal intelligence, these different researchers provided the base for Köhler's studies on anthropoid apes. Köhler conducted experiments similar to those of Hobhouse. +Köhler with a background in many disciplines (philosophy, history, natural science, and experimental psychology) finished his doctorate under the supervision of Carl Stumpf at the Berlin Psychological Institute. In 1913, Stumpf offered him the directorship of the Anthropoid Station in Tenerife, which he accepted. Stumpf had considered Köhler for the position already in 1912 but ruled him out due to missing experience in animal psychology research. Before and after his stay in Tenerife Köhler created and contributed to the movement of Gestalt psychology together with his contemporaries Kurt Koffka and Max Wertheimer. +The experiments described in the book were conducted at the Anthropoid Station in Tenerife. The station was conceptualized by Max Rothmann and funded by the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences. In 1912 most of the chimpanzees arrived, by a shipment from Cameroon, then a German colony. The first director was Eugen Teuber, followed by Köhler as the second and last director, due to influences of World War I. The station's research was not unaffected by World War I. Köhler was obliged to stay on the island until 1920, five years longer than planned. The station was suspected of espionage and the estate was subsequently sold by the owner, leading to a relocation of the research station to a nearby estate in 1918. +During his prolonged stay on the island, he wrote about his experiments. Between 1915 and 1921 he published four papers on his primate research. One of these was reprinted and retitled in the book Intelligenzprüfungen an Menschenaffen. +By 1920, financial difficulties in post-war Germany forced the cessation of experiments, and Köhler returned to Berlin. The station was officially closed in the same year. + +== Contents == +In Intelligenzprüfungen an Menschenaffen, Köhler documents his experiments with chimpanzees at the Tenerife station. Köhler's methodology involved presenting chimpanzees with a desired target out of reach, requiring creative problem-solving from the apes. For example, reaching some fruit by making use of a stick or a box. He thoroughly observed and documented the apes' behaviours and the strategies they used to solve these tasks. +The introduction is highlighting the importance and generalisability of the work due to the similarities of apes and humans. Köhler points out large individual differences between apes and describes their individual characteristics, which he compares to personalities. +The following chapters structured by the experimental set-ups, exploring the apes' abilities to find correct ways around obstacles, their tool use in various manners and also building tools and towers of boxes. The book highlights the difference between genuine achievements and coincidental problem-solving. Köhler observed and analysed that apes could use tools and exhibit insight. In contrast to Thorndike's publications, Köhler's research emphasised that apes showed forms of problem-solving beyond trial-and-error learning, highlighting the cognitive similarities between apes and humans. He emphasises his observation that a genuine solution, is preceded by a perceptual stage, such as an ape carefully looking around. + +== Editions == +The book was published in multiple editions with the various editions each having a different title: + +1917. Intelligenzprüfungen an Anthropoiden. Berlin: Royal Prussian Society of Sciences. +1921. Intelligenzprüfungen an Menschenaffen. Berlin: Springer (called a 'second edition', but the first was a two-part whole issue journal publication 1918/19). +1925. The Mentality of Apes. Translated from the second revised edition by Ella Winter. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner. U.S. edition 1925 by Harcourt, Brace & World. Also included is a translation of Köhler's long 1921 paper as Some contributions to the psychology of chimpanzees. Appendix, p281–342. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mentality_of_Apes-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mentality_of_Apes-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..fd6198c64 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mentality_of_Apes-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +--- +title: "The Mentality of Apes" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mentality_of_Apes" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:00.215109+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Reception == +Gabriel Ruiz and Natividad Sánchez from the University of Seville examined Köhler's experiments in the context of the animal psychology of his time with the aim of assessing the historical significance of Köhler's book. With regard to its reception, the researchers concluded, "The impact and historical relevance of Köhler’s Intelligenzprüfungen an Menschenaffen is utterly undeniable". +At first the influence of the book was limited, due to the ongoing war in Europe and the highly specialised nature of the topic. Following the English translation in 1925, the book attracted international attention and interest. Over the course of the 20th century, it became a seminal text in the field of comparative psychology, significantly influencing the study of apes. The increased interest was "followed by nearly a century of German primate research, observations of gorillas in Germany’s sophisticated zoos, and public funding for the study of primates." In other countries, the work of Köhler was built upon by Ivan Pavlov, who replicated the experiments, critiquing them and publishing alternative explanations for ape behaviour. +The influence of the book was also the basis for the Jane Goodall's work in primatology in the 1960s. In contrast to Köhler's experiments on chimpanzees in captivity, Jane Goodall studied the behaviour of chimpanzees in the wild. Köhler believed that similar studies could be performed on young children, and that future research should focus on these possibilities. Child intelligence studies followed in the mid 20th century, among others by Jean Piaget, who had valued Köhler's works. +The reception of Köhler's works slightly changed with the translation of the German word Einsicht into insight, which is used within the book. Insight suggested a hypothetical mechanism by which apes solve a problem, which was not expressed in the original version. The term insight was thus introduced into problem-solving research and received much attention in the field of creativity research. +The publication is said to have further influenced Clark Hull in the development of his theory of learning. +In recognition of Köhler's contributions, the Tenerife station has been memorialised and the Wolfgang Köhler Primate Research Centre (WKPRC) in Leipzig has been established to promote research on non-human primates. This centre underlines the lasting legacy in the field of primate cognition stemming from the book. +Köhler himself abstained from further research in the field of animal studies. The unexpected isolation on Tenerife for six years led to feelings of frustration, and he was unmotivated to continue his research in Germany. Köhler instead pursued his interest in Gestalt psychology. + +== External links == +The Mentality of Apes at the Internet Archive + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..cafb67a12 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +--- +title: "The Mismeasure of Man" +chunk: 1/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:15.085525+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Mismeasure of Man is a 1981 book by paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. The book is both a history and critique of the statistical methods and cultural motivations underlying biological determinism, the belief that "the social and economic differences between human groups—primarily races, classes, and sexes—arise from inherited, inborn distinctions and that society, in this sense, is an accurate reflection of biology". +Gould argues that the primary assumption underlying biological determinism is that "worth can be assigned to individuals and groups by measuring intelligence as a single quantity". Biological determinism is analyzed in discussions of craniometry and psychological testing, the two principal methods used to measure intelligence as a single quantity. According to Gould, these methods possess two deep fallacies. The first fallacy is reification, which is "our tendency to convert abstract concepts into entities". Examples of reification include the intelligence quotient (IQ) and the general intelligence factor (g factor), which have been the cornerstones of much research into human intelligence. The second fallacy is that of "ranking", which is the "propensity for ordering complex variation as a gradual ascending scale". +The book received many positive reviews in the literary and popular press, while scientific reception was highly polarized. Positive reviews focused on the book's critique of scientific racism, the concept of general intelligence, and biological determinism, while negative reviews criticised Gould's scientific arguments, historical accuracy, and political bias. The Mismeasure of Man won the National Book Critics Circle award. Gould's findings about how 19th-century researcher Samuel George Morton measured skull volumes were particularly controversial, inspiring several studies debating his claims. +In 1996, a second edition was released. It included two additional chapters critiquing Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray's book The Bell Curve (1994). + +== Author == + +Stephen Jay Gould (; 1941 – 2002) was a professor at Harvard, teaching paleontology, evolutionary biology, and the history of science. An active and prodigious author, Gould's work was frequently cited by colleagues, being both influential and sometimes polarizing. He was also among the best selling authors of popular science, with a broad global readership. As in The Mismeasure of Man, throughout his writings Gould regularly criticized biologically determined explanations for human behavior, as seen in his "Against Sociobiology" (1975) and "The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm" (1979). + +== Summary == + +=== Craniometry === + +The Mismeasure of Man is a critical analysis of the early works of scientific racism which promoted "the theory of +unitary, innate, linearly rankable intelligence"—such as craniometry, the measurement of skull volume and its relation to intellectual faculties. Gould alleged that much of the research was based largely on racial and social prejudices of the researchers rather than their scientific objectivity; that on occasion, researchers such as Samuel George Morton (1799–1851), Louis Agassiz (1807–1873), and Paul Broca (1824–1880), committed the methodological fallacy of allowing their personal a priori expectations to influence their conclusions and analytical reasoning. Gould noted that when Morton switched from using bird seed, which was less reliable, to lead shot to obtain endocranial-volume data, the average skull volumes changed; however, these changes were not uniform across Morton's "racial" groupings. To Gould, it appeared that unconscious bias influenced Morton's initial results. Gould speculated, + +Plausible scenarios are easy to construct. Morton, measuring by seed, picks up a threateningly large black skull, fills it lightly and gives it a few desultory shakes. Next, he takes a distressingly small Caucasian skull, shakes hard, and pushes mightily at the foramen magnum with his thumb. It is easily done, without conscious motivation; expectation is a powerful guide to action. +In 1977 Gould conducted his own analysis on some of Morton's endocranial-volume data, and alleged that the original results were based on a priori convictions and a selective use of data. He argued that when biases are accounted for, the original hypothesis—an ascending order of skull volume ranging from Blacks to Mongols to Whites—is unsupported by the data. + +=== Bias and falsification === + +The Mismeasure of Man presents a historical evaluation of the concepts of the intelligence quotient (IQ) and of the general intelligence factor (g factor), which were and are the measures for intelligence used by psychologists. Gould proposed that most psychological studies have been heavily biased, by the belief that the human behavior of a race of people is best explained by genetic heredity. He cites the Burt Affair, about the oft-cited twin studies, by Cyril Burt (1883–1971), wherein Burt claimed that human intelligence is highly heritable. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..18778dc10 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +--- +title: "The Mismeasure of Man" +chunk: 2/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:15.085525+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== IQ, g, statistical correlation, and heritability === +As an evolutionary biologist and historian of science, Gould accepted biological variability (the premise of the transmission of intelligence via genetic heredity), but opposed biological determinism, which posits that genes determine a definitive, unalterable social destiny for each man and each woman in life and society. The Mismeasure of Man is an analysis of statistical correlation, the mathematics applied by psychologists to establish the validity of IQ tests, and the heritability of intelligence. For example, to establish the validity of the proposition that IQ is supported by a general intelligence factor (g factor), the answers to several tests of cognitive ability must positively correlate; thus, for the g factor to be a heritable trait, the IQ-test scores of close-relation respondents must correlate more than the IQ-test scores of distant-relation respondents. However, correlation does not imply causation; for example, Gould said that the measures of the changes, over time, in "my age, the population of México, the price of Swiss cheese, my pet turtle's weight, and the average distance between galaxies" have a high, positive correlation—yet that correlation does not indicate that Gould's age increased because the Mexican population increased. More specifically, a high, positive correlation between the intelligence quotients of a parent and a child can be presumed either as evidence that IQ is genetically inherited, or that IQ is inherited through social and environmental factors. Moreover, because the data from IQ tests can be applied to arguing the logical validity of either proposition—genetic inheritance and environmental inheritance—the psychometric data have no inherent value. +Gould pointed out that if the genetic heritability of IQ were demonstrable within a given racial or ethnic group, it would not explain the causes of IQ differences among the people of a group, or if said IQ differences can be attributed to the environment. For example, the height of a person is genetically determined, but there exist height differences within a given social group that can be attributed to environmental factors (e.g. the quality of nutrition) and to genetic inheritance. The evolutionary biologist Richard Lewontin, a colleague of Gould's, is a proponent of this argument in relation to IQ tests. An example of the intellectual confusion about what heritability is and is not, is the statement: "If all environments were to become equal for everyone, heritability would rise to 100 percent because all remaining differences in IQ would necessarily be genetic in origin", which Gould said is misleading, at best, and false, at worst. First, it is very difficult to conceive of a world wherein every man, woman, and child grew up in the same environment, because their spatial and temporal dispersion upon the planet Earth makes it impossible. Second, were people to grow up in the same environment, not every difference would be genetic in origin because of the randomness of molecular and genetic development. Therefore, heritability is not a measure of phenotypic (physiognomy and physique) differences among racial and ethnic groups, but of differences between genotype and phenotype in a given population. +Furthermore, he dismissed the proposition that an IQ score measures the general intelligence (g factor) of a person, because cognitive ability tests (IQ tests) present different types of questions, and the responses tend to form clusters of intellectual acumen. That is, different questions, and the answers to them, yield different scores—which indicate that an IQ test is a combination method of different examinations of different things. As such, Gould proposed that IQ-test proponents assume the existence of "general intelligence" as a discrete quality within the human mind, and thus they analyze the IQ-test data to produce an IQ number that establishes the definitive general intelligence of each man and of each woman. Hence, Gould dismissed the IQ number as an erroneous artifact of the statistical mathematics applied to the raw IQ-test data, especially because psychometric data can be variously analyzed to produce multiple IQ scores. + +=== Second edition === +The revised and expanded second edition (1996) includes two additional chapters, which critique Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray's book The Bell Curve (1994). Gould maintains that their book contains no new arguments and presents no compelling data; it merely refashions earlier arguments for biological determinism, which Gould defines as "the abstraction of intelligence as a single entity, its location within the brain, its quantification as one number for each individual, and the use of these numbers to rank people in a single series of worthiness, invariably to find that oppressed and disadvantaged groups—races, classes, or sexes—are innately inferior and deserve their status". + +== Reception == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0bb7e9f65 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "The Mismeasure of Man" +chunk: 3/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:15.085525+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Praise === +Gould claimed the majority of reviews of The Mismeasure of Man were positive. Gould's colleague Richard Lewontin, a celebrated evolutionary biologist who held positions at both the University of Chicago and Harvard, wrote a glowing review of Gould's book in The New York Review of Books, endorsing most aspects of its account, and suggesting that it might have been even more critical of the racist intentions of the scientists he discusses, because scientists "sometimes tell deliberate lies because they believe that small lies can serve big truths." Gould said that the most positive review of the first edition to be written by a psychologist was in the British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology, which reported that "Gould has performed a valuable service in exposing the logical basis of one of the most important debates in the social sciences, and this book should be required reading for students and practitioners alike." In The New York Times, journalist Christopher Lehmann-Haupt wrote that the critique of factor analysis "demonstrates persuasively how factor analysis led to the cardinal error in reasoning, of confusing correlation with cause, or, to put it another way, of attributing false concreteness to the abstract". The British journal Saturday Review praised the book as a "fascinating historical study of scientific racism", and that its arguments "illustrate both the logical inconsistencies of the theories and the prejudicially motivated, albeit unintentional, misuse of data in each case". In the American Monthly Review magazine, Richard York and the sociologist Brett Clark praised the book's thematic concentration, saying that "rather than attempt a grand critique of all 'scientific' efforts aimed at justifying social inequalities, Gould performs a well-reasoned assessment of the errors underlying a specific set of theories and empirical claims". Newsweek gave it a positive review for revealing biased science and its abuse. The Atlantic Monthly and Phi Beta Kappa's The Key Reporter also reviewed the book favorably. + +=== Awards === +The first edition of The Mismeasure of Man won the non-fiction award from the National Book Critics Circle; the Outstanding Book Award for 1983 from the American Educational Research Association; the Italian translation was awarded the Iglesias prize in 1991; and in 1998, the Modern Library ranked it as the 24th-best English-language non-fiction book of the 20th century. In December 2006, Discover magazine ranked The Mismeasure of Man as the 17th-greatest science book of all time. + +=== Reassessing Morton's skull measurements === +In a paper published in 1988, John S. Michael reported that Samuel G. Morton's original 19th-century study was conducted with less bias than Gould had described; that "contrary to Gould's interpretation ... Morton's research was conducted with integrity". Nonetheless, Michael's analysis suggested that there were discrepancies in Morton's craniometric calculations, that his data tables were scientifically unsound, and he "cannot be excused for his errors, or his unfair comparisons of means". Michael later complained that some authors, including J. Philippe Rushton, selectively "cherry-picked facts" from his research to support their own claims. He lamented, "Some people have turned the Morton-Gould affair into an all or nothing debate in which either one side is right or the other side is right, and I think that is a mistake. Both men made mistakes and proving one wrong does not prove the other one right." +In another study, published in 2011, Jason E. Lewis and colleagues re-measured the cranial volumes of the skulls in Morton's collection, and re-examined the respective statistical analyses by Morton and by Gould, concluding that, contrary to Gould's analysis, Morton did not falsify craniometric research results to support his racial and social prejudices, and that the "Caucasians" possessed the greatest average cranial volume in the sample. To the extent that Morton's craniometric measurements were erroneous, the error was away from his personal biases. Ultimately, Lewis and colleagues disagreed with most of Gould's criticisms of Morton, finding that Gould's work was "poorly supported", and that, in their opinion, the confirmation of the results of Morton's original work "weakens the argument of Gould, and others, that biased results are endemic in science". Lewis' study examined 46% of Morton's samples, whereas Gould's earlier study was based solely on a reexamination of Morton's raw data tables. However Lewis' study was subsequently criticized by a number of scholars for misrepresenting Gould's claims, bias, faulted for examining fewer than half of the skulls in Morton's collection, for failing to correct measurements for age, gender or stature, and for its claim that any meaningful conclusions could be drawn from Morton's data. +In 2015 this paper was reviewed by Michael Weisberg, who reported that "most of Gould's arguments against Morton are sound. Although Gould made some errors and overstated his case in a number of places, he provided prima facie evidence, as yet unrefuted, that Morton did indeed mismeasure his skulls in ways that conformed to 19th century racial biases". Biologists and philosophers Jonathan Kaplan, Massimo Pigliucci, and Joshua Alexander Banta also published a critique of the group's paper, arguing that many of its claims were misleading and the re-measurements were "completely irrelevant to an evaluation of Gould's published analysis". They also maintain that the "methods deployed by Morton and Gould were both inappropriate" and that "Gould's statistical analysis of Morton's data is in many ways no better than Morton's own". +A 2018 paper argued that Morton's interpretation of the data was biased but that the data itself was accurate. The paper argued that Morton's measurements were similar to those of a contemporary craniologist, Friedrich Tiedemann, who had interpreted the data differently to argue strongly against any conception of racial hierarchy. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..34e10c68f --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "The Mismeasure of Man" +chunk: 4/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:15.085525+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Criticism === +In a review of The Mismeasure of Man, Bernard Davis, professor of microbiology at Harvard Medical School, said that Gould erected a straw man argument based upon incorrectly defined key terms—specifically reification—which Gould furthered with a "highly selective" presentation of statistical data, all motivated more by politics than by science. Davis said that Philip Morrison's laudatory book review of The Mismeasure of Man in Scientific American was written and published because the editors of the journal had "long seen the study of the genetics of intelligence as a threat to social justice". Davis also criticized the popular-press and the literary-journal book reviews of The Mismeasure of Man as generally approbatory; whereas, he said that most scientific-journal book reviews were generally critical. Davis accused Gould of having misrepresented a study by Henry H. Goddard (1866–1957) about the intelligence of Jewish, Hungarian, Italian, and Russian immigrants to the U.S., wherein Gould reported Goddard's qualifying those people as "feeble-minded"; whereas, in the initial sentence of the study, Goddard said the study subjects were atypical members of their ethnic groups, who had been selected because of their suspected sub-normal intelligence. Davis also argued that Goddard had proposed that the low IQs of the sub-normally intelligent men and women who took the cognitive-ability test likely derived from their social environments rather than from their respective genetic inheritances, and concluded that "we may be confident that their children will be of average intelligence, and, if rightly brought up, will be good citizens". Gould pushed back against some of Davis' claims in a 1994 revised edition of the book. While Davis characterized the book's reception as negative in the scientific journals, Gould argued that of twenty-four academic book reviews written by experts in psychology, fourteen approved, three were mixed opinions, and seven disapproved of the book. +In his review, psychologist John B. Carroll said that Gould did not understand "the nature and purpose" of factor analysis. Statistician David J. Bartholomew, of the London School of Economics, said that Gould erred in his use of factor analysis, irrelevantly concentrated upon the fallacy of reification (abstract as concrete), and ignored the contemporary scientific consensus about the existence of the psychometric g. +Reviewing the book, Stephen F. Blinkhorn, a senior lecturer in psychology at the University of Hertfordshire, wrote that The Mismeasure of Man was "a masterpiece of propaganda" that selectively juxtaposed data to further a political agenda. Psychologist Lloyd Humphreys, then editor-in-chief of The American Journal of Psychology and Psychological Bulletin, wrote that The Mismeasure of Man was "science fiction" and "political propaganda", and that Gould had misrepresented the views of Alfred Binet, Godfrey Thomson, and Lewis Terman. +In his review, psychologist Franz Samelson wrote that Gould was wrong in asserting that the psychometric results of the intelligence tests administered to soldier-recruits by the U.S. Army contributed to the legislation of the Immigration Restriction Act of 1924. In their study of the Congressional Record and committee hearings related to the Immigration Act, Mark Snyderman and Richard J. Herrnstein reported that "the [intelligence] testing community did not generally view its findings as favoring restrictive immigration policies like those in the 1924 Act, and Congress took virtually no notice of intelligence testing". Psychologist David P. Barash wrote that Gould unfairly groups sociobiology with "racist eugenics and misguided Social Darwinism". +A 2019 paper argued that Gould was incorrect in his assessment of the Army Beta and that, for the knowledge, technology and test development standards of the time, it was adequate and could measure intelligence, possibly even in the modern day. + +=== Responses by subjects of the book === +In his review of The Mismeasure of Man, Arthur Jensen, a University of California (Berkeley) educational psychologist whom Gould much criticized in the book, wrote that Gould used straw man arguments to advance his opinions, misrepresented other scientists, and propounded a political agenda. According to Jensen, the book was "a patent example" of the bias that political ideology imposes upon science—the very thing that Gould sought to portray in the book. Jensen also criticized Gould for concentrating on long-disproven arguments (noting that 71% of the book's references preceded 1950), rather than addressing "anything currently regarded as important by scientists in the relevant fields", suggesting that drawing conclusions from early human intelligence research is like condemning the contemporary automobile industry based upon the mechanical performance of the Ford Model T. +Charles Murray, co-author of The Bell Curve (1994), said that his views about the distribution of human intelligence, among the races and the ethnic groups who compose the U.S. population, were misrepresented in The Mismeasure of Man. +Psychologist Hans Eysenck wrote that The Mismeasure of Man is a book that presents "a paleontologist's distorted view of what psychologists think, untutored in even the most elementary facts of the science". \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-4.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-4.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ca834bfc7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man-4.md @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ +--- +title: "The Mismeasure of Man" +chunk: 5/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:15.085525+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Responses to the second edition (1996) === +Arthur Jensen and Bernard Davis argued that if the g factor (general intelligence factor) were replaced with a model that tested several types of intelligence, it would change results less than one might expect. Therefore, according to Jensen and Davis, the results of standardized tests of cognitive ability would continue to correlate with the results of other such standardized tests, and that the intellectual achievement gap between black and white people would remain. +James R. Flynn, a researcher critical of racial theories of intelligence, repeated the arguments of Arthur Jensen about the second edition of The Mismeasure of Man. Flynn wrote that "Gould's book evades all of Jensen's best arguments for a genetic component in the black–white IQ gap, by positing that they are dependent on the concept of g as a general intelligence factor. Therefore, Gould believes that if he can discredit g no more need be said. This is manifestly false. Jensen's arguments would bite no matter whether blacks suffered from a score deficit on one or ten or one hundred factors." Rather than defending Jensen and Rushton, however, Flynn concluded that the Flynn Effect, a nongenetic rise in IQ throughout the 20th century, invalidated their core argument because their methods falsely identified even this change as genetic. +According to psychologist Ian Deary, Gould's claim that there is no relation between brain size and IQ is outdated. Furthermore, he reported that Gould refused to correct this in new editions of the book, even though newly available data were brought to his attention by several researchers. + +== See also == +Intelligence quotient +History of the race and intelligence controversy +Scientific racism + +== References == + +== External links == + +=== Praise === +"Debunking as Positive Science" by Richard York and Brett Clark +"The Roots of Biological Determinism" by Garland Allen, Journal of the History of Biology +"The Mismeasure of Man" by Martin A. Silverman and Ilene Silverman, Psychoanalytic Quarterly +"The Mismeasure of Man" by John H. Lienhard, NPR, The Engines of Our Ingenuity. +"Intelligence and Some of its Testers" by Franz Samelson, Science + +=== Criticism === +"Reflections on Stephen Jay Gould's The Mismeasure of Man" Archived 2007-08-07 at the Wayback Machine by John B. Carroll +"The Mismeasures of Gould" Archived 2011-07-01 at the Wayback Machine by J. Philippe Rushton, National Review +"Race, Intelligence, and the Brain" by J. Philippe Rushton +"The Debunking of Scientific Fossils and Straw Persons" by Arthur Jensen +"Neo-Lysenkoism, IQ and the press" by Bernard Davis, The Public Interest + +== Further reading == +Goodfield, June (1981). "A mind is not described in numbers". The New York Times Book Review (Nov. 1): 11. +Gould, S. J. (1981). Mismeasure of Man. New York: Norton & Company +Gould, S. J. (1981). "The Real Error of Cyril Burt" Archived 2015-05-18 at the Wayback Machine +Gould, S. J. (1984). "Human Equality Is a Contingent Fact of History". Natural History 93 (Nov.): 26–33. +Gould, S. J. (1994). "Curveball: Review of The Bell Curve" Archived 2009-06-15 at the Wayback Machine. The New Yorker 70 (Nov. 28): 139–49. +Gould, S. J. (1995). "Ghosts of Bell Curves Past". Natural History 104 (Feb.): 1219. +Janik, Allan (1983). "The Mismeasure of Man". Ethics. 94 (1): 153–55. doi:10.1086/292523. S2CID 159990126. +Junker, Thomas (1998). "Blumenbach's Racial Geometry" (PDF). Isis. 89 (3): 498–501. doi:10.1086/384075. S2CID 144161573. +Kaplan, J. M.; Pigliucci, M.; Banta, JA (2015). "Gould on Morton, Redux" (PDF). Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences. 30: 1–10. +Korb, K. B. (1994). "Stephen Jay Gould on Intelligence". Cognition. 52 (2): 111–23. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.22.9513. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90064-7. PMID 7924200. S2CID 10514854. +Leach, Sir Edmund (1982). "Review: The Mismeasure of Man". New Scientist 94 (May 13): 437. +Lewis, J. E.; et al. (2011). "The Mismeasure of Science: Stephen Jay Gould versus Samuel George Morton on Skulls and Bias". PLOS Biol. 9 (6) e1001071. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071. PMC 3110184. PMID 21666803. +Nature eds. (2011). "Mismeasure for Mismeasure". Nature 474 (23 June): 419. +Ravitch, Diane (2008). "The Mismeasure of Man". Commentary 73 (June). +Reich, Eugenie Samuel (2011) "Stephen Jay Gould accused of fudging numbers" Archived 2014-07-30 at the Wayback Machine. Nature News Blog (June 13) +Sulloway, Frank (1997). "Still Mismeasuring Man". Skeptic. 5 (1): 84. +Wade, Nicholas (2011). "Scientists Measure the Accuracy of a Racism Claim". New York Times (13 June 2011): D4. +Weisberg, Michael (2015). "Remeasuring Man" (PDF). Evolution & Development. 16 (3): 166–78. doi:10.1111/ede.12077. PMID 24761929. S2CID 10110412. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-11-17. Retrieved 2015-08-23. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naturalists'_Handbooks-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naturalists'_Handbooks-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..fb89bf9e5 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naturalists'_Handbooks-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +--- +title: "The Naturalists' Handbooks" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Naturalists'_Handbooks" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:15.491076+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Naturalists' Handbooks is a series of natural history books aimed at students, naturalists and ecologists. Most volumes cover topics relating to insects, but some cover other groups of invertebrates, and some are botanical or mycological in scope, and other cover study techniques. The series first handbook, Insects on Nettles was published in 1983. + + +== Volumes == +A list of the volumes published to date is: + +Insects on Nettles by B N K Davis (1991) +Grasshoppers by V K Brown (1990) +Solitary Wasps by Peter F Yeo and Sarah A Corbet (1995) +Insects and Thistles by Margaret Redfern (1995) +Hoverflies by Francis S Gilbert (1993) +Bumblebees by Oliver E Prys-Jones and Sarah A Corbet (1991) +Dragonflies by Peter L Miller (1995) +Common Ground Beetles by Trevor G Forsythe (1987) +Animals on Seaweed by Peter J Hayward (1998) +Ladybirds by Michael Majerus and Peter Kearns (1989) +11 Aphid Predators by Graham E Rotheray (1989) +Animals on the Surface Film by Marjorie Guthrie (1989) +Mayflies by Janet Harker (1989) +Mosquitoes by Keith R Snow (1990) +Insects, Plants and Microclimate by D M Unwin and Sarah A Corbet (1991) +Weevils by M G Morris (1991) +Plant Galls by Margaret Redfern and R R Askew (1992) +Insects on Cabbages and Oilseed Rape by William D J Kirk (1992) +Pollution Monitoring with Lichens by D H S Richardson (1992) +Microscopic Life in Sphagnum by Marjorie Hingley (1993) +Animals of Sandy Shores by Peter J Hayward (1994) +Animals under Logs and Stones by C Philip Wheater & Helen J Read (1996) +Blowflies by Zakaria Erinçlioglu (1996) +Ants by Gary J Skinner +Thrips by William D J Kirk (1996) +Insects on Dock Plants by David T Salt & B Whittaker (1998) +Insects on Cherry Trees by Simon R Leather & Keith P Bland (Spring 1999) +Studying Invertebrates by C Philip Wheater & Penny A Cook (2003) +Aphids on deciduous trees by Tony Dixon & Thomas Thieme (2020) +Snails on rocky sea shores by John Crothers (2012) +Amphibians and reptiles by Trevor J. C. Beebee +Ponds and Small Lakes: Microorganisms and Freshwater Ecology by Brian Moss (2017) +Solitary bees by Ted Benton (2017) +Leaf beetles by Dave Hubble (2017) + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Panda's_Thumb_(book)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Panda's_Thumb_(book)-0.md index 460985242..28951179b 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Panda's_Thumb_(book)-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Panda's_Thumb_(book)-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Panda's_Thumb_(book)" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:19:05.233975+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:17.485954+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Science_of_Life-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Science_of_Life-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..f7f45d005 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Science_of_Life-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +--- +title: "The Science of Life" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Science_of_Life" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:35.983998+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Science of Life is a book written by H. G. Wells, Julian Huxley and G. P. Wells, published in three volumes by The Waverley Publishing Company Ltd in 1929–30, giving a popular account of all major aspects of biology as known in the 1920s. It has been called "the first modern textbook of biology" and "the best popular introduction to the biological sciences". Wells's most recent biographer notes that The Science of Life "is not quite as dated as one might suppose". +In undertaking The Science of Life, H. G. Wells, who had published The Outline of History a decade earlier, selling over two million copies, desired the same sort of treatment for biology. He thought of his readership as "the intelligent lower middle classes ... [not] idiots, half-wits ... greenhorns, religious fanatics ... smart women or men who know all that there is to be known". +Julian Huxley, the grandson of T. H. Huxley under whom Wells had studied biology, and Wells' son "Gip", a zoologist, divided the initial writing between them; H. G. Wells revised, dealt (with the help of his literary agent, A. P. Watt) with publishers, and acted as a strict taskmaster, often obliging his collaborators to sit down and work together and keeping them on a tight schedule. (H. G. Wells had begun the book during his wife's final illness and is said to have used work on the book as a way to keep his mind off his loss.) +The text as published is presented as the common work of a "triplex author". H. G. Wells took 40% of the royalties; the remainder was split between Huxley and Wells's son. In his will, H. G. Wells left his rights in the book to G. P. Wells. +In 1927, Huxley gave up his chair of Zoology at King's College, London to concentrate on the work. Thanks to the success of the book, Huxley was able to give up teaching and devote himself to administration and experimental science. +The book was originally serialised in 31 fortnightly parts, published in 3 volumes in 1929–30 and in a single volume in 1931. The volume includes more than 300 illustrations. It was a great success, though the stock market crash and subsequent depression held back sales, in part because of declining memberships in book clubs. +It has been said of Book Four (The How and Why of Development and Evolution) that it "offers perhaps the clearest, most readable, succinct and informative popular account of the subject ever penned. It was here that [Huxley] first expounded his own version of what later developed into the evolutionary synthesis". +The Science of Life is also notable for its introduction of modern ecological concepts. It is also notable for its emphasis on the importance of behaviorism and Jung's psychology. Toward the end The Science of Life strays from the scientific to the moral realm and devotes a chapter (Book Eight, Ch. VIII: "Modern Ideas of Conduct") to practical moral advice to the reader, advising him (the masculine pronoun is used throughout, a universal practice circa 1930): "After his primary duties to himself, the first duty of Mr. Everyman to others is to learn about himself, to acquire poise and make his persona as much of a cultivated gentleman as he can. He has to be considerate. He has to be trustworthy." In its last pages, Wells emphasises the lack of "credibility" of personal immortality, and advocates "realization of [one's] participation in a greater being with which he identifies himself", whether this be "the Deity" or "Man". \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Science_of_Life-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Science_of_Life-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..e4333d569 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Science_of_Life-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +--- +title: "The Science of Life" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Science_of_Life" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:35.983998+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Publication record == +The Science of Life: a summary of contemporary knowledge about life and its possibilities was first issued in 31 fortnightly parts published by Amalgamated Press in 1929–30, bound up in three volumes as publication proceeded. A mail-order version of the book was also published, though this was dropped after the stock market crash. It was first issued in one volume by Cassell in 1931, and reprinted in 1934 and 1937; a popular edition, fully revised, with a new preface by H. G. Wells, appeared in 1938. It was again published as separate volumes by Cassell in 1934–1937: I The living body. II Patterns of life (1934). III Evolution—fact and theory. IV Reproduction, heredity and the development of sex. V The history and adventure of life. VI The drama of life. VII How animals behave (1937). VIII Man's mind and behaviour. IX Biology and the human race. In New York, it was published by Doubleday, Doran & Co. in 1931, 1934 and 1939; and by The Literary Guild in 1934. Doubleday also issued a four-volume limited edition of the work in 1931, limited to 750 sets, with the first volume autographed on the limitation page by the three authors. Three of the Cassell spin-off books were also published by Doubleday in 1932: Evolution, fact and theory; The human mind and the behaviour of Man; Reproduction, genetics and the development of sex. The Science of Life was translated into French. During World War II a one-volume edition designed for use in military classes was issued. As late as 1960 the work was still being used in college classes in the US +Of historic interest is Book Three – The Incontrovertible Fact of Evolution, comprising five chapters; I. The fact to be proved, II. The evidence in the rocks, III. The evidence from plant and animal structure, IV. The evidence from the variation and distribution of living things, V. The evolution of Man. Considering that this was written less than five years from the Scopes Trial, it is a bold, comprehensive account of the scientific knowledge of evolution at the time. Book Four concentrates on the controversies about evolution concluding that "the broad positions of Darwinism emerge from a scrutiny of the most exacting sort, essentially unchanged". +The section entitled "The Ecological Outlook" anticipates many of the themes of the later green movement, including stressing the importance of reducing pollution and protecting endangered species from extinction, as well as the importance of alternative power sources. +The reference given is the most complete available, but there may have been other publishers and dates, and some books may have been given alternative titles. There are editions in some other languages. + +== Outline == +Introduction +The Range, Nature, and Study of Living Things 1 +Book One—The Living Body +The Body is a Machine 24 +The Complex Body-Machine and How It Works 32 +The Harmony and Direction of the Body-Machine 97 +The Wearing Out of the Machine and Its Reproduction 140 +Book Two—The Chief Patterns of Life +The First Great Phylum: Vertebrates 168 +The Second Great Phylum: The Arthropods 194 +Further Patterns of Individualized Animal Life 210 +Less Individualized Animals 235 +Vegetable Life 253 +The Lowly and Minute 268 +Is our Knowledge of the forms of life complete? 311 +Book Three—The Incontrovertible Fact of Evolution +The Fact to be Proved 314 +The Evidence of the Rocks 318 +The Evidence from Plant and Animal Structure 356 +The Evidence from the Variation and Distribution of Living Things 374 +The Evolution of Man 402 +Book Four—The Hows and the Why of Development and Evolution +The Essence of the Controversies about Evolution 425 +How Individuals Originate 433 +The Mechanism of Inheritance 459 +The A B C of Genetics 468 +The Growth of the Individual 508 +What Determines Sex 552 +Variation of Species 576 +Selection in Evolution 600 +Is there a mystical Evolutionary Urge? 629 +Book Five—The History and Adventures of Life +The Prologue 644 +Life Before Fossils 660 +The Era of Crawling and Swimming 675 +Life Conquers the Dry Land 701 +The Full Conquest of the Land 738 +The Modern Era 774 +Man Dawns Upon the World 796 +Book Six—The Spectacle of Life +Habitats 823 +Life in the Sea 839 +Life in Fresh Water and on Land 878 +Some Special Aspects of Life 922 +The Science of Ecology 961 +Life Under Control 1012 +Book Seven—Health and Disease +Infectious and Contagious Disease 1033 +The Nourishment of the Body 1054 +Fresh Air and Sunlight 1076 +The Present Health of Homo Sapiens 1089 +Book Eight—Behavior, Feeling, and Thought +Rudiments of Behaviour 1102 +How Insects and Other Invertebrates Behave 1147 +The Evolution of Behaviour in Vertebrates 1200 +Consciousness 1270 +The Culminating Brain 1278 +The Cortex at Work 1288 +Human Behaviour and the Human Mind 1318 +Modern Ideas of Conduct 1390 +Borderland Science and the Question of Personal Survival 1411 +Book Nine—Biology of the Human Race +Peculiarities of the Species Homo Sapiens 1436 +The Present Phase of Human Association 1454 +Index 1481–1515 +The pagination is that of the 1934 Literary Guild edition. + +== References == + +== External links == +Online edition 1931 facsimile edition in Internet Archive \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sea_Around_Us-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sea_Around_Us-0.md index c989669ae..38cfe8747 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sea_Around_Us-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sea_Around_Us-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sea_Around_Us" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:19:33.843887+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:37.146601+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-0.md index 7ba267a20..989725fe2 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/4 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T07:08:32.764248+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:38.351487+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-1.md index 50a86738a..6795ac555 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-1.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-1.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 2/4 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T07:08:32.764248+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:38.351487+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-2.md index 72923f3ef..fd8deea78 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-2.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-2.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 3/4 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T07:08:32.764248+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:38.351487+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-3.md index d48207f67..61f3c5390 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-3.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene-3.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 4/4 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Selfish_Gene" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T07:08:32.764248+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:38.351487+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Song_of_the_Cell-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Song_of_the_Cell-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8b9946e68 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Song_of_the_Cell-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "The Song of the Cell" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Song_of_the_Cell" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:42.981156+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Song of the Cell: An Exploration of Medicine and the New Human is a book on the history of the human understanding of cell biology, written by Siddhartha Mukherjee, an Indian-born American physician and oncologist, who is Assistant Professor of Medicine at Columbia University. + + +== Background == +Song of the Cell is Mukherjee's fourth book. He is the author of the 2011 "biography of cancer" The Emperor of All Maladies, which won the Pullitzer Prize for General Nonfiction . + + +== Content == +The book tells the history of human understanding of the cell. +In recounting the early history in the field, Murkherjee focuses on telling the stories of figures such as Robert Hooke, who first coined the term cell after viewing a small piece of cork under a microscope. +The book is written for a general readership and there is an emphasis on explaining the roles of cells. The book also examines current concerns, such as on the use of stem cells within regenerative medicine. + + +== Reception == +Song of the Cell was positively reviewed. Tom Whipple of The Times called it "a wonderfully ambitious overview of cell biology". In The Guardian Suzanne O'Sullivan felt the imagery could sometimes be too simplistic, but praised the book as "a masterclass in cell function". Jennifer Szalai of The New York Times was especially appreciative of the metaphors, such as "gunslinging sheriff" for antibody and "gumshoe detective" for T cell, which Mukherjee uses to explain the development of cell biology. +Robin McKie of The Observer called the book "free of overly complex detail" and "assured". + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..21ed9c03e --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +--- +title: "The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs" +chunk: 1/6 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:40.659577+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs, Being the first part of the geology of the voyage of the Beagle, under the command of Capt. Fitzroy, R.N. during the years 1832 to 1836, was published in 1842 as Charles Darwin's first monograph, and set out his theory of the formation of coral reefs and atolls. He conceived of the idea during the voyage of the Beagle while still in South America, before he had seen a coral island, and wrote it out as HMS Beagle crossed the Pacific Ocean, completing his draft by November 1835. At the time there was great scientific interest in the way that coral reefs formed, and Captain Robert FitzRoy's orders from the Admiralty included the investigation of an atoll as an important scientific aim of the voyage. FitzRoy chose to survey the Keeling Islands in the Indian Ocean. The results supported Darwin's theory that the various types of coral reefs and atolls could be explained by uplift and subsidence of vast areas of the Earth's crust under the oceans. +The book was the first volume of three Darwin wrote about the geology he had investigated during the voyage, and was widely recognised as a major scientific work that presented his deductions from all the available observations on this large subject. In 1853, Darwin was awarded the Royal Society's Royal Medal for the monograph and for his work on barnacles. Darwin's theory that coral reefs formed as the islands and surrounding areas of crust subsided has been supported by modern investigations, and is no longer disputed, while the cause of the subsidence and uplift of areas of crust has continued to be a subject of discussion. + +== Theory of coral atoll formation == + +When the Beagle set out in 1831, the formation of coral atolls was a scientific puzzle. Advance notice of her sailing, given in the Athenaeum of 24 December, described investigation of this topic as "the most interesting part of the Beagle's survey" with the prospect of "many points for investigation of a scientific nature beyond the mere occupation of the surveyor. In 1824 and 1825, French naturalists Quoy and Gaimard had observed that the coral organisms lived at relatively shallow depths, but the islands appeared in deep oceans. In books that were taken on the Beagle as references, Henry De la Beche, Frederick William Beechey and Charles Lyell had published the opinion that the coral had grown on underwater mountains or volcanoes, with atolls taking the shape of underlying volcanic craters. The Admiralty instructions for the voyage stated: + +The circularly-formed Coral Islands in the Pacific occasionally afford excellent land-locked harbours, with a sufficient entrance, and would be well adapted to any nice astronomical observations which might require to be carried on in undisturbed tranquillity. While these are quietly proceeding, and the chronometers rating, a very interesting inquiry might be instituted respecting the formation of these coral reefs .... A modern and very plausible theory has been put forward, that these wonderful formations, instead of ascending from the bottom of the sea, have been raised from the summits of extinct volcanoes ... +As a student at the University of Edinburgh in 1827, Darwin learnt about marine invertebrates while assisting the investigations of the anatomist Robert Edmond Grant, and during his last year at the University of Cambridge in 1831, he had studied geology under Adam Sedgwick. So when he was unexpectedly offered a place on the Beagle expedition, as a gentleman naturalist he was well suited to FitzRoy's aim of having a companion able to examine geology on land while the ship's complement carried out its hydrographic survey. FitzRoy gave Darwin the first volume of Lyell's Principles of Geology before they left. On their first stop ashore at St Jago island in January 1832, Darwin saw geological formations which he explained using Lyell's uniformitarian concept that forces still in operation made land slowly rise or fall over immense periods of time, and thought that he could write his own book on geology. Lyell's first volume included a brief outline of the idea that atolls were based on volcanic craters, and the second volume, which was sent to Darwin during the voyage, gave more detail. Darwin received it in November 1832. +While the Beagle surveyed the coasts of South America from February 1832 to September 1835, Darwin made several trips inland and found extensive evidence that the continent was gradually rising. After witnessing an erupting volcano from the ship, he experienced the 1835 Concepción earthquake. In the following months he speculated that as the land was uplifted, large areas of the ocean bed subsided. It struck him that this could explain the formation of atolls. +Darwin's theory followed from his understanding that coral polyps thrive in the clean seas of the tropics where the water is agitated, but can only live within a limited depth of water, starting just below low tide. Where the level of the underlying land stays the same, the corals grow around the coast to form what he called fringing reefs, and can eventually grow out from the shore to become a barrier reef. Where the land is rising, fringing reefs can grow around the coast, but coral raised above sea level dies and becomes white limestone. If the land subsides slowly, the fringing reefs keep pace by growing upwards on a base of dead coral, and form a barrier reef enclosing a lagoon between the reef and the land. A barrier reef can encircle an island, and once the island sinks below sea level a roughly circular atoll of growing coral continues to keep up with the sea level, forming a central lagoon. Should the land subside too quickly or sea level rise too fast, the coral dies as it is below its habitable depth. + +== Darwin's investigations to test his theory == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..4cd72aa80 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +--- +title: "The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs" +chunk: 2/6 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:40.659577+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +By the time that the Beagle set out for the Galápagos Islands on 7 September 1835, Darwin had thought out the essentials of his theory of atoll formation. While he no longer favoured the concept that atolls formed on submerged volcanos, he noted some points on these islands which supported that idea: 16 volcanic craters resembled atolls in being raised slightly more on one side, and five hills appeared roughly equal in height. He then considered a topic which was compatible with either theory, the lack of coral reefs around the Galápagos Islands. One possibility was a lack of calcareous matter around the islands, but his main proposal, which FitzRoy had suggested to him, was that the seas were too cold. As they sailed on, Darwin took note of the records of sea temperature kept in the ship's "Weather Journal". +He had his first glimpse of coral atolls as they passed Honden Island on 9 November and sailed on through the Low or Dangerous Archipelago (Tuamotus). Arriving at Tahiti on 15 November, Darwin saw it "encircled by a Coral reef separated from the shore by channels & basins of still water". He climbed the hills of Tahiti, and was strongly impressed by the sight across to the island of Eimeo, where "The mountains abruptly rise out of a glassy lake, which is separated on all sides, by a narrow defined line of breakers, from the open sea. – Remove the central group of mountains, & there remains a Lagoon Isd." Rather than recording his findings about the coral reefs in his notes about the island, he wrote them up as the first full draft of his theory, an essay titled Coral Islands, dated 1835. They left Tahiti on 3 December, and Darwin probably wrote his essay as they sailed towards New Zealand where they arrived on 21 December. He described the polyp species building the coral on the barrier wall, flourishing in the heavy surf of breaking waves particularly on the windward side, and speculated on reasons that corals in the calm lagoon did not grow so high. He concluded with a "remark that the general horizontal uplifting which I have proved has & is now raising upwards the greater part of S. America & as it would appear likewise of N. America, would of necessity be compensated by an equal subsidence in some other part of the world." + +=== Keeling Islands === + +FitzRoy's instructions set detailed requirements for geological survey of a circular coral atoll to investigate how coral reefs formed, particularly if they rose from the bottom of the sea or from the summits of extinct volcanoes, and to assess the effects of tides by measurement with specially constructed gauges. FitzRoy chose the Keeling Islands in the Indian Ocean, and on arrival there on 1 April 1836, the entire crew set to work, first erecting FitzRoy's new design of a tide gauge that allowed readings to be taken from the shore. Boats were sent all around the island to carry out the survey, and despite being impeded by strong winds, they took numerous soundings to establish depths around the atoll and in the lagoon. FitzRoy noted the smooth and solid rock-like outer wall of the atoll, with most life thriving where the surf was most violent. He had great difficulty in establishing the depth reached by living coral, as pieces were hard to break off and the small anchors, hooks, grappling irons, and chains they used were all snapped off by the swell as soon as they tried to pull them up. He had more success using a sounding line with a bell-shaped lead weight armed with tallow hardened with lime; this would be indented by any shape that it struck to give an exact impression of the bottom; it would also collect any fragments of coral or grains of sand. +These soundings were taken personally by FitzRoy, and the tallow from each sounding was cut off and taken on board to be examined by Darwin. The impressions taken on the steep outside slope of the reef were marked with the shapes of living corals, and otherwise were clean down to about 10 fathoms (18 m); then at increasing depths, the tallow showed fewer such impressions and collected more grains of sand until it was evident that there were no living corals below about 20–30 fathoms (36–55 m). Darwin carefully noted the location of the different types of coral around the reef and in the lagoon. In his diary, he described, "examining the very interesting yet simple structure & origin of these islands. The water being unusually smooth, I waded in as far as the living mounds of coral on which the swell of the open sea breaks. In some of the gullies & hollows, there were beautiful green & other colored fishes, & the forms & tints of many of the Zoophites were admirable. It is excusable to grow enthusiastic over the infinite numbers of organic beings with which the sea of the tropics, so prodigal of life, teems", though he cautioned against the "rather exuberant language" used by some naturalists. + +As they left the islands after eleven days, Darwin wrote out a summary of his theory in his diary: Throughout the whole group of Islands, every single atom, even from the most minute particle to large fragments of rocks, bear the stamp of once having been subjected to the power of organic arrangement. Capt. FitzRoy at the distance of but little more than a mile from the shore sounded with a line 7200 feet long, & found no bottom. Hence we must consider this Isld as the summit of a lofty mountain; to how great a depth or thickness the work of the Coral animal extends is quite uncertain.... Under this view, we must look at a Lagoon Isd as a monument raised by myriads of tiny architects, to mark the spot where a former land lies buried in the depths of the ocean. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9501863ef --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +--- +title: "The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs" +chunk: 3/6 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:40.659577+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Publication of theory == +When the Beagle returned on 2 October 1836, Darwin was already a celebrity in scientific circles, as in December 1835 University of Cambridge Professor of Botany John Stevens Henslow had fostered his former pupil's reputation by giving selected naturalists a pamphlet of Darwin's geological letters. Charles Lyell eagerly met Darwin for the first time on 29 October, enthusiastic about the support this gave to his uniformitarianism, and in May wrote to John Herschel that he was "very full of Darwin's new theory of Coral Islands, and have urged Whewell to make him read it at our next meeting. I must give up my volcanic crater theory for ever, though it cost me a pang at first, for it accounted for so much... the whole theory is knocked on the head, and the annular shape and central lagoon have nothing to do with volcanoes, nor even with a crateriform bottom.... Coral islands are the last efforts of drowning continents to lift their heads above water. Regions of elevation and subsidence in the ocean may be traced by the state of the coral reefs." Darwin presented his findings and theory in a paper which he read to the Geological Society of London on 31 May 1837. +Darwin's first literary project was his Journal and Remarks on the natural history of the expedition, now known as The Voyage of the Beagle. In it he expanded his diary notes into a section on this theory, emphasising how the presence or absence of coral reefs and atolls can show whether the ocean bed is elevating or subsiding. At the same time he was privately speculating intensively about transmutation of species, and taking on other projects. He finished writing out his journal around the end of September, but then had the work of correcting proofs. +His tasks included finding experts to examine and report on his collections from the voyage. Darwin proposed to edit these reports, writing his own forewords and notes, and used his contacts to lobby for government sponsorship of publication of these findings as a large book. When a Treasury grant of £1,000 was allocated at the end of August 1837, Darwin stretched the project to include the geology book that he had conceived in April 1832 at the first landfall in the voyage. He selected Smith, Elder & Co. as the publisher, and gave them unrealistic commitments on the timing of providing the text and illustrations. He assured the Treasury that the work would be good value, as the publisher would only require a small commission profit, and he himself would have no profit. From October he planned what became the multi-volume Zoology of the Voyage of H.M.S. Beagle on his collections, and began writing about the geology of volcanic islands. +In January 1838, Smith, Elder & Co. advertised the first part of Darwin's geology book, Geological observations on volcanic islands and coral formations, as a single octavo volume to be published that year. By the end of the month Darwin thought that his geology was "covering so much paper, & will take so much time" that it could be split into separate volumes (eventually Coral reefs was published first, followed by Volcanic islands in 1844, and South America in 1846). He also doubted that the treasury funds could cover all the geological writings. The first part of the zoology was published in February 1838, but Darwin found it a struggle to get the experts to produce their reports on his collections, and overwork led to illness. After a break to visit Scotland, he wrote up a major paper on the geological "roads" of Glen Roy. On 5 October 1838 he noted in his diary, "Began Coral Paper: requires much reading". + +In November 1838 Darwin proposed to his cousin Emma, and they married in January 1839. As well as his other projects he continued to work on his ideas of evolution as his "prime hobby", but repeated delays were caused by his illness. He sporadically restarted work on Coral Reefs, and on 9 May 1842 wrote to Emma, telling her he was: gloomy & tired— the government money has gone much quicker than I thought & the expences of the coral-volume are greater being, as far as we can judge from 130£ to 140£.— How I am publish the remainder I know not, without taking 2 or 300£ out of the funds—& what will you say to that.— I am stomachy & be blue deviled— I am daily growing very very old, very very cold & I daresay very sly. I will give you statistics of time spent on my coral-volume, not including all the work on board the Beagle— I commenced it 3 years & 7 months ago, & have done scarcely anything besides— I have actually spent 20 months out of this period on it! & nearly all the remainder sickness & visiting!!! + +=== Publication and subsequent editions === +The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs was published in May 1842, priced at 15 shillings, and was well received. A second edition was published in 1874, extensively revised and rewritten to take into account James Dwight Dana's 1872 publication Corals and Coral Islands, and work by Joseph Jukes. + +=== Structure of book === +The book has a tightly logical structure, and presents a bold argument. Illustrations are used as an integral part of the argument, with numerous detailed charts and one large world map marked in colour showing all reefs known at that time. A brief introduction sets out the aims of the book. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..c1ffbed3d --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ +--- +title: "The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs" +chunk: 4/6 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:40.659577+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The first three chapters describe the various types of coral reef, each chapter starting with a section giving a detailed description of the reef Darwin had most information about, which he presents as a typical example of the type. Subsequent sections in each chapter then describe other reefs in comparison with the typical example. In the first chapter, Darwin describes atolls and lagoon islands, taking as his typical example his own detailed findings and the Beagle survey findings on the Keeling Islands. The second chapter similarly describes a typical barrier reef then compares it to others, and the third chapter gives a similar description of what Darwin called fringing or shore reefs. Having described the principal kinds of reef in detail, his finding was that the actual surface of the reef did not differ much. An atoll differs from an encircling barrier reef only in lacking the central island, and a barrier reef differs from a fringing reef only in its distance from the land and in enclosing a lagoon. +The fourth chapter on the distribution and growth of coral reefs examines the conditions in which they flourish, their rate of growth and the depths at which the reef building polyps can live, showing that they can only flourish at a very limited depth. In the fifth chapter he sets out his theory as a unified explanation for the findings of the previous chapters, overcoming the difficulties of treating the various kinds of reef as separate and the problem of reliance on the improbable assumption that underwater mountains just happened to be at the exact depth below sea level, by showing how barrier reefs and then atolls form as the land subsides, and fringing reefs are found along with evidence that the land is being elevated. This chapter ends with a summary of his theory illustrated with two woodcuts each showing two different stages of reef formation in relation to sea level. +In the sixth chapter he examines the geographical distribution of types of reef and its geological implications, using the large coloured map of the world to show vast areas of atolls and barrier reefs where the ocean bed was subsiding with no active volcanos, and vast areas with fringing reefs and volcanic outbursts where the land was rising. This chapter ends with a recapitulation which summarises the findings of each chapter and concludes by describing the global image as "a magnificent and harmonious picture of the movements, which the crust of the earth has within a late period undergone". A large appendix gives a detailed and exhaustive description of all the information he had been able to obtain on the reefs of the world. +This logical structure can be seen as a prototype for the organisation of On the Origin of Species, presenting the detail of various aspects of the problem, then setting out a theory explaining the phenomena, followed by a demonstration of the wider explanatory power of the theory. Unlike the Origin which was hurriedly put together as an abstract of his planned "big book", Coral Reefs is fully supported by citations and material gathered together in the Appendix. Coral Reefs is arguably the first volume of Darwin's huge treatise on his philosophy of nature, like his succeeding works showing how slow gradual change can account for the history of life. In presenting types of reef as an evolutionary series it demonstrated a rigorous methodology for historical sciences, interpreting patterns visible in the present as the results of history. In one passage he presents a particularly Malthusian view of a struggle for survival – "In an old-standing reef, the corals, which are so different in kind on different parts of it, are probably all adapted to the stations they occupy, and hold their places, like other organic beings, by a struggle one with another, and with external nature; hence we may infer that their growth would generally be slow, except under peculiarly favourable circumstances." + +=== Reception === +Having successfully completed and published the other books on the geology and zoology of the voyage, Darwin spent eight years on a major study of barnacles. Two volumes on Lepadidae (goose barnacles) were published in 1851. While he was still working on two volumes on the remaining barnacles, Darwin learnt to his delight in 1853 that the Royal Society had awarded him the Royal Medal for Natural Science. Joseph Dalton Hooker wrote telling him that "Pordock proposed you for the Coral Islands & Lepadidae, Bell followed seconding on the Lepadidae alone, & then followed such a shout of paeans for the Barnacles that you would have [smiled] to hear." \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-4.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-4.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..0b4a6705e --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-4.md @@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ +--- +title: "The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs" +chunk: 5/6 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:40.659577+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Late 19th-century controversy and tests of the theory === +A major scientific controversy over the origin of coral reefs took place in the late 19th century, between supporters of Darwin's theory (such as the American geologist James Dwight Dana, who early in his career had seen coral reefs in Hawaii and Fiji during the 1838–1842 United States Exploring Expedition), and those who supported a rival theory put forward by the Scottish oceanographer John Murray, who participated in the 1872–76 Challenger expedition. Murray's theory challenged Darwin's notion of subsidence, proposing instead that coral reefs formed when accumulating mounds of calcareous marine sediments reached the shallow depths that could support the growth of corals. Amongst Murray's supporters was the independently wealthy American scientist Alexander Agassiz, who financed and undertook several expeditions to the Caribbean, Pacific and Indian Ocean regions to examine coral reefs in search of evidence to support Murray's theory, and to discredit Darwin. +A series of expeditions to test Darwin's theory by drilling on Funafuti atoll in the Ellice Islands (now part of Tuvalu) was conducted by the Royal Society of London for the purpose of investigating whether basalt or traces of shallow water organisms could be found at depth in the coral. Drilling occurred in 1896, 1897 and 1898, attaining a final depth of 1,114 feet 6 inches (339.70 m), still in coral. Professor Edgeworth David of the University of Sydney was a member of the 1896 expedition and leader of the 1897 expedition. At the time these results were regarded as inconclusive and it was not until the 1950s when, prior to carrying out nuclear bomb tests on Eniwetok, deep exploratory drilling through 4,200 feet (1,300 m) of coral to the underlying basalt finally vindicated Darwin's theory. However, the geologic history of atolls is more complex than Darwin (1842) and Davis (1920 & 1928) envisioned. + +== Darwin's findings and later views == +Darwin's interest on the biology of reef organisms was focussed on aspects related to his geological idea of subsidence; in particular, he was looking for confirmation that the reef building organisms could only live at shallow depths. FitzRoy's soundings at the Keeling Islands gave a depth limit for live coral of about 20 fathoms (37 m), and taking into account numerous observations by others, Darwin worked with a probable limit of 30 fathoms (55 m). Later findings suggest a limit of around 100 m (330 ft), still a small fraction of the depth of the ocean floor at 3,000–5,000 m (9,800–16,400 ft). Darwin recognised the importance of red algae, and he reviewed other organisms that could have helped to build the reefs. He thought they lived at similarly shallow depths, but banks formed at greater depths were found in the 1880s. Darwin reviewed the distribution of different species of coral across a reef. He thought that the seaward reefs most exposed to wind and waves were formed by massive corals and red algae; this would be the most active area of reef growth and so would cause a tendency for reefs to grow outwards once they reach sea level. He believed that higher temperatures and the calmer water of the lagoons favoured the greatest coral diversity. These ecological ideas are still current, and research on the details continues. + +In assessing the geology of the reef, Darwin showed his remarkable ability to collect facts and find patterns to reconstruct geological history on the basis of the very limited evidence available. He gave attention to the smallest detail. Having heard that parrotfish browsed on the living coral, he dissected specimens to find finely ground coral in their intestines. He concluded that such fish, and coral eating invertebrates such as Holothuroidea, could account for the banks of fine grained mud he found at the Keeling Islands; it showed also "that there are living checks to the growth of coral-reefs, and that the almost universal law of 'consume and be consumed,' holds good even with the polypifers forming those massive bulwarks, which are able to withstand the force of the open ocean." +His observations on the part played by organisms in the formation of the various features of reefs anticipated later studies. To establish the thickness of coral barrier reefs, he relied on the old nautical rule of thumb to project the slope of the land to that below sea level, and then applied his idea that the coral reef would slope much more steeply than the underlying land. He was fortunate to guess that the maximum depth of coral would be around 5,000 ft (1,500 m), as the first test bores conducted by the United States Atomic Energy Commission on Enewetak Atoll in 1952 drilled down through 4,610 ft (1,410 m) of coral before reaching the volcanic foundations. In Darwin's time no comparable thickness of fossil coral had been found on the continents, and when this was raised as a criticism of his theory neither he nor Lyell could find a satisfactory explanation. It is now thought that fossil reefs are usually broken up by tectonic movements, but at least two continental fossil reef complexes have been discovered to be about 3,000 ft (910 m) thick. While these findings have confirmed his argument that the islands were subsiding, his other attempts to show evidence of subsidence have been superseded by the discovery that glacial effects can cause changes in sea level. +In Darwin's global hypothesis, vast areas where the seabed was being elevated were marked by fringing reefs, sometimes around active volcanoes, and similarly huge areas where the ocean floor was subsiding were indicated by barrier reefs or atolls based on inactive volcanoes. These views received general support from deep sea drilling results in the 1980s. His idea that rising land would be balanced by subsidence in ocean areas has been superseded by plate tectonics, which he did not anticipate. + +== See also == +Formation of coral reefs +Darwin's paradox +List of reefs +Zimmerman's Competing Theory of Reef Formation + +== Notes == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-5.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-5.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8437ee447 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs-5.md @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +--- +title: "The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs" +chunk: 6/6 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_and_Distribution_of_Coral_Reefs" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:40.659577+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== References == +Browne, E. Janet (1995), Charles Darwin: vol. 1 Voyaging, London: Jonathan Cape, ISBN 1-84413-314-1 +Darwin, Charles (15 December 1962), Stoddart, D. R. (ed.), "Coral Islands by Charles Darwin, with Introduction, map and remarks", Atoll Research Bulletin, no. 88, Washington, D. C.: The Pacific Science Board, National Academy of Sciences—National Research Council, pp. 1–20, retrieved 22 January 2009 +Darwin, Charles (2002–2008), John van Wyhe (ed.), "Extracts from letters to Professor Henslow", Darwin Online, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Darwin, C. R. (1837), "On certain areas of elevation and subsidence in the Pacific and Indian oceans, as deduced from the study of coral formations. (Read 31 May)", Proceedings of the Geological Society of London, no. 2, pp. 552–554, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Darwin, Charles (1839), Narrative of the surveying voyages of His Majesty's Ships Adventure and Beagle between the years 1826 and 1836, describing their examination of the southern shores of South America, and the Beagle's circumnavigation of the globe. Journal and remarks. 1832–1836., vol. III, London: Henry Colburn, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Darwin, Charles (1842), The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs. Being the first part of the geology of the voyage of the Beagle, under the command of Capt. Fitzroy, R.N. during the years 1832 to 1836, London: Smith Elder and Co, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Darwin, Charles (1845), Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the countries visited during the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle round the world, under the Command of Capt. Fitz Roy, R.N. (2 ed.), London: John Murray, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Darwin, Charles (1874), The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs (2 ed.), London: Smith Elder and Co, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Darwin, Charles (1887), Darwin, Francis (ed.), The life and letters of Charles Darwin, including an autobiographical chapter, London: John Murray, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Darwin, Charles (1958), Barlow, Nora (ed.), The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809–1882. With the original omissions restored. Edited and with appendix and notes by his granddaughter Nora Barlow, London: Collins, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Desmond, Adrian; Moore, James (1991), Darwin, London: Michael Joseph, Penguin Group, ISBN 0-7181-3430-3 +Davis, W.M. (1920), "The small islands of almost-atolls", Nature, 105 (2636), Nature, v. 105, p. 292–293: 292–293, Bibcode:1920Natur.105..292D, doi:10.1038/105292b0, S2CID 4252726 +Davis, W.M. (1928), The coral reef problem, New York: American Geo¬graphical Society Special Paper No. 9, 596 p. +FitzRoy, Robert (1839), Voyages of the Adventure and Beagle, Volume II, London: Henry Colburn, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Herbert, Sandra (1991), "Charles Darwin as a prospective geological author", British Journal for the History of Science, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 159–192, doi:10.1017/s0007087400027060, S2CID 143748414, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Herbert, Sandra (2005), Charles Darwin, Geologist, Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, ISBN 0-8014-4348-2 +Keynes, Richard (2001), Charles Darwin's Beagle Diary, Cambridge University Press, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Lyell, Charles (1830), Principles of Geology, being an attempt to explain the former changes of the Earth's surface, by reference to causes now in operation, vol. 1, London: John Murray, retrieved 20 January 2009 +Rosen, Brian (1982), "Darwin, coral reefs, and global geology", BioScience, vol. 32, no. 6, American Institute of Biological Sciences, Oxford University Press, pp. 519–525, doi:10.2307/1308903, JSTOR 1308903, retrieved 20 January 2009 +van Wyhe, John (27 March 2007), "Mind the gap: Did Darwin avoid publishing his theory for many years?", Notes and Records of the Royal Society, 61 (2): 177–205, doi:10.1098/rsnr.2006.0171, S2CID 202574857, retrieved 20 January 2009 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Evolutionary_Theory-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Evolutionary_Theory-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..58913b191 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Evolutionary_Theory-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "The Structure of Evolutionary Theory" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Structure_of_Evolutionary_Theory" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:21.033766+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Structure of Evolutionary Theory (2002) is Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould's technical book on macroevolution and the historical development of evolutionary theory. The book was twenty years in the making, published just two months before Gould's death. Aimed primarily at professionals, the volume is divided into two parts. The first is a historical study of classical evolutionary thought, drawing extensively upon primary documents; the second is a constructive critique of the modern synthesis, and presents a case for an interpretation of biological evolution based largely on hierarchical selection, and the theory of punctuated equilibrium (developed by Niles Eldredge and Gould in 1972). + + +== Summary == +According to Gould, classical Darwinism encompasses three essential core commitments: Agency, the unit of selection (which for Charles Darwin was the organism) upon which natural selection acts; efficacy, which encompasses the dominance of natural selection over all other forces—such as genetic drift, and biological constraints—in shaping the historical, ecological, and structural influences on evolution; and scope, the degree to which natural selection can be extrapolated to explain biodiversity at the macroevolutionary level, including the evolution of higher taxonomic groups. +Gould described these three propositions as the "tripod" of Darwinian central logic, each being so essential to the structure that if any branch were cut it would either kill, revise, or superficially refurbish the whole structure—depending on the severity of the cut. According to Gould "substantial changes, introduced during the last half of the 20th century, have built a structure so expanded beyond the original Darwinian core, and so enlarged by new principles of macroevolutionary explanation, that the full exposition, while remaining within the domain of Darwinian logic, must be construed as basically different from the canonical theory of natural selection, rather than simply extended." +In the arena of agency, Gould explores the concept of "hierarchy" in the action of evolution (the idea that evolution may act on more than one unit simultaneously, as opposed to only acting upon individual organisms). In the arena of efficacy he explores the forces beside natural selection that have been considered in evolutionary theory. In the arena of scope he considers the relevance of natural selection to the larger scale patterns of life. +Gould was motivated to write the book by contrasting the opinions of Darwin and Hugh Falconer about the future of Darwinism. Part I of the book focuses on the early history of evolutionary thought (pre-1859). Chapter one introduces and outlines the Structure of Evolutionary Theory, with chapter two covering the structure of The Origin of Species, chapter three focusing on issues surrounding agency, chapters four and five covering efficacy, and chapters six and seven covering scope. Part II—comprising the bulk of the text—focuses on the modern discussion and debate (post-1959). Chapters eight and nine cover agency, while chapters ten and eleven cover efficacy, and twelve covers scope. +Sections of the book dealing with punctuated equilibrium, primarily chapter nine, have been posthumously reprinted as a separate volume by Belknap Harvard. + + +== References == + + +== External links == + +Harvard's promotional page +Charlie Rose, March 1, 1994 - Gould discusses the purpose of the book +Of Beauty and Consolation - Gould on writing Structure \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Surprising_Archaea-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Surprising_Archaea-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ca8875855 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Surprising_Archaea-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@ +--- +title: "The Surprising Archaea" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Surprising_Archaea" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:41.804585+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Surprising Archaea: Discovering Another Domain of Life is a popular science book written about the domain Archaea. It was written by John L. Howland and first published in 2000 by the Oxford University Press. The book records the, "archaeal rise from obscurity...to their current prominent place in molecular and evolutionary biology." + + +== See also == +Carl Woese +Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria, and Eucarya + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..19448e757 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@ +--- +title: "The Voyage of the Beagle" +chunk: 1/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:52.406583+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Voyage of the Beagle, originally published as Journal and Remarks, is an 1839 book written by Charles Darwin, covering his research and activities during the second survey expedition of the ship HMS Beagle, bringing him considerable fame and respect. This was the third volume of The Narrative of the Voyages of H.M. Ships Adventure and Beagle, the other volumes of which were written or edited by the commanders of the ships. Due to the popularity of Darwin's account, the publisher reissued it later in 1839 as Darwin's Journal of Researches, and the revised second edition published in 1845 also used this title. A republication of the book in 1905 introduced the title The Voyage of the Beagle, by which it is now best known. + +Beagle sailed from Plymouth Sound on 27 December 1831 under the command of Captain Robert FitzRoy. While the expedition was originally planned to last two years, it lasted almost five—Beagle did not return until 2 October 1836. Darwin spent most of this time exploring on land (three years and three months on land; 18 months at sea). The book is a vivid travel memoir as well as a detailed scientific field journal covering biology, geology, and anthropology that demonstrates Darwin's keen powers of observation, written at a time when Western Europeans were exploring and charting the whole world. Although Darwin revisited some areas during the expedition, for clarity the chapters of the book are ordered by reference to places and locations rather than by date. +Darwin's notes made during the voyage include comments hinting at his changing views on the fixity of species. On his return, he wrote the book based on these notes, at a time when he was first developing his theories of evolution through common descent and natural selection. The book includes some suggestions of his ideas, particularly in the second edition of 1845. + +== Context == +In May 1826 two ships left Plymouth to survey the southern coasts of South America. The senior officer of the expedition was Phillip Parker King, Commander and Surveyor of HMS Adventure, and under his orders Pringle Stokes was Commander and Surveyor of HMS Beagle. In August 1828 Stokes died after shooting himself. In December Robert FitzRoy was given command of the ship and continued the survey. In January 1830 FitzRoy noted in his journal the need for expertise in mineralogy or geology, on a future expedition he would "endeavour to carry out a person qualified to examine the land; while the officers, and myself, would attend to hydrography." Both ships returned to Plymouth in August 1830. King was in poor health, and retired from the Navy (he moved back to his home in Australia in 1832). +In August 1831, while Beagle was being readied, FitzRoy's offer of a place for a self-funded naturalist was raised with University of Cambridge professors. Henslow passed it on to Darwin who was well qualified and, enthused by reading Humboldt's Personal Narrative, was on a short study tour with geologist Adam Sedgwick in preparation for a planned visit with friends to Tenerife. Darwin read the letters when he got home, and was eager to join the voyage. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8281b09fb --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +--- +title: "The Voyage of the Beagle" +chunk: 2/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:52.406583+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Darwin's diary / journal === +On board the ship, Darwin began a day-to-day record of activities in the form of a diary, which he commonly called "my Journal". Darwin wrote entries, in ink, while on the ship or when staying for a period in a house on shore. When travelling on land, he left the manuscript on the ship, and made pencil notes in pocket books to record details of his excursions along with his field notes on geology and natural history. He then wrote up his diary entries from these notes or from memory, sometimes several weeks after the event. +Pages 1 and 2, dated 16 December 1831, outline events from Darwin arriving home on 29 August to his arrival at Devonport on 24 October. From page 3 onwards he adopts a consistent layout, with month, the year and place in a heading at the top, page number in a top corner, and the day of the month in the margin at each entry. After delays and false starts due to weather, they set off on 27 December. Darwin suffered seasickness, and his entry for that date starts "I am now on the 5th of Jan.y writing the memoranda of my misery for the last week". +In April, a month after reaching South America, he wrote to his sister Caroline that he was struggling to write letters, partly due to "writing everything in my journal". A few weeks later at Botafogo in Rio de Janeiro, tired and short of time, he sent her "in a packet, my commonplace Journal.— I have taken a fit of disgust with it & want to get it out of my sight, any of you that like may read it.— a great deal is absolutely childish: Remember however this, that it is written solely to make me remember this voyage, & that it is not a record of facts but of my thoughts". He invited criticisms. In reply, his sister Catherine praised his "interesting and entertaining" descriptions, "Susan read the Journal aloud to Papa, who was interested, and liked it very much". His Wedgwood relatives had asked to see it at Maer Hall. Darwin left that "entirely in your hands.— I suspect the first part is abominaly childish, if so do not send it to Maer.— Also, do not send it by the Coach, (it may appear ridiculous to you) but I would as soon loose a piece of my memory as it.— I feel it is of such consequence to my preserving a just recollection of the different places we visit." +By 14 July 1833 Darwin had sent more of his diary. On 28 October Caroline gave the requested critical assessment – in the first part Darwin had "probably from reading so much of Humboldt, got his phraseology & occasionally made use of the kind of flowery French expressions which he uses, instead of your own simple straight forward & far more agreeable style. I have no doubt you have without perceiving it got to embody your ideas in his poetical language & from his being a foreigner it does not sound unnatural in him". However, "the greatest part I liked exceedingly & could find no fault". In July 1834, Darwin agreed that these points were "perfectly just", and continued to update his diary carefully. +As Beagle headed homewards in April 1836, Darwin told Caroline that FitzRoy too was busy with writing "the account of the Voyage". This "Book" might be "rather diffuse", but otherwise good: "his style is very simple & excellent. He has proposed to me, to join him in publishing the account, that is, for him to have the disposal & arranging of my journal & to mingle it with his own. Of course I have said I am perfectly willing, if he wants materials; or thinks the chit-chat details of my journal are any ways worth publishing. He has read over the part, I have on board, & likes it." Darwin asked his family about this idea, but would be aware the custom of the Navy was that the captain had a right to first use of papers. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b3e4de0dc --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +--- +title: "The Voyage of the Beagle" +chunk: 3/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:52.406583+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== Journal and remarks === +Soon after Darwin's return, he was at a party hosted by Fanny and Hensleigh Wedgwood for their relatives on 4 December 1836. They agreed to review his journal. The physician and travel writer Henry Holland looked at some pages and "thought that it would not be worth while to publish it alone, as it would be partly going over the same ground with the Captain", leaving Darwin "more perplexed" but "becoming rather inclined to the plan of mixing up long passages with Capt Fitzroy." He would "go on with the geology and let the journal take care of itself", but Emma Wedgwood did not think Holland "any judge as to what is amusing or interesting", and like Catherine thought it should be published by itself, not "mixed up with Capt. FitzRoy's". Fanny and Hensleigh found the "Journal so interesting, that it is quite difficult to stop to criticize". Though "not in general a good reader of travels", he "found no part of yours tedious." They had "read a great deal of it aloud too" as a more severe test, and concluded it had "more variety and a greater number of interesting portions" than other travel books, "the less it is mixed up with the Captains the better." +After advice from Broderip, FitzRoy wrote on 30 December that "One volume might be for King—another for you—and a third for me. The profits if any, to be divided into three equal portions—What think you of such a plan?" Darwin agreed, and began work on his volume. In March he told Fox "I am now hard at work and give up every thing else for it. Our plan is as follows.— Capt. FitzRoy writes two volumes, out of the materials collected during both the last voyage under Capt. King to T. del Fuego and during our circumnavigation.— I am to have the third volume, in which I intend giving a kind of journal of a naturalist, not following however always the order of time, but rather the order of position.— The habits of animals will occupy a large portion, sketches of the geology, the appearance of the country, and personal details will make the hodge-podge complete.— Afterwards I shall write an account of the geology in detail, and draw up some Zoological papers.— So that I have plenty of work, for the next year or two, and till that is finished I will have no holidays." + +== Publication of FitzRoy's narrative and Darwin's book == +Darwin reorganised his diary, trimmed parts, and incorporated scientific material from his field notes. He passed his writing to the publisher Henry Colburn, and in August 1837 had the first proofs back from the printer. Henslow helped check them; on 4 November, Darwin wrote to him that "If I live till I am eighty years old I shall not cease to marvel at finding myself an author". Part of it was printed, "the smooth paper and clear type has a charming appearance, and I sat the other evening gazing in silent admiration at the first page of my own volume, when I received it from the printers!" +FitzRoy had to edit King's account of the first voyage, adding extracts from the journal of the previous captain of Beagle and his own journal when he took over, as well as write his own account of the second voyage. In mid-November 1837, he took offence that Darwin's preface to volume III (and a similar preface to the first part of The Zoology) lacked, in his view, enough acknowledgement of the help given by FitzRoy and other officers; the problem was overcome. By the end of February 1838, King's Narrative (volumes I) and Darwin's Journal (volume III) had been printed, but FitzRoy was still hard at work on volume II. +The Narrative was completed and published as a four-volume set in May 1839, as the Narrative of the Surveying Voyages of His Majesty's Ships Adventure and Beagle, describing their Examination of the Southern Shores of South America, and the Beagle's Circumnavigation of the Globe, in three volumes. Volume one covers the first voyage under Commander Phillip Parker King, volume two is FitzRoy's account of the second voyage. Darwin's Journal and Remarks, 1832–1835 forms the third volume, and the fourth volume is a lengthy appendix. The publication was reviewed as a whole by Basil Hall in the July 1839 issue of the Edinburgh Review. +Volume two includes FitzRoy's Remarks with reference to the Deluge in which he recanted his earlier interest in the geological writings of Charles Lyell and his remarks to Darwin during the expedition that sedimentary features they saw "could never have been effected by a forty days' flood", asserting his renewed commitment to a literal reading of the Bible. He had married on the ship's return, and his wife was very religious. +Darwin's contribution proved remarkably popular and the publisher, Henry Colburn of London, announced on 15 August a separate volume of Darwin's text, published with a new title page as Journal of Researches into the Geology and Natural History of the various countries visited by H.M.S. Beagle. The Publishers‘ Circular of 2 September carried an advertisement for this volume, as well as a separate advertisement for the other volumes, as listed at William Broderip's article in the Quarterly Review. This was apparently done without seeking Darwin's permission or paying him a fee. + +=== Second edition: changing ideas on evolution === \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-3.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-3.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..eb058cfe6 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-3.md @@ -0,0 +1,48 @@ +--- +title: "The Voyage of the Beagle" +chunk: 4/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:52.406583+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The second edition of 1845 incorporated extensive revisions made in the light of interpretation of the field collections and developing ideas on evolution. This edition was commissioned by the publisher John Murray, who actually paid Darwin a fee of £150 for the copyright. The full title was modified to Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of the countries visited during the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle round the world. +In the first edition, Darwin remarks in regard to the similarity of Galápagos wildlife to that on the South American continent, "The circumstance would be explained, according to the views of some authors, by saying that the creative power had acted according to the same law over a wide area". (This was written in a reference to Charles Lyell's ideas of "centres of creation".) Darwin notes the gradations in size of the beaks of species of finches, suspects that species "are confined to different islands", "But there is not space in this work, to enter into this curious subject." +Later editions hint at his new ideas on evolution: + +Considering the small size of these islands, we feel the more astonished at the number of their aboriginal beings, and at their confined range... within a period geologically recent the unbroken ocean was here spread out. Hence, both in space and time, we seem to be brought somewhat near to that great fact – that mystery of mysteries – the first appearance of new beings on this earth. +Speaking of the finches with their gradations in size of beaks, he writes "one might really fancy that from an original paucity of birds in this archipelago, one species had been taken and modified for different ends." +In 1890, John Murray published an illustrated edition of the book, at the suggestion of the artist Robert Taylor Pritchett, who was already known for accompanying voyages of the RYS Wanderer and Sunbeam, and producing pictures used in books on these cruises. In his foreword to this edition of Journal and Researches, Murray said that most "of the views given in this work are from sketches made on the spot by Mr. Pritchett, with Mr. Darwin's book by his side", and the illustrations had been "chosen and verified with the utmost care and pains". + +== Contents – places Darwin visited == +For readability, the chapters of the book are arranged geographically rather than in an exact chronological sequence of places Darwin visited or revisited. The main headings (and in some cases subheadings) of each chapter give a good idea of where he went, but not the exact sequence. See second voyage of HMS Beagle for a detailed synopsis of Darwin's travels. The contents list in the book also notes topics discussed in each chapter, not shown here for simplicity. Names and spellings are those used by Darwin. The list below is based on the Journal and Remarks of 1839. + +Preface +Chapter I: St. Jago–Cape de Verde Islands (St. Paul's Rocks, Fernando Noronha, 20 Feb.., Bahia, or San Salvador, Brazil, 29 Feb..) +Chapter II: Rio de Janeiro +Chapter III: Maldonado +Chapter IV: Río Negro to Bahia Blanca +Chapter V: Bahía Blanca +Chapter VI: Bahia Blanca to Buenos Aires +Chapter VII: Buenos Aires to St. Fe +Chapter VIII: Banda Oriental +Chapter IX: Patagonia +Chapter X: Santa Cruz–Patagonia +Chapter XI: Tierra del Fuego +Chapter XII: The Falkland Islands +Chapter XIII: Strait of Magellan +Chapter XIV: Central Chile +Chapter XV: Chiloe and Chonos Islands +Chapter XVI: Chiloe and Concepcion +Chapter XVII: Passage of Cordillera +Chapter XVIII: Northern Chile and Peru +Chapter XIX: Galapagos Archipelago +Chapter XX: Tahiti and New Zealand +Chapter XXI: Australia (Van Diemen's Land) +Chapter XXII: Coral Formations (Keeling or Cocos Islands) +Chapter XXIII: Mauritius to England +In the second edition, the Journal of Researches of 1845, chapters VIII and IX were merged into a new chapter VIII on "Banda Oriental and Patagonia", and chapter IX now included "Santa Cruz, Patagonia and The Falkland Islands". After chapter X on Tierra del Fuego, chapter XI had the revised heading "Strait of Magellan–Climate of the Southern Coasts". The following chapters were renumbered accordingly. Chapter XIV was given the revised heading "Chiloe and Concepcion: Great Earthquake", and chapter XX had the heading "Keeling Island:–Coral Formations", with the concluding chapter XXI keeping the heading "Mauritius to England". + +== Notes == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-4.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-4.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..96f120a40 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle-4.md @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +--- +title: "The Voyage of the Beagle" +chunk: 5/5 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:52.406583+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +== Sources == +Darwin, Charles (June 1960), "Darwin as a Traveller", The Geographical Journal, 126 (2): 129–136, Bibcode:1960GeogJ.126..129D, doi:10.2307/1793952, JSTOR 1793952 Retrieved on 15 December 2006 +Browne, E. Janet (1995), Charles Darwin: vol. 1 Voyaging, London: Jonathan Cape, ISBN 1-84413-314-1{{citation}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) +Browne, E. Janet (2002), Charles Darwin: vol. 2 The Power of Place, London: Jonathan Cape, ISBN 0-7126-6837-3{{citation}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) +Darwin, Charles (1835), Extracts from letters to Professor Henslow. Cambridge, [printed by the Cambridge University Press for private distribution] Retrieved on 30 April 2007 +Darwin, Charles (1887), Darwin, F (ed.), The life and letters of Charles Darwin, including an autobiographical chapter., London: John Murray{{citation}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) (The Autobiography of Charles Darwin) Retrieved on 15 December 2006 +Darwin, Charles (1958), Barlow, N (ed.), The autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809–1882. With the original omissions restored. Edited and with appendix and notes by his grand-daughter Nora Barlow., London: Collins{{citation}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) (The Autobiography of Charles Darwin) Retrieved on 15 December 2006 +Desmond, Adrian; Moore, James (1991), Darwin, London: Michael Joseph, Penguin Group, ISBN 0-7181-3430-3 +Freeman, R. B. (1977), The Works of Charles Darwin: An Annotated Bibliographical Handlist (Second ed.), Cannon House Folkestone, Kent, England: Wm Dawson & Sons Ltd Retrieved on 30 April 2007 +Gordon, Robert; Thomas, Deborah (20–21 March 1999), "Circumnavigating Darwin", Darwin Undisciplined Conference, Sydney. Retrieved on 15 December 2006 +Keynes, Richard (2001), Charles Darwin's Beagle Diary, Cambridge University Press, retrieved 24 October 2008 +Rookmaaker, Kees; van Wyhe, eds. (March 2021), Transcription of Darwin, C. R. [Beagle diary (1831-1836)]. EH88202366, Darwin Online +Thomson, Keith S. (2003), HMS Beagle : the story of Darwin's ship, London: Phoenix, ISBN 978-0-7538-1733-9, OCLC 52143718 +van Wyhe, John (2006), Charles Darwin: gentleman naturalist: A biographical sketch Retrieved on 15 December 2006 + +=== Bibliography of original publications === +Voyages of the Adventure and Beagle, Volume I – King, P. Parker (1839), Proceedings of the first expedition, 1826–30, under the command of Captain P. Parker King, R.N., F.R.S, Great Marlborough Street, London: Henry Colburn Retrieved on 30 April 2007 +Voyages of the Adventure and Beagle, Volume II – FitzRoy, Robert (1839), Proceedings of the second expedition, 1831–36, under the command of Captain Robert Fitz-Roy, R.N., Great Marlborough Street, London: Henry Colburn Retrieved on 15 December 2006 +Voyages of the Adventure and Beagle, Volume III – Darwin, Charles (1839), Journal and remarks. 1832–1836., London: Henry Colburn{{citation}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) (The Voyage of the Beagle) Retrieved on 30 April 2007 +Voyages of the Adventure and Beagle, Appendix – FitzRoy, Robert (1839b), Appendix, Great Marlborough Street, London: Henry Colburn Retrieved on 15 December 2006 +Darwin, Charles (1845), Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the countries visited during the voyage of H.M.S. Beagle round the world, under the Command of Capt. Fitz Roy, R.N. (Second ed.), London: John Murray{{citation}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) (The Voyage of the Beagle) Retrieved on 30 April 2007 +Darwin, Charles (1890), Journal of researches into the natural history and geology of the various countries visited by H.M.S. Beagle etc. (First Murray illustrated ed.), London: John Murray{{citation}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) (The Voyage of the Beagle) Retrieved on 3 August 2014 + +== External links == + +=== Full texts === +The Voyage of the Beagle at Standard Ebooks + + The Voyage of the Beagle at Project Gutenberg +The Voyage of the Beagle at LibriVox (audiobook library) + +=== Other resources === +The Voyage of the Beagle and Darwin's explorations – a multi-page synopsis with maps. +Bright Sparcs – The Journal of Syms Covington, Assistant to Charles Darwin Esq. on the Second Voyage of HMS Beagle +Charles Darwin's Great Adventure: Voyage of the Beagle Without the Science \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hunt_Morgan_bibliography-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hunt_Morgan_bibliography-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..1da135be1 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hunt_Morgan_bibliography-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ +--- +title: "Thomas Hunt Morgan bibliography" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hunt_Morgan_bibliography" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:09.578105+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +This is a list of books and monographs by the American geneticist Thomas Hunt Morgan. Morgan produced 22 books on embryology, genetics and evolution. Books are in order by date. Three of Morgan's co-authors have their own articles: Calvin Bridges, Alfred Sturtevant and Hermann Joseph Muller. + +The Development of the Frog's Egg: An Introduction to Experimental Embryology, New York: Macmillan, 1897. Full text online at [1]. Translated into German by Bernhard Solger and published in 1904 as Die Entwicklung des Froscheies.[2]. +Regeneration Columbia University Biological Series, New York: Macmillan, 1901. Full text online at [3]. +Evolution and Adaptation, New York: Macmillan, 1903. Full text online at [4]. +Experimental Zoology, New York: Macmillan, 1907 +Heredity and Sex, New York: Columbia University Press, 1913. Full text online at [5]. +The Mechanism of Mendelian Heredity, with A.H. Sturtevant, H.J. Muller and C.B. Bridges, New York:Henry Holt, 1915. Revised and re-issued in 1922. Full text online at [6]. +A Critique of the Theory of Evolution, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1916. Full text online at [7]. +Sex-linked Inheritance in Drosophila, with C.B. Bridges, Washington DC: Carnegie Institution, 1916. Full text online at [8]. +The Genetic and the Operative Evidence of Relating to Secondary Sexual Characteristics, Washington DC: Carnegie Institution, 1919 +The Physical Basis of Heredity, Monographs on Experimental Biology, Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott, 1919. Full text online at [9]. +Contributions to the Genetics of Drosophila Melanogaster, with A.H.Sturtevant and C.B.Bridges: Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1919. +Some Possible Bearings of Genetics on Pathology, Lancaster PA: New Era Printing Co., 1922 +The Third-Chromosome Group of Mutant Characters of Drosophila melanogaster, with C.B. Bridges, Washington DC: Carnegie Institution, 1923 +Laboratory Directions for and Elementary Course in Genetics, with H.J. Muller, A.H. Sturtevant and C.B. Bridges, New York: Henry Holt, 1923 +Human Inheritance, Pittsburgh:University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, 1924 +Evolution and Genetics, Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1925 +The Theory of the Gene, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1926 +Genetics and the Physiology of Development, Woods Hole: Marine Biological Laboratory, 1926 +Experimental Embryology, New York: Columbia University Press, 1927 +What is Darwinism?, New York: W.H. Norton, 1929 +The Scientific Basis of Evolution, New York: W.H. Norton, 1932 +Embryology and Genetics, New York: Columbia University Press, 1934 + + +== See also == +List of publications in science \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-0.md index c48498e3c..7944bb6f7 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/3 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:19:58.472887+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:22.239345+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-1.md index e607b18f1..1662089de 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-1.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-1.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 2/3 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:19:58.472887+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:22.239345+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-2.md index 94d90922d..a568684aa 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-2.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle-2.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 3/3 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time's_Arrow,_Time's_Cycle" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:19:58.472887+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:22.239345+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toward_a_New_Philosophy_of_Biology-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toward_a_New_Philosophy_of_Biology-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..13aa303a7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toward_a_New_Philosophy_of_Biology-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +--- +title: "Toward a New Philosophy of Biology" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toward_a_New_Philosophy_of_Biology" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:44.146071+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Toward a New Philosophy of Biology: Observations of an Evolutionist (published by Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, in 1988) is a book by Harvard evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr. +It is a collection of 28 essays, five previously unpublished, grouped into ten categories—Philosophy, Natural Selection, Adaptation, Darwin, Diversity, Species, Speciation, Macroevolution, and Historical Perspective. The book, Mayr notes in the Forward, is an attempt "to strengthen the bridge between biology and philosophy, and point to the new direction in which a new philosophy of biology will move." + + +== Reviews == +Ayala, Francisco J. Science, New Series, Vol. 240, No. 4860 (June, 1988). +Griesemer, James R. The Quarterly Review of Biology, Vol. 64, No. 1 (March, 1989). +Maienschein, Jane. Isis, Vol. 80, No. 3 (September, 1989). +Smith, John Maynard. New York Review of Books, Volume 39, Number 9, May 14, 1992. + + +== Notes == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise_on_Man-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise_on_Man-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..37f6fc012 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise_on_Man-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +--- +title: "Treatise on Man" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise_on_Man" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:45.250497+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Treatise on Man (French: L'Homme) is an unfinished treatise by René Descartes written in the 1630s and published posthumously, firstly in 1662 in Latin, then in 1664 in French by Claude Clerselier. The 1664 edition is accompanied by a short text, The Description of the Human Body and All Its Functions (La description du corps humain et de toutes ses fonctions), also known as the Treatise on the Formation of the Foetus (Traité de la formation du fœtus), the remarks of Louis La Forge and the translated preface from the Latin edition by Florent Schuyl. +The book in part focuses on Descartes' views on human physiology. It covers the topics of digestion, nutrition, respiration, blood circulation, nerves, muscles, and tendons. + +== Editorial context == + +René Descartes first began work on the treatise in the 1630s, but gave up seeking its publication when he learned of Galileo Galilei's condemnation by the Roman Inquisition. +A first version of the text appeared in Latin in 1662, edited and prefaced by Florent Schuyl, who proposed another edition in 1664 in the same language from another manuscript. The first French language edition was published the same year, edited by Claude Clerselier. It includes figures composed by Descartes, Louis de la Forge and Gérard von Gutschoven, as well as a division into 106 numbered articles by Claude Clerselier. There is attached a treatise found in Descartes' inventory under the name of Description of the human body and designated as the Treaty of the fetus by Clerselier, as well as the preface by Schuyl to the Latin edition of 1662 and a long commentary by Louis de la Forge. + +== Summary == + +=== Treatise of Man === +The opening of the treatise shows its unfinished state : it announces the description of the body, then that of the soul and finally of the articulation between the two; only the first presents itself to the reader's eyes. It adopts a fictional form, describing a being similar to man regardless of any consideration of his formation and the addition of a rational soul, therefore like a machine. +The first part deals with the main functions of this bodily machine : digestion, nutrition, respiration, blood circulation and the formation of animal spirits. Descartes claims that meats are digested by liquors and that part of it is converted into blood in the liver. The blood, which circulates perpetually, pushed out of the arteries by the heart, nourishes the various parts of the body. The more subtle parts of the blood go to the brain while the others descend through the vessels intended for generation. Cerebral blood produces in the pineal gland, a “very bright and very pure flame” called animal spirits. +The second part explains the movement. Descartes then uses the metaphor of a fountain. Animal spirits, like water, flow through nerves, like pipes, activating muscles and tendons, compared to various springs and devices. Channels allow the spirits to move from one muscle to the opposite muscle, and to strain or relax them through the valves. Breathing, ingestion and excretion thus correspond to the alternating action of opposing muscles. +The third part is devoted to the external senses of touch, sight, smell, taste and hearing. The pain comes from a tugging of severing nerves and the feeling of harshness from irregularity in their strain. The arousal of the nerves in the tongue gives rise to the taste, which in turn indicates whether a food is suitable for the body. Smell depends on nerve threads that run from the base of the brain to the nose while the auditory nerves are moved by the air leading into the ears. Descartes provides further developments on sight, describing in a review the structure of the eye, the function of three ocular humors, as well as the mechanism of vision. +The fourth focuses on the inner senses of hunger, thirst, joy and sadness, as well as the role of the organs in the formation of animal spirits. Appetite arises from the action of liquor on an empty stomach, just as the air or smoke that replaces the lack of liquor in the throat induces the idea of thirst. Comparing the functions of this bodily machine to an organ, Descartes asserts that they depend "on the spirits that come from the heart, the pores of the brain through which it passes and the way these spirits are distributed in the pores." The natural inclinations are explained by the diversity of minds, itself correlated with food, air and organs. +The fifth deals with the structure of the brain and the formation of different faculties. The brain is a tissue made up of concavities and threads forming a tight mesh, converging towards the gland. Sneezing and dizziness are respectively considered congestion of animal spirits towards the nasal parts or the inner surface. Common sense ideas arise from the actual presence of objects and their impression on animal spirits as they emerge from the H gland, while others are from the imagination. Memory results from more or less lasting and repeated traces left by these impressions. The convergence of minds by this gland explains both the origin of movement and the formation of an idea, which itself can result from the combination of several of them. Descartes develops the influence of the eyes on the action of the gland and the composition of the movement. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise_on_Man-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise_on_Man-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..8c2a86325 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise_on_Man-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@ +--- +title: "Treatise on Man" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treatise_on_Man" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:45.250497+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +=== The Description of the Human Body === +The Description of the Human Body is also an unfinished treatise. It was written in 1647. Descartes felt knowing oneself was particularly useful. This for him included medical knowledge. He hoped to cure and prevent disease, even to slow down aging. +René Descartes believed the soul caused conscious thought. The body caused automatic functions like the beating of the heart and digestion he felt. The body was necessary for voluntary movement as well as the will. However, he believed the power to move the body was wrongly imagined to come from the soul. A sick or injured body does not do what we want or moves in ways we do not want. He believed the death of the body stopped it from being fit to bring about movement. This did not necessarily happen because the soul left the body. +René Descartes believed the body could exist through mechanical means alone. This included digestion, blood circulation, muscle movement and some brain function. He felt we all know what the human body is like because animals have similar bodies and we have all seen them opened up. +He saw the body as a machine. He believed the heat of the heart somehow caused all movement of the body. Blood vessels he realized were pipes, he saw that veins carried digested food to the heart. (This was brought further by William Harvey. Harvey developed the idea of the circulation of the blood.) Descartes felt that an energetic part of blood went to the brain and there gave the brain a special type of air imbued with vital force that enabled the brain to experience, think and imagine. This special air then went through the nerves to the muscles enabling them to move. + +== References == + +== Bibliography == +Descartes, René (2018). L'Homme (in French). presentation, notes, chronology and bibliography by Delphine Antoine-Mahu. Paris: Flammation. p. 545. ISBN 978-2-08-120643-4. +Antoine-Mahut, Delphine; Gaukroger, Stephen (2016). Descartes' Treatise on Man and its Reception. Dordrecht: Springer. ISBN 978-3-319-46987-4. + +== External links == +René Descartes: The Description of the Human Body: summary preface in translation. +Descartes, René (1596–1650) \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Terror-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Terror-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..78d56dfa8 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Terror-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +--- +title: "Twelve Days of Terror" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twelve_Days_of_Terror" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:46.411437+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Twelve Days of Terror: A Definitive Investigation of the 1916 New Jersey Shark Attacks is a non-fiction book by Richard G. Fernicola about the Jersey Shore shark attacks of 1916. The book was published in 2001 by Lyons Press. + + +== Overview == + +Fernicola offers an in-depth investigation of the shark attacks of 1916 plus modern-day attacks. He interviewed people connected with the victims of the attacks and examines the arguments and conclusions of contemporary and modern scientists to determine the species of the shark involved in the attacks. + + +== Film == +The book was made into an episode of the History Channel's documentary series In Search of... titled Shark Attack 1916 (2001) and the Discovery Channel's docudrama 12 Days of Terror in 2004. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_the_Sea_Wind-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_the_Sea_Wind-0.md index 5685c335c..c2085b09b 100644 --- a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_the_Sea_Wind-0.md +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_the_Sea_Wind-0.md @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ chunk: 1/1 source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Under_the_Sea_Wind" category: "reference" tags: "science, encyclopedia" -date_saved: "2026-05-05T06:20:06.669489+00:00" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:47.663814+00:00" instance: "kb-cron" --- diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Dioscurides-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Dioscurides-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..9e3bd46bb --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Dioscurides-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +--- +title: "Vienna Dioscurides" +chunk: 1/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Dioscurides" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:51.191481+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The Vienna Dioscurides or Vienna Dioscorides is an early 6th-century Byzantine Greek illuminated manuscript of an even earlier 1st century AD work, De materia medica (Ancient Greek: Περὶ ὕλης ἰατρικῆς, romanized: Perì hylēs iatrikēs) by Pedanius Dioscorides in uncial script. It is an important and rare example of a late antique scientific text. After residing in Constantinople for just over a thousand years, the text passed to the Holy Roman Emperor in Vienna in the 16th century, a century after the city fell to the Ottoman Empire. +The 491 vellum folios measure 37 cm (15 in) by 30 cm (12 in) and contain more than 400 pictures of animals and plants, most done in a naturalistic style. In addition to the text by Dioscorides, the manuscript has appended to it, the Carmen de herbis attributed to Rufus, a paraphrase of an ornithological treatise by a certain Dionysius, usually identified with Dionysius of Philadelphia, and a paraphrase of Nicander's treatise on the treatment of snake bites. + +== History == +The manuscript was created in about 515 AD in the Byzantine (Eastern Roman) Empire's capital, Constantinople, for a resident Byzantine imperial princess, Anicia Juliana, the daughter of Anicius Olybrius (one of the last of the Western Roman Emperors). The manuscript is accordingly now called the Juliana Anicia Codex by scholars. Although it was created as a luxury copy, in later centuries it was used daily as a textbook in the imperial hospital of Constantinople, and a medieval note records that a Greek nurse there, named Nathanael, had it rebound in 1406. +Throughout the Byzantine period the manuscript was used as the original for copies of the work that were given to foreign leaders, including the Arabic edition of Abd al-Rahman III of Spain for the creation of which the Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII sent a Greek copy and a translator. A note recording the name of one Michael of the Varangian Guard is also found in the text. +The manuscript was restored and a table of contents and extensive scholia added in Byzantine Greek minuscule, by the patriarchal notary John Chortasmenos in 1406. In the mid-15th century, it was used to create the Pope Alexander VII Dioscorides, now in the Vatican Library, by the monks of St. John the Baptist Greek orthodox monastery in Constantinople. After the fall of Constantinople in 1453 a subsequent owner handwrote each plant's name in Arabic and Hebrew. The manuscript, still in Istanbul a century after the fall of the city, was purchased from Moses Hamon, the Arabic-speaking, Jewish physician to sultan Suleiman the Magnificent, by the Flemish diplomat Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq, who was in the employ of Emperor Ferdinand I of the Austrian Habsburgs. The manuscript is now held among the manuscripts of the Austrian National Library (German: Österreichische Nationalbibliothek) in Vienna, where it is identified as the Codex Vindobonensis med. gr. 1. The manuscript was inscribed on UNESCO's Memory of the World international register in 1997 in recognition of its historical significance. + +== Illustrations == +The manuscript has 383 extant full-page illustrations of plants out of the original 435 illustrations. The illustrations fall into two groups. There are those that faithfully follow earlier classical models and present a quite naturalistic illustration of each plant. There are also other illustrations that are more abstract. The majority of the illustrations were painted in a naturalistic style so as to aid a pharmacologist in the recognition of each plant. However, it is believed that these illustrations were made as copies of an earlier herbal and were not drawn from nature. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Dioscurides-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Dioscurides-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7354e7cab --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Dioscurides-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ +--- +title: "Vienna Dioscurides" +chunk: 2/2 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Dioscurides" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:51.191481+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +In addition to the illustrations of the text, the manuscript contains several frontispieces in the form of a series of full-page miniatures. Of special note is the dedication miniature portrait of Anicia Juliana on folio 6 verso. The manuscript was presented to Anicia out of gratitude for her funding the construction of a church in the suburbs of Constantinople. This portrait is the oldest extant dedication portrait. The portrait has Anicia seated in a ceremonial pose distributing alms. She is flanked by personifications of Megalopsychia (magnanimity) and Phronesis (prudence). At her feet, another personification, labeled "Gratitude of the Arts", kneels. A putto holds a dedication copy up to Anicia. Anicia and her attendants are enclosed within an eight-point star within a circle all formed of intertwined rope. Within the outer spandrels of the star are putti, done in grisaille, working as masons and carpenters. This miniature is an altogether original creation and, with the inclusion of the personifications and the putti, shows the endurance of the classical tradition in Constantinople, despite the fact that Anicia herself was a pious Christian.The series of frontispieces in the manuscript begins with two full-page miniatures, each having a group of seven noted pharmacologists. In the second picture (folio 3 verso, see here), the most prominent and only one sitting on a chair is Galen. He is flanked by three pairs of other physicians, seated on stones or the ground. Closest to Galen are Crateuas and Dioscurides. The second pair are Apollonius Mys and Nicander. Farthest from Galen are Andreas and Rufus of Ephesus. Each of the figures is a self-contained portrait and was probably modeled on authors' portraits from the various authors' treatises. The seven figures are contained within an elaborate decorated frame. The background is solid gold, which places the figures in an abstract space. This is the earliest known manuscript to use a solid gold background. +Following the two miniatures of seven pharmacologists, there are two author portraits. In the second portrait (see here), Dioscurides sits writing in a codex on his lap. He is shown in profile, which corresponds to the portrait in the previous miniature. It is possible that there was a tradition based on Dioscurides' life portrait that the images are based on. In front of Dioscurides is an artist, seated at a lower level, painting an illustration of the mandrake root. He is painting from nature. The mandrake root he is looking at is held by the personification of Epinoia (the power of thought). There is architectural background consisting of a colonnade with a central niche. +The paraphrase of the treatise on birds by Dionysius is in three books. The first two books have illustrations of the birds inserted into the text columns without frame or background (for example, see here). The third book has 24 birds arranged in a grid on a full-page miniature (see illustration above). The birds portrayed throughout the treatise are of high artistic merit and are faithful to nature in form and color. Most of the birds are easily identifiable. Some of the birds contained in the full-page miniature in the third book are not described in the text of the paraphrase. It is probable that these illustrations are based on the illustrations from an older, different treatise, possibly that of Alexander of Myndus. This manuscript, however, is the oldest surviving illustrated treatise on birds. + +== Gallery == + +== References == + +=== Notes === + +=== Sources === +Walther, Ingo F. and Norbert Wolf. Codices Illustres: The world's most famous illuminated manuscripts, 400 to 1600. Köln, TASCHEN, 2005. +Weitzmann, Kurt. Late Antique and Early Christian Book Illumination. New York: George Braziller, 1977. + +== Further reading == +Leslie Brubaker, "The Vienna Dioskurides and Anicia Juliana" in Byzantine Garden Culture ed. Antony Robert Littlewood, Henry Maguire, and Joachim Wolschke-Bulmahn (Washington, D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection, 2002). +Weitzmann, Kurt, ed., Age of spirituality: late antique and early Christian art, third to seventh century, no. 179, 1979, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, ISBN 9780870991790; full text available online from The Metropolitan Museum of Art Libraries +Lazaris, Stavros, "L'illustration des disciplines médicales dans l'Antiquité : hypothèses, enjeux, nouvelles interprétations", in: La Collezione di testi chirurgici di Niceta (Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 74.7). Tradizione medica classica a Bisanzio, M. Bernabò (ed.), Roma, 2010, pp. 99–109 +Lazaris, Stavros, "L'image paradigmatique : des Schémas anatomiques d'Aristote au De materia medica de Dioscoride", Pallas, 93 (2013), pp. 131–164 \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..766685b91 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +--- +title: "What Is Life?" +chunk: 1/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life?" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:53.548785+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +What Is Life? The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell is a 1944 science book written for the lay reader by the physicist Erwin Schrödinger. The book was based on a course of public lectures delivered by Schrödinger in February 1943, under the auspices of the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, where he was Director of Theoretical Physics, at Trinity College, Dublin. The lectures attracted an audience of about 400, who were warned "that the subject-matter was a difficult one and that the lectures could not be termed popular, even though the physicist’s most dreaded weapon, mathematical deduction, would hardly be utilized." Schrödinger's lecture focused on one important question: "how can the events in space and time which take place within the spatial boundary of a living organism be accounted for by physics and chemistry?" +In the book, Schrödinger introduced the idea of an "aperiodic solid" that contained genetic information in its configuration of covalent chemical bonds. In the 1940s, this idea stimulated enthusiasm for discovering the chemical basis of genetic inheritance. Although the existence of some form of hereditary information had been hypothesized since 1869, its role in reproduction and its helical shape were still unknown at the time of Schrödinger's lecture. In 1953, James D. Watson and Francis Crick jointly proposed the double helix structure of deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) on the basis of, amongst other theoretical insights, X-ray diffraction experiments conducted by Rosalind Franklin. They both credited Schrödinger's book with presenting an early theoretical description of how the storage of genetic information would work, and each independently acknowledged the book as a source of inspiration for their initial researches. + +== The "What is life?" Lecture Series == +The book, published in 1944, is based on lectures delivered under the auspices of the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies at Trinity College, Dublin in February 1943, attended by Éamon de Valera and his cabinet. At that time, although DNA was known to be a constituent of cell nuclei, it had not yet been identified with certainty as the molecular basis of inheritance, and the concept of a "heredity molecule" was strictly theoretical, with various candidates. One of the most successful branches of physics at this time was statistical physics. Schrödinger himself is one of the founding fathers of quantum mechanics, a theory which posits a statistical focus for understanding the natural world at subatomic scale. +The “What is Life?” series of three public lectures was delivered by Schrödinger in Trinity College Dublin in February 1943 under the auspices of the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies (DIAS). In 1940, the Irish Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Éamon de Valera had invited Schrödinger to become the first Director of the School of Theoretical Physics at DIAS. Schrödinger, an Austrian physicist who had shared the Nobel Prize in Physics in 1933 for his development of wave-mechanics, had left Nazi-Germany and, after sojourns at Oxford, Graz and Ghent, settled in Dublin for what became a sixteen-year tenure, the longest of his life. One of DIAS's statuary requirements was to organise an annual lecture series for a general audience. Schrödinger devised the 1943 series himself and delivered it at Trinity College Dublin (TCD). + +Schrödinger presented the three lectures on consecutive Fridays (5th, 12th and 19th) in February 1943 at Trinity under the collective title “What is Life?”. The lectures were held in the Physics Lecture Theatre in the Fitzgerald building in TCD. According to Schrödinger himself, as recorded in this book “What is life?”, the audience numbered about 400 for each lecture. As the Physics Lecture Theatre held only about 150, each lecture is thought to have been repeated on each of the following Mondays. The lectures were widely publicised in The Irish Times, and even received coverage in Time magazine in the U.S. Indeed, on February 6th 1943 The Irish Times, published a photograph of Schrödinger with Dr Ernest Alton, Provost of Trinity and Taoiseach (Prime Minister) Eamon de Valera, standing outside the Physics Building in Trinity before the lecture. +Schrödinger’s stated objective was to address the question: “How can the events in space and time which take place within the spatial boundary of a living organism be accounted for by physics and chemistry?” The subject matter was acknowledged in advance as difficult and not a popular science lecture in the usual sense. In his lectures, and later in the 1944 book based on them, Schrödinger explored how physical concepts might underlie the stability of hereditary structures, mutation, and the organisation of living cells. He introduced the concept of the “aperiodic crystal” to describe the proposed hereditary material. He also argued that living systems are consistent with the laws of thermodynamics and compensate for the reduction in entropy associated with their growth by feeding on “negative entropy” from their environment. While the molecular mechanism of heredity in the form of DNA had not yet been discovered at the time, in 1935, Nikolay Timofeev-Ressovsky, Karl Zimmer, and Max Delbrück had presented the first experimental evidence of a molecular basis of genes at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Chemstry in Berlin. Schrödinger knew Delbrück from his time in Berlin and was deeply intrigued by his work. His speculations in Dublin brought attention to the experimental work and helped stimulate further inquiry. +The book which evolved from his lectures has been widely credited with influencing the young molecular biologists James D. Watson and Francis Crick, both of whom acknowledged his work as formative in their discovery of the DNA double-helix in 1953. The Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies holds a 1953 letter from Crick to Schrödinger noting that Watson and Crick had been influenced by What Is Life?. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life-1.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life-1.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..98c39528e --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life-1.md @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +--- +title: "What Is Life?" +chunk: 2/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life?" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:53.548785+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +The lectures may be regarded as “the most important and exciting thing to happen in Trinity in all of the six dark years of wartime.” Time magazine reported that “Only in the precarious peace of Eire could Europe today provide such a spectacle. At Dublin’s Trinity College last month crowds were turned away from a jampacked scientific lecture. Cabinet ministers, diplomats, scholars and socialites loudly applauded a slight, Vienna-born professor of physics. Erwin Schrödinger was speaking on the subject ‘What Is Life?’.” +Trinity College now commemorates the lectures in various ways: an annual “What is Life?” Lecture (inaugurated in 1995) and usually delivered in the Physics Lecture Theatre honours the 1943 series; in 2018 the 75th-anniversary conference “Schrödinger at 75: The Future of Biology” was organised. The Trinity Library also produced an exhibition celebrating Schrödinger’s Dublin years and the impact of the lectures. + +== Background == +Max Delbrück's thinking about the physical basis of life was an important influence on Schrödinger. However, long before the publication of What is Life?, the American geneticist Hermann J. Muller, who would later win a Nobel Prize in 1946, had in his 1922 article "Variation due to Change in the Individual Gene" already laid out all the basic properties of the "heredity molecule" (not yet known to be DNA) which Schrödinger re-derived in 1944 "from first principles" in What is Life? (including the "aperiodicity" of the molecule), properties which Muller specified and refined additionally in his 1929 article "The Gene As The Basis of Life" and during the 1930s. Muller himself wrote in a 1960 letter to a journalist regarding What Is Life? that whatever the book got right about the "hereditary molecule" had already been published before 1944 and that Schrödinger's were only the wrong speculations; Muller also named two famous geneticists, including Delbrück, who knew every relevant pre-1944 publication and had been in contact with Schrödinger before 1944. DNA as the molecule of heredity became foremost only after Oswald Avery's bacterial-transformation experiments published in 1944; before those experiments, proteins were considered the most likely candidates. DNA was confirmed as the molecule in question by the +Hershey–Chase experiment conducted in 1952. + +== Content of What is Life? book == +In Chapter I, Schrödinger explains that most physical laws on a large scale are due to chaos on a small scale. He calls this principle "order-from-disorder". As an example he mentions diffusion, which can be modeled as a highly ordered process, but which is nevertheless caused by random movement of atoms or molecules. As the number of atoms is reduced, the behaviour of a system becomes increasingly random. He states that life greatly depends on order and that a naïve physicist may assume that the master code of a living organism has to consist of a large number of atoms. +In Chapter II and III, he summarizes what was known at the time about the hereditary mechanism. Most importantly, he elaborates on the role mutations play in biological evolution. He concludes that the carrier of hereditary information has to be both small in size and permanent in time, contradicting the naïve physicist's expectation. This contradiction cannot be resolved by classical physics. +In Chapter IV, Schrödinger presents molecules, which are indeed stable even if they consist of only a few atoms, as the solution. Even though molecules had long been known to exist, their stability could not be explained by classical physics due to the discrete nature of quantum mechanics. Furthermore, mutations are directly linked to quantum leaps. +He continues to explain, in chapter V, that true solids, which are also permanent, are composed of highly ordered crystals. The stability of molecules and crystals is due to the same principles, and a molecule might be called "the germ of a solid". On the other hand, an amorphous solid, without crystalline structure, should be regarded as a liquid with a very high viscosity. Schrödinger writes that the heredity material is likely to be a molecule, which unlike a crystal does not repeat itself. He calls this an "aperiodic crystal". Its aperiodic nature allows it to encode an almost infinite number of possibilities with a small number of atoms. He finally compares this picture with the known facts and finds it in accordance with them. +In Chapter VI, Schrödinger states: + + ...living matter, while not eluding the "laws of physics" as established up to date, is likely to involve "other laws of physics" hitherto unknown, which however, once they have been revealed, will form just as integral a part of science as the former. +He anticipates that this statement will be open to misconception and tries to clarify it. The main principle involved with "order-from-disorder" is the second law of thermodynamics, according to which entropy only increases in a closed system (such as the universe). Schrödinger explains that living matter evades the decay to thermodynamical equilibrium by homeostatically maintaining negative entropy in an open system. +In Chapter VII, he maintains that "order-from-order" is not absolutely new to physics; in fact, it is even simpler and more plausible. But nature follows "order-from-disorder", with such exceptions as the predictable movement of the celestial bodies and the behaviour of mechanical devices such as clocks. Even those are influenced by thermal and frictional forces. The degree to which a system functions mechanically or randomly depends on the temperature. If sufficiently heated, a clock melts into a puddle of randomly moving molecules. Conversely, if the temperature approaches absolute zero, any system behaves more and more mechanically. Some systems, such as clocks, approach this mechanical behaviour even at room temperature. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life-2.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life-2.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..b5eb03be5 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life-2.md @@ -0,0 +1,36 @@ +--- +title: "What Is Life?" +chunk: 3/3 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Is_Life?" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:53.548785+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Schrödinger concludes this chapter and the book with philosophical speculations on determinism, free will, and the mystery of human consciousness. He attempts to "see whether we cannot draw the correct non-contradictory conclusion from the following two premises: (1) My body functions as a pure mechanism according to Laws of Nature; and (2) Yet I know, by incontrovertible direct experience, that I am directing its motions, of which I foresee the effects, that may be fateful and all-important, in which case I feel and take full responsibility for them. The only possible inference from these two facts is, I think, that I – I in the widest meaning of the word, that is to say, every conscious mind that has ever said or felt 'I' – am the person, if any, who controls the 'motion of the atoms' according to the Laws of Nature". Schrödinger then states that this insight is not new and that the Upanishads considered this insight of "ATMAN = BRAHMAN" to "represent quintessence of deepest insights into the happenings of the world." Schrödinger rejects the idea that the source of consciousness should perish with the body because he finds the idea "distasteful". He also rejects the idea that there are multiple immortal souls that can exist without the body because he believes that consciousness is nevertheless highly dependent on the body. Schrödinger writes that, to reconcile the two premises,"The only possible alternative is simply to keep to the immediate experience that consciousness is a singular of which the plural is unknown; that there is only one thing and that what seems to be a plurality is merely a series of different aspects of this one thing…: +Any intuitions that consciousness is plural, he says, are illusions. Schrödinger is sympathetic to the Hindu concept of Brahman, by which each individual's consciousness is only a manifestation of a unitary consciousness pervading the universe — which corresponds to the Hindu concept of God. Schrödinger concludes that "...'I' am the person, if any, who controls the 'motion of the atoms' according to the Laws of Nature." However, he also qualifies the conclusion as "necessarily subjective" in its "philosophical implications". In the final paragraph, he points out that what is meant by "I" is not the collection of experienced events but "namely the canvas upon which they are collected." If a hypnotist succeeds in blotting out all earlier reminiscences, he writes, there would be no loss of personal existence — "Nor will there ever be." + +== Schrödinger's "paradox" == + +In a world governed by the second law of thermodynamics, all isolated systems are expected to approach a state of maximum disorder or entropy: an irreversible state of thermodynamic equilibrium, where free energy is no longer available to do work. It has been argued that, since life approaches and maintains a highly ordered state, it violates the aforementioned second law, implying that there is a paradox. However, since the biosphere is not an isolated system, there is no paradox. The increase of order inside an organism is more than paid for by an increase in disorder outside this organism by the loss of heat into the environment. By this mechanism, the second law is obeyed, and life maintains a highly ordered state, which it sustains by causing a net increase in disorder in the Universe. In order to increase the complexity on Earth—as life does—free energy is needed, and in this case is provided by the Sun. + +== Legacy == +Schrödinger’s What is Life? (based on his 1943 Dublin lectures) helped ignite molecular biology by framing heredity as a physical problem and popularizing the idea of an “aperiodic crystal,” effectively anticipating a genetic code. It drew physicists into biology; Sarkar notes its influence on founders such as Watson, Crick, Benzer, and Wilkins, even if some said they’d have come into the field anyway. Yet posterity criticized Schrödinger’s dated biology and his speculation about “new laws” and “negative entropy.” Sarkar argues those criticisms are often unfair for their time, and that the book’s lasting legacy is conceptual inspiration more than technical accuracy. Crick’s later letter to Schrödinger—now held by D.I.A.S.—captures this dual legacy: gratitude for inspiration and confirmation that “aperiodic crystal” proved apt. + +== Editions == +Erwin Schrödinger (1944), What Is Life? and Other Scientific Essays. Based on lectures delivered under the auspices of the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies at Trinity College, Dublin, in February 1943. Doubleday (1956) and Internet Archive. + +== See also == +Entropy and life +Gibbs free energy +James D. Watson +Philosophy of biology +Quantum Aspects of Life + +== References == + +== External links == +Österr. Zentralbibliothek für Physik Scan of the title and first part of the contents +(in Italian) Critical interdisciplinary review of Schrödinger's "What Is life?" +Schrödinger's influence on biology \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Mad_Pursuit-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Mad_Pursuit-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..51f2e87d4 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Mad_Pursuit-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,21 @@ +--- +title: "What Mad Pursuit" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Mad_Pursuit" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:54.697243+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +What Mad Pursuit: A Personal View of Scientific Discovery is a book published in 1988 and written by Francis Crick, the English co-discoverer in 1953 of the structure of DNA. In the book, Crick gives important insights into his work on the DNA structure, along with the central dogma of molecular biology and the genetic code, and his later work on neuroscience. + + +== Description == +The main purpose of Crick's book is to describe some of his experiences before and during the "classical period" of molecular biology from the 1953 discovery of the DNA double helix to the 1966 elucidation of the genetic code. There is a prologue outlining Crick's upbringing, education, and war work on magnetic and acoustic mines, and following World War II his decision on what branch of science to study, using the "gossip test". (Your interests are revealed by your gossip.) There is also an epilogue that outlines Crick's work after 1966, his move to the Salk Institute with his career transition to neuroscience concentrating on visual consciousness in primates, and some of his conclusions regarding research in theoretical biology, especially with regard to the brain sciences. +Crick comments on various aspects of the DNA double helix discovery and gives a qualified endorsement to the 1987 television movie Life Story with Jeff Goldblum as Jim Watson and Tim Pigott-Smith as Francis Crick. There is a clear presentation of the basic ideas of molecular biology with appendices "A Brief Outline of Classical Molecular Biology" and "The Genetic Code." Crick gives some anecdotes and explains some important ideas and insights without too much technical jargon. +According to the Nobel prize-winning physicist Philip W. Anderson, the basic goal of experimental science is "learning the truth about the world around us. Crick's words are as good a guide to that end as I have seen." +"This is a book to be read more than once; the beauty of its style masks much hard science and subtle thought. In spite of having heard it many times from others, the story of DNA as told by Crick still makes a marvelous read. A sense of clarity of thought combined with an equally strong sense of commitment and overlaid with the deep power of his thinking runs through the book. One sees that Crick possesses that all-important but dismayingly elusive knack of distinguishing what is significant from what is not. His confidence in the power of structural chemistry to unravel the functioning of biological molecule is unflagging. At the same time, warning signals sound constantly to keep possible evolutionary arbitrariness in mind". + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_Do_Camels_Belong-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_Do_Camels_Belong-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3165be887 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_Do_Camels_Belong-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +--- +title: "Where Do Camels Belong?" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Where_Do_Camels_Belong?" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:55.886547+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Where Do Camels Belong? is a book by biologist Ken Thompson. +The book examines the science and history of invasive species. The book describes itself as "an examination of the whole question of native and alien species, and what might be called an alien invasions industry—and its implications". +The title of the book is in reference to a question posed on its first page, questioning the reader as to "where camels belong?" as a native species; while pointing out that whilst most associated with the Middle East, camels actually first evolved in North America, are most diverse in South America, and have their only truly wild extant population in Australia. + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Is_Sex_Fun-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Is_Sex_Fun-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..3ae81b6f5 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Is_Sex_Fun-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,66 @@ +--- +title: "Why Is Sex Fun?" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Is_Sex_Fun?" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:57.090689+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Why Is Sex Fun? The Evolution of Human Sexuality is a 1997 book about the evolution of human sexuality by the biologist Jared Diamond. + + +== Introduction == +Why is sex fun? This question has intrigued scientists for years. Sexual pleasure isn't just about biology—it's also a big part of human relationships and culture. While sex originally evolved for reproduction, in humans it serves other purposes like bonding, emotional connection, and even stress relief. In this article, we'll look at biological, psychological, and cultural reasons why sex is enjoyable, using ideas from Jared Diamond's book Why Is Sex Fun? The Evolution of Human Sexuality. + + +== Concealed Ovulation and Recreational Sex == +One unique feature of human sexuality is concealed ovulation. Unlike many animals, women do not show obvious signs of fertility. This means sex can happen anytime during the menstrual cycle, not just when a woman is fertile. Diamond offers two main theories for why this evolved: + +Many-Fathers Theory: Women had sex with multiple men to confuse paternity, which reduced the risk of infanticide. +Daddy-at-Home Theory: Frequent sex encouraged men to stick around, provide resources, and protect their children. +These ideas help explain why sex became recreational and pleasurable instead of only for reproduction. + + +== Pair Bonding and Long-Term Relationships == +Humans often form long-term partnerships, like marriage, which is rare among mammals. These bonds help with raising kids and cooperating in social groups. Sexual pleasure strengthens these relationships, making them more stable. Diamond points out that this is very different from most mammals, where males usually don't help care for offspring. + + +== Private Sexual Behavior == +Humans also tend to have sex in private, unlike most animals. Diamond suggests this evolved because of social norms and the need to keep peace in groups. Privacy reduces jealousy and conflict, making sex less disruptive to social life. + + +== Menopause and Its Role == +Menopause seems strange from an evolutionary perspective—why stop reproducing while still healthy? Diamond argues it's a trade-off: older women focus on caring for children and grandchildren instead of risking late pregnancies. This helps families survive and pass on knowledge. + + +== Secondary Sexual Characteristics == +Human bodies show traits that signal health and fertility, like breasts, hips, and muscles. Diamond explains theories behind these traits: + +Runaway Selection: Preferences make traits more exaggerated over time. +Handicap Principle: Costly traits show genetic quality. +Truth-in-Advertising: Traits honestly signal health and fertility. +For example, fat in breasts and hips may signal ability to nurse and a wider birth canal, while muscles suggest strength and resourcefulness. + + +== Summary == +Diamond addresses aspects of human sexuality such as why women's ovulation is not overtly advertised; why humans have sex in private rather than in public like other mammals; and why the ovaries are U-shaped. + + +== Publication history == +Why Is Sex Fun? was published in 1997 by Basic Books, as part of the Science Masters series. + + +== Reception == +Why Is Sex Fun? received a positive review from the biologist Steve Jones in The New York Review of Books. Jones described the book as engaging and interesting. However, he questioned Diamond's treatment of concealed ovulation, finding it inconclusive. +The anthropologist Peter B. Gray and the evolutionary biologist Justin R. Garcia maintained that Why Is Sex Fun? was one of the best-read books on human sexuality. However, they considered it "informative but too thin in substance". + + +== References == + + +=== Bibliography === +Books + +Journals \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Zebras_Don't_Get_Ulcers-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Zebras_Don't_Get_Ulcers-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6bc968bf7 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Zebras_Don't_Get_Ulcers-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@ +--- +title: "Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Zebras_Don't_Get_Ulcers" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:58.244182+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers is a 1994 (2nd ed. 1998, 3rd ed. 2004) book by Stanford University biologist Robert M. Sapolsky. The book includes the subtitle "A Guide to Stress, Stress-related Diseases, and Coping" on the front cover of its third edition. + + +== Background and synopsis == +The title derives from Sapolsky's premise that for animals such as zebras, stress is generally episodic (e.g., running away from a lion), while for humans, stress is often chronic (e.g., worrying about losing one's job). Therefore, many wild animals are less susceptible than humans to chronic stress-related disorders such as ulcers, hypertension, decreased neurogenesis and increased hippocampal neuronal atrophy. However, chronic stress occurs in some social primates (Sapolsky studies baboons) for individuals on the lower side of the social dominance hierarchy. +Sapolsky focuses on the effects of glucocorticoids on the human body, arguing that such hormones may be useful to animals in the wild escaping their predators, (see fight-or-flight response) but the effects on humans, when secreted at high quantities or over long periods of time, are much less desirable. Sapolsky relates the history of endocrinology, how the field reacted at times of discovery, and how it has changed through the years. While most of the book focuses on the biological machinery of the body, the last chapter of the book focuses on self-help. +Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers argues that social phenomena such as child abuse and the chronic stress of poverty affect biological stress, leading to increased risk of disease and disability. + + +== Reception == +The book received mostly positive reviews. Kirkus Reviews called it an "entertaining explanation of how stress affects the body and what we can do to counteract its effects." Barry Keverne wrote in a review for New Scientist: "Everyone can benefit from reading Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers and gain insights into the workings of the body and mind, and why some of us are more vulnerable than others to stress-related illness." + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Stress: Portrait of a Killer Archived 2016-03-17 at the Wayback Machine, National Geographic documentary based on Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers +"Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers: Stress and Health", lecture by Robert Sapolsky +"Why Zebras Don't Get Ulcers", NPR segment from December 3, 1999 from Fresh Air \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wider_than_the_Sky-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wider_than_the_Sky-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..07584c410 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wider_than_the_Sky-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +--- +title: "Wider than the Sky" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wider_than_the_Sky" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:31:59.407766+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Wider than the Sky: The Phenomenal Gift of Consciousness is an English-language book on neuroscience by the neuroscientist Gerald M. Edelman. Yale University Press published the book in 2004. The book includes a glossary, a bibliographic note, and an index. The title alludes to an English-language poem written by Emily Dickinson in about 1862. In that poem, Dickinson describes the brain as "wider than the sky", "deeper than the sea", and "just the weight of God". +In the preface, Edelman describes, as follows, the purpose of the book: + +A scientific analysis of consciousness must answer the question: How can the firings of neurons give rise to subjective sensations, thoughts, and emotions? To some, the two domains are so disparate as to be irreconcilable. A scientific explanation must provide a causal account of the connection between these domains so that properties in one domain may be understood in terms of events in the other. This is the task I have set myself in this small book. +The book's content is similar to the 2000 book Edelman co-authored: A Universe of Consciousness: How Matter Becomes Imagination. Both books put forward the theory of neuronal group selection, also known as neural Darwinism. Both books make a distinction between primary consciousness and higher-order consciousness. + + +== Reviews == +Shermer, Michael (March 2004). "The major unsolved problem in biology". Scientific American. 290 (3): 103–105. Bibcode:2004SciAm.290c.103S. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0304-103. +Wilson, David L. (December 2005). "Wider Than the Sky: The Phenomenal Gift of Consciousness". Quarterly Review of Biology. 80 (4): 501. doi:10.1086/501314. +Laureys, Steven (21 April 2005). "Wider Than the Sky: The Phenomenal Gift of Consciousness". New England Journal of Medicine. 352 (16): s1728. doi:10.1056/NEJM200504213521626. +Blackmore, Susan (1 October 2004). "Half a second to stop being wicked". Times Higher Education Supplement (1660): 26. \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderful_Life_(book)-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderful_Life_(book)-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..6281fe866 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderful_Life_(book)-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,43 @@ +--- +title: "Wonderful Life (book)" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderful_Life_(book)" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:24.616556+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +Wonderful Life: The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History is a 1989 book on the evolution of Cambrian fauna by Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould. The volume made The New York Times Best Seller list, was the 1991 winner of the Royal Society's Rhone-Poulenc Prize and the American Historical Association's Forkosch Award, and was a 1991 finalist for the Pulitzer Prize. Pulitzer juror Joyce Carol Oates later revealed the non-fiction jury had unanimously recommended the book for the prize, but the selection was rejected by the Pulitzer board. Gould described his later book Full House (1996) as a companion volume to Wonderful Life. + + +== Summary == + +Gould's thesis in Wonderful Life was that contingency plays a major role in the evolutionary history of life. He based his argument on the extraordinarily well preserved fossils of the Burgess Shale, a rich fossil-bearing deposit in Canada's Rocky Mountains, dating 505 million years ago. Gould argues that during this period just after the Cambrian explosion there was a greater disparity of anatomical body plans (phyla) than exist today. However most of these phyla left no modern descendants. All of the Burgess animals, Gould argues, were exquisitely adapted to their environment, and there exists little evidence that the survivors were any better adapted than their extinct contemporaries. +Gould proposed that given a chance to "rewind the tape of life" and let it play again, we might find ourselves living in a world populated by descendants of Hallucigenia rather than Pikaia (the ancestor of all vertebrates, or at least a close relative thereof). Gould stressed that his argument was not based on randomness but rather contingency, a process by which historical outcomes arise from an unpredictable sequence of antecedent states, where any change in the sequence alters the final result. Because fitness for existing conditions does not guarantee long-term survival – particularly when conditions change catastrophically – the survival of many species depends more on luck than conventional features of anatomical superiority. Gould maintains that, "traits that +enhance survival during an extinction do so in ways that are incidental and unrelated to the causes of their evolution in the first place." Gould earlier coined the term exaptation to describe fortuitously beneficial traits, which are adaptive but arise for reasons other than incremental natural selection. +Gould regarded Opabinia – an odd creature with five eyes and frontal nozzle – as so important to understanding the Cambrian explosion that he wanted to call his book Homage to Opabinia. Gould wrote: + +I believe that Whittington's reconstruction of Opabinia in 1975 will stand as one of the great documents in the history of human knowledge. How many other empirical studies have led directly on to a fundamentally revised view about the history of life? We are awestruck by Tyrannosaurus; we marvel at the feathers of Archaeopteryx; we revel in every scrap of fossil human bone from Africa. But none of these has taught us anywhere near so much about the nature of evolution as a little two-inch Cambrian oddball invertebrate named Opabinia. + + +== Reception == + +Wonderful Life quickly climbed the national bestseller lists within weeks of publication. It stimulated wide discussion regarding the nature of progress and contingency in evolution. +Gould's thesis was that if the history of life were replayed over again, human-level intelligence would prove unlikely to ever arise again. The evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr argued that Gould, "made such contingencies a major theme in Wonderful Life, and I have come to the conclusion that here he may be largely right." In his review, the biologist Richard Dawkins wrote that, "The view that he is attacking – that evolution marches inexorably towards a pinnacle such as man – has not been believed for 50 years." +Biologist John Maynard Smith wrote, "I agree with Gould that evolution is not in general predictable. ... Although I agree with Gould about contingency, I find the problem of progress harder. ... I do think that progress has happened, although I find it hard to define precisely what I mean." Philosopher Michael Ruse wrote that, "Wonderful Life was the best book written by the late Stephen Jay Gould, paleontologist and popular science writer. It is ... a thrilling story that Gould tells in a way that no one else could equal." +Some of the anatomical reconstructions cited by Gould were soon challenged as being incorrect, most notably Simon Conway Morris' 1977 reconstruction of Hallucigenia. Conway Morris' reconstruction was, "so peculiar, so hard to imagine as an efficiently working beast" Gould speculated that Hallucigenia might be "a complex appendage of a larger creature, still undiscovered." It was later brought to light by paleontologists Lars Ramskold and Hou Xianguang that Conway Morris' reconstruction was inverted upside down, and likely belonged to the modern phylum Onychophora. +The ultimate theme of the book is still being debated among evolutionary biologists today. + + +== See also == +March of Progress (illustration) + + +== References == + + +== External links == +Wonderful Life Archived 2021-02-24 at the Wayback Machine - by Stephen Jay Gould +The Cambrian "Explosion": Slow-fuse or Megatonnage? - by Simon Conway Morris +The disparity of the Burgess Shale arthropod fauna and the limits of cladistic analysis - by Stephen Jay Gould \ No newline at end of file diff --git a/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WormBook-0.md b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WormBook-0.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..ef8be8da2 --- /dev/null +++ b/data/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WormBook-0.md @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +--- +title: "WormBook" +chunk: 1/1 +source: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WormBook" +category: "reference" +tags: "science, encyclopedia" +date_saved: "2026-05-05T08:32:00.588160+00:00" +instance: "kb-cron" +--- + +WormBook is an open access, comprehensive collection of original, peer-reviewed chapters covering topics related to the biology of the nematode worm Caenorhabditis elegans (C. elegans). WormBook also includes WormMethods, an up-to-date collection of methods and protocols for C. elegans researchers. +WormBook is the online text companion to WormBase, the C. elegans model organism database. Capitalizing on the World Wide Web, WormBook links in-text references (e.g. genes, alleles, proteins, literature citations) with primary biological databases such as WormBase and PubMed. C. elegans was the first multicellular organism to have its genome sequenced and is a model organism for studying developmental genetics and neurobiology. + + +== Contents == +The content of WormBook is categorized into the sections listed below, each filled with a variety of relevant chapters. These sections include: + +Genetics and genomics +Molecular biology +Biochemistry +Cell Biology +Signal transduction +Developmental biology +Post-embryonic development +Sex-determination systems +The germ line +Neurobiology and behavior +Evolution and ecology +Disease models and drug discovery +WormMethods + + +== References == \ No newline at end of file