background_energy.pdf Background for stories concerning energy 1 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu Background for stories concerning energy From the educational point of view, there appear to be three aspects which are relevant with respect to teaching energy in lower secondary school: Energy as a concept, together with energy conservation, re- newable energy, and energy efficiency. The aim of this historical background is to form a basis for stories that may be used individually or combined, and that enable teachers to address these three aspects. The historian and philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn pointed out that up to twelve researchers can be identified as being involved in the establish- ment of the principle of energy conservation (Kuhn 1959). One of those researchers, James Prescott Joule, can be seen as a central figure to this background. Joule is a central figure as he is the person who established the mechanical equiva- lent of heat – at least this is the standard notion. However, if one takes a closer look, then it gets evident that it was not just Joule who is responsi- ble for establishing his work, but also William Thomson, who later became Lord Kelvin. Yet, Joule himself did not start from scratch and par- ticularly referred to the work of Benjamin Thomp- son, Count Rumford, who carried out researches about heat in late 18 th / early 19 th century. Actually these researchers were more oriented on practical purposes than those of Joule. The first significant aim towards renewable energies can be seen in the work of the French teacher Augustin Mouchot who, in the 1870ies carried out substantial re- search on using solar energy for industrial ma- chinery. Count Rumford and his work on heat Rumford’s work on heat covers a huge variety of researches; he worked significantly on the topic for some 25 years. His first research in this respect resulted from his military context: he examined the quality of powder (Thompson 1781). In doing so, he suspended the cannon as well as a ballistic pendulum, the amplitude of the oscillation after firing the powder served as an indication of its quality. Whilst the initial research in not that important with respect to energy, one detail actually is: Rumford observed that the cannon heated up most when he did not shoot a bullet but just made the gunpowder explode in the barrel. When being in Munich and having the responsibility for the pro- duction of weaponry, Rumford made another ob- servation that he turned into an experiment: In the process of cannon-boring, the metal heated up. Rumford used a blunt drill in order to increase the Fig. 1: Rumford’s experiment on the quality of gun-powder. (Thompson 1781) 2 Background for stories concerning energy Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu heat production. In doing so, he was able to heat up the water (and that was a mass of 26.58 lb) that was initially intended for cooling to the boiling point (Thompson 1798). At the same time, Rumford demonstrated that the heat capacity of the metallic chips that were pro- duced in the process of drilling was not changed in their heat capacity. From his experiments, Rum- ford concluded that heat can be produced from mechanical work in an unlimited amount – as the production of material substances was not in ac- cordance with the accepted understanding, he had also to conclude that heat is not a substance but the motion of the smallest particles of matter. Doing so brought him in conflict with the most recent accepted doctrine with respect to heat: In 1789 the French chemist Antoine Laurent Lavoi- sier published his famous Traité Élémentaire de Chimie … (Lavoisier 1789). In this monograph as well as in a variety of research papers Lavoisier used the term caloric. For Lavoisier, caloric was one of the "simple substances belonging to all the kingdoms of nature, which may be considered as the elements of bodies" (Lavoisier 1790, p. 175). This substance was said to be weightless and thus considered to be one of the imponderables. Other imponderables were the matter of light (in Lavoi- sier’s nomenclature lumic), moreover, there were one or two electric and magnetic fluids. Caloric was taken to be the explanation for the phenomena connected with heat. In some attributes caloric was very similar to the older substance named phlogiston, although there were important differ- ences between Lavoisier's System and the one founded by Becher and Stahl. This played also a role in naming the first instrument that enabled measurements of the amount of heat calorimeter (Roberts 1991, see also Beretta 2005), the ice calorimeter. For the discussion of Rumford’s work with re- spect to energy conservation, the importance of Lavoisier's work lies not in the fact that his system can be seen as the accepted theory – and actually Rumford’s work did not change this impression significantly, on the very contrary: In the first quarter of the 19 th century, heat was a material substance and most researchers identified this substance with Lavoisier’s caloric. The im- Fig. 2 Rumford’s cannon-boring experiment (Thompson 1798). Background for stories concerning energy 3 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu portance for Rumford’s work lies in the postulated indestructibility of the elements. As caloric was one of Lavoisier's elements (even though impon- derable, but it was listed in his system as an ele- ment such as Oxygen or Iron), it was obvious that this substance could neither be destroyed nor cre- ated. Thus the idea of conservation was estab- lished in the theory of heat. Whilst Rumford’s cannon boring experiments can be seen in direct relation to the establishment of the theory of heat, two other of his research projects appear to be relevant in the context of the project too: On the one hand, he analyzed the ra- diant heat. This became a topic in natural philoso- phy at the very beginning of the 19 th century when William Herschel (who is besides this work best known for his discovery of Uranus) came in a series of measurements to the conclusion that the radiation from the sun did not just consist of light, but also contained radiant heat which had its larg- est intensity beyond the red part of the spectrum. 1 These ‘new rays’ became an issue of investiga- tion for several researchers, most namely John Leslie who published in 1804 a monograph deal- ing with this issue. However, Rumford published 1 The background of these experiments was the idea to find out which part of the (visible) spectrum might affect lenses in a telescope in the most significant manner due to heating up the glass. also in 1804 an investigation in which he analyzed the ability of various materials to emit radiant heat. 2 Whilst this inquiry may be seen as funda- mental research, there are also aspects of applica- bility in his investigation: it was relevant with respect to the improvement of the efficiency of stoves, an issue that had been central to Rumford’s work for decades. Rumford developed an instrument that he called thermoscope. This instrument consists of a glass capillary that is U-shaped. At both ends of the capillary, hollow spheres are attached. These spheres are blackened and made from very thin glass. Due to the blackening, the glass spheres absorb radiant heat, as the glass is very thin, the absorbed heat is conducted to the air inside of the sphere. As the capillary is closed, due to the in- crease of temperature, the pressure is increased as 2 See Leslie (1804) and Thompson (1804), for a discussion of these investigations see Olson (1970). Fig. 5: Rumford’s thermoscope, Thompson 1804 Fig. 4: Herschel’s experimental set-up for the dis- covery of radiant heat, Herschel 1800. Fig. 3:Ice calorimeter by Lavoisier and Laplace (Lavoi- sier 1789), https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ commons/3/35/Ice-calorimeter.jpg 4 Background for stories concerning energy Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu well, consequently, the pressure on each side is related to the absorbed radiant heat. In the middle of the horizontal part of the glass capillary, a drop of alcohol is placed. When the pressure in both arms is different, the drop moves towards the side of lower pressure. Consequently, the gas at lower pressure is compressed whilst the gas at higher pressure expands until pressure equal pressures are reached. Between the two spheres, a copper disc is placed, thus the heat emitted from a source that is placed in a geometrical line with the two balls can affect only one of the spheres. The thermoscope is placed on a wooden frame. On both sides, heat sources (metal cans filled with hot water) can be placed and changed in their dis- tance towards the thermoscope. At the beginning of each experiment, both heat sources are placed in the same distance. Due to the absorption of radiant heat and the resulting different pressure, the alcohol drop starts to move. The experimenter increases the distance between the stronger heat source and the thermoscope until the alcohol drop is in its initial equilibrium position. Comparing the distances of the two sources to the thermoscope serves as an indicator of their emission – Rumford took it for granted that the heat emitted from de- creases with the inverse square of the distance. This relation was already demonstrated by the Swiss mathematician Johann Heinrich Lambert for the decrease of light intensity with the distance, a work Rumford was through his own work in the field of photometry familiar with. Lambert’s rela- tion s appeared to be plausible for radiant heat as well – on the one hand due to its similarity with light, on the other as an isotropic radiation de- creases with the inverse square of the distance. Yet, the question of improving the efficiency was not limited to his work on radiant heat and stoves. Another research that can be seen in this context was his analysis of the insulating proper- ties of different materials. This analysis was also carried out whilst Rumford was minister of war in Munich, and was in a broader sense related to a military issue. The aim was to develop the basis for determining the most suitable material for the uniforms of the Bavarian soldiers who ideally would get only one type of uniform that was sup- posed to be suitable for winter as well as summer. Like in the experiment on analyzing radiant heat, Rumford used metal cans as heat sources. These cans were covered with different clothing materi- als, hot water was filled in, and Rumford observed the decrease of the waters temperature. In doing so, he was able to determine the most efficient way to insulate the human body. To summarize, Rumford can in retrospect be identified as a starting point for various develop- ment in the energy science – he carried out exper- iments that were related to the formulation of the principle of energy conservation as well as to a field that nowadays can be labeled ‘energy effi- ciency’, particularly with respect to different ma- terials. The formulation of the principle of energy con- servation Joule started his research in analyzing electri- cal motors. 3 This was directly related to his work in the brewery his father owned. Here, steam en- gines were used, and, after the development of the electrical motor, the potential of this new device seemed to be superior to the one of a steam en- gine. Consequently, Joule’s aim seemed to have been the construction of an economical electro- magnetic engine. This can be derived by the fol- lowing: "I can hardly doubt that electro- magnetism will ultimately be substituted for steam to propel machinery. ... the economy (of an en- gine) will be in direct ratio of the quantity of elec- tricity, and the costs of working the engine may be reduced ad infinitum" (Joule 1884, p. 14). This idea of an ‘economical perpetuum mobile’ is not just found in Joule’s writings, but many scholars of this time held this opinion. 4 Joule finally came 3 On the early history of electrical motors see in particular Schiffer (2008). 4 This is not to be confused with a scientific perpetuum mo- bile as it has been done e.g. by Breger: “Obviously Joule has no principal objection to a perpetuum mobile at this time; Fig. 6: Rumford’s heat radiator, Thompson 1804. Background for stories concerning energy 5 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu to the conclusion (like other scholars) that the zinc that reacts in the galvanic element is more expen- sive than the fuel for a steam engine which is sup- posed to carry out the same work like the electri- cal motor. During the following years, the subject of Joule's research was the production heat either by voltaic electricity, in batteries or in chemical com- bustion; these investigations were quantitative. After completing this research, Joule turned to a new topic: in 1843, on the occasion of the meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Joule presented a paper° which initiated his later prestige. He described the new subject of his investigations in announcing that "having proved that heat is generated by the magneto- electrical machine, and that by means of the in- ductive power of magnetism we can diminish or increase at pleasure the heat due to chemical changes, it became an object of great interest to inquire whether a constant ratio existed between it and the rnechanical power gained or lost" (Joule 1884, p. 149). Joule performed new experiments to demonstrate the existence of a mechanical equivalent of heat and to determine its numerical value. From a first series of experiments he deter- mined the coefficient as 838 ftlb/BTU, in a second series published in the same article he gave 770 ftlb/BTU. Looking at the data Joule published gives some insight into Joule's theoretical background. The equivalents he calculated with the data in his pa- per were (in ftlb/BTU): 896; 1001; 1040; 910; 1026; 587; 742 (mean of five experiments); 860 (mean of two experiments); 770. The two bold data derive from experiments "conducted in pre- cisely the same manner" (Joule 1884, p. 153). It seems to be daring to take these data as a proof for the existence of any equivalent, in other words, Joule had to believe in the existence of a mechani- cal equivalent of heat in order to formulate this result from his data. The data could also be inter- preted as an indication that the amount of heat produced from the same mechanical work may differ significantly, depending on some unknown or at least unclear parameter. However, Joule came to the formulation that there is a mechanical equivalent of heat, and that the deviation of the data are caused by the reading limitations in his experiments: "I admit that there is a considerable difference between some of the results, but not, I think, greater than may be referred with propriety obviously he thinks that an inexhaustible source of power is practicable"(Breger 1982, p.194). to mere errors of experiment" (Joule 1884, p. 156). Although Joule realized the difference between his data, he claimed to have proved the existence of a mechanical equivalent of heat. Therefore, it seems to be plausible that he came not to believe in the existence of the equivalent from his experi- mental data but for other reasons. Towards the end of his research on this topic, Joule himself gave an insight into these reasons declaring that he was "satisfied that the great agents of nature are, by the Creator's fiat, indestructible; and whatever me- chanical force is expended, an exact equivalent of heat is always obtained" (Joule 1884, p. 158). This statement gives an imagination of the theoretical background Joule had in mind when trying to determine the mechanical equivalent of heat. For Joule it was not compatible with his view of na- ture that anything could be destroyed or created. He had embodied the idea of conservation in a way that made it impossible to accept any excep- tions of this principle. But there seemed to be several exceptions as, for example, the generation of heat by the magneto-electrical machine. There- fore, it was necessary for Joule to develop a new idea, the idea of equivalent transformation of what he called great agents of nature. This idea, the equivalent convertibility, is the great conceptual step that was necessary to come from the principle of conservation of heat (as caloric) in Lavoisier's sense to the principle of energy conservation. The paper Joule presented in 1843 was not paid much attention to in the scientific world. In the following years Joule presented several papers in which he described various different experiments he made to determine the value of the mechanical equivalent of heat with higher precision. Two of these papers are noteworthy for completely differ- ent reasons. One was published in the Philosophi- cal Transactions of 1850, it was entitled "On the Mechanical Equivalent of Heat". In this paper Joule described in full detail his experiments with the famous paddle-wheel. This paper did not only include the data Joule got from his experiments and the calculation of the mechanical equivalent, but also a detailed description of the experimental set-up. Additionally, Joule described his experi- ments on the friction of mercury and of cast iron. In a way, the publication of this paper in the pres- tigious Philosophical Transactions can be seen as a strong indicator of the acceptance of Joule’s work by the British scientific community. The other important paper Joule presented at the annual Meeting of the British Society. As his biographer D. Cardwell pointed out: "Joule be- lieved his paper would have passed without notice 6 Background for stories concerning energy Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu had not a young man at the back of the hall risen and asked penetrating questions that created a lively interest in the paper" (Cardwell 1989, p. 83). This young man was William Thomson, later Lord Kelvin. He was one of the first really influ- ential scientists, and he was the first interested in Joule's results. Although he did not agree with Joule's ideas at first, he became convinced and not only supported Joule's theory, but also started a successful collaboration with him. Thomson was skeptic about Joule’s experi- mental claims as he was trained in part in France where he became familiar with the work of Victor Regnault and Sadi Carnot. The latter had demon- strated that the work of a steam engine is depend- ing on the temperature difference, thus the work was not equivalent to a specific amount of heat, but depending on the temperature differences. Only when the concept of energy and energy dis- sipation (and in this respect entropy) had been developed, both Joule’s and Carnot’s findings were no longer in contradiction. In some sense, this contradiction together with the growing ac- ceptance of the energy concept triggered the de- velopment of the energy concept. Only during the collaboration Thomson became convinced that Joule’s results were correct and important, in the following he supported Joule in the scientific community. This aspect is relevant for the acceptance of Joule’s work in the British scientific community: Ignoring his findings may in part be explained by the fact that Joule was a brewery owner in Man- chester. Even though this turned out to be crucial for Joule’s experimental resources (which will be discussed later) it also caused a difficulty: Even though conceptual difficulties played a role, it was also Joule’s status that was meaningful. He was not a trained scientist but more a ‘gentlemen of science’ without a scientific CV or position. Whilst this was the standard during the 18 th and in the early 19 th century, in the middle of the century the situation had changed. Science became more and more professionalized in Britain, and part of this professionalization was the resulting limita- tion of science to professional practitioners. There were of course exceptions, most notably Michael Faraday, however, when Joule started publishing on the mechanical equivalent of heat, his social status was certainly an issue. On the other hand, William Thomson was well trained, a young pro- fessor at the University of Glasgow and, despite his age, already well-established in the scientific community. Thus, it was not just the individual Thomson who supported Joule’s work, but also the scientists with his status. Consequently, the support by Thomson contributed to the acknowl- edgment of Joule’s work. But it is not a question of social status that is interesting in Joule’s work: His experiments are equally remarkable. To give but a brief description on the experiment: Figure 7 is a perspective view of the set-up Joule gave in his paper. aa are wooden pulleys; l foot in diameter and 2 inches thick, with wooden rollers, bb, bb, 2 inches in diameter, and steel axles, cc, cc, one quarter of an inch in diameter. The pulleys were built per- fectly true and equal to one another. The axles were supported by brass friction wheels dddd, dddd, the axles of which worked in holes drilled into brass plates attached to a strong wooden table, which Joule affixed to the wall of his laboratory. The weights e, e, were suspended by string from the rollers bb, bb; and fine twine attached to the pulleys aa connected them with the central roller f, which, by means of a pin, could easily be attached Fig 7: Joule’s paddle wheel apparatus, Joule 1872 Background for stories concerning energy 7 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu Figure 9: Joule’s paddle wheel, horizontal cut. Joule 1872 Figure 8: Joule’s paddle wheel, lateral cut. Joule 1872 to, or removed from, the axis of the frictional ap- paratus. This apparatus is represented in figure 8 (left) vertically and in figure 8 (right) horizontally. It consisted of a brass paddle-wheel furnished of 8 sets of 4 revolving arms each and 4 sets of 4 sta- tionary vanes each. The brass axis worked freely and was divided at d into two parts to avoid any conduction of heat in that direction. The paddle wheel firmly fitted into a copper vessel with two holes in the lid, one for the insertion of the axis, and one for the insertion of a thermometer. During the experiment a large wooden screen was at- tached to the table to avoid all effects of heat radi- ation from the experimenter. At the beginning of the experiment, the vessel is filled with water, and it needs about 6 l of water to fill this vessel. When everything is in thermal equilibrium, the temperature of the water as well as the one of the room is measured, and the ther- mometer is removed from the vessel. Then the weights of a total of 26 kg are wound up for about a meter and then go down, driving a paddle-wheel that is stirring the water. This procedure is repeat- ed twenty times, and it takes some 35 minutes to realize these 20 runs. In the end, according to Joule’s data, an increase of the water temperature of approximately 0.5°C can be measured. Analyzing this experiment reveals some details that are noteworthy and which show that Joule was in an extraordinary situation: Joule was able to employ some of the most skilled craftsmen who were at hand in an industrial town such as Man- chester. The instrument maker – John Benjamin Dancer – was extremely versed and particularly able to create extremely sensitive thermometers. Their sensitivity was extraordinary: "The two thermometers he (Joule) had acquired in 1844 were, he claimed the first accurately-calibrated thermometers in Britain … ." (Cardwell 1989, p. 234) The thermometer which was used to deter- mine the temperature of the water had a length of 87 cm and had a range from freezing point to about 85°F (see Ashworth 1930). Joule wrote that "constant practice had enabled me to read off with the naked eye to 1/20 of a division it followed that 1/200 of a degree Fahr, was an appreciable tem- perature" (Joule 1884, p. 303). At such a degree of sensitivity, water is far from being at a constant temperature. Consequently, the procedure of de- termining this temperature is far from being easy. Instead of waiting until the mercury column of the thermometer comes to rest and then read the tem- perature, Joule had to find other means to deter- mine when the thermometer and the water were in thermal equilibrium. As Sibum demonstrated, measuring temperatures was part of the brewer’s culture, thus Joule had the respective competence to carry out the measurement from his profession- al background. There are other aspects which indicate that this experiment was embedded in the brewers’ culture: Joule used a copper vessel without any insulation, even though the room should not affect the ther- mal condition of the water in any way. This may 8 Background for stories concerning energy Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu seem a bit unusual, particularly when one takes into consideration that Joule actually used a wooden shield to protect the vessel from the radia- tion of the body of the experimenter. However, the copper vessel is a device commonly used in beer brewing, thus Joule was very versed in controlling the thermal situation in such a vessel – an insulat- ed one (which could not be perfectly insulated) was not familiar as a system to Joule. But there are also material aspects in the Man- chester brewery that enabled Joule to carry out his experiment successfully. On the other hand Joule needed a room with a huge heat capacity – other- wise the heat produced by the human body in winding up the weights would affect the room temperature and thus the experimental result sig- nificantly. Such a room exists in a brewery: the cellar in which the beer is stored. This has a huge heat capacity and thus an almost uniform tempera- ture, thus it was a room with the physical proper- ties that were necessary for the production of reli- able data. On the other hand, Joule could use a brewing mate to do the work of winding up the weights. This required certain skills as the weight is heavy, and one has to be fast and controlled at the same time to do this work. Joule himself was not in the physical position of doing this work, moreover, he was a gentleman, and doing such a work would not correspond to his social status. 5 Starting research on renewable energy In mid-nineteenth century, industrialization progressed at high speed. One of the side effects was the necessity to have fuel for the seam en- gines that were the central power source in the factories. To France, this started to pose a major problem, as the coal deposits turned out to be lim- ited and were almost exhausted. This was even more a problem as the potential imports could only come from England – the traditional (eco- nomic) rival to France. Consequently, the French government promised financial support to any researcher who proposes promising concepts of how to avoid a dependency of France from Eng- lish coal. This was the moment when the French second- ary school teacher Augustin Mouchot entered the stage. Mouchot combined two devices that had been known previously: A blackened hollow cyl- inder containing water – a similar device had been used by the end of the eighteenth century by Hor- ace Benedict de Saussure for making experiments 5 Similarly, Joule did not mention the person doing the physi- cal work in the experiments he carried out afterwards which led to what is nowadays known as the Joule-Thomson-Effect (see Sichau 2000). on heat radiation. This was combined with a hol- low mirror that was used to focus solar radiation on the cylinder. Already in 1861, Mouchot was able to produce steam with his device. In the fol- lowing years, he intended to improve his set-up to make it more useful for technical purposes. The attempts were financially supported by the French government. Two outcomes can be named as direct results: On the one hand, Mouchot was able to develop solar cooking devices, items that were used in particular by the French army in their North Afri- can colonies. These devices enabled the soldiers to prepare hot meals without producing smoke, a detail relevant from a military perspective. These cookers were used until the 20 th century. The other result of Mouchot’s attempts was a steam engine that was operated with steam pro- duced by his solar apparatus. Mouchot devised several of the engines, the largest was shown at the world exhibition in Paris in 1878. The conical mirror had a diameter of some five meters, and the engine could be used as a printing device, but was also able to produce ice. Mouchot was awarded a gold medal for this ma- chine. Yet, by this time, things had changed once again. A major problem of Mouchot’s machine remained the mirror which was made with a silver coating – this tended to oxidize, thus reducing the efficiency of the machine and requiring a constant cleaning of the mirror. However, another devel- opment turned out to be far more problematic for Mouchot: Miners had found new coal deposits in Eastern France, consequently, the necessity for finding an alternative source of energy for the steam engine did not exist any longer. Moreover, in a report Mouchot’s machine was labeled as economic inefficient. As a result, the French gov- Figure 10: Mouchot’s apparatus at the Paris World Fair, http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/66/M ouchot1878x.jpg Background for stories concerning energy 9 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu ernment ceased to support Mouchot’s research financially; this brought his work to an end. References Ashworth JR (1930): Joule's Thermometers in the Possession of the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society (Journal of Scientific Instruments Vol 7, No. 11, London) pp 361 - 363. Ashworth JR (1931): A List of Apparatus now in Manchester which belonged to Dr. J.P. Joule, F.R.S., with Remarks on his M.S.S., Letters, and Autobiography. In: Manchester Memoirs Vol 75, No 8, 105. Beretta M. H. (2005). Lavoisier in Perspective. München, Deutsches Museum. Breger H (1982). Die Natur als arbeitende Maschine. Brown SC (1979): Benjamin Thomson, Count Rumford (MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., London). Goldfarb SG (1977) Rumford's Theory of Heat: A Reassess- ment. In: British Journal for the History of Science Band 10:S. 25 - 36. Heering P (1992) On J.P. Joule's Determination of the Me- chanical Equivalent of Heat. In: Hills, Skip (Ed.): The His- tory and Philosophy of Science in Science Education Vol.1, Kingston, Ontario), pp 495-505. Herschel, W. (1800). Experiments on the Refrangibility of the invisible Rays of the Sun. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society 90, 284-292. Joule JP (1850): On the Mechanical Equivalent of Heat. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 140, 61-82. Reprinted in Joule JP (1884): The Scientific Papers. Joule, JP (1872). Das mechanische Wärmeäquivalent. Braun- schweig, Vieweg. Kuhn, TS (1959): Energy conservation as an example of simultaneous discovery. In: M. Clagett (ed.): Critical Prob- lems in the History of Science. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 321 - 356. Leslie, J. (1804): An experimental inquiry into the nature and propagation of heat. London, Printed for J. Mawman. Mouchot, Augustin (1869), La chaleur solaire et ses applica- tions industrielles. Paris. Olson RG (1970) Count Rumford, Sir John Leslie, and the Study of the Nature and Propagation of Heat at the Begin- ning of the Nineteenth Century. In: Annals of Science Band 26: 273 - 304. Roberts L. (1991). A Word and the World: ¬The Significance of Naming the Calorimeter. ISIS 82: 198 - 222. Schiffer MB (2008): Power struggles: scientific authority and the creation of practical electricity before Edison. Cam- bridge, Mass., The MIT Press. Sibum HO (1995): Reworking the Mechanical Value of Heat: Instruments of Precision and Gestures of Accuracy in Early Victorian England. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 26, 73 - 106. Sichau C (2000): Die Joule-Thomson-Experimente: An- merkungen zur Materialität eines Experiments. In: NTM 8:223-243. Smith C & Wise MN (1989): Energy and Empire: ¬A bio- graphical study of Lord Kelvin (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge - New York - Port Chester - Melbourne – Sydney Thompson, B (1781): New Experiments upon Gun-Powder, with Occasional Observations and Practical Inferences; To Which are Added, an Account of a New Method of Deter- mining the Velocities of All Kinds of Military Projectiles, and the Description of a Very Accurate Eprouvette for Gun-Powder. In: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 71, 229-328 Thompson, B. (1798). "An Inquiry concerning the Source of the Heat Which is Excited by Friction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 88: 80-102. Thompson, B (1804): An Enquiry concerning the Nature of Heat, and the Mode of Its Communication. In: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 94, 77-182. Background for stories concerning energy was written by Peter Heering with the support the European Commission (project 518094-LLP-1-2011-1-GR-COMENIUS-CMP) and Flensburg University, Germany. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the infor- mation contained therein. Biography Rumford.pdf Biography: Sir Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford 1 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu Biography: Sir Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford Much of what we know today about heat began with the ideas of Count Rumford which he developed in the late eighteenth century in Munich, Germany. That, how- ever, is not all for which Rumford is famous. He originated the study of human nutri- tion and the insulating properties of clothing, created the soup kitchen, and invented thermal underwear, the coffee percolator, the kitchen oven, and central heating, to mention but a few of his many innovations. Rumford was not born with that name and not in Germany. In 1753, in the town of Woburn, Massachusetts, USA, Ruth and Benjamin Thompson became the proud parents of a baby boy, whom they named Benjamin. This biography is about Benjamin who, at the age of 39, became Count Rumford of the Holy Roman Empire. Benjamin’s father died when the child was only two years old. His mother’s hasty remarriage provided Ben- jamin with a stepfather whom he disliked. Fortunately, unlike most other children his age, Benjamin was sent to grammar school at age eight. By age 13, having ac- quired a mastery of advanced algebra, geometry, as- tronomy, and even higher mathematics, he left school and was sent to a nearby town to learn a trade, as an apprentice. He tried many different jobs, but none of them held his interest. He spent most of his spare time conducting experiments on electricity and gunpowder and creating inventions. The young Ben, as his mother called him, was dif- ferent from other children his age, and the passions and habits he developed at that time contributed to his be- coming a great scientist later in life. Benjamin meticu- lously organized all the details of his life, from his daily schedule, accounting for every hour of the day, to his expenses, keeping a record of every purchase he made for his experiments. Moreover, he was keenly interested in science and liked to invent machines and to study from science books. His scientific exploits, too, were always organized and practical. Finally, at age 18, his apprenticeships ended when he was offered a job as a schoolmaster in Concorde, New Hampshire. There he met the wealthy widow, Sarah Walker. With Sarah’s encouragement, the two were soon married, thereby considerably raising the social status of Thompson. Sarah bought Benjamin a flashy crimson coat, and they travelled in a fashionable, two-horse carriage. Through his newfound status, Thomson formed an association with the Governor that culminated in him being appointed a major in the New Hampshire military at 19 years of age. Military life in 1773 was dangerous and tense. War was brewing between the British and Americans, which eventually resulted in the American Revolutionary War. Both civilians and the military were choosing sides. During his time, Thompson began spying and recruiting for the British in New Hampshire and was the first person to use invisible ink as he passed infor- mation to the British. Local activist groups fighting against British rule accused him of being a British spy and pursued him. When an angry mob came to his home, he was already well on his way to Boston. Soon, it grew too risky for British loyalists to remain in Amer- ica, and, in April of 1776, Thomson was evacuated to London, England. He left his wife and two-month-old daughter behind. As he had never developed a close bond with his wife, his departure proved to be the end of their marriage. In London, Thompson supplied military intelli- gence to the British and was rewarded with a salaried position at the level of Lieutenant Colonel in the British army, which involved no work. He used his leisure time to pursue scientific experiments for the military. Over the next few years, he invented a device for measuring the power of gunpowder, which was used for over a century. He also performed experiments to determine the recoil of guns in different situations. The income of his position, however, was not sufficient, and Thomp- son made plans to venture to the European continent in search of military opportunities and advancement. In preparation for his departure from Britain in 1783, he successfully lobbied for promotion to full colonel and, with his splendid new, crimson uniform, travelled to Strasbourg as a staging point for his ambitions. It so happened that a military review was taking place in Strasbourg when he arrived in September, affording him the opportunity to present himself in his full rega- lia. The reviewer of the parade, the nephew of the Elec- tor of Bavaria, was so impressed with Thompson that he invited him to Munich with a letter of introduction to the Elector. Through a series of efforts on Thomp- son’s part, he first secured a knighthood from the King of England and then an entry-level military position from the Elector in Munich. Sir Thompson devised a comprehensive reform plan for the military in Bavaria. In 1789, he presented the plan, which was not only accepted but resulted in his promotion to the rank of major general and ap- pointment to the Bavarian Privy Council. Thompson’s 2 Biography: Sir Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu plan addressed two of the biggest expenses that any military has in peacetime—food and clothing. In an effort to save money, he began to conduct experiments to find the cheapest and most efficient way of providing food and clothing. He also started a clothing workhouse to produce clothing for the military. The impressed Elector rewarded Thompson’s efforts by conferring on him the title of Count Rumford of the Holy Roman Empire. Thompson’s first experiment involved testing dif- ferent types of material to determine how well they conduct heat. To do so, he placed the material he wished to test around a hollow, metal cylindrical con- tainer that was closed at both ends, except for a hole at one end. He mounted the container on a wooden stand and filled it with hot water nearly at the boiling point, then inserted the end of a thermometer through a stop- per in the hole so that it extended to the center of the container. Then, he measured the amount of time it took for the thermometer to cool from 21° to -12°C. The experiment told him how quickly heat left the ma- terial and, thereby, which materials he should use to clothe the army. The goal of his second experiment was to create the most cost-effective and nutritious soup to feed the mili- tary and the workers in the clothing-production work- house. Using low-cost ingredients, such as potatoes and barley, he began a long series of tests with farm animals to see which combinations of ingredients kept the ani- mals healthiest with the lowest costs. Eventually, every meal fed to the employees at his workhouse was a kind of soup. His soup recipes were very specific, and his attention to detail was very evident in every recipe, re- cording the cooking time, ingredient preparation, and utensils used. His work was some of the first in the sci- ence of nutrition, and Rumford Soup became famous throughout Europe and can still be found in modern cookbooks. Another area of science that fascinated Rumford was the theory of heat. At the time, scientists thought that heat was a fluid-like substance, called caloric, which entered an object when it was warmed and left when it cooled. The hotter the object, the more caloric fluid it had. This fluid, according to the caloric theory, could not be created or destroyed. Since this fluid had volume, objects expanded when heated and contracted when cooled. Rumford’s observations contradicted the theory of caloric, and he set about trying to disprove it. Through his role in the military, Rumford had no- ticed that intense heat was created during the process of cannon boring, in which a large hole is drilled into a cannon to create the cannon barrel. According to ca- loric theory, the metal from the cannon should eventu- ally run out of caloric and stop producing heat. In his most famous experiment, Rumford arranged for a can- non to be bored under water, with a blunt drill. After two-and-a-half hours, the water began to boil. Since heat kept getting produced by the cannon-boring proc- ess and its production did not drop or stop over time, Rumford argued that heat could not be a caloric fluid. Rumford also investigated whether or not heat had weight. For this experiment, he used three nearly iden- tical glass bottles. He filled one bottle halfway with wa- ter, a second bottle with an equal amount of wine, and a third with mercury. After sealing the bottles, he added weights to make them all exactly equal in weight. He then placed the bottles on a balance in a room with a consistent temperature of 16°C. Once the bottles and their contents had reached that temperature, he moved the balance to a much colder room. After two days, he measured the bottles to find that, even with the water frozen, they were all the same weight as before. He moved the balance back into the warm room and al- lowed the ice to melt. Based on the heat lost in the first bottle during freezing, different amounts of caloric fluid should have left each bottle; yet, after returning to room temperature, their weights remained exactly the same. With this experiment, Rumford concluded that heat does not have weight. In the last twenty years of his life, Rumford contin- ued to make new inventions and improve upon existing ones. He invented the modern fireplace and chimney, the double boiler, a portable stove, and the drip coffee- pot. Count Rumford died suddenly of typhoid fever on August 21, 1814, at 62 years of age, leaving a monu- mental legacy. He helped remove beggars from the streets by inventing the soup kitchen and feeding soup to the poor of Bavaria. Most notably, he created the public park, the first and most famous of which is the English Garden in Munich, still serving as a place of public enjoyment to this day. References Brown, S. C., (1981). Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford Cambridge USA: MIT Press. Sparrow, W. J., (1964). Knight of the White Eagle: A biography of Sir Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford, 1753-1814, New York: Crowell. Biography: Sir Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford was written by Stephen Klassen, Sarah Dietrich, and Cathrine Froese Klassen, with the support of the European Commission (project 518094-LLP-1-2011-1-GR- COMENIUS-CMP) and the University of Winnipeg, Canada. This publication reflects only the views of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. Canons against Calorics.pdf Canons against Calorics 1 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu Canons against Calorics Benjamin Thompson, Bavarian Minister of War, went into the workshop to supervise the production of new cannons. As you may notice, Benjamin Thompson is not really a common Bavarian name, and actu- ally, Thompson was not a Bavarian citizen but he was born in the British colonies in North America. At the time he was entering the workshop there were no more British colonies in North America – the events were are going to discuss took place by the end of the 18th century. During the American Revolution, Thompson had acted as a spy for the British, consequently he had to leave when things turned out to end bad for them. Why a North American could become the Bavarian Minister of War is a completely differ- ent story and should not bother us here. But evidently, the supervision of the production of weaponry was amongst the duties of a Minister of War, at least in those days. Europe was at the Edge of War, the French Revolution and the following Empowerment of Napoleon put a threat to all European rulers, and thus there would be war – well, in fact there was already military conflict. Consequently, new cannons were needed, and consequently, Benjamin Thompson had to go to the workshop to make sure that the work was going efficient and that the quality of the weapons was as expected. When Thompson stood in the workshop, he immediately felt anger raise as most of the work- men stood around waiting. “What is going on?” he addressed one of the waiting workers (actually he said “Was ist hier los?”, but for the sake of the story we will translate the entire discussions into English). The worker bowed and then replied “Sir, we are waiting for the drill to be sharpened”. To understand this response, you have to ask yourself how a cannon is produced. When you imagine a cannon (like one used by pirates or in ancient for- tifications), it can be described as a metal barrel with a long, centered hole in it. Now you may think that this can be casted like this, but actually (at least at the time of our story) the metal cylinder had to be casted and then the borehole had to be drilled – actually this was supposed to be going on at the workshop at this time. Now, to drill the hole into the barrel, two horses were constantly turning a large and heavy metal axis that had one end sharpened and served as a drill. Of course, there was some mechanism that made sure that the hole was drilled in the very center of the barrel, but these details are not relevant to our story. But you can imagine that the axis was heavy, and to re- move it from the barrel, bring it to the workbench where it could be sharpened again, and bring it back in place was no simple task. Moreover, evi- dently the sharpening of such a large drill would take quite some time. Thompson felt not really satisfied by the re- sponse of the workman, as he had been to the workshop the day before, had found the same situation, and on his request had received the same response. Such a response may have been ac- ceptable once, but not on two days in a row. Con- sequently he demanded to see the worker in charge of the tools and inquired why it took that long to sharpen the drill. To his amaze-ment, he learned that the drill was not still in the process of being sharpened but the procedure had to be start- ed once again. The workman pointed out that some drills had broken, and even though new ones were to be made, for the time being the workers had to interrupt the process of drilling the hole in the cannon from time to time. To Thompson, this appeared not really ac- ceptable – workers standing around waiting for a tool to be prepared were not his idea of efficiency. Thus, he demanded that the workers should work with a blunt drill whilst the other one was still sharpened. Yet, they refused by arguing that the metal would become too hot and the quality of the barrel would diminish. Thompson became irritated – this does not seem to make sense from his scien- tific understanding of heat. He was well aware that heat could be excited by friction, however, to his understanding (and also to the one of all other scientists he knew – and he knew a lot of scien- tists) this was due to the substance of heat being pressed out of the materials that were rubbed. Consequently, after some time of rubbing materi- als against each other, all substance of heat should be pressed out – so why could these craftsmen argue that the cannon would get hotter all the time? Thomp-son felt that this issue deserves some more of his attention, so he mumbled to the workers ‘Work on, and be more efficient’ and went back to his carriage to go home, thinking about this problem. The next day, an energetic Thompson ap- peared at the workshop where the men were drill- ing the hole into the cannon. To their amazement, Thompson ordered them to stop. He told them to get a blunt drill and place it in the machine. When the workers looked at themselves puzzled, Thompson felt that some explanation was needed: 2 Canons against Calorics Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu “We are going to carry out a scientific experiment. I want to determine how much heat can be gener- ated through the friction of a blunt drill and the cast metal of the cannon.” Well, actually this explanation did not seem to be working too well, as the expression in the faces of the workers did not seem to change. Thus, Thompson ordered them to get on as he advised them. They replaced the drill with one that was blunt, they brought some water to cool the metal, and they started making the horses walk again in their usual circle. After a while, Thompson noted that the metal became warm, and after some more time, it did not only become warm, it became hot. When Thompson had the impression that the iron was too hot to be touched with the naked hand, he ordered the workers to use the water to cool the metal and to continue working. After a while, he noticed that the water was getting warm, and after some more time, the water was getting hot, and in the end, the water showed little bubbles and was about to begin to boil. Thompson told the workers to stop, and to get back to their work as the exper- iment was over. He could see some puzzlement in their faces, but this time their feelings correspond- ed to his own – even though for entirely different reasons. How could it be that so much heat was in the metal that it seemingly was never squeezed out completely? But if heat was a substance, it had to be limited in its amount. Thus, if it was unlimited, it could not be a substance but had to be … Rumford went home as something came to his mind. He recalled that he had been reading about an ancient Greek concept of matter being formed out of little particles, and that these particles were supposed to be in permanent motion. At home, he consulted his bookshelf and found the book he was looking for. Democritus had developed this idea, but his theory was rejected by Aristotle, and thus scholars had believed until then that heat is a material substance. Even though modern scholars had been able to overthrow the Aristotelian worldview, the notion of heat being a substance was still the key idea to describe the related phe- nomena. Only recently, the French chemist Lavoi- sier had extremely successfully established a new chemical system, in which the substances of light (lumic) and heat (caloric) were identified as ele- ments. But Rumford’s cannon-boring experiment seemed to disprove a material theory of heat and to show that heat was instead something immate- rial. Rumford went to his desk and started to write down his findings. He knew that his claim would meet severe opposition. Therefore, he decided that he would not publish his paper in Paris, instead, he would send it to London to the Royal Society. As he was a member, and knew that he had an excel- lent reputation amongst the influential members of this learned society, they would certainly publish his paper, even if there were not fully convinced. At the same time, he would also prepare a German version of the paper and submit it to the Annalen der Physik, the recent-ly founded German journal which was becoming the main reference in the physical sciences. Rumford smiled while he was writing, but then an idea crossed his mind. How could it be that the workers seemingly knew that the heat produced in the friction was not finite? And he recalled his disbelief the day before – would other scientists believe his claim and abandon the material theory of heat? Rumford’s papers, both the German and the English one, were published in 1798. However, despite his efforts to establish his mechanical the- ory of heat, other scientists kept the understanding of heat being a substance, being caloric. Even though no one contradicted his experimental find- ings, scientists kept relying on the material theory of heat for more than three decades after the pub- lication of Rumford’s papers. References Brown, S. C. (1979). Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. Brown. S. C. (1962). Count Rumford: Physicist Extraordi- nary. New York: Anchor Books. Ellis, G. E. (1871). Memoir of Sir Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford, With Notices of his Daughter. Philadelph- ia: Claxton, Remsen, & Haffelfinger. Goldfarb S.G. (1977) Rumford's Theory of Heat: A Reas- sessment. In: British Journal for the History of Science 10, 25 – 36 Larsen, E. (2011). An American in Europe: The Life of Benjamin Thompson, Count Rumford. New York: The Philosophical Library. Sparrow, W. J. (1964). Knight of the White Eagle : Sir Ben- jamin Thompson. New York : Thomas Y. Crowell Compa- ny. Canons against Calorics was written by Peter Heering with the support of the European Commission (project 518094- LLP-1-2011-1-GR-COMENIUS-CMP) and University of Flensburg, Germany. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsi- ble for any use which may be made of the information con- tained therein. EN_Guidelines_Thompson_cannons.pdf Suggestions to Teachers (Rumford and calorics) 1 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu Suggestions to Teachers (Rumford and calorics) Expected results After the lesson, the students are expected to: 1. Experiment with a device, which is a simulation of the Thompson’s cannon for his experimentation. 2. Interpret the observations from their experimentation. 3. Indentify Thompson’s reflections, when he interpreted the observations of his experiment, based on the narration. 4. Write the characteristics of science and the ways it develops, based on the narration as well as the lesson activities, according to the McComas’ list. 5. Write a scientific text about the nature of heat, which is similar to Thompson’s announcements of the nature of heat, based on the lesson activities as well as proposed resources. 6. Make inquiry in the web and write a text concerning the scientific views about the nature of heat by the temporal sequence, from the ancient years until today. About the activities of students The proposed students' activities are indicative and they aim at the accomplishment of the above expected outcomes. Moreover, the teacher may choose some of them for the teaching process in relation to its aims, the needs of students and the available time. Finally, she/he can create her/his own activities. About the emergence of the characteristics of science in the narration, these characteristics are quoted in the website, comprehensively (in classification of the stories by NOS). About the locating of the characteristics of Nature of Science in the proposed activities, indicatively, we can quote the following: A) The activities 2 and 3concern the characteristic of Nature of Science: “Science demands and relies on empirical evidence”. B) The activity 4 concerns the characteristic of Nature of Science: “Knowledge production in science includes many common features and shared habits of mind” C) The activity 5 concerns the characteristics of Nature of Science: a)”Science is a highly creative endeavor” and b) “Scientific knowledge is tentative but durable”. D) The activity 6 concerns the characteristic of Nature of Science: “There are historical, cultural, and social influences on science”. E) The activity 7 concerns the characteristics of Nature of Science, which are quoted in the previous activities: 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. 2 Suggestions to Teachers (Rumford and calorics) Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu Suggestions to Teachers (Rumford and calorics) were written by Aikaterini Rizaki and Panagiotis Kokkotas with the support by the European Commission (Project 518094-LLP-1-2011-1-GR-COMENIUS-CMP) and the NKUA of Greece. This publication reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained there in. EN_LA_Thompson_cannons.pdf Student’s Learning Activities (Rumford and calorics) 1 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu Student’s Learning Activities (Rumford and calorics) Activity 1 You will watch a video with narration or listen to a story from your teacher about Benjamin Thompson (Rumford) and his experiment on cannons. Please write the important points of the story that you will listen to, and discuss them in your group. (Indicative important points: the way in which the cannons were manufactured in the late 18th century. The experiment carried out by the workers in the cannon factory, under the supervision of Benjamin Thompson. His observations and remarks on the experiment. His reflections on the nature of heat. The new model of heat and the death of the caloric theory…..) ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………… ……………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………….………………………….………………………………………………………………… …………………………………….……………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………………… ……………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………….………………………….………………………………………………………………………… ……… Activity 2 Based on the narrated story, describe the experiment that was carried out by Rumford and the workers in the cannons’ factory. (You may use the following websites: http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/R/Rumford.html http://www.eoht.info/page/Cannon+boring+experiment ) …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/R/Rumford.html http://www.eoht.info/page/Cannon+boring+experiment 2 Student’s Learning Activities (Rumford and calorics) Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu Activity 3 Experimental procedure: You have at your disposal an experimental device that simulates the layout used by Rumford at his experiment with the cannons. Sequential phases of the metal rod’s movement into the metal tube. Please hold firmly with one hand the metal tube. With the other hand move the metal rod back and forth into the metal tube, for one minute. Repeat the same procedure for two minutes. Write down your observations and try to explain the increase of the temperature in the device. .…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Student’s Learning Activities (Rumford and calorics) 3 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………… Activity 4 According to the story and the text of the following website, write a text that describes Benjamin Thomson’s announcements about the nature of heat, at the journals of his day. http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3143157?uid=3738128&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21103274 082171 …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………… Activity 5 Based on the story of the video and your internet research write a text outlining the evolution of scientific views on the nature of the heat from the time of Aristotle to today, with a time sequence. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..… http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3143157?uid=3738128&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21103274082171 http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3143157?uid=3738128&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21103274082171 4 Student’s Learning Activities (Rumford and calorics) Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ……… Activity 6 How do you explain the scientific community’s delay to accept the kinetic theory of heat? …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………… Activity 7 Using the list of ideas that describe the characteristics of science and the ways it develops, try to locate and write these ideas in the story you heard and the activities of this lesson. These ideas that scientists call Nature of Science (Nature Of Science-NOS- ) are: Characteristics of Nature of Science (NOS) 1. Science demands and relies on empirical evidence. 2. Knowledge production in science includes many common features and shared habits of mind. 3. Scientific knowledge is tentative but durable. 4. Laws and theories are related but distinct kinds of scientific knowledge. 5. Science is a highly creative endeavor. 6. Science has a subjective element. 7. There are historical, cultural, and social influences on science. 8. Science and technology impact each other, but they are not the same. 9. Science and its methods cannot answer all questions. Student’s Learning Activities (Rumford and calorics) 5 Storytelling Teaching Model: http://science-story-telling.eu Scientists argue that in order to learn science one must first understand what exactly science is. Because it is difficult to define science, scientists give a list of its characteristics. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………..………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………………… Student’s Learning Activities (Rumford and calorics) were written by Aikaterini Rizaki and Panagiotis Kokkotas with the support by the European Commission (Project 518094-LLP-1-2011-1-GR-COMENIUS-CMP) and the NKUA of Greece. This publication reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein. Hictorical Ressources.pdf A Primary Sources Rumford, Benjamin Count of: An Inquiry Concerning the Source of the Heat Which is Excited by Friction. By Benjamin Count of Rumford, in: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 88 (01.01.1798), S. 80–102, available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/106970. Rumford, Benjamin Count of: An Inquiry Concerning the Weight Ascribed to Heat, in: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London 89 (01.01.1799), S. 179–194, available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/107032. B Secondary Sources Brown, G. I.: Scientist, Soldier, Statesman, Spy - Count Rumford: ¬The Extraordinary Life of a Scientific Genius. Stroud (Gloucestershire): Sutton 1999. Brown, S. C.: Count Rumford: Physicist Extraordinary. Westport, Conn.: Greenwood Press 1979. Goldfarb, Stephen J.: Rumford’s Theory of Heat: A Reassessment, in: The British Journal for the History of Science 10, Ausgabe 01 (1977), 25, available online: http://www.journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0007087400015090. Heering, Peter: An Experimenter’s Gotta Do What an Experimenter’s Gotta Do—But How?, in: Isis 101, 4 (01.12.2010), 794–805, available online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/657478 links.pdf http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvadfdDtfDA&- http://cetera.home.pl/SATM/EN/caloric/
-
File type
- application/zip
-
Referenced at
-