arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2002.07620

Crossing borders in the 19th century and now -- two examples of weaving a scientific network

R. Folk·Yu. Holovatch
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Scientific research is and was at all times a transnational (global) activity. In this respect, it crosses several borders: national, cultural, and ideological. Even in times when physical borders separated the scientific community, scientists kept their minds open to the ideas created beyond the walls and tried to communicate despite all the obstacles. An example of such activities in the field of physics is the travel in the year 1838 of a group of three scientists through the Western Europe: Andreas Ettingshausen (professor at the University of Vienna), August Kunzek (professor at the University of Lviv) and P. Marian Koller (director of the observatory in Chremsminster, Upper Austria). 155 years later a vivid scientific exchange began between physicists from Austria and Ukraine, in particular, between the Institute for Condensed Matter Physics of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine in Lviv and the Institute for Theoretical Physics of Johannes Kepler University Linz. This became possible due to the programs financed by national institutions, but it had its scientific background in already knotted historic scientific networks, when Lviv was an international center of mathematics and in Vienna the 'School of Statistical Thought' arose. Due to the new collaboration, after the breakup of the Soviet Union, Ukraine became the first country to join the Middle European Cooperation in Statistical Physics (MECO) founded in the early 1970s with the aim of bridging the gap between scientists from the Eastern and Western parts of Europe separated by the iron curtain.

Explore related subjects

physics.hist-phcond-mat.stat-mech

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

R. Folk, Yu. Holovatch. 2020-02-18. Crossing borders in the 19th century and now -- two examples of weaving a scientific network. https://doi.org/10.5488/cmp.23.23001

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Scientific Promise

Scientists constantly face decisions about what lines of research to pursue. This Element introduces the philosophical debate about scientific pursuitworthiness. It explains how it can be rational to pursue a theory even if the theory is less well supported than its rivals, and it discusses existing philosophical frameworks for guiding pursuit decisions. The Element also develops a new perspective. Existing accounts focus predominantly on theories, while experiments are largely neglected. This is an important shortcoming. Theoretical promise depends on experimental promise, and experimental promise raises questions of its own. Drawing on the epistemology of experimentation, the Element advances an account of experimental pursuitworthiness. It is argued that such pursuitworthiness depends on experimental virtues like a clear signal and simplicity of design. Moreover, the kinds of uncertainty that constrain the assessment of scientific pursuits are examined. Finally, the Element highlights open questions in the philosophy of scientific pursuitworthiness.

physics.hist-ph↗
arXiv2026

Is Black Hole Evaporation Prediction Friendly?

Manchak and Weatherall (2018) formulate the black hole information paradox as a failure of predictability in black hole evaporation spacetimes, diagnosed by non-global hyperbolicity. I offer a strategy for resolving this paradox. I argue that failures of predictability in black hole evaporation are not well diagnosed by non-global hyperbolicity. I then consider two weakenings of global hyperbolicity: prediction and retrodiction friendliness, the failure of which could ground a new paradox. However, deidealized black hole evaporation models can be prediction and retrodiction friendly. Therefore, the information paradox cannot be based upon failures of global hyperbolicity, nor either retrodiction or prediction unfriendliness.

physics.hist-ph↗
arXiv2026

The Crab Nebula progenitor: recovering the 1054 AD supernova event as galactic Gamma-ray burst

In 1054 AD a daytime star appeared in the constellation of Taurus, for three weeks, and it was reported in various sources from Europe to China/Japan: it was one of the few documented galactic supernovae of the last two millenia. This paradigm has been established about sixty years ago, as the comprehension of the physics of supernovae progressed with enough observational data. The Gamma-ray bursts were discovered in the same period, but only in the past few years have their observations become daily and their distances have been fully understood as cosmological. After the explosion, the exponential decay of the luminosity in gamma-rays and X-rays has been followed with telescopes onboard dedicated satellites. Also the exponential decay of the afterglow's optical and radio frequencies have been observed with the largest optical and radio telescopes. Within the binary-driven hypernova framework, successful in explaining all the observed phases of the Gamma-ray bursts, the universal exponential decay can be extended to 1000 years after the burst, to account for the present values of Gamma and X-rays as well as optical and radio frequencies of the Crab Nebula. Both the daytime visibility of the burst, and the simultaneous radiation plagues appeared in Constantinople and Cairo is a strong evidence of the presence of Gamma-rays in the lower atmosphere, coming from the same source originating the Crab nebula. The association to the daytime visibility of that star and the following plague meets exactly the etymology of the word dis-aster, bad star.

physics.hist-ph↗