SC NATS 1760 6.0 B – Science, Technology and Society
Lecture 1 – Methods and Beginnings
An Economic Perspective on Science and Technology - Methods
Bernal’s Marxism, science and history
Role of scientist in capitalist society, origins of science in society
Conditions of production, economic context of science and technology
Concerns with Science in the Modern World
Science changes rapidly, unpredictably and is not in control of scientists*
The disinterested pursuit of truth, moral concerns *
Five characteristics of science: o an institution, a method, a cumulative tradition of knowledge, a factor in production a factor shaping beliefs and attitudes to people and nature
Science as an Institution
Professionalization, social status and economic contributions of science *
Education and mathematical training and public understanding of science
Science started out as a part time occupation of the upper classes*
Science as a Method
Science has methods, historically located
Trades and scientific method *
Scientific approach to experiment similar and error methods of the trades
Scientific observations, assumptions and hypotheses, experience, experiments
Classification (ordering experience into categories) and measurement (quantification of properties of objects) *
Economic background of mathematics *
Measurement, experiment, generalization *
Scientific apparatus, senses, manipulation of nature *
Laws (general relationships), hypotheses (specific claims) and theories (groups of claims), integration and logic
Scientific language, theory, experiment and observation
Tactics of science, strategy of science (choosing problems), economic concerns*
Discovery and economic goals (Faraday, light, heat, electricity and magnetism) *
Cumulative Tradition of Science
Science and the criticism of existing theories and ideas, accumulation of knowledge o “Science is far more than the total assembly of known facts, laws and theories, criticizing and often destroying as much as building. Nevertheless, the whole edifice of science never stops growing. It is permanently, as we may say, under repair; but it is always in use.” Bernal pp 18-19
Early science is constitutive of later science
The time sequence of scientific development (math, astronomy, mechanics, physics, chemistry, biology, sociology) “fits even more closely the possibly useful applications which were in the interest of the ruling or rising classes at different times.” Bernal, p 20*
Interaction of scientific fields, great man history, social nature of science
Science as a Means of Production
The origins of science as a specialized activity can be linked to its role as a means of production *
The geographic dispersion of science has followed trade, industry and technical advances * o “When the productive relations are changing rapidly, as when a new class is rising into a position of power, there is a particular incentive to improvements in production that will enhance the wealth and power of this class, and science is at a premium. Once such a

class is established and is still strong enough to prevent the rise of a new rival, there is an interest in keeping things as they are – techniques become traditional and science is at a discount.” Bernal p 24
Science and literacy, education and training *
Class barriers and scientific progress *
Science as a Source of Ideas
Science is not just a history of ideas
Conflict between idealistic/formal and material/practical influences
The Beginnings of Science
Origins of science hidden and fragmentary
Science and the manipulation of nature, techniques of early man *
Tools and language, manipulation of nature, extension of knowledge
Technical development and social traditions
Design of tools, experimental method, use of models, etc. *
Fire, cooking, tanning, dying, boiling and chemistry *
Plants and animal knowledge, hunting and gathering, botany and biology *
Art, symbolism, mathematics and writing
Regularities, manipulation of nature, observational and descriptive knowledge
Mechanics and the manipulation of objects, knowledge of statics and dynamics
Traditional basis of knowledge, observing and knowing
Ecological “footprint” of humanity: o Technology, expansion, population, altering environment o Hunting and gathering culture, animal populations parasitic societies
Technologies and scientific theory, physics
Shamans and medicine men as scientific precursors
-
Methods and Beginnings
Introduction of Bernal
Scientists aren’t interested in the history of science. Bernal talks about where does science start and he looks at the history to see where modern science fits in. He’s interested in production and understanding how things are made. He’s a Marxist; he talks about science and technology so he could see how it’s substantiated. Bernal notes that science is changing all the time and society is always changing as history moves forward. It’s also unpredictable because we don’t know what new theories are going to come forward. Both science and history change in all ways. Scientists themselves don’t control the applications of what they come up with, which Bernal notes. (In most cases they don’t have control over what they produce). Science itself is motivated by other things so that we could do stuff with it. Science always has an applied part of it, and there’s always a purpose to it.
Science as an Institution
Bernal mentions that development is when science contributes to the economy. During the scientific revolution they become more important which by the 19 th century it becomes a profession. Practicing science requires knowledge in math, so most people don’t understand science so it separates them from the rest of the world. It started out as a part-time “hobby: by wealthy people.
Science as a method
Science has many methods that changed over time. Bernal looks at practices of science and what scientists actually do. He looks at the skills and abilities which come from the trades. Bernal says the trial and error method is adopted from the trade, which is adopted by scientists. These observations are looked at before they are actualized. Scientists also conduct experiments by going out into the natural world. Scientists also classified things and measures/quantify things, it is mathematical in order to understand things. Classification and measurement is done in everyday life but science too it and magnified it. This is also connected to economics which was done in earlier time but there had to be a record of what is sold and bought, and math is connected to that which is connected to science. The

ability to quantify and measure allows us to do more experiments and then it allows it to be universal and generalized so that everyone can understand. Scientists also use scientific tools to allow us to collect info about the world, and to see further that we cant do natural, we use technology to extend our senses. As well, to manipulate the world in ways that we cant do on our own. Scientists describe nature in laws in hypothesis and theories in order to organize the world using cognitive tools. Science’s language is math, to help understand nature and how it fits into the world. Bernal Argues that the methods of science are the tactics of science in order to solve a problem, but then he mentions that science also has a strategy which is deciding which problems we need to solve and work on. For Bernal, the strategy of science is determined by economic factors by the most part. This means that the tactics aren’t determined by economics but the strategy is. Science frequently expands when it ignores economic problems. Bernal argues that we should only look at economic factors because of this ex. Renaissance.
Cumulative Tradition of Science
Science is about the now, but Bernal argues that the now builds on the old. We cant get to the newer theory without the older. Bernal is cumulative in that sense but we don’t keep everything from the old theories. Science is always growing and changing based on what is there. Today is different than 500 years ago, but we wouldn’t be here without that. The time sequence is math, astronomy, mechanics, physics, chem., bio, sociology, which fits more closely to external factors, like economy. “fits even more closely the possibly useful applications which were in the interest of the ruling or rising classes at different times.”
Bernal, p 20*
Individual people are a product of our society so it’s the society who ultimately caused the inventions.
We need to look at the social context to understand as well.
“Science is far more than the total assembly of known facts, laws and theories, criticizing and often destroying as much as building. Nevertheless, the whole edifice of science never stops growing. It is permanently, as we may say, under repair; but it is always in use.” Bernal pp 18-19
Science as a means of production
Bernal argues that science becomes a specialized activity at the same time it is linked to production. Ex.
17 th century statistics said they come up with the applications but it came out in the 19 th century. The geographic dispersion of science has followed trade, industry and technical advances. “When the productive relations are changing rapidly, as when a new class is rising into a position of power, there is a particular incentive to improvements in production that will enhance the wealth and power of this class, and science is at a premium. Once such a class is established and is still strong enough to prevent the rise of a new rival, there is an interest in keeping things as they are – techniques become traditional and science is at a discount.” Bernal p 24. Science moves around just like the economy shifts. When there’s a certain group of people in power they have influence. But when people are in power they don’t want others to be in power so they dominate. Times in history people come together from different groups and scientists adopted from there. According to Bernal, this is a conflict between theoretical and political science.
Beginnings of Science
Bernal goes back to human civilization. Representation of science today is the computer etc. Bernal says it’s hard to look back because its very different. Part of the purpose of nature is to manipulate, and science is related to old civilization science that was how it was done back then too. Therefore, early human activity shaped our science today. As well tools, language, that we adapted from old civilizations.
Back then they communicated through language which allows growing and accumulation. He also argues that social tradition was also passed to different groups within communities all over the world, so knowledge is social. Tools were designed to change the physical object to use it, using the scientific method which is what we use now. -> Trying different things o see what works. Cooking and burning is early chemistry. Chemical knowledge is the study of how substances behave. Knowledge of plants and animals also started here, which emerged as botany. There isn’t a lot of written work so a lot of it is guess work and assuming. Art also appears in early civilization, it is the basis of symbolism, math and writing.
Writing comes from art which Bernal argues that art comes before math and is crucial to science. The knowledge developed was passed on from one generation to the next. It was only necessary to observe

the world and survive, but these were crucial to later observations. The basis of mechanics is by moving things around which started in early civilization. Knowledge is traditional and it is discovered someone doesn’t need to know it themselves and then with that theoretical science can be build on. Our technological footprints have always been pushing the environment in ways that benefit us. Early hunting and gathering would hunt until there was no more and then moved to hunt more, they were disrespectful in that sense. What changed for us today magnified exponentially which we now can affect nature globally. The bow and arrow led to knowledge that later contributed to physics. Early tools allowed us to develop our theories in physics. Medicine mans used knowledge and tools to understand science which is the same as science today.

SC/NATS 1760 6.0 B – Lecture 2 - Missing
Agriculture
Agriculture developed approximately 10000 years ago
Growing of crops and the domestication of animals
Change from nomadic tribes to settlements, knowledge of growing cycle of plants o Early agriculture expanded our knowledge of plants
Populations growth, food storage, work
Agricultural techniques: sowing, hoeing, reaping, threshing, storing, grinding, baking, brewing, weaving, pottery, etc.
Surplus food as common goods, private property
Agriculture and delayed gratification of work
Religion, change of the seasons, fertility rites
Artificial irrigation, food surplus, higher populations, early government o “hydrological hypothesis”: civilization arose from the development of large-scale irrigation agriculture o Large scale irrigation agriculture, centralized coordination for management, storage and distribution
Creation of cities, administration, crafts, trade and labour
Urbanization and division of labour, specialization
Priests as administrators and rulers
Urbanization, class differentiation, slaves, labourers and citizens
Metal, Transportation and Trade
Use of metal for tools o trial and error (experimentation), material properties (chemistry)
Use of bronze (tin and copper), guilds and metal working techniques
Sharp edged tools, carpentry, machines out of wood
Transportation technologies for food, goods, metal
River valleys, water transport, sea travel, navigation, astronomy
Wheeled cart and plough, agricultural expansion, measurement, recording and standardization
Writing and trade, mathematics and transactions
Large-scale public works and complex economic transactions, complex mathematics
Architecture and early geometry, e.g. volume of pyramid
Agriculture and the calendar, astronomy, astrology
Medicine, prognosis and case knowledge
Precious metals, measurement, chemistry
Class Divisions in Early Society
Priesthood, mathematics, astronomy and medicine, upper classes
Scholars versus labourers in Egypt, class society and basic technologies
Benefits of production and labour
Agriculture, war, expansion, technological progress
Engineering weapons, siege engines, mining
Wealth concentration and large civil engineering projects
Large-scale hydrological agriculture: dams, canals, ploughs, sickles and wheels
Slavery, expansion, casualties of war, separation of labour from knowledge
Hieroglyphics, poetry, literature, techniques and technologies

SC NATS 1760 6 – Lecture 3 – Classical Culture
The Iron Age and Greek Natural Philosophy
 Science and ancient Greece, technology and ancient China
 Ancient Greece:
 Scholarly discussion about nature
 The exclusion of religion from explanations of nature
 City states and democracy, open inquiry, the role of other cultures
Iron
 Iron important for commerce by 12 th century BC






Forging and welding soft wrought iron, trial and error
Technique, simple tools, wood and iron ore, secret of steel
Communities, iron weapons, horses, warfare with nomadic peoples
Cheap iron, axes, iron-shod plows, forestry, carpentry, agriculture
Shipbuilding, cheaper sea transportation of goods
Increased construction, food production and population growth, costal cities had lower transport

 costs and expanded trade
 “The Iron Age is the first in which commodity production becomes a normal and indeed an essential part of economic activity”
 trade and local production
Slavery, labour, trade, small cities, warfare and political relations
Money in widespread use by 7 th century BC, erosion of tribal relations
Greek Natural Philosophy
 Classical civilization, old ideas and practices, natural philosophy and democracy
 Greek agricultural production and trade
 New ways of thinking, vested interests and connections with other cultures
 Greek dialectic, critical thinking
 Greek natural philosophy, abstract, generalizations from first principals, experience and




 quantification
Greeks dislike for trades and labour, patrons and schools
Rulers and philosophers divorced from practical work, idealist and abstract
 Thales: everything was originally water: earth, air and living things came from this water
 Phase change, plants and animals, materialist and atheist theory
 Heraclitus: all things were ultimately made of fire, constantly in flux
 Empedocles: four elements, earth, water, air and fire
Pythagoras, number theory, Babylonian and Egyptian sources
Numbers and shapes, 1 - point, 2 - line, 3 - plane
Circles in astronomy, Heraclides and Aristarchus: Earth a sphere, planets, sun and moon all revolved around a “central fire”
Democritus: small, uncuttable particles called atoms moving in a void 



Atomic theory materialistic and atheist
Hippocrates, observational work, rejected religious explanations
Empedocles: four humours matching the four elements: fire, air, water and earth - blood, bile, phlegm and black bile, health and the balance of humours
Aristotle
 Aristotle (384-322 BC), student of Plato’s, tutored Alexander the Great
 Importance of observation, classification logic
“The Philosopher”, work criticized, the authority until at least Renaissance
Aristotle’s ideas are compatible with commonsense, but not reducible to it
Four causes: material, formal, efficient (agent making the change) and final (purpose – biological model)
Aristotle: senses reflect real qualities in objects, empiricism

4 elements - earth, air, fire and water
Motion is imparted, force must be constant to maintain it
Natural motion: air and fire up, earth and water down, celestial motion in circles, all other motion “forced” or “unnatural”
Earth is immobile and spherical at center of universe
Void impossible, infinite motion and speed
Heavens and the 5 th element, natural circular motion
Great chain of being, minerals and vegetables to man
Greek Astronomy
Museum at Alexandria mathematical and astronomical research
Claudius Ptolemy (85-165 AD): 5 planets: Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn
Heavens spherical and rotated, sun, moon, stars
Earth a motionless sphere located at the centre of the universe.
Classical science was abstract and idealistic, separated from craft knowledge
Science, Technology and China
China ahead in technology, behind in natural philosophy
China was isolated by mountains, deserts and steppes
Sung dynasty (10 th -13 th century) rice agriculture, increasing population
Population spiked (estimated at 115-123 million), shifted south, urbanization increased (to 20% of population), leisured middle class
Government
Centralized authority in emperor, Emperor T’ai-tsu (960-976),
Sung Dynasty (960-1279) economic, cultural & political growth
Transfer from hereditary power to a meritocracy, civil service
Bureaus, departments, supervisors, political power
Merchant classes controlled by state
12 th century China: 50,000 km of waterways and canals, 1100 mile Grand Canal
Hydrological engineering crossed land boundaries, reinforced centralized state
Large scale agriculture & trade, large scale state planning, trees, construction, manufacturing and ship industry
Ceramics, textiles, paper, machinery
Paper and block printing (8 th century), movable type in 1040
Chinese Science and Philosophy
Alchemical work, lifespan extension
Charcoal, saltpeter (potassium nitrate), sulphur and arsenic (gunpowder) 9 th cent., bombs and grenades, cannons and rockets by 10 th century
Pyrotechnics for celebrations, fumigation, and for medicinal purposes
Math and astronomy, state support
Practical mathematics, economic and engineering problems
No mathematical community, no societies
Algebra over geometry and trigonometry, Muslim mathematicians
Accurate observational astronomy, new stars, comets, eclipses
Astronomy a state secret, transfers, children entering bureau
Accurate meteorological data and agriculture
The Development of Chinese Science
Centralization, critical inquiry, institutions: guilds, colleges, universities, etc.
Bureaucracy and work in science and technology
Government exams and natural philosophy, state support

Craft knowledge and scholarly knowledge
General scientific method, universal laws, logic, induction and deduction
Confucian focus on ethics and social commitments over study and control of nature
The Iron Age and Greek natural philosophy
The first culture where we see the discussion of nature, and exclude religious explanations. They believed religion was in the spiritual world but not when explaining science. The last thing is the idea that city states were democratic and its an important component of science. Bernal argues that abstract science started in ancient Greece.
Iron
Iron has been around since 12 th century B.C. Once it was learned it could be passed on, and all was needed is wood, iron and basic tool, it became more used. It was hard to learn but easy to teach. Iron working became very popular. The spread of iron weapons leads to the feature of classical life. Iron was a lower quality of bronze and cheap to make. Ex. Used to make axes. Iron also allowed shipbuilding to occur and allows more growth. Only coastal cities do better because they could ship back forth. There’s also an increase of making things in order to trade them to places that don’t have it. Through trade they were numerous but in a larger network -> extend of urbanization. By the 7 th century, money became widespread and it eroded tribal relations that existed before.
Greek Natural Philosophy
Classical civilizations took old ideas and developed these ideas and developed the democratic idea. This was possible because they were smaller populations. Greeks had to rely on other societies for food and opened trade and opened science and nature. Greek philosophy was dominated by back and forth argument and interested in discussion. One important part is it was applied to old and new ideas and weren’t afraid to challenge anything. Greek science was abstract and was interested in generalization.
They didn’t think individual knowledge was as important as general. One of the first Greeks that was involved in the quantification of nature which develops to math. Bernal argues that the Greeks separated the intellectual occupations and labour. Very few of them worked, and they taught in schools. The rulers and philosophers were separated from work and they had a generalized view of science.

NATS 1760 – Lecture 4 – Dutch Hydraulic Engineering
Medieval Dutch Hydraulic Engineering
European rainfall, thick, wet soil, iron–shod plough and oxen
Field rotation, crop, fallow, manure, population increase
Horse-collar, increased horse population, cavalry, stirrups
Hydraulic Engineering in Holland
Limited land for farming, starvation, disease and warfare
Holland below sea level, hydraulic engineering to create farmland
Drainage of marshland using canals
Reciprocal effect: draining one area led to flooding in another, draining led to lowering of land further below sea level
Simple technological developments and unexpected consequences
Coordination and Control
13th century: dikes (embankments to hold in water), dams (blocking rivers), sluices (canal with gates), and drainage canals
1100 and 1300 hundreds of dikes and dams
Excluding external water meant more flooding
Polders: units of land at the same water level with shared drainage system, labor and capital intensive
Windmills for drainage
System of autonomous water boards, predated government
No central co-ordination, taxes and public works local
The water boards were responsible for: regular inspection of facilities, recommending repair, supervising and organizing labour and materials, collecting taxes, dispute resolution
Management of problem, hydrological hypothesis, unintended consequences, technological fix, environmental changes
Dutch Hydraulic Engineering
Mediaeval Dutch hydraulic engineering
Europe had a different agricultural climate. They had cooler weather and thicker wet soil. The soil was harder to deal with so they used an iron-shod plough and oxen. Other things were adopted like field rotation-take fields and allow fields to fallow and restore nutrients. Use one field and after done harvesting then leave it to fallow. The horse-collar was used to yoke something to a horse, and it distributes the weight so that its not around his neck. It allowed the use of horses rather than oxen. Oxen are more expensive -> bigger and more food. Horses were cheaper. This led an increase to the horse population. All these developments all allowed Europe to increase its food production in the early medieval time. In addition, the sizes of armies increased significantly. Agriculture contributed to this because more horses were needed and then they were used for Calvary. The introduction to the stirrup
(Chinese invention) allowed knights to carry heavy armour, because without it its very hard. One thing that didn’t come out of this is centralized agriculture.
Hydraulic Engineering in Holland
Populations expanded and food supply increase. But Europe is comparatively small in terms of land that is usable for agriculture. Crop failure caused large-scale starvation, and this cased conflicts and rebellion. Holland was below sea level and became a site for agricultural using hydraulic engineering to create farmland. Swamps are nutrient rich, and once the water is drained and crops are planted. By learning how to drain the water, the Dutch came up with agricultural land where there wasn’t before. The historical pattern is changing, the use of the same hydraulic engineering to aid with agriculture, but there isn’t the formation of a large scale centralized government. Every other example of hydraulic engineering led to a centralized government. There were some small settlements. The Dutch achieved significant land

drainage with simple tools and technology by digging ditches. How do human activities impact the environment? In the beginning they drain existing waterways by making them deeper. However, as they dig deeper they get lower under sea level and more prone to flooding – land sublimation. So they built more canals and waterways to get rid of the excess water. It’s a process that continues – a reciprocal effect. It was an unintended consequence of drainage, they didn’t see this when they started the process.
Every time you do something on a large scale, it leads to unintended consequences and cant be predicted.
Coordination and Control
By the end of the 13 th century there were dikes (embankments to hold water), dams (blocking rivers), sluices (canal with gates) and drainage canals. Between 1100-1300, they wanted to keep the external out and the internal out. They had to drain without letting external water in. This led to the construction of sluices. The Dutch pioneered polders which are units of land at the same water level with shared drainage system. The system works as long as there are a series of agricultural settlements at a distance between. The challenge of polder is it is labour intensive and creates more work. Drainage of land started by digging deeper and larger ditches, but the problem is the land sublimation and gravity isn’t helping out. If the land sinks enough there’s no more of an elevation factor. So digging more ditches didn’t help anymore. So they used windmills to pump water out, this allowed further drainage and maintenance of water. By the 15 th century they were a common site in Holland. This engineering led to a local centralized government, and local water maintenance-local water boards. They were organizations that were responsible for regular inspection of facilities, recommending repair, supervising and organizing labour and materials, collecting taxes and dispute revolution. These survived as autonomous local governments and then moved to larger scale governments. They came up with a storm surge barriers that let walls down when they needed to. They were to stop large storms from coming to the land. You have large-scale engineering to get excess water out, but there isn’t a centralized bureaucratic government, so there seems to be an exception. The unintended consequences led to more and more technology that needed to be developed. There is a series of technological fixes, and this developed into storm surge barriers. They were making significant changes using simple technologies.

SC / NATS 1760 - Lecture 5 – Medieval Science
Introduction
10 centuries of history, end of the Classical period to end of the medieval period
What happens to science in this long span of time?
Greek natural philosophy, in techniques and ideas, decays, is transmitted across cultures, it recovers and eventually transforms
Recovering the classical world view, adapting it Feudalism and religion
Classical World View
No religious explanations, exclusion of trades and labour, breaking down nature into components
(elements, atoms), the importance of numbers, observation, classification and logic, theories of the elements, the causes, geocentric astronomical theories
From Classical to Feudal Civilization
Western Roman Empire falls, institutions and technologies, decentralized economic and political system
Large-scale technologies, long-range technologies
Wealthy (plutocrats or barbarians), estate owning class, peasants
Land and tools in exchange for rent, tax or service on crops
Feudal demands on science, classical world view sufficed
Production more widespread and closer to people
Subsistence economy, increased technological innovation, labour shortages
Feudal need for science given mode of production
Outside Europe
Dark Ages, Greek natural philosophy in India, Persia, Central Asia and China, economic and cultural success
Trade networks, manufacturing industry for luxury items o Manufacturing innovations (e.g. looms, printing) from China to West
Science thrived in India, China and Persia, mathematics, astronomy and medicine
Religious Factors
Islam, Christianity, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism and Hinduism
Priesthood, fixed rituals, belief in the order of the universe, sacred books, contributed to literacy, open to all, social and natural order, afterlife
Christianity and oppression, Aristotelian and Platonic ideas
Christianity as a cultural institution: literacy, education, administration and law
Initially diffuse, centralized authority (Pope, bishops), incorporated into the state
Mystical neo-Platonic theories of the soul and Christian doctrine
Greek philosophies integrated, observation and experiment ignored
Treating scripture as authoritative about natural philosophy held up scientific advance
Feudal economy did not necessitate change in Church views
Christian sects, spread of medical and astronomical knowledge
Syria, Egypt and India, Hindu introduction of the number zero
Islamic and medieval science involved a reinvestigation of classical sources, reinterpreted and expanded on the basis of their experience
Crafts knowledge, Medieval period and Renaissance
Islamic Influences
The rise of Islam: widespread literacy, common religion, common culture, social stability, trade in goods and ideas
No new economic system, mercantilist, minimized slavery, no centralization of power

Use of Chinese technologies: steel, silk, paper and porcelain
Religion less restrictive of natural philosophy
Arabic translation, Greek history, poetry, drama, science and philosophy
Encyclopedias popular, inclusion of ideas from many cultures
Islamic scholars critical of Classical ideas, astrology and alchemy.
Islamic scientists most often doctors, supported by state or wealthy merchants, secular and commercial focus
Doctrine of “two truths”: one spiritual and one rational
Astrology, astronomy and mathematics, Hindu number system
Observational astronomy, diseases of the eye, optics, eyeglasses, foundation for telescopes, microscopes and cameras
Islamic scholars and practical knowledge, chemistry, distillation
Production of soda, alum and other salts, textiles
Medieval Christianity adopted the science of the Greeks, transformed by Islamic scholars into something more complex and wide reaching
Medieval Science
From Federal to feudal civilization
Western roman empire falls, it was a centralized place. They developed a road system that allowed them to control colonies. When they fell there was no longer a centralized system. They built aqueducts and transportation technology. After the break of the empire, there were 2 groups left, the plutocrats
(wealthy merchants) and barbarians. The peasants worked the land but had to give a piece of their land as a rent. They went to a decentralized political system where everyone was a farmer. The classical worldview that the Europeans produced was necessary for their lifestyle. They didn’t need better science so better science didn’t get developed. However feudalism introduced new farming techniques developed locally and spread to large areas. Feudalism is a substance economy where you make just enough to get by. But this isn’t good when there are diseases and when things don’t go well. Because of this, they didn’t get an increase in population because of the lack of food. There is a significant amount of warfare and population was low, so many people turned to technology to aid to labour. Why does science come to prominence in Europe in the 15, 16, 17 century and nowhere else? The development of technology in the medieval period contributes to the later development of science. The things they learnt with developing technology and labour later contributes to science. Feudal society didn’t need science until the late middle ages where navigation is used.
Outside Europe
This period isn’t really the dark ages just because there wasn’t much going on in Europe, but there was science in other countries like Persia, china etc. These countries were thriving, they had extensive trade networks, and they had luxury item that were produced and this led to more skills. Ex. Looms were developed in China. Although there wasn’t much going on scientifically in Europe, there was in other parts taken originally from the Greeks.
Religious Factors
Several religions came to prominence in the world in the medieval world, Islam, Christianity etc. These religions all share the same beliefs, they all had a fixed priesthood, the order of the universe, sacred books, rituals, all the religions contributed to literacy. They were open to all people, they believed that nature helps us organize our universe now, and the belief in the after-life. Christianity arose from oppression and slaves. As it became more popular then Greek philosophy came into Christianity.
Christianity formed the only cultural institution to remain in Europe, it maintained literacy and the only form of education as well as law and administration of society. The church became the institution that transmitted literacy. It started out diffusely and started as a decentralized government, but then moved t a more centralized society. The state and church were separate. Generally, Greek philosophies were integrated into Christianity. They took a lot of neo-platonic ideas (spiritual side) but didn’t take the

scientific parts. Treating a scripture for the basis of nature, this held up science. The reason people challenged the authority of the church because at that time there was an economic need to develop science. There were various sects and they spread classical knowledge around. The science of the Greeks expanded by Islam and medieval. Craft knowledge become important and the knowledge of craftsman become important.
Islamic Influences
In the medieval period the Islamic culture was the most advance during this time. It added to widespread literacy, social stability (allowed science institutions to develop) and trade in goods and ideas. They continued the existing trade and kept a decentralized government. They imported Chinese technologies and contributed to their development. They also developed many encyclopedias, and they were very good at getting a comprehensive view of ideas. That’s very important for science. Arabic Islamic scholars weren’t invested in Greek ideas because it wasn’t their culture, so they were critical of Greek ideas so they were critical of science and developed it more and advancement of science. Science was practiced largely by doctors and did science on the side, and were supported by the sides, and they had a secular commercial need. They treated science and religion as 2 separate things, so there wasn’t a need to base science on religion, and this was an advantage. The importance of astrology lead to astronomy. They also adopted the Hindu number system and more people could learn it and contribute to science.
Observational astronomy was well developed, and they made a lot of research on the disease of the eye, and lead to development of optics, and the eyeglasses. This helped later contribute to cameras and microscopes. They didn’t have the Greek distain for practical knowledge they preferred theoretical knowledge, they intermingled the 2 areas, and they advanced chemistry. Textiles did well because they used basic chemistry to change color and fabric. All this was transmitted to other parts of the world and later to Europe to contribute to science.

NATS 1760 – Lecture 6 – Medieval Science Part II
Feudalism
Fall of the Roman Empire, feudal economy, local defense and self-sufficiency, trade in luxury goods and slaves
Land based feudal system, craft based industry
Common ownership of land, forced labor
Lords provided protection from aggressors, demanded service
Technological advances (iron, ploughs, harnesses and looms, mills) dispersed
Feudal economy expanded in scope over more land
Trade and local manufacturing, importance of towns, wealthy capitalists
Expansion and labor shortages, mechanical action and water and animal power
The Christian Church
Church a landowner, source of literacy
Church opposed the rising urban class of merchants and artisans
12 th century: universities in Europe, liberal arts (grammar, rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy and music), philosophy and theology
12 th century massive translation of Arabic works into Latin, classical ideas
Islamic and Christian problems with natural philosophy: how was the universe created, how were faith and reason related, literal readings of the Bible and Koran, and the validity of mystical experience
Conflict and change, economic needs
European science and clerics, Islamic science and doctors
Christian science part-time, supporting revelation with experience
Astronomy for calendars and astrology
All nature was a hierarchy, spheres for the fixed stars, planets and moon
Technology and Industry
Technologies from China: the horse-collar, the clock, the compass, the sternpost rudder, gunpowder, paper and printing
Improved means of production and transportation, trade
Industry in the countryside, water and windmills (fulling cloth, forging iron and sawing wood), innovation outside of guilds
Millwrights as “mechanics” base of knowledge for later innovations
Mechanical clocks, magnets and the compass, force at a distance
Gunpowder, Chinese origin, land based aristocracy and wealthy republics, technical skills and natural resources
Gunpowder and medieval chemistry, theories of combustion
Cannonball trajectories and dynamics, distillation, alcohol
Paper, shortage of copyists, development of printing
Printing with movable type, literacy, cheap books, trades and the learned classes
Larger market for manufactured goods, rich merchants o “The fundamental reason why that advance [of science] was so long delayed was that in a feudal economy, Islamic or Christian, there was no way in which rational science could be used to any practical advantage.” (246)
Medieval Science Part II
Feudalism
The feudal system was locally based and the society rebuilt itself after the fall of the roman empire. It replaced the slave society by serfs and peasant. The feudal system is land based because it is agricultural so the value is land. Agricultural products were produced locally and wasn’t shipped. The industry was largely craft-based labour, and had very little division of labour. In the medieval system the peasants worked the land which was commonly owed. Lords would use their force to control the peasants into harvesting food so that the lord could later sell it. It was a coercive system versus capitalism. In exchange

for this, the peasants got protection from other people. There was a lot of death and conflict over the control of land. The technological advances – better ploughs, looms, mills. Technologies were simple but were wide-spread. This is one of the reasons why the medieval period was susceptible to conflict. There were many occurrences of starvation. The feudal economy expanded in scope of more land, if you want more power and wealth you need land, so the feudal system demanded to expand to other countries for land. What they didn’t have is a centralized system, they had a lot of local systems. Trade and local manufacturing increased in a small scale and town began to grow rather than cities. One of the things that came out is a wealthy class of merchants emerged and eventually they became the capitalists that emerged. Due to the rapid expansion there were labour shortages. Technology was substituted for technology in many cases. Water and animal power were used for this. The horse became a primary mode on the farm. Water mills were used for grinding etc. Water power is the primary method well into the late
19 th century.
The Christian Church
The church owned land and it still owns a significant amount of land in Europe. The church was also the source of literacy, one of the few places where literacy survived after the fall of the roman empire. The church was opposed to the wealthy merchants putting themselves against the teachings of the church. The church tied themselves to the economic side of the society. As early as the 12 th century, universities were formed. Universities emerged at the same time the merchants emerged, what they are teaching isn’t connected to economy but it is one of the reason why they emerged. The knowledge of classical organization was lost in Europe but was kept in Arabic, and then retranslated into Latin and eventually fused to other societies. Both the Islamic and Christian world had conflicts between science and faith. However in the Islamic world there was a compromise, that science and faith are separate, and therefore science was allowed to thrive. But in the Christian world science slows down because they cant co-exist. When science conflicts with faith it creates problems. Bernal argues that this conflict was significant until economic demands required science to get better, so this trumped faith. Where there is conflict between science and faith, it is eventually overcome by economic demands. One significant difference between Islamic and Christian ways, is in Europe the only people who had education were the priests so they dominated the science. Whereas in Islam the doctors were the ones who developed science who believed too. Christian science was done part-time. There is motivation to study nature because nature is created by G-d and we want to know more about G-d. Astronomy was used for calendars in Europe. Astronomy was primarily developed in the Islamic world. The general view in Europe is hierarchy, at the top was G-d and at the bottom was rocks etc. And everything revolved around the sun.
Technology and Industry
A number of technologies came from China and were transferred to Europe. One of the possible factors is king’s khan who allowed routes. For example, the horse collar, clock, compass, gun powder, printing.
Better means of transportation also was developed in the medieval period as manufacturing is more of a focus and land is less focused. Industry arose in the country side around water and windmills, like sawing food etc. This allowed innovation to occur outside the control of guilds. Guilds controlled labour in each area. Production becomes decentralized so its harder for guilds to control, so in the medieval period they lose control. Mill wrights were technological experts who moved from place to place. Mechanical clocks were also developed in the medieval period, and became a method of keeping track of work. Once you can keep track of time it could structure labour. Another important point is the use of magnets and compass. It introduced the idea of force at distance, which is important to the theory of gravity. The introduction to gun powder introduced cannons and weapons are larger. Only larger and wealthier lords and powers are able to own them. The ability to have gunpowder without oxygen and this challenged idea of chemistry. Also they learnt about physics with cannons. Building large guns required technical skills and natural resources, which needs money and power. This ultimately led to the demise of knights etc.
Distillation is a chemical process and was used for alcohol and used for pure chemicals to sue for tests.
The introduction of paper provided a cheap substitute for parchment, which was expensive to make. This led to a shortage of copyists which led to the demand of printing. Medieval manuscripts were notoriously mistaken. Printing improved accuracy and speed. Printing means there is more printed matter available,

and more craftsmen were able to write their knowledge which was passed on. The emergence of larger market and trade, a middle class merchant emerged and capitalism emerged. It didn’t occur before this because money and power was concentrated, whereas in the feudal system the power and money was dispersed among the feudal system. The reason why science doesn’t thrive in the feudal economy in
there is no economic need for science in a feudal system, where local agriculture was primarily used.
They didn’t need science so it didn’t expand. Then in the early modern period they need to expand to other countries and this is when science changes.

Science, Technology, and Colonial Expansion
SC-NATS 1840F Lecture 7 - Science, Technology and Colonial Expansion
Science and technology, colonial expansion
15 th century Capitalism, international trade and European expansion, new resources and land
Technology (sailing ships, telescopes, clocks) and science (astronomy) and navigation, discovery and conquest, colonialism
ASIDE: Technology and Navigation o Mathematical equations: time, distance, angle, longitude or latitude o Angles (sextants), direction (compass), position (telescopes), time (mechanical clock)
Trade, conquest and colonization, population shifts, war and disease
Christopher Columbus, 1492, Francisco Pizzaro, 1532, Cajamarca, Peru
Inca Emperor Atahuallpa, 168 against 80,000
Success attributed to efficiency and psychological impact of guns
4-1/2 million sq km (Peru + Chile + Mexico + Ecuador), 504,782 sq km Spain
Europeans advantages: Horses (combat, speed, endurance), steel (weapons and armor), infectious diseases (decimating populations), centralized states (resources for colonization), writing + printing to gain information
Number and accuracy of guns, decreasing psychological impact
New world populations eventually adopted horse and guns
Combat advantages of horses: vantage point, defense of height, speed, maneuverability, armor
Horse collar, horse, stirrup, cavalry
Steel weapons versus quilted armor, steel armor
Smallpox, influenza, typhus and bubonic plague (95% of population)
Technology, science and sailing ships
Malaria, yellow fever and Europeans, Africa, India, SE Asia and New Guinea
Resources of centralized nation states, market wealth
Writing, inspiration, methods, maps, printing press
Poor communication, information, misconceptions, speed, precedent
By the 15 th century, the Europeans became wealthier and started adventuring to other places. They constantly needed more land because their land was small. They also needed more land for new resources. In this time a few technologies came together like sailing ships, navigation. Telescope – able to see the constellations. Clock – it was around since the earliest of civilizations but it comes out by the medieval period. It took till the 19 th century for them to be more accurate. Sextant – like a protractor.
They all improved the ability to tell time distance, angle etc. There were certain calculations in astronomy that needed values which could be found with these new technologies. The better you can navigate around. According to Diamond, this was a huge population shift. Several native populations were killed through disease and war. And vice versa, diseases from America were spread to Europe. The story with
Pizzaro is pretty standard. But in this case, the Incas were 168 against 80,000. The explanation is that the
Europeans had firearms and it terrifies the natives and allows them to win. Spain subjugated 4-1/2 million sq km – Peru, Chile, Mexico, Ecuador, they were able to get a few times their land mass colonized so there was a lot of temptation to conquer. Also European states had a lot of resources and money to do these expeditions. They also had writing and printing to share information. According to Diamond all these factors add to the Europeans conquering. But guns weren’t really a factor because they weren’t accurate, and not significantly deadly, he says the weaponry wasn’t so successful and within a few years the native
Americans acquired the technologies. By the time the Europeans came to the new world they were very experienced with horses – they were up higher, speed maneuverability, cavalry, they were also very terrifying when they were first seen. That also gave the Europeans a significant advantage, and technology from farming like stirrups also helped them here. There was also development in armour with steel, in addition they had swords etc, so they were more or less invulnerable to the natives. Disease –
Diseases like small pox, influenza, were spread and made a huge difference to colonization. These

diseases couldn’t have happened if it weren’t for the human population to develop the technologies to bring the animals over. Diamond points out they had the resources of centralized nation states, to have the wealth to have all the armours and horses. Another important factor is in the Incan emperor was also a religious leader so when he was killed it affected the natives. Writing – early victories were written quickly and other expeditions were followed. When they saw things worked well they wrote it down and it as spread. Also maps were produced as they learnt more about the territories, they could reproduce the exact same thing over and over. This gave the Europeans an advantage. For example the Incans didn’t think they were there for conquest. Diamond argues that the locals weren’t prepared for the Europeans.

SC/NATS 1760 Lecture 8 – The Scientific Revolution
The Scientific Revolution, 16 th -17 th century
Bernal treats economic and political factors as the sources of the scientific revolution, not the context
Bernal highlights the transformation of the Feudal economy
Rise of monarchy and the bourgeoisie
Technical improvements in agriculture and textile production
Expansion of trade due to improvements in agriculture and navigation increases markets
Capital investment in science and technology
Marxism in Theory
Exploitation and the economy
From slavery to serfs to the proletariat
Capitalists own the means of production, worker alienation
Capitalism is only a stage in a larger historical process
Role of science and technology in this process
Interrelation of scientific and economic changes
Importance of science
Economic transformation more important than scientific development (“possible and necessary”)
Science is permanent, capitalism is temporary
Practical and abstract elements of science merged in scientific revolution
Economic and religious changes allow scientists to challenge ancient authorities
Competing authority, not new authority
Astronomy and the Scientific Revolution
navigation, observations and mathematical structure
Nicholas Copernicus (1473-1543), Torun, Poland
De Revolutionibus orbium coelestium, 1543
Problems with Ptolemy
Copernicus: o Spherical earth, rotated on axis o Large Universe o Sun-Centred model o Mars and Venus
Tycho Brahe (1546-1601)
New star in 1572, comet in 1577
Geocentric model that had all of the planets revolving around the sun, and the sun revolving around the Earth.
Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), mathematician and a supporter of Copernicus
Elliptical orbits and non-uniform velocities
Galileo Galilei, 1564-1642, Many interests, mathematics, astronomy, mechanics, and instrumentation
Telescopic observations produced criticisms of Ptolemaic and Aristotelian cosmology: o Moons of Jupiter o Imperfections on the moon o Phases of Venus o Planets and stars
Disputes over telescopic observations
Church condemnation of Copernicanism in 1616
Galileo was censured from holding, defending or teaching it.
Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems, 1632
Protestant reformation and Galileo’s status

The Expansion of Science
Merchant interests and manufacturing interests
Nation building, economic expansion, communication, cooperation and demand for scientific innovation
Scientists independently wealthy, merchants, landowners, lawyers, doctors, clergy
Royal Society of London and the French Royal Academy
Science and practical issues: pumping and hydraulics (mining), gunnery and mechanics (warfare) and navigation (trade)
Scientists traded ideas, published work, carried out public experiments
Experimental basis to 17 th century science
Robert Boyle, Robert Hooke and air-pump, vacuum, atomism, corpuscular theory
Experimental Equipment
Telescope and optical theory
Microscope and new observations, microorganisms
Air pump, experiments on vacuum and combustion, respiration, sound, electricity
Celestial Mechanics
Copernicus and physics, rotating and revolving Earth
Motion of stellar bodies, centrifugal force and gravity
Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727), mmathematics, astronomy, optics, mechanics, chemistry, alchemy
Professor, warden of the Royal Mint, Knighthood
Principia Mathematica Philosophia Naturalis (1687)
force should decrease with distance, inverse-square law (1/r 2 )
Force associated with a change in motion, rather than motion itself, objects tend to preserve their motion until acted upon by a force
Universal gravity: planets, moon, falling objects, tides
Unifies terrestrial and celestial realms
Revolutions in Science
Disruption of capitalism and revolution in science
Unity to 17 th century science, in persons (broad interests), ideas (quantitative analysis) and applications (practical)
Astronomy
Ptolemy says that the sun revolves around the earth. And it moves in a uniform circle which is perfect because no matter where you start on a circle you’ll end up in the same spot. And they also goes along with the fact that the heaven is perfect. Copernicus says that the earth revolves around the sun, and this was rejected by the church.
SC/NATS 1760 – Lecture 9 – Comparative History and the Scientific Revolution
Shift from a geocentric to a heliocentric planetary system

By the end of the Scientific Revolution (early 18 th century): o Merging of terrestrial and celestial physics o Religious views successfully challenged o New fields of research o Scientific authority and scientific community o Public science o New technologies
These sorts of changes happened in Europe first, why?
Astronomy and agriculture, Arabic/Islamic civilization, China, Europe, Americas
The Question
Why didn’t the scientific revolution happen in Arabic/Islamic civilization, where science was the most advanced anywhere at that time? o Copernicus and Arabic/Islamic astronomical models o Direct observational evidence, predictions, complexity o Practical success of Arabic astronomy, Al-Battani (d. 929) o Experimental method
“Cultural and structural impediments” to revolution
 Huff's Arguments
 1. Certain “Norms” or “Values” are necessary for science to emerge in its modern form, these
 norms emerged in Europe and not elsewhere
2. The breakthrough to the modern scientific viewpoint was premised upon the ability of natural philosophers to describe nature in ways that were at variance with the established views, through the creation of an “institutional neutral space”
The Norms of Science
Norms or values of scientific practice, “Scientific Ethos” according to Robert Merton o 1. Universalism: that truth claims are to be subjected to preestablished impersonal criteria consonant with observation and with previously confirmed knowledge.
(Scientific knowledge has rational, universal standards) o 2. Communalism: that the substantive findings of science are a product of social collaboration and are assigned to the community. They constitute a common heritage.
(Scientific knowledge is public) o 3. Disinterestedness: that the scientist searches for truth for its own sake, apart from the interests of class, nation or economic reward. Such rewards may be received, but work should not be specifically directed towards obtaining them. (Scientific knowledge is enough on its own) o 4. Organized Scepticism: that judgement should be suspended until the facts are at hand and beliefs have been scrutinized in terms of empirical and logical criteria. (Science is sceptical)
Regulative ideals o Interpretive flexibility o Role-Sets
Huff: These norms were institutionalized in European science, and allowed the scientific revolution to come to full fruition
Universalism: Scientific knowledge has rational, universal standards
Legal Models: o Particularistic models and legal theory o Europe on the Roman model
Communalism o Scientific knowledge is public

Restrictions on questions about nature
Methods for concealment of knowledge: o Symbolism, suppressing premises of an argument, dealing with subjects outside of their proper context, speaking enigmatically, transposing words and letters, using equivocal terms, use of contradictory premises, using extreme brevity, failing to draw obvious conclusions…
The printing press
Disinterestedness and Organized Scepticism o Scientists pursue knowledge for the sake of knowledge o Science is skeptical about all knowledge claims
All scholarship anchored in religion in Islam
Astronomy linked to religion
Limitations in reason of man
Emergence of an Institutional Neutral Space
Institutional neutral space
What was the institutional space in Islamic society: o Religious objections o Legal corporations, societies, organizations o Personalized or particular authority o Marginalization of foreign sciences
Legal Reality: Corporations
 Islamic law and corporate bodies
 “… corporate personalities such as business corporations, guilds, cities, towns or universities did not exist in Islamic law” o Religious interference o Lack of standardized curriculum
In the west, the “… collective appropriation of uniform standards of teaching (and practice) by a professional group located in an institutionally autonomous location – the university, but also in professional guilds – and hence the exclusion of extraprofessional and religious censors and overseers.”
Comparative History and the Scientific Revolution
There was a shift from a geocentric to a heliocentric planetary system. After the scientific revolution there was a significant change with religious beliefs, they challenged the existence of the earth that it was just another planet. Ex. Galileo was put in jail and arrested by the church but in the end his foundlings were later taught in universities. The scientific change contributed to changes that lasted longer over time.
They developed methods that were used and could be applied to other areas. One of the key differences between post and pre revolution, after the scientific revolution almost everything had a mathematic part to it, and before they were still developing math. Also science after the scientific revolution it gained a relative area in universities. Scientific communities and societies were formed that allowed scientists to associate with each other and share ideas. This all happened over the course of the scientific revolution.
Before the revolution science was a more private area, but after it was more public. Scientists are interested in the scientific revolution, it happened in Europe, and why did it happen there and not in other parts of the world? Astronomy was important to all cultures so why didn’t the change happen to all cultures? Also geometric astronomy was quite in one part of the world ex. In China, why didn’t the major changes happen there?
Huff’s Question
He was very interested in why the sceintifc revolution didn’t happen in Arabic/Islamic civilization, where science was the most advanced? Copernicus used Arabic/Islamic models to construct one of the theories

in astronomy. He also points that Arabic/Islamic success was practical, they were leaders in the field. Al-
Battani was an example, his worked was cited well for 600 years after he passed away. His also points out the experimental method that was used ex. Optics, was developed. There were certain things that the
Islam/Arab world had before the scientific revolution. He says what stopped the scientific revolution from happening rather than looking at why it could have happened?
Huff’s Arguments
Huff argues in order to explain that certain norms or rules are necessary for science to emerge. According to these norms they emerged at place and science emerged there. 2. If you want to develop science you need to be able to say things that might be controversial. A place where you can say what you want and not get in trouble, the place that you can do this is universities. The creation of universities was the key to the ultimate development in Europe.
Norms of Science
Scientific Ethos according to Robert Merton:
1.
Universalism: that truth claims are to be subjected to preestablished impersonal criteria consonant with observation and with previously confirmed knowledge. (Scientific knowledge has rational, universal standards). Scientific knowledge has universal standards. There are rules that are created and then they are applied everywhere.
2.
Communalism: that the substantive findings of science are a product of social collaboration and are assigned to the community. They constitute a common heritage. (Scientific knowledge is public). Scientific knowledge is public. When scientists did research they made it public.
3.
Disinterestedness: that the scientist searches for truth for its own sake, apart from the interests of class, nation or economic reward. Such rewards may be received, but work should not be specifically directed towards obtaining them. (Scientific knowledge is enough on its own). The primary motivation of science is to find out more about the world.
4.
Organizational Skepticism: Science is a skeptical enterprise. When scientists do their work they check things to make sure what they are doing is right.
Do norms and values have to hold at all times to be considered norms? No they do not. Norms work according to regulative ideals, they don’t force you to do anything, but they push you in one direction to another. Interpretative flexibility, ex. Organized skepticism, they can be interpretative in different ways.
Role-sets, another reason is science sometimes clash with other roles in society. These values don’t dictate what scientists do but they influence. These norms were institutionalized in Europe and allowed science to develop. They came to dominate science by influence.
Universalism
In Arabic Islamic societies legal norms were the most developed. Huff looks at scientific law as developed elsewhere. Scientific models were developed to be similar to the legal realm. His first point is that there was resistance in the Arabic society with legal realm and so too with science. For example punishments were particular rather than have a legal system. It’s a particularistic society rather than a generalist. Huff argues with the Roman model is that there are natural norms that are adopted. We can know what these laws are and we can apply them, this is from the legal and scientific perspective. You have to believe that science makes sense. According to Huff the particular Arab/Islam society didn’t believe that so it didn’t develop there. Huff also argues that scientific knowledge is public but in Arabic/Islamic cultures science was hidden. Certain methods were used to conceal knowledge who didn’t have that background. This doesn’t fit well with the values of science. As well, the printing press wasn’t used based on the idea that the knowledge is supposed to be concealed. Whereas in Europe it was used for a long time. Also there were restrictions on questions about nature.
Disinterestedness
The formation of universities allowed for science to flourish. You couldn’t have organized skepticism in the Arab/Islam world because science and religion clash, so they couldn’t argue against religion. Huff also points out that people weren’t able to understand knowledge other than through religion.

Emergence of Institutional Space
The legal system was set up that if people did things that were against religion there was something associated with it. Also there was no concept of a corporation that come together to defend others in
Islamic law. In the Arabic/Islamic world education didn’t have standards, you would choose a scholar to learn with. In Europe the education was standardized.
Legal Reality: Corporations
Groups of people who have come together and organized themselves in some way. According to Islamic law we are all part of one big community so it doesn’t make sense to divide into smaller groups. So there is no reason to make legal difference like guilds, cities etc. This hindered the ability of science to develop, because once you create a different group they are protected and can do whatever they wanted.
According to Huff science needs to be standardized and general. In the west, the “… collective appropriation of uniform standards of teaching (and practice) by a professional group located in an institutionally autonomous location – the university, but also in professional guilds – and hence the exclusion of extraprofessional and religious censors and overseers.” People could say what they wanted to and they could challenge the scientific idea. It was possible to be critical of the church ideas, some were punished for that, but the information was later developed. The inability to create a place where people could say what they wanted hindered the Islamic world from moving t a geocentric world to a heliocentric world.
NATS 1760 Lecture 10 – Commerce and the Scientific Revolution
Bernal – capitalism and scientific growth, astronomy and navigation

Objectivity and the Growth of Science
natural objects, personal acquaintance
Complex theories and sophisticated mathematics
Scientific revolution and the “first age of global commerce”
Medicine and the life sciences
Observational knowledge, tradesmen and common people
Travelers: sailors, tourists, doctors, merchants, diplomats
European middle class in Renaissance, dominant personal, intellectual and economic interests
Foreign spices, tobacco, chocolate, coffee and tea, cabinets of curiosities, gardens
Colonial holdings, “data base” of science, local knowledge
Commerce and Knowledge
Descriptive knowledge of objects and economic transactions
Trade methods for handling objects imported into science
Knowledge of objects, good taste and social standing
Objectivity: the kind of knowledge related to the detailed acquaintance with objects
Early modern preference for acquaintance over discourse
Scientific Growth
Arguments for the improvement of science: o Science grows in a democracy (Greece) o Science grows when spurred on by economic demands (Bernal) o Science grows when there is a “free space” for inquiry (Huff) o Science grows when commerce increases (Cook)
Common thread: open inquiry
Abstract theoretical knowledge and knowledge of objects
Commerce and the Scientific Revolution
Objectivity and the growth of science
Cook starts his argument that people become acquainted with things and simple observations could relate to science in simple ways. People who aren’t scientists make observations and contribute to science. But if you only look at what scientists do you can miss what isn’t contributed. Many people view science as complex theories and mathematics but in addition observations matter as well. Just like Bernal he points out that the scientific revolution came around the time when countries around the world were trading, at the same time science emerges. Cook focuses more on life sciences as oppose to astronomy.
He focuses in on observational knowledge he claims that its collected by tradesman and everyday people
Its important to look at this and see how science evolves. In order to find the observational knowledge, he focuses on mundane every activities. He talks about reports brought back from doctor, sailors etc and these reports were understood by scientists and written down. Whats important is that these observations from non-scientists added to science. Cook also argues that the Europeans middle class becomes powerful. And the interest in this middle class became dominant in society – economic and social aspects. These interests shaped society and then science. At this time it was a period of growth and trade, and it became fashionable to have things from other countries. Europeans consumed foreign goods like spices, chocolate etc. They liked to collect strange things from other countries and show them to others. This is very important because at this time people were revisiting classical knowledge from the
Greeks and challenged the info. There was also the emergence of the exotic gardens and brought back plants from other countries. Cook’s point is that the desire for new things leads to knowledge about them, and this adds to science. Science benefited immensely from colonialism, there was new data from the new world which added to the “data base” of science.
Commerce and Knowledge
Knowledge of objects became useful as well, and therefore trade and commerce inspired people to know more about objects, which led to the development of science. The need to trade of goods and bring them

over long distances in good shape added to the preservation of them and this added to science. As well, knowing a lot about plants and animals from the new world was trendy. Knowing about these objects became socially desirable and status. It became more important to say that you saw and held the object rather than read about it, whereas in the medieval period it was more about what was read in books. It wasn’t enough to just get knowledge from books, and this is a very important shift. Cook labels this as objectivity. Cooks highlighting the knowledge was plants was very important to science rather than book knowledge.
Scientific Growth
Science improves on certain circumstances. Science tends to do well in a democracy, example with the
Greeks. Many authors have argued that science thrives in a democracy. Another argument is science grows when there are economic demands. Science also grows when there is a free space to say what you want which is huff’s arguments. Cooks arguments is that science improves when we have become more knowledgeable in objects, and a free exchange in goods. The common thread between all this is open inquiry, there has to be an open space to work on science without a restriction.
NATS 1760 6.0 B – Lecture 12 – Science and The Industrial Revolution
Discoveries, connections with science and industry, trends
Astronomy and navigation, 19 th century industry and science

Seventeenth Century Science
Growth and slowdown of science over 17 th century
Merchants shifting to land investments (lower risk)
Established interests, traditional industries, regular profits and control
Other explanations: o Newton’s science close to complete, working out details o Benefits of science to navigation achieved, subsequent developments slower o Merchants not knowledgeable about science
17 th century science, navigation, manufacturing and agriculture
Scientific societies, Sweden, Russia and Prussia
Scientific Developments in the 18 th Century
Science increased in scope rather than depth, new fields
Electricity, public demonstrations, practical uses, electric rail, distributed power
Botany, medicinal uses, timber, mining
Chemistry – chemical versus manual bleaching, weeks to days
18 th century science worked out Newton’s theories, assumed correct
Political changes and changes in science, French Revolution, weights and measures, metric system, science education reforms
Science and the Nineteenth Century
Aniline artificial dyes, 19 th century, textile industry, natural dye economies (India)
Capitalists, chemistry, local industry, weavers
Chemistry, fertilizers, productivity, anesthetics
Specialized scientific societies, disciplines and journals, science and universities
wealthy amateur to middle class professional
Feedback from industry to science: thermodynamics data from steam engines
Modern form of industry emerges: application of science to production, larger firms and conglomerates, science used in war, large scale science, industrial research laboratory
Science and the Industrial Revolution
How science did or didn’t contribute to the industrial revolution? Bernal is less interested in individual scientists and more interested in how did it contribute to the industry. Science doesn’t really benefit industry significantly until the 19 th century.
Seventeenth Century Growth
At the end of the 17 th century science started to slow down whereas the beginning grew rapidly, Bernal attributes this to social and economic reasons. He argues that a new class of merchants arose who were less interested in science and more interested in acquiring land. They became less into risks by the end of the century. Capitalitism turns science more conservative over time since those in power want to stay in power. Other explanations: 1. Newton’s work on the theory of gravity was so advanced that few people want to challenge it and they worked on the ideas around it. Similar arguments were made about
Einstein. 2. As people tried to do other things they discovered it was harder than they thought. It was easier to improve physics and astronomy rather than other parts of science. ex. Organic chemistry, its very hard to improve.3. In the early 17 th century there were gentlemen scholars who were interested in science, which sped it up. Later on science became an activity in the side. And the manufacturers were the ones who developed it. Science contributed significantly to navigation but not agriculture and manufacturing which are main parts of the economy. Where science did flourish is in scientific societies like Sweden and Russia.
18 th Century
Bernal argues that science increased in scope rather than in depth, new fields developed rather than more depth. Ex. Electricity, it became a specific field of research. Originally it was used for tricks and

demonstrations, for amusement. This changed as scientists became more interested in it, ex. Electric rail.
Prior to 18 th century, botany was for medicinal purposes and then in the 18 th century plants were studied more to see how they could be used for manufacturing ex. Timber and mining. Chemistry contributed to chemical bleaching, it used to start to take a few months and then they figured out how to do in a couple days, which contributed to industry. 2 ways to change process: First way is to make products , which can be sold. The second thing science does is to change process, if you make something cheaper then to make more money. Both things are important for capitalism, which is why science became a high in demand thing in the 18 th century. Creating chemical bleaches is a change in product, which is an example to show that. Most scientists looked to Newton and they used his methods in other areas. He invented calculus, and after this they attempted to use mathematics for all areas. He also mentions that important political changes were going on ex. The French revolution led to the introduction of measurement, weights, metric system – leads to standardization.
Science and the 19 th century
Bernal talks about the chemical industry because it contributes to textiles. For many years the only way to make colourful clothing is by natural dyes in India. And then in the 19 th century they were able to make artificial dyes which made them the exporter of cheap clothing, which destroyed the whole natural dye industry. Its cheaper for machines to be used then to have workers do the work – weavers. Chemistry contributed to aesthetics and fertilizers – contributes the productivity of agriculture by a lot, where its good for our health or environment is another argument. They saw the maximization of science in universities, journals, scientific s societies in different areas. Science in universities becomes the main part of it and universities become research based. Over the course of 300 years science goes from something done on the side for fun to a middle class profession. Early steam engines were developed without scientific output, what’s interesting is the steam engine contributed to science by creating data about heat engines, which was transferred back to science. The last point is by the 19 th century, we begin to see the outline of modern industries. Ex. The application of science in all industrial production. The bigger companies can do more science and further run the industry. Science isn’t only done by individuals, companies do science in laboratories in companies, it started in Germany and it shifted a bit to universities who do research for companies.
NATS 1760 – Lecture 12 - Expansion and Exploitation in the Industrial Revolution
Political Underpinnings of the Industrial Revolution
The Industrial Revolution - 18 th to the 19 th century, production changes, factory labor, steam engines

Technology and management, explosion in production and consumption
Population increase, production increase, environmental burden
Political and economic forces, exploitation of nature, shift from mercantilism to capitalism
Mercantilism: nations should maintain a positive balance of trade by having more exports than imports, and that they should hoard specie (gold or silver)
Modes of Production before the Industrial Revolution
Three dominant modes of production before the Industrial Revolution: o Artisanal production: highly skilled artisans or craftsmen produced goods, they trained apprentices, there was little division of labour, and most goods were produced from start to finish by one individual o Mass-production: there was limited mass-production in the pre-Industrial Revolution period, in the putting-out system. Groups of workers would perform one operation on a product, moving it on to the next group to perform the next operation. This work was done in small buildings in rural areas, and merchants controlled production o Factory production: when large numbers of labourers were needed and could be gathered at one particular place, factory production was possible, but this was limited to a few fields (ship production, mining)
Industrial Revolution: dominance of last two modes of production, deskilling, lower wages, larger scale cheap production
Workers displaced from agriculture to urban areas, value of income decreased, market versus home production
Cotton, tropical plant, production of cheap clothing, traded for slaves used on sugar plantations
Displaced agricultural laborers, colony resources and markets
Colonial powers, land shortage, cotton growth
Capitalist investment in land, peerages and overseas ventures
Investment in mills and factories by new entrepreneurial class
Factories initially cheap, tight margins, savings from labor, lowered wages, extended working day, child labor
Competition for Empire in the 19 th Century
Nineteenth century competition between English and French for control of global trade and resources
Disrupting trade, military strength and economic power
French sealed off Europe from British trade, Britain secured colonial markets in compensation
British taxed Indian population, used funds for purchases of Chinese silks, cottons and teas, eliminating the need to use specie (silver and gold)
Shift from West Indies (sugar and slaves) to East Indies (India), transfer from mercantilism to industrial capitalism
Economy of West Indies destroyed, abandonment of slavery an economic issue
1813, cheap UK cotton exports to India (1873 – 60% of UK cotton exports to India)
Mercantilism and control of Spanish silver, dominance of luxury trade (furs, sugar, spices, Indian cotton)
Sugar beet and abandonment of the West Indies slave population
India and North America important to UK as markets
18 th century UK moved to gold standard, Brazillian gold from Portugal, paper money
1816 gold standard for paper money, import and export controls on gold lifted
Shift from silver to gold a political change based on imperial trade possibilities
London centre of a financial empire in European commerce
Not ownership that matters, but control of the flow of capital
Trade favored importing of raw materials and exporting of manufactured goods
Tariffs reduced and trade liberalized, trade, not specie, was core of the shift from mercantilism to capitalism, and key to expansion of the industrial revolution

Expansion and Exploitation in the industrial revolution
From the 18 th to the 19 th century. The industrial revolution is most important to us in terms of production, and how factory labour is done. After the industrial revolution a lot more labour was done. Steam engines were introduced over the course of the industrial revolution. It’s a mechanical form of something we used to do by nature or animals. It’s a technological man-based change. We change the way work is done, we go from an artisanal method to one that is factory based, and mass produced. The scale of production increased, which is what allows us to mass-produce things. The period leading up to the industrial revolution, population also increased, which could be a spur for the industrial revolution. The impact on the environment also added to the industrial revolution. Ex. Creates more waste and uses more energy.
Political and economic forces were also important in this time. One force includes: Nature could be used to our benefit when pushed to the maximum. Theres a shift from mercantilism to capitalism.
Mercantilism; nations should maintain a positive balance of trade by having more exports than imports, and that they should hoard specie (gold and silver). Get as most silver and gold as you can.
Modes of production
A way of making things that we consume. According to Naler, there were 3 primary modes. Before the industrial revolution, these modes existed by they changed. 1. Artisanal production occurs when highly skilled artisans or craftsman produced goods themselves, from the beginning to the end. It was small scale and they trained apprentices and this was part of the production.
Theres little division of labour, all the tasks were done by one artisan. It is now a minority way of production. 2. Mass-production: there was limited mass-production in the pre-industrial revolution period. Ex. Textiles. It was work in small building and small cities.
3. Factory production: when large numbers of labourers were needed and could be gathered at one particular place. It became the dominant mode of production after the industrial revolution. Most factory production today is also mass-production, so also combine.
The industrial revolution saw the 2 last modes as the dominant modes. However, It deskilled the workers over the course of the industrial revolution. The amount of skill needed was less. It also saw a widespread lowering of wages. With this it lower costs for capitalists and decreased wages for the labourists and this produced larger scale cheap production. Once this happened it was cheaper to make larger scale rather than making things themselves. The industrial revolution starts in the textile industry. Common textiles were important with cotton, which could be used to trade for slaves in the economy. This caused colonial markets to become important, they became valuable for the goods they were manufacturing. Initially for their resources and then for the goods they manufactured from the resources. One of the challenges in
Europe is it very small, so they need land to produce food and couldn’t grow cotton, where it is very land intensive. In the beginning of the revolution, there was a lot of capitalist investment in lands. Then they realized they could make money in production and in factories. Initially the factories were cheap, and so cheap that you didn’t need a lot of money to invest. But as a result of this the margins were relatively tight, so they did everything they did to save money, so they paid cheap wages, and this caused cheap scale labour. They also extended the long working day, and introduced child labour.
Competition for empire in the 19 th century
There was a widespread global competition between English and French for control of global trade and resources. Disrupting trade is as important as a military victory. The more people you have in the country, the more people to support. Trade disruption was also effective in military strength, if you cut off trade routes and resources of other countries, then countries aren’t able to build ships etc. They taxed the local colonies to sell goods, get tax revenue. There is also a transition in the economy, from mercantilism to industrial capitalism, from West Indies with sugar and slaves, to east indies (India). India went from a luxury fabric exporter to a cheap cotton export. Mercantilism itself depended on the control of Spanish silver, and dominance of luxury trade. There was also the introduction of the sugar beet. With the industrial revolution, there is a strong awareness of cultivating markets. So they lowered the cost of production to make more money, but to do that you need to make a lot of things cheap. So you need to convince people to buy and have large markets to buy. The Indies and North America were important to the Uk for markets. Gold and silver is what everyone wanted, but paper money was introduced because

gold is more valuable. London became the center of the financial empire in European commerce. Its not ownership but rather how capital flows from one place to another. Trade policy also shifted from favour of importing raw materials and exporting of manufacturing goods. Tariffs were introduced, and trade was liberalized, as trade became the focus and not the hoarding of gold and silver. This is the key to the industrial revolution.
SC/NATS 1760 – Lecture 13 – Science and Industry in the 18 th and 19 th Centuries
Economic factors do not determine “what is found out”, but “when and how” new facts are introduced

Steam Engine and Thermodynamic Theory
Thermodynamic theory and steam engines
Vacuum and atmospheric pressure
Christian Huygens & Denis Papin (1673) small charge of gunpowder exploded in cylinder, vacuum causes cylinder to be pushed downwards by air pressure, lifting 1600lbs through 5 feet
Steam engine: piston covers chamber, steam pushes it up, cooling the steam causes it to condense, creating vacuum, and weight of atmosphere presses down
Thomas Newcomen: steam engine in 1712
Newcomen engine inefficient, demonstrated that a vacuum could be harnessed
James Watt introduced a separate condenser for steam, improved efficiency
No significant scientific contributions to the early development of steam engine
Thermodynamic Theory
Joseph Black: specific heat and latent heat o Specific heat: different substances are heated to different degrees by the same amount of heat o Latent heat: when you heat a material and it changes phase the temperature does not increase for a time, as the energy is used to change it from one phase to another, this energy is latent in the material
Heat is a substance found inside of things, imponderable, like light or electricity
Sadi Carnot: first person to quantify heat transformation into work
Conservation of energy, heat, motion and electricity are different forms of energy
Electricity
Electricity an imponderable fluid, passed through certain substances, and not others, stored in objects called Leyden jars
Storage of electricity and experiments
Benjamin Franklin: electricity has a charge, lightning and electricity the same
Coulomb measured electricity with a magnetic needle, electricity and magnetism and inverse square laws
Patterns: energy was convertible, different forces (gravity, electricity, magnetism) behaved according to inverse square laws
Alessandro Volta –a damp cloth between two pieces of metal could produce electricity, first battery
Electricity used for different purposes: medical, decomposition of materials
Oerstead - connection between electricity and magnetism
Michael Faraday: moving electrical current produces a magnetic field, and vice versa
Currents can be produced by moving magnets, basis of electric motor
Chemistry
Chemical processes: o Rusting of metal o Calcination: add heat to metal and get ashen calx o Calx can be transformed back to the original metal by heating it with charcoal o Mixing solutions can change their color o Distillation for purification
Combustion, Experiments with Fire
Progress and the problem of combustion
Combustion is a primary process in chemistry and alchemy
Aristotle’s 4 element theory
Fire as a weightless fluid with small particles that penetrate other substances
1703 Ernst Stahl borrowed from alchemical theory to explain combustion
Alchemical theory something escaped during combustion

He called the substance released phlogiston (Greek phlogistos, meaning burnt)
Phlogiston and combustion (fire, heat, light)
Combustion a loss of phlogiston, leaving ash behind
Air supports combustion, absorbing phlogiston, to saturation
Phlogisticated air is saturated and will not support combustion
Dephlogisticated air will support combustion
No combustion in a vacuum, as it cannot absorb phlogiston
Weight gain on combustion, phlogiston has negative weight, or levity
Pneumatics, Experiments with Air
Vacuums used to develop scientific theories, liquids evaporate in a vacuum, water boils at lower temperature
Experimental isolation of different kinds of air
Henry Cavendish: immersed metals in acid to produce gas, inflammable air, or phlogiston o Mixing two kinds of air together (common and inflammable) with a spark produced a liquid o Dephlogisticated air also produced liquid when sparked
Joseph Priestly: heating the calx of mercury produces respirable air, or dephlogisticated air
Lavoisier and the Revolution in Chemistry
Antoine Laurent Lavoisier, beheaded during Terror of French Revolution
1789, Elements of Chemistry, a fundamental change in chemistry
Lavoisier’s work standardized quantitative laboratory methods in chemistry
He applied “methods of physics”, i.e. Newton, to chemistry
“Balance approach”, weight of products and reactants to be equal
Lavoisier and Combustion:
Certain metals (mercury and lead), gained weight when heated
Objects heated in air would combust
Lavoisier reversed phlogiston theory; air was absorbed during combustion, rather than phlogiston being emitted
When you burn a metal it absorbs oxygen and becomes a metallic oxide
Calx’s are thus metal + oxygen
“Eminently respirable air” or flammable air, was found in acids, named it “oxygen”, or “acid begetter” in Greek
Water is a complex substance made up of two kinds of air or gasses
Nomenclature
Substances named according to known components, using Greek and Latin names
Standardization in textbooks
Element: whatever was left over after analysis, an experimental definition
Science and Capitalism
“… science was affecting the development of capitalism, enabling it to turn away from the individualist free competition of small-scale industry to the large monopolist undertakings with deliberately planned and scientific production methods.” p 658
Science and understanding of world, science and changing or manipulating world
Scientists and tradesmen, and the availability of capital allow shift
Science and Industry in the 18 th and 19 th Century
Steam engines and Thermodynamic Theory

Bernal argues that science changes with business. Different theorists have said different things. Bernal is very clear what the economic factors do. He says that economic factors do not determine “what is found out” but “when and how” new facts are introduced. The people who are practicing science are willing to pay to do so. If they discovered a new technology they are able to pay for it. Thermodynamic theory- science of heat, how it works etc. It jumps at the same time that the steam engine becomes important to the scientific revolution. Bernal points out that steam engines arrive before thermodynamics does. It doesn’t mean there weren’t ideas, but the theory wasn’t developed until after. Steam enginesatmospheric pressure, condensation, which all creates a vacuum. You can create a space where there’s nothing at all. And all science until then suggested there was no such thing because you need to have infinite speed, which also is impossible. It was resisted until technologies like this was created. Christian
Huygens and Denis Papin. The newcomen engine was extremely inefficient, and demonstrated that a vacuum could be harnessed. Steam engines were first used at coal mines, they were only economic in coal mines, so it didn’t matter that it was inefficient. This important because it could be used in one area that is inefficient but if you improve it could become efficient enough to be used elsewhere. James Watt introduced a spate condenser for steam, which improved inefficiency. Bernal is interested because there’s no significant contributions to the early development of steam engines. After having the steam engines for a long time, scientists learned a lot about heat. They became high pressure and high temperature very quickly, and they blew up a lot.
Thermodynamic Theory
Joseph Black introduced to ideas to heat. 1. The concept of specific heat, which is different materials plus the same amount of heat, and they reach different temperatures. 2. Latent heat is when you heat a material and it changes phase the temperature does not increase for a time, as the energy is used to change it from one phase to another, this energy is latent in the material. Heat was originally thought to be a substance inside of materials, and they referred to it as imponderable, also with electricity and light.
Sadi Carnot was the first person to quantify heat transformation into work. The steam engine also proved the idea of conservation of energy. Heat can be converted into motion, which is key to the development of key technology.
Electricity
In the 18 th century the science expanded, and initial organizations treated electricity like heat as in it was imponderable fluid. Some things were conductors and some were insulators. It was possible to collect electricity in a Leyden jar, like a battery. When you couldn’t generate electricity, you needed to capture lighting in the next storm. You can experiment with electricity if its stored. Benjamin Franklin determined that electricity had a charge. Which was also linked to lighting. Coulomb by accident discovered that there was a correlation with electricity and magnetism, if you move an electric current you get a magnetic field.
If you move a magnetic field then you can create electricity. This all works with inverse square laws, a strong force of attraction when 2 things are together, and a weak force when they are far apart. With magnetism you could actually feel this, but with gravity, you can’t. Which shows that all these different fields of science are connected and similar. Allessandro Volta discovered that by putting a damp cloth between two pieces of metal could produce energy, which is the first battery. Then electricity was used for different purposes like medicine, and decomposition of materials. Electric generators are born by knowing that you can move electric current produces a magnetic field and vice versa, founded by Michael faraday.
Chemistry
Mixing solutions can change their colour. Distillation for purification.
Combustion, Experiments with Fire
During the 18 th century the idea of combustion came under way. Fire was thought to be a weight-less fluid, another imponderable fluid. They took a lot of early theoretical knowledge and brought it forward.
Ernst Stahl - If you took something and light it on fire, then theres something coming out of the thing on fire. He referred to this substance that is released called philiston. You only see this if you see it on fire. Air supports combustion by sucking out congestion. They discovered that if you take a glass jar and put a candle over it, and pump out all the air, the candle wont go out, because the philiston won’t come out.
Pneumatics, Experiments with Air

Water boils at a lower temperature. They isolated different kinds of air. Inflammable air- if you mix two kinds of air together (common and inflammable) with a spark produced a liquid. Dephlogisticated air also produced liquid when sparked. All these experiments with fire and air had no standardization of terms etc.
Lavoisier and Combustion
He wrote a book , which was very important to chemistry. He provided standard methods and processes to be used inside the lab. He applied the methods of physics, that all chemical processes need to equal each other. He noted certain metals gained weight when heated like mercury. Objects heated in air would combust. He realized that air was involved in combustion, he suggested that when you combust something, something comes into the substance like air. Lavoisier noted that flammable air is found in acids, and named it oxygen. Water is a complex substance made up of two kinds of air or gasses.
Substances could be broken down into its components with analysis. He took these discoveries and changed how we refer to substances. We refer to substances by its components, elements, using Greek and Latin names. You discover this in a lab or outside. His ideas were used in textbooks and in order t understand chemistry; you need to learn the nomenclature.
Science and Capitalism
These developments occurred at the time that there were economic pressures. The demands in the industry leads into science. P.658 ‘…science was affecting the development of capitalism, enabling it to turn away from the individualist free competition of small-scale industry to the large monopolist undertakings with deliberately planned and scientific production methods.” You don’t get the science without the technologies behind it. Science itself jumps when the head and the hand come together.
NATS 1760 – Lecture 13 – Technology, Imperialism and Investment
Long distance transportation and communication, securing territory, controlling borders, moving people and goods, imperial powers and colonies
Railways crucial technologies in economic expansion, 18 th and 19 th century, large, “modern” corporation

Traditional non-Western economies did not industrialize (except Japan), why? Benefits of industrialization unequal, why?
Headrick answers this question by focusing on technological diffusion, the transfer of technology from one society to another
Colonizing powers and technological advantage, conquer, control and exploit
Last half of the 19 th century, the Europeans controlled a large part of non-Western world
19 th century European imperialism, technological changes, military and medical
Combination of technologies, European colonial advantage: o Application of steam and iron to boats o Improvement in weapons (e.g. machine guns) o Quinine to combat malaria o Steam ships, railways and telegraphs (for control of colonies)
Technological determinism: politics and economics follow the technology , pattern in more than one nation
Western nations strip colonies for raw materials, increased production and lowered costs with
Western technologies in pre-industrial nations
Production levels were increased, but: o Economies were not diversified o Per capita incomes were not raised
reaction hostile (increased nationalism) and accepting (demand increased)
Western innovations destroyed indigenous industries (e.g. use of aniline dyes to replace natural dyes)
Technology transfer, two stages: actual technologies and operators (geographic relocation), transfer of “knowledge, skills and attitudes” (cultural diffusion)
Railways, modernization, progress and economic development
Railways: lower costs, greater speed, and greater productivity (capacity)
Expectations in technological development, capital intensive rail, expectations and investment
Productivity and rail technology transfer, railways created on assumption of future economic growth
Railway demands on host society: o High fixed costs and long development times, large capital investments o Banks and capital markets, risk prone investors o Governments exerting right of eminent domain, lands for lines o Technical education for engineers and workers o Equipment and fuel at industrial level
India one of the largest rail networks in the world, as a colony, without significantly industrializing
Indian railways, military and economic, “modernization”
Initial expectation for transportation of goods, passenger transport became primary
Military advantages to train network and a communication network (post and telegraph), discipline over colonized
Goods to ports and overseas markets
In India, when Dalhousie advocated a rail plan with government guarantee (5%) and supervision, but private railroads
Acknowledged great capital needs of railways, government took away financial risk, encouraged private investment
By 1859 six private railway companies in India
Transfer from system of supervision by government engineers (slow), to one with final government approval, faster, increased costs
High cost of Indian railways: wide rivers, steep mountains, double width bridges, wider, heavier rails and “technical overbuilding” o Technical overbuilding was result of government guaranteeing the project (5%), engineers overbuilt, cost concerns removed

o Costs transferred from British capitalists to government of India
Expensive wider gauge rail was abandoned when the government took over building railways, due to cost overruns
Government guaranteed profits for private sector, public sector costs cutting, prior claim on best routes
“Of course the new lines, being narrower, had a lower carrying capacity than the standard 1.676meter gauge. Despite their lower initial cost, the state lines lost money because the companies had already taken up the most profitable routes between the major cities, while the government’s lines into frontier areas or into regions of frequent famines had a social or strategic, rather than a commercial purpose.” 72
Transportation and communication technology and profit, government investment.
Military switched back to wider gauge, two gauge system required: switching goods at transfer points, inefficiencies, duplication of technical support infrastructure (mechanics, engineers, shops, machines)
Coordination costs, standardization, stick with one technology, even if it is not optimal
Competition, preference for established technologies and products
Railway bridges in India, high engineering quality, guarantee and costs
alternative technologies have political consequences: higher quality British designs more expensive, Indian government bore extra costs
Government guaranteed profits, introduced another cost to the state o Railways set rates and fares, government veto power on capital expenditures and maintenance o long-range planning difficult, projects could stop at any time o Distant owners, return on investment guaranteed, minimal innovation, competition, rate lowering, improvement of service o Guarantee system: technically overbuilt, expensive, cost-cutting politicians developed a two gauge system, coordination costs
India lacked capital markets, railways financed in UK markets, 99 percent of Indian railway capital was British
Profits from railways went to foreign investors, foreign investors controlled decisions
Technical feature: facilities required to create them (foundries, forges and machine shops) same as those required to maintain them, railway nations eventually manufactured their own engines o Indian railways imported steam engines from UK, local manufacturers were competitive exporting them o The British Engineering Standards Association prerequisites for engine design adopted, standardization, simplified maintenance, built up stock, reduced costs o Standardization cut off foreign competition and local industry o Lesson: standardization, has positive and negative implications
Technology, Imperialism and Investment
Railways is a crucial technology, they allowed goods to be moved from place to place. They are also important for us because they are an example of large modern corporations. It was also something that allowed the economy to grow. Hedrick believes that technology moves from civilization to civilization, and the same with industrialization. He focuses on technological diffusion, which is the transfer of technology from one society to another. They used certain technological advantages and supplemented their numerical disadvantages with other nations who have a larger population. A combination of technologies gave the Europeans colonial advantages : Application of steam and iron to boats, improvement in weapons (e.g machine guns), quinine to combat malaria, steam ships, railways and telegraphs (for control of colonies). This allowed them to expand further outwards and secure resources. Hedrick is saying that
Europeans that secured these technologies became materialistic, and they extended their reach. They also attempted to transfer their technologies where they have larger populations and they manufactured

things for cheaper. What this did was it increased production levels. But in these other countries, the economies weren’t diversified so they didn’t introduce new industries. Also, per capita didn’t increase so the local population wasn’t better off, economically speaking. Sometimes the reaction to British technology is positive or negative. There was a rise in nationalism and hostility, they weren’t keen on
British rule but they did want British technologies. Which is still a problem today. Western innovations also destroyed indigenous industries for example India went from manufacturing luxury goods to cheap goods. Hendrick points out that technology transfer has 2 stages: move the people and technology
(geographic relocation), and the 2 nd this is to transfer the knowledge and skills and attitudes (cultural diffusion). Railways led to modernization and economies would modernize along with them. Railways brought 3 consistent benefits: lower costs, greater speed, and greater productivity (capacity). Another important role with railways is their expectations, they cost a lot of money to run which is why they were run by large corporations. They created expectations of the railway in order to convince people to invest in railways, like saying they are profitable and increase productivity. Unfortunately the productivity and success worked against them, for every railway that was created, another one collapsed. The development of railways also demands on society:
- High fixed costs, and long development times, large capital investments
- Banks and capital markets, risk prone investors
-Governments exerting the right of eminent domain, lands for lines. The government had to step in order to place the railways when there were people who had properties in the way.
-Technical education for engineers and workers
-Equipment and fuel at industrial level. They need to take care of the railways which need a transfer of technology.
Railway technology is transferred to India but there wasn’t a subsequent industrialized economy.
Everywhere else where they transferred railways there was an industrialized economy. Railways were promoted in India for military benefits and the transportation of goods. The telegraph and the train allowed these things to happen, to take things from the center and move them to other parts. They encouraged private companies to invest and guaranteed 5% profit. To get this they needed to have government supervision, but they could build the railroads themselves. The government established that railways need a lot of capital. The high cost of railways came from technical overbuilding. Eventually these excess costs concerned the government and they stepped in and took over building the railways. A late entry to the market gave up profit, but private investors were able to make more money. “Of course the new lines, being narrower….” P. 72
Sometimes companies will pick certain technologies even if they aren’t as optimal but since they are cheaper, they are used. Hedrick makes it clear that technological choices also have political effects, as they had investors make 5% profit, they taxed the Indian population. The railways charged how much they exported goods, and the government didn’t have very much control. The guarantee system cost the local population a lot of money and it isn’t standardized. India lacked capital markets, so they had to be financed in the UK. The profits from the railways went to the investors and the decisions were made were made by them. Steam railways have a technical feature: the facilities required to create them are the same as those required to main them, railway nations eventually manufactured their own engines. The
British engineering standards association prerequisites for engine design adopted. Standardize engineering was good for the industry because it took over costs for the managers but it was bad for the local industries.
NATS 1760 Lecture 15 – Science and Engineering In Industry
Science and industry (electrical and chemical), 19 th century
Noble’s Analysis of Science and Industry
Late 19 th / early 20 th century, science, new products, production methods, efficiencies

Theoretical science and applied science, shift of interest over century
Capitalists, publications, university contacts, R+D laboratories, science for profit, efficiency
Science based industry in US, chemistry and physics (electricity)
Scientific R+D long and expensive, excess capital, traditional manufacturing profits, financial speculation, Industrial consolidation (vertical integration)
Beyond resources of individual entrepreneur
Family owned industries, large corporations, diverse products, consolidation
1920’s: 500+ mergers in chemical & electrical industries
small number of large companies dominant: Dow, Union Carbide, Dupont
Wide range of products: Union Carbide: carbon, alloys, oxyacetylene, liquid gas, bakelite and plastics, Dupont explosives, gasoline, and automobile applications
Science, variety of applications, industrial laboratories
Diffusion to petroleum, metallurgy, paper, cement, photography, fertilizer, steel industries
The Chemical Industry in the US
industrial revolution, high demand, batch production and synthetics
Generic chemicals: acids, alkalis, inorganic salts for manufacturers
Industries requiring chemicals for manufacturing: textiles, paper, leather, glass, soap, paint, petroleum, rubber, electrical equipment, fertilizers, insecticides, automobile industry
Before WWI, German chemical dyes advanced: initial lead, low cost, university science R+D network, patents
After WWI, US acquires German patents
Tariff barriers to protect domestic chemical industry
US industry processes: catalytic, liquefying of air, electrochemical, organic synthesis
Electrolytic process: salts, soda, chlorine and bromine
Foreign processes, out producing sources by turn of century
The Reciprocal Relationship between Science and Industry
Science: new processes and products, monopolies, patent control
Applied scientific research, industry needs, curriculum
Industrial Momentum and the Electrical Industry
Turn of century US electrical industry monopolized, key innovations and patents
Electrical power generation, lighting, transportation and communications industries in late
1800’s
Electrical industry engineers and scientists moved to other industries, spread use of patents, research laboratories and technical training
ATT (telephones), GE & Westinghouse (lighting, power, traction)
Reliable current, efficiency, standardization, reliability
Patents and Innovation
17 year patents, securing patents and mergers for control
Edison laboratory Menlo Park, New Jersey
Market guide for innovations, incandescent lighting at gas lighting prices, improvements to lower price
Technological systems complex, network of innovations, ownership of relevant patents
Edison General Electric and Thomson-Houston merged into GE
Patent appropriations & mergers led to ATT dominance
Patent maintenance and pursuit expensive and time consuming, patent pools

Patents are idea protection, complexity, science
Vertical Integration
Supplier of product merges with product user: vertical integration
Industrial processes, science, capital intensity, vertical integration reduction of transaction costs, supply and price guarantees
Share purchase / mergers between chemical companies and product users (automobile industry)
Share purchase / mergers with companies that produced their raw materials, eg. Copper, potash, sulfur, phosphate and nitrate
Internal demand for greater purity, volume and variety of products
1910, US chemical companies scope wide, medicinal and fine chemicals
DuPont and explosives, dynamite, nitroglycerine and black powder
Conclusion: The “Scientific Revolution” in Industry
Electrical & chemical industries in US, 19 th / 20 th century, added scientific knowledge to their processes
This required: o Control and purchase of patents o Scientific training for employees o Large scale industrial scientific R+D
Electrical and chemical engineers and scientists, “scientific revolution” in industry, identity of corporate and scientific advancement
Science and engineering in industry
Electrical and chemical industries were industries where business and science came together in the strongest way
Noble analysis of science and industry
There was a combination of things happening, chemistry and business came together. New products became available and new production methods came with new industries. New production methods lead to more efficiencies. Science contributes to industries in this way. This is important because in capitalism, any advantage over competitors is advantageous. At the beginning of the 19 th century, people had the interest in theoretical science and applied science, by the end of the 19 th century this was inverted. The vast majority of modern science is applied science. Wealthy investors heard about science through university contacts. They realized what the scientists were doing could make money, they invested in research and their own in house labs. Today investing money in universities is cheaper than hiring your own scientists. The goal in all this was profit and efficiency. Science –based chemistry took off with physics, specifically the electric industry. Scientific research and development (R&D) can pay off in a big way which is why major companies invest in it, but the risk is it takes a really long time and costs a lot of money, and theres no way to guarantee its going to work. Ways to get money: 1. One of the things it requires is excess capital like taking traditional manufacturing profit that many companies do. 2. Another way is financial speculation, to get investors and stock market, and this spurs R&D as well. 3. Also vertical integration. But because it is so expensive, individual entrepreneurs aren’t able to have enough resources.
In the early 19 th century there were many family-owned companies, and now there are large corporations who have a variety of products, and they have a tendency to buy smaller companies. This tendency was magnified in the late 19 th century. In the early 20 th centuries large companies became dominant and each of the companies ex. Dow, union carbide, DuPont, had a large range of products. Science itself is needed to have a variety of products, they need to make as many things as possible, and science helps create new applications. And scientific research became even more significant, and this led to more in-house

laboratories, and they were established in electrical and chemical industries. And these went to other industries like petroleum, metallurgy, paper, cement, photography, steel industries etc.
The chemical industry in the U.S
During the industrial revolution there was a demand in catch production, making larger amounts. And the development for synthetics, chemical production for natural products. Generic chemicals were used by other industries, and the u.s primarily focused on batch production. Some industries that needed the chemicals for manufacturing are textiles, paper etc.
Before the First World War, the Germans dominated the chemical dyes, they owned significant number of patents. But after, the patents were brought back to the U.S and they resold them to the companies. Then the chemical industries started to do a lot better. They also had tariff barriers to protect domestic chemical industry. These things allowed the u.s industry to diversify like catalytic, liquefying of air etc.
Electricolitical processes were also used in the chemical industry. Thanks to the patents, the U.s industry went through a real turnaround.
The reciprocal relationship
Science provided new products and new processes, as well it reinforces monopolies . wealthy companies had patent control, and less powerful companies had less control for the patents. Applied scientific research changed through applications, scientists started to change their work towards what the company wanted to do and to benefit business. As a result, this shaked the school curriculum, those who are teaching shifted their curriculum to reflect corporate areas, more practical and less theoretical.
Industrial momentum and the electrical industry
Turn of the century, it was fueled by key innovations and patents that gave them the advantage in the industry. Electrical power generation, lighting, transportation and communications industries in late
1800s all contributed to the industrial industries. Technical training programs were used in the companies to raise the general technical level of science who worked in the company. In the electrical industry a small number of companies emerged. What happened in the electrical industry is the need for electrical current and standardization which led to efficiency and reliability.
Patents and innovations
Patent is a form of intellectual protection. Patents will stimulate innovations, because theres an incentive if your idea is safe and you get money for it. Some larger companies only ability to succeed was to secure patents, and not necessarily coming up with it themselves. One of the people who used patents, was
Thomas Edison who had a lab in Menlo park, new jersey. He understood the business side. He introduced electrical lighting at the same price as gas lighting and then adjusted his costs so that it would be competitive, so he understood the business side. He’s a good example who invented a lot of technologies, but most modern technologies are complex and every part of it has a patent, and they require a system of innovations. They are generally a bunch of things put together, and each part of the technology is patented. In order to sell that technology you need to own all the patents for all the different parts, but very few companies own all patents. So this created a problem. One way to do this is through mergers and acquisitions. Edison general electric and thomsonhouston merged into general electric and they were able to make the light bulb. Patent appropriations and mergers led to ATT. Patent maintenance and pursuit was expensive so companies pooled patents together and any company in that group could access the patent. And it costs so much money that some companies gave up. Patents are protection for ideas, but what that means is that science became more involved in industry, then patents become more important for industry.
Vertical integration
When a supplier of a product merges with product user, when a downstream user buys an upstream user.
Buying the company that makes the things you need. For example, car manufacturers could buy the paint company or steel company. As industrial processes became more expensive there was a reduction of transaction costs with administration costs which are less than transaction costs. So one way for companies to save money is to buy the companies. It also allows price guarantees for your inputs if you own the company. But some things do affect if the costs change like materials. So many mergers happen in this time period. Vertical integration also led to an internal demand for greater purity, volume and variety of products. As a result of an aggressive of vertical integration, US companies widen their scope into medicine and fine chemicals.

Conclusion: “The scientific revolution” in Industry
This is when industry and business really became together. Particularly electrical and chemical industries where science contributed to companies. So companies had to buy patents, and invest in large-scale research and developments. Noble argues that corporate and scientific advancement is the same thing.
They start to see science done for corporate purposes, and to this day a vast majority of science is doe this way.
NATS 1760 – Lecture 16 – The Automobile
- The automobile is pervasive & integrated in North America
- Pervasive: millions \owned, millions produced

- Integrated: birth and death occur in cars, as well as conception, work, eating, we do almost everything we do elsewhere in cars
- Cars have been around since before most of us born
- restrictions on use: licensing and cost of operation
- Cars are intertwined with pop culture, North American values; they are indicators of individual freedom and economic prosperity, sign of adulthood
- altered urbanization, expansion reinforced car
Current Concerns about The Automobile
- Internal combustion engine, gasoline, greenhouse gasses
- Scale of automobile use, exhaust as an environmental and health problem
- The Kyoto accord reduction of greenhouse gas 6% below 1991
- Reducing car emissions, targets, reduce total number, reduce pollution of individual cars.
- Hybrid cars now available, electric cars are soon promised
- Changing design of car to solve problem is “technological fix”
- Changing the way cars are used (carpooling) is social fix
Kirsch and the Electric Car
- Electric, gas & steam cars, turn of century
- 1898 a New York Sun article stated that,
At that busy corner, Grand Street and the Bowery, there may be seen cars propelled by five different methods of propulsion – by steam, by cable, by underground trolley, by storage battery and by horses. [Kirsch, 11]
- 1885 Gottlieb Daimler & Carl Benz, liquid benzene fuel for cars
- 1887, Rudolph Diesel, compressed fuel injection
- Commercial electric and steam cars predated gasoline powered cars
- First electric car in 1894, electric cabs in NY in 1897
Steam, Electricity and Internal Combustion
- Turn of century, steam power well developed, 150 years experience with steam engines & trains, thermodynamics
- Electrical technology: electromagnetic theory, electric trams, lighting, power generation and battery development from the laboratory tradition meant that electricity was very well understood
- Internal combustion less-developed technology, less experience, benefited from science
(thermodynamics & chemistry), and steam technology
- Chemical industry, petrochemicals, dye technology (printing and textiles), established industries and old traditions
Internal Combustion Development
- Internal combustion engines initially less reliable & efficient
- Technological achievement of internal combustion
- Rudolf Diesel,
… traced the origin of the engine he invented to his training at the Munich polytechnic. In 1878 he heard a lecture there on Carnot’s theorem concerning the ideal conditions for expansion of gases in an engine’s cylinder… this ideal, as he later wrote, ‘pursued me incessantly’. [Pacey, 172]
- Carnot’s scientific work, Diesel engine, steam engine data
- Carnot’s increase in temperature increased efficiency of heat engine, gasoline burnes hot
The Competition
- Science (chemistry, thermodynamics, electromagnetism), technology (steam engines and electrical motors)
- horse & automobile

- between 800,000 and 1.3 million pounds of manure each day in New York City
- Automobile, technological fix
- Automobiles expensive, heat and cold, further and faster than horse
- expanding populations, manufacturing and production, shipping capacity
- Automobiles and horses, military and commerce, WWII, rural and poor
Steam Cars
- Lighter, high pressure & temperature
- Steamboat, train boiler explosions 1800’s, stigma
- Steam flexible , gasoline, kerosene, wood or coal
- Pure water, clogging, unreliable, expensive to fix, and too dangerous
Electric Cars
- Electric engine flexibility, 2-3X rated power (hills, mud), gasoline stall
- Stopped & restarted easily, commercial use
- Fueling, technical & organizational challenges
- 1909 over 4000 central charging stations over United States
- Standardization poor, charging technology unreliable
- Electric industry ignored, vanity technology
- Batteries: limited storage capacity, charging times varied
- Long distance rail shipping, local by automobile, electric cars sufficient
- Markets expanded, greater range of internal combustion advantage
- Electric motors: frequent small adjustments by experts
- Private clients, speed, range & performance, commercial clients wanted cost-effectiveness and a respectable range
Internal Combustion Cars
- Internal combustion lighter, higher speeds, accidents, wear and tear, social menace, initially constant breakdowns
- Simpler to fix, little technical knowledge
- Sensitive to fuel impurities, engine problems until fuel standardized
- Gasoline & kerosene widely available, heating and lighting
- Long distance touring (private users), before gas stations
- Infrastructure investment not needed in the beginning
Wartime Influences
- Standardization of parts, “American system of manufacture”
- Military firearms industry in mid-1800’s
- 1913, Henry Ford, mass production, standardized parts
- WWII, military internal combustion, range and simplicity
Gasoline as a Fuel
- Mid-1800’s, oil in US, chemical analysis at university, commercial applications
- Early 1900’s, electric lighting replacing kerosene, need for new demand
- Gasoline: low flash point and a high temperature of combustion
- Cracking method, gasoline from crude oil
- Oil has complex, heavy, long chain molecules, “cracked” or broken down to produce lighter kerosene and gasoline
- By 1911, chemists working for oil companies developed methods to crack petroleum using high temperatures and pressures
- Improvements eliminated “knock”, increased efficiency & purity
Advantages of Internal Combustion

- Private users liked range, simplicity; ease of fuelling
- Electrical industry ignored car market, failed to standardize
- Oil industry saw demand for cars, innovated to meet needs
- Businesses liked range & reliability for growing urban population
- Military adoption of gasoline engine gave it early support
- Chemical improvements: cheap, plentiful and efficient fuel
- Population growth, cheap automobiles, the desire to travel far and fast, all contributed to the demand for the internal combustion car
- Expanding urban population also demanded products & services, this drove the commercial adoption of internal combustion vehicles
Kirsch’s Argument
- Electric car initially more flexible, comparable range for most applications, and of sufficient speed
- Gasoline cars were more prone to breakdowns (knock, stalling, general), less reliable, easier to fix
- Improvements expected for electric, success of industry
- While waiting, consumers chose IC cars IC cars then improved, fuel & engine efficiency
- “waiting” for competitive battery, IC dominated market, standard technology
The Rise of the Internal Combustion Automobile
- 1913 - 1929, annual car & truck manufacturing increased from 1/2M to 4.5M+, most internal combustion
- By 1914 35,000 electric & 1.5M internal combustion cars.
- Federal, state & industrial investment in car infrastructure: roads, fuel, repair facilities, parking lots, traffic police, courts, insurance
- 1927, annual car-related deaths 21,000+, injuries higher
- WWII contributed to the domination of the IC automobile
- Postwar industrialization & rising populations increased demand, oil price shocks in 1970’s, improvements in production & design, no significant reduction in demand
Lessons from the Past
- People expect long distance travel, speed, standardized parts
- Industry, commerce, labor and urban development, fast, fuel-efficient vehicles.
- Hybrid cars and performance requirements.
- infrastructure, charging technology, road infrastructure
- Effect of attaching millions of electric cars to electricity grid
- 25% of electrical power in Canada fossil fuel generated
- electric cars: traffic volume, accidents, urban planning
The automobile
The automobile is both pervasive and integrated into American society. Pervasive – they are all over the place. Integrated-everything we do in society, we also do with cars. We treat technology like the part of our environment, like a natural thing. Certain technologies that are pervasive tend to be treated like natural objects. But sometimes you need to wonder about it, and it makes it hard to be critical about it.
There are some restrictions on the use of cars. And there’s a cost of the car. Cars are also intertwined with pop culture, there are books, movies etc about cars. They are intertwined with adulthood. Cars are also markers of economic prosperity. It is difficult to overstate the impact of cars on society, like urbanization patterns and expansion; the way cities are laid out has to do with accommodating the cars.
Current Concerns about the automobile
Cars burn gasoline and produce greenhouse gasses, and contribute to environmental issues. One of the things that make cars the problem, is the amount that we have, the cumulative environmental impact is a

lot. And its very hard to convince people to stop driving and to reduce their pollution impact. The exhaust on urban spaces in urban areas affects health as well. Reducing carbon emissions from cars wont reduce the pollution because there are other causes of pollution, but it will make a dent in it. Changing the design of the car is a technological fix. Changing the use of the car is a social fix. There are a couple of things we can do to impact the car.
Kirsch and the electric car
At the turn of the century there was the steam, electric and gas cars. In 1898, there was an article that says that cars were moved around by horse or storage battery, but no gas.
Steam, electricity and internal combustion
Steam power was well developed by the turn of the century, they had 150 years of experience.
Thermodynamics was well developed, where they used the technology to improve steam engines.
Electrical technology was also fairly advanced, the electromagnetic theory was developed etc. We knew a lot about electricity, and we had a lot of technologies. Internal-combustion was not as developed, it was a newer technology. It did benefit from science, thermodynamic and chemistry. It was the newest technology, with the least knowledge about and least experience. The chemical industry had some interest in petrochemicals, dye technology (printing and textiles). Of the three technologies, combustion was the newest.
Internal combustion development
They were initially less reliable, and efficient. But it was a technological achievement. They work by harnessing explosions to create energy. It was only possible because some of the early pioneers were convinced that it was possible, and made the incentive to work on it. Sometimes science can create the framework to work on science. Another benefit was the data from steam engine use about how heat works, was contributed to internal-combustion. The hotter the engine, the better it works. That’s why gasoline was the chosen fuel, it burns the hottest.
The competition
All three technologies have a connection to science and contributed to science. Two of them had well developed connections to cars. There was no serious connection with internal combustion in cars because it was a newer technology. But horses and cars are connected, because horses were the mode of transportation until cars were introduced. The first competition was between horses and cars. Diseases were transferred more easily through horses, and horse manure. Cars were initially suggested to the health problem that they don’t produce manure, but they didn’t understand that it emits pollution. So it was a technological fix. Cars are fairly expense to operate, but they work in extreme heat and cold. Motor vehicles could also go further and faster than horses. In the early 20 th century, there was an expanding population, so cars came at a good time where it allowed moving goods around. Horses haven’t disappeared but it took a while for them to become more uncommon.
Steam cars
Steam cars are lighter, but unfortunately, there were many explosions and it was quite common. So there was a public stigma against it. It didn’t deter them from riding on boats and cars, but cars they didn’t want to use. Steam cars could be powered by different fuels. But the water had to be pure, or it would clog up and not work properly. They proved to be unreliable, expensive to fix and oo dangerous, so they were dropped off early.
Electric cars
The electric car was more flexible in the beginning than the gas car, since there wasn’t as much stalling.
Electric cars stopped and started very easily, so it made it easy with delivery, and it was used for commercial use. The problem was fueling, how do you make sure that people were close to charge cars.
Kirsch points out that there were lots of places to charge the car, the problem was the technology wasn’t standardized. One of the reasons is the electrical industry didn’t think that cars were as important, they looked at them as a luxury item. They figured that it would stay that way, o they didn’t bother investing or

standardizing the technology. There’s the battery concern, the charging time period varied wildly and there was limited storage capacity. Cars got the job done, but they were able to go further with gas cars.
Electric motors required a lot of adjustments by experts. In the end clients wanted speed, range and performance.
Internal combustion cars
The engines were lighter than and could go faster than electric cars. But this led to more accidents and more wear and tear on the technology, and constant breakdowns. Internal combustion cars were simpler to fix rather than to get them looked at by someone else, which was needed for electric cars. Early cars would stall because the gas wasn’t good quality. In the beginning they were operated by kerosene, and there weren’t gas stations around, but kerosene was around all the time, since it was used to light lamps.
Cars could make long trips on kerosene.
Wartime Influences
Cars came onto the scene when mass production came about, so they were able to mass produce parts etc. The main advantage was it lowered the cost of the cars. Henry ford, raised the salary of the employees and lowered the price of the cars, and they could afford to buy cars, which would allow a wider range of people to buy them. By WWII, they used internal combustion exclusively for transportation. Cars were simple to fix and they could go further, so it made sense to use these cars. So that made the army another client for cars.
Gasoline as a fuel
Oil was taken to universities for analysis. This is an example how university-based science allowed people to see commercial applications of science. Electric lighting was replacing kerosene, so an established market for kerosene is being lost, so they had to replace it with something. So they developed gasoline so that they can replace the kerosene market with gas. Its handy for fuel because it has a high temperature of combustion, and low flash point. In order to produce gasoline, you take oil and break it down using the cracking method. Over time, improvement of gas eliminated “knock”, and increased efficiency and purity.
For this technology to become dominant, there was a definite contribution from science. The support from the peterotechnical industry was an important point.
Advantages of Internal Combustion
Because gas such a high combustion point and low flash point, its very dangerous that no one wanted it around, so they dumped into lakes and environment. You never know when science will make something valuable. The electrical industry, ignored the electric car. But the oil industry improved when they saw the demand for cars, innovated to meet the needs. Chemical industry stepped in to prove that it was efficient, cheap and plentiful. Population growth also contributed to cheap cars ad this gave the desire to travel far and fast.
Kirsch’s Argument
He focuses on one dimension. Initially the electric car was flexible, and sufficient enough. Gas cars in the beginning were less reliable and harder to fix. While people were waiting for a better electric car to come out, they gave in and bought the combustion car , which gave the support and funding for the industry to grow.
The rise of the internal combustion automobile
Cars aren’t stand alone technology, you need, social, federal, industrial investments. We accept a high death rate from cars. Over the last few years, oil spikes high, but the sales of larger vehicles do not change significantly. Even if it costs more money to pay for gas, people change the way they spend rather than their usage.
Lessons from the past
We expect range and speed from cars. Industry, commerce, labour lead to urban development. Charging technology is needed but road infrastructure is ok. If the electric car becomes dominant, it adds to the electricity usage. Whether or not an electric car with solve the problem, has to do with how you use the car. Electric cars wouldn’t solve traffic volume, accidents and urban planning.

NATS 1760 – Lecture 17 - Gasoline
Internal combustion engine and gasoline

Gasoline production, evolving markets, competing technologies and contributions from science
Early History – The Science of Gasoline
By-product of petroleum refining
Home lighting industry, early 19 th century homes, candles or lamps, whale oil
Overhunting of whales, costs increased
Oil in US in open surface ponds, heating and pressurizing oil, kerosene, lamp fuel and heat source, machine lubrication
1850’s, drilling for oil, sample analysis by chemists to determine commercial value, connection between science and industry
The first oil well in 1859, barrels a day, 1899 US oil wells produced 60 million barrels of oil
Besides kerosene: o “…naphthas for local anesthetics, solvents for industry, fuel for stoves and the internal combustion engines, wax for pharmaceuticals and candles, oils and lubricants to free machines from friction, heavy oils for the gas industry…”
Gasoline dangerous, dumped into rivers as it was too volatile
Value of gasoline, chemists, increase in yield from 10% to 50% by WWII
First method of gasoline production: refining, different components of oil change into a gas (boil) at different temperatures
Modern gasoline - complex chemical process, over one hundred different chemicals
Low flash point (it ignites easily) and a high temperature of combustion (it burns hot)
Cracking: high heat, pressure and catalysts, scientific research and development
Cracking increased yield of gasoline, increased demand due to popularity of automobile
Catalysts and continuous cracking to occur, increased yields
Cracking, extra substances (methane, ethane, hydrogen, fuel oil and kerosene)
The Business of Gasoline
Gasoline refining and production, large scale business, large range of investors, consolidation or monopolization
In 1873 Rockefeller’s Standard Oil controlled, “… ten percent of the refining capacity of 103 US refineries; in 1880 Standard Oil controlled 90 percent!” (159)
1911 - US government enacted anti-trust legislation to break up oil monopolies

Gasoline and the internal combustion automobile, reciprocal evolution, improvements in fuel and viability of internal combustion automobile, improvements in automobile drove gasoline innovation o For example, Henry Ford reduced cost of automobile through mass production and assembly line o Each worker on the assembly line did one task, deskilled labor, increased production speed and uniformity of product o Between 1908 and 1916 cost decreased from $850 to $360
Total amount of gasoline produced increased from 18.5 billion gallons in 1930, to 110 billion gallons per year by 1980
On average, each American citizen consumes approximately 450 gallons of gasoline per year
“Each year American automobiles and trucks consume between 100 and 120 billion gallons of gasoline to travel over one trillion miles at a cost in excess of $130 billion.” (150)
NATS 1760 – Lecture 18 - Space Exploration
Large rockets for space travel, predecessors in Germany during WWII
Connections to literature and film, parallel with nuclear power

o Jules Verne “From the Earth to the Moon” and H.G. Wells “The First Men on the Moon”
German technological superiority, Werner Von Braun
Solid fuel rocketry in 10 th century China
Germans amateur rocket program, secrecy, slave labor
US and Russian acquisition of German rocket scientists
Peenemunde: pulse jet engines, rocket planes, aerial torpedoes, ballistic missiles
Hitler’s interest in “wonder weapons”
German military and private-sector involvement
German “rocket race” parallel with American “nuclear bomb race”
Luftwaffe, convention, institutional momentum, radical ideas
Propeller planes, speed limits and jets
After the War
1957, “Sputnik”, Russian satellite, space race, hydrogen bombs
Series of orbital launches, moon mission (1969), gigantic rockets
Exploration and destiny
Costs of space exploration and social responsibility
Challenger disaster (1986), Columbia disaster (2003)
New US agenda, space station, colony on the moon, eventually Mars
Colonization and commercial exploitation of space
Unmanned Space Exploration
Putting people in space requires: o Air o Food o Water o Shielding from radiation o Ability to return home o Acceptance of risk to human life
Manned spaceflight is dangerous and expensive
Military missions, public interest, “No bucks without Buck Rogers”
Marginalized science, cheaper unmanned missions
Explosives, weapons tests, certain biological research
Robotics and space exploration, telecommunications, cybernetic control, robotics and computing
Astronomical research, commercial applications and people
Social costs of spending on manned space exploration
Manned Space Exploration
Anasari X prize of 10 million, Burt Rutan
Two stage system, a “plane” (White Knight), and a rocket (Space Ship One)
Rockets and fuel, cost of manned space exploration, Space tourism
Space Exploration
The use of rockets is one of the technologies that is directly linked to literature and film. This isn’t uncommon in the history of science and technology. The Germans developed a rocket program in WWII.
They terrified people but they were that accurate and they didn’t do as much damage. Noifeld points out that most of the Germans were humiliated and a way to get back on top was by developing rockets.
Werner Von Braun was one of the ones who was most interested. There was an interest in the technology before it was fully developed. The Germans then decided to further develop rockets through the army.
They wanted the rockets to be hidden from the allies, and to keep the rockets from the public. So they hid it. And the army had exclusive control over the rockets, and they were the only ones who had control over it. After the 2 nd world war there was a movement for the Soviet Union and Americans to take from the
Germans their scientists and resources. One of the main reasons that the Americans got to the moon

faster were they found the best scientists than the Russians did. This is parallel to the American nuclear bomb project where it was hidden from everyone. The German rocket program wasn’t only for making rockets, but also for jet engines, and airplanes. Another thing that benefited from this program, is the
Germans put a lot of money into the program and in the end they benefited. The project was strictly military and this also shaped the nature of the project as it developed. Its often the case, that things are developed at the same time, and people weren’t communicating their theory. For example, In America they were trying to develop the same rocket but didn’t have as much financial backing. This is also parallel to the
“nuclear bomb race” where different countries had different ideas but they didn’t share them. The
Luftwaffe was a new branch in the military, and armies prefer technologies they do know rather than they don’t know. The government was also looking into the future to develop the technology necessary to develop jet powered planes.
After the war
In 1957, the USSR launched “Sputnik” which scared the Americans that they had the technology to get something into space, even though it didn’t do very much. Some say that this sped up the race for
Americans to build space technology. Getting a satellite first showed that they were more superior. And if you can get a satellite into space, then you could get a bomb into space, and they were concerned. NASA was formed, which is a government organization that mandates space exploration. Their mandate responsibility is also for people to go into space and explore. Getting to the moon and back was an impressive technology and scientific achievement. It landed them superiority. Getting man to the moon, was used with standard rocket technology that was developed during the war-liquid fuel, the German technology that was developed and used. There are people who see it as socially irresponsible and wasting money, spending people to space when it isn’t necessary. But on the other hand, it pushes our boundaries and inspires us. The early rocket program had different disasters for example, the challenge disaster (1986), and Columbia Disaster (2003). President Bush’s vision sees the colonization and commercial exploitation of space - space exists for our purpose and we should be able to go out there and bring things back.
Unmanned Space Exploration
If you want to put people into space, you need air, food, water and then in space you need to be shielded from radiation. Also you need the ability to return home, which gets complicated. And you need to accept the risk to human life. Sending people to space is very costly and risky. Military missions are to send satellites into space, and they use space shuttles to aid this and to have man in space. In order to keep the public interested in space exploration there needs to be man sent up into space, because if there aren’t men sent up then people believe the money Is being wasted. But if there are astronauts being sent up, they support it. Also, space has advantages over land-based research. And some experiments are set aside for space and if there aren’t men sent up then it costs less since you don’t need as much technology. The people who care about space exploration care about it either way, if there is a man sent up or not. Certain areas of science and technology has improved from unmanned space exploration, like distance medicine, robots. A lot of astronomical research can be done without people, once the technology is developed.
Space astronomy is almost exclusively done by unmanned space exploration. Ultimately the primary need for people to do this is commercial applications. It is easier to harvest technologies is with man. Other applications are easier without man. Astronomers believe it is a waste of money for manned space exploration, rather than unmanned. One of the primary benefits from manned space exploration hasn’t manifested itself as of yet.
Manned Space Exploration
In 2004 Burt rutan was awarded a prize of 10 million by going into space 2 times. By taking a glider into the atmosphere and then shooting from there. Rutan’s system saved a large amount of fuel. His system was the cheapest of the manned and unmanned system, and it allowed man to go into space. This

technology has been suggested for space tourism, where regular people can go up into space using technology from Russia and other places.
NATS 1760 Lecture 19 - State Sponsored Technological Development
- Technological and scientific development, state and private sector

- Technology and private industry, science and the state
- Industrial scientific and technological development, science and technology and private interests
- Funding and directing of scientific research
- Privatization of state run enterprises
- State contributing resources, laws, facilitating finance, private sector unwillingness to support infrastructure
- State regulation, legislation and infrastructure
- Role of the state in innovation, private sector competitiveness and efficiency, privatization
- Polymer Incorporated, WWII Canadian Crown corporation, synthetic rubber
- Synthetic rubber and complex scientific knowledge (gasoline)
- Synthetic rubber for private industry, saleable goods
- Protected market, no commercial orientation, postwar over capacity
- Advantages: Polymer scientists and synthetics, skilled scientists and advanced technology
- PostwarCanadian Crown corporations sold off, "infant industry" request, government ownership
- Legislation removed, limits on the % of natural rubber in manufactured items
- Sympathy in Canada for continued government involvement in the economy after the war, successful wartime economic management, popularity of Keynesian economic theory
- US and Russia did not export synthetic rubber, Germany not allowed to
- Marshall Plan to reconstruct Europe after the war, 1.1billion worth of goods in Canada, demand increases during the Korean war
- Post WWII acquisition of German science and technology, “several thousand tons” of German chemical research equipment was brought back to Canada
- Polymer directly benefitted from the war
- Wider industry helped Polymer, artificial rubber, increase in natural rubber supply and lower cost, diversification of supply
- Postwar increase in popularity of the automobile
- Alfred Chandler: structure of companies altered to fit new strategies, Polymer:
- created a R+D department
- created a sales division
- set a price point to compete with natural rubber
- prioritized profit
- pursued export markets to sell off excess capacity

- focused on both process improvement to lower prices and new product development to secure markets
- found markets for the by-products of rubber production
- Postwar attitudes towards synthetic materials, Polymer invested in advertising and education of the public
- Synthetic products shifted image, from wartime replacements to superior, scientifically engineered products
Conclusions
- Polymer made important scientifically based innovations, solved problem of cold temperature buckling of synthetic butyl rubber
- State owned corporations favoring domestic industries
- Postwar increase in international demand, Polymer support of the international market
-Government support for Polymer’s business decisions
- Ownership not important, attitude towards competition matters
State Sponsored Technological Development
Both governments and the private sector have been involved in developing technology. The vast majority of science and technology is developed in the industrial context. There are numerous examples where the state takes a part even if it isn’t doing the research themselves, like laws, resources, facilitating finance
(the legal structures for money to be transferred). Infrastructure development is frequently made by the government because the private sector doesn’t want to invest since everyone benefit but the public doesn’t invest, so its generally the government who gets involved without getting involved in the research. These are all things that we expect the government to do. However, many people question whether the government should be directly involved in science and technology, and this is the private sectors job. The reason is the private sector is more effective and productive at it. The private sector has to compete, and their ability to innovate will increase in order to win, so they are better at developing technologies. This argument is the primary argument for privatization. Ex. A company that is state owned and then it became privatized. It competed in the market for synthetic rubber, its called Polymer
Incorporated. “ While Canadian women were using rubber in the home…And yet Canada, with its abundance of natural wealth, had no domestic supply.” Creating artificial rubber is an entirely scientific development. During the actual war, polymer focused on saleable goods to the private industry. It had a protected market and they didn’t have to make a profit since they were state owned. The Canadian market made sure that no other source of rubber could be sold in Canada. The developed rubber since it was hard to get real rubber since some of those countries weren’t accessible to the allies, and Canada couldn’t grow it because of the weather. The advantages that Canadians had: We had skilled scientists and advanced technology, and polymer scientists and synthetics. During the war, Canada created new companies and privatized many government owned countries. When this happened, Polymer request
“infant industry”, which is a request that the government should protect them against all the other competition. But this request was refused. The government also removed legislation. During the war, there were limits on the % of natural rubber, but after the war they removed this and this caused a problem to Polymer. But the government said that they weren’t going to protect polymer, they had to end for themselves. Canada was generally in a preferential position because the US and Russia didn’t export synthetic rubber, and Germany wasn’t allowed to export it. The US stepped up with the Marshall
Plan after the war when Europe was in shambles. 1.1 Billion worth of goods to rebuild the European

infrastructures, and this benefited polymer. Wartime benefited polymer in a couple of different ways like equipment and contracts. Also, the wider industry helped Polymer, and many companies stayed with artificial rubber in case there would be another stop in natural rubber. After the war, the automobile industry took off, which added to the need of rubber, both natural and artificial. Alfred Chandler -
Structure of companies to fit new strategies: Polymer: - Created R&D development, - Prioritized profit, created sales division, - set a price point to compete with natural rubber, - prioritized profit, - pursued export markets to sell off excess capacity, - focused on both process improvement to lower prices and new product development to secure markets, -found markets for the by-products of rubber production.
After the war, attitudes towards synthetic materials changed, most people viewed synthetic products as inferior substitutes. After the war, Polymer and other companies tried to change the public’s view. Ex.
Also with plastic.
Conclusions
Polymer itself solved the problem of cold temperature, buckling of synthetic butyl rubber. An argument that Is often made is the government favors domestic owned businesses. When decisions need to be made, the government chose the company to behave in a business like fashion. Ownership isn’t important. It doesn’t really matter who owns the company in terms of innovation etc, what matters is the attitude towards the market. After the war, Polymer said they were going to be competitive and that’s what happened. Privatization doesn’t affect anything.
*Bernal argues that capitalism makes scientific revolution necessary. It’s a little extreme, but it was definitely necessary. Bernal undervalues the renaissance and revolution.

Physics and industrialization
Nuclear power expensive, dangerous, litigious, minority supply
High expectations, oil crises, volatility of oil market
Ontario reduction in fossil fuels, French and Eastern European nuclear capacity
China, Korea and industrialization
Nuclear power and nuclear weapons capacity, high enriched uranium and tritium (12 yr
½ life), plutonium
Nuclear weapon states: US, Russia, UK, France, China, India, Pakistan, North Korea
Potential NWS’s: Israel, South Africa
Current Status of Nuclear Power
-
12% nuclear in Canada, we sell nuclear power to US
-
Point Lepreau nuclear reactor in New Brunswick:
 Subsidized by Federal Government 50%
 9 years to construct, going 1 billion over budget
 Sells power to New England at higher rates, since capital investment was made by the Canadian government, US is eager to buy power
 We are subsidizing US power consumption
-
441 reactors worldwide (18%), France, Lithuania approximately 80% nuclear
-
Majority of worldwide reactors light water reactor (LWR) design, Canada: heavy water reactor (HWR), CANDU (Canadian Deuterium Uranium), 400-600MW
-
Highly enriched uranium fuel, moderator, likelihood of fission
-
Nuclear waste, thousands of years
-
France: nuclear waste approximately 1.2 kg per person per year, 100kg of toxic industrial waste, 15kg of hospital waste, 3000 kg of non-toxic industrial waste, and
700kg of agricultural waste
-
Mining: waste products in building construction, spent uranium shell casings
-
Radioactive waste: space, burial, mixing with glass and steel containment
-
Reprocessing: reactor transmutation of harmful isotopes into shorter lived ones
-
Waste and institutional life
-
Krypton & xenon (atmosphere), iodine and tritium (water), radiation emission
-
TMI March 28, 1979:
 Confusion over information, malfunctioning valves led to core overheat and possibly explosive hydrogen bubble formation
-
Chernobyl, April 25, 1986:
 Improper changes in testing protocols to override delay in return to full power led to meltdown and explosion
 Chernobyl was in a situation where water absorbed neutrons, so loss of water increased rate of fission

 Heat spike caused steam explosion
-
Two accidents: misinformation and deliberate disobedience of safety protocols
85% of French power nuclear generated
Nuclear a science based technology, economic failure
Technological development to rebuild nation, national identity
Recreation of a French national identity along technocratic lines
French engineers, promotion of French national interests
Large-systems approach to engineering
Defeat in WWII, national anxiety about technological backwardness
French nationalized electricity, coal and gas industries after WWII
French technologists, politicians, political goals
Technological advance, geopolitical power, decolonization, cultural hegemony of US
Two national organizations: EDF (electrical utility), and CEA (atomic energy agency)
Conflicting goals, CEA – weapons-grade plutonium, EDF - efficient electricity, divergent goals within state
CEA - limited monopolies, “champion” industries, EDF - competition
CEA – natural uranium reactor design - produced plutonium, military implications
Graphite moderator, manufacturing communists
CEA - “policy of champions”, a single contractor, incentive
Nuclear components non-specific designs, not cost sensitive
CEA - on-line refueling, maximized weapons-grade plutonium
EDF - broke up design, tendered bids, efficient designs (higher temperature and pressure, no on-line refueling)
Nuclear technologies embodied political goals, technopolitics
Technopolitics: “politics conducted through specifically technological means”, conducted by technologists, not elected officials, deriving its power from “expert knowledge and its expression in material artifacts or practices”.
Nuclear power integrated with French political process, national identity construction

Nuclear power represents technology and science coming together. Nuclear gives a small amount of world power. In the 1970s there was a spike in nuclear power again. In the 50s the problem remains the same today, that if you build a nuclear reactor, you have the basic components to build a nuclear bomb. Plutonium is a byproduct of uranium plants which can be used to make nuclear bombs.
Current status of Nuclear power
12% of nuclear power in Canada, and we sell nuclear power to the US. Point Lepreau in New
Brunswick: The vast majority of nuclear reactors go over budget, its very time consuming and very expensive. We subsidized the creation, but the private companies get the profit. There are
441 reactors worldwide which is made by burning coal. France and Lithuania, have more than
80% of their power from nuclear plants. Canada is the exception to the rule of nuclear power design. One of the advantages of our design, is its very easy to get out the dangerous by product but the disadvantage is the by product. They are also more efficient at burning uranium. Most reactors have highly enriched uranium fuel, and some sort of moderator to increase the neutrons etc. High enriched uranium could also be used to manufacture bombs which is what we are worried about, but Canadian reactors do not have that problem.
Waste concerns
Spent uranium is still radioactive even though it isn’t reactive enough to be used as fuel. It’s a dangerous substance that needs to be dealt with, and it lasts for thousands of years until its not dangerous anymore. France: They produce the most nuclear waste – approx. 1.2 kg per person per year… Nuclear waste is dangerous but we don’t make as much of as we do as other waste.
We have to mine the uranium in order to put it in reactors. And in the 60s and 70s, the substance was used in building, but its not used anymore. Spent uranium could be used for bullets, but after the gulf war, many people came back with weird symptoms so they found that it does cause harm. One way to deal with the waste is get rid of it, by sending it into space. Also putting the waste in salt mines, or putting it in sealed container. Another way, is reprocessing, which is eliminating more of the radioactivity by reprocessing the reactors to make the final product less dangerous. One of the key problems in all of this is that nuclear waste lasts thousands of years, and to except that we can manage it is for a long period of time. So many are concerned about the commitment. Nuclear reactors normally emit small amounts of
Krypton and xenon into the atmosphere, and iodine and tritium in water, and scientists have said that its safe but its debatable.
Well known nuclear accidents: TMI and Chernobyl
Three mile island (TMI) – march 28,1979 accident is when a bowel got stuck in the reactor, and the scientists couldn’t get it figured out. One of the things that happened was a light was flashing but no one could see the light because of a tag was blocking it. But the good news, it there was a meltdown, but there was no known fatalities, or cancer exposure etc. It was contained. But a hydrogen bubble was created around it, and if it blew up it would have been set up into orbit. But that didn’t happen.
Chernobyl – april 25, 1986 The people running the reactor didn’t wait till the reactor cooled down, so they turned up the reactor to get it to burn the xenon faster. This happened because the people running the reactor didn’t obey the rules. So some people say that maybe we should have them because they cause

problems and not everyone follows rules. The reactor can cause a steam explosion that blows materials over the atmosphere, which is what happened at Chernobyl.
Nuclear Power in France
85% of their energy is generated by nuclear power. It’s the epitome of nuclear based technology where everywhere else is an economic failure. Many other countries have abandoned and France has embraced it. Hescht argues that building nuclear reactors to rebuild their nation after WWII, to show that they are technically advanced. He points out that they saw it was political thing. This focus on national goals fits with making money. After WWII, the French nationalized electricity, coal and gas industries. What the technologists and engineers looked at themselves as adopting political goals while not being politicians themselves. After WWII, many French colonies separated from war and got humiliated during the war, and they needed to make up for it, and so they decided to pursue nuclear power. Also they were afraid of the Americans’ economy. So the French saw that there was potential in nuclear power. It was shaped by two organizations – EDF (and CEA, they had conflicting roles. CEA was concerned with designing plutonium to be used for their bombs. And EDF produced efficient and cheap electricity. It shows that even within a government there are conflicting goals. Another difference is the CEA channeled limited monopolies , and EDF promoted competition. The CEA decided on a design that was natural uranium reactor that could produce it for bombs. They used graphite instead of heavy water. They knew that there weren’t a lot of profit to be made because its so expensive. They encouraged competition and broke down the design in different parts (hescht). The EDF specifically picked a design for their use , which is called technopolitics – ‘politic conducted through specifically technological means’, conducted by technologist, not elected officials. Thus it became popular as a way to express national identity and not have to be political.

Complex modern technologies, organizations and institutions
Predictability, testing and demonstration
Complexity: each part of the system relies on another part or parts for their regular actions, e.g. (bicycles)
Causes of technological complexity, cumulative improvements and market diversification
Science and technological complexity (gases, electricity, magnetism and fission)
Complexity and quantification in engineering
Science, trial and error, expectations
Example: Watt’s cumulative improvements to steam engine: o Separate condenser o Transfer of stroke into rotation o Dual acting engine o Increase from 14.7 lbs per square inch to 200 psi by 1900 o Risks of boiler explosion o Also led to elimination of condenser, as it does not use atmosphere any more and does not need a vaccum
 Complexity: high tolerances, trained technicians, built on-site, expensive lubricants and materials o Increased efficiency and power adds to complexity o Turbines, steam, friction and reciprocating motion o High pressures (several thousand psi)
Complexity and empirical testing, training time, skill and knowledge
Complex technology and trades
Time, money, skill investment, new skills, changing old skills, risks
Standardization in US, monopolization, pace of innovation
France: few designs, standardized parts, lower costs, greater reliability
Slow development and testing
Biological technologies (drugs), complexity, spread of effects
Inevitability of accidents, probabilistic risk assessment (PRA)
Cumulative small problems and risk
-
but take away in a crisis, when too much information is given to be processed
-
Complex technologies inherently unsafe, regular accidents inevitable
Interactive Complexity: The components of complex systems can interact in many ways to create accidents

Interactive Coupling: Systems tightly linked so that they don’t allow sufficient time to react to and analyse problems
The more complex a technology, the more ways something can go wrong, and in a tightly coupled system the number of ways that something can go wrong increases exponentially with the number of components in the system. The complexity also makes the system more vulnerable to error. Even a tiny mistake may push the system to behave in strange ways, making it difficult for the operators to understand what is happening and making it likely that they’ll make further mistakes.
-
but individual control is often needed to stop accidents (TMI control room)
Extra safety systems, risk and complexity
Perrow: chemical plants, space missions, genetic engineering, aircraft, nuclear weapons, military early warning systems and nuclear power plants and regular accidents
Perceptions of Risk
-
Political ideology and risk perception
Judgement and complex technologies, subjectivity and ideologies
Science, self-criticism and credibility
Human-centred engineering, improved management, design
Paradox of information, present general information
Human cognitive systems, social and technological fix
Prescriptive management, rules
High Reliability Organizations, changing organizational structure
Local knowledge and Paradox of Centralization
Judgment, criticism, mistakes, punishment, costs
“Whistleblowers” and nuclear industry
HRO’s: steady turnover of employees, new ideas, creativity and criticism, communication, rules
HRO’s: (aircraft carriers, some nuclear plants, air traffic control systems, electric power) organization in normal and crisis periods
Social fix, change use

Design changes to rule out accidents
Chemical industry: green chemistry, nuclear industry: “Inherent” or “passive” safety systems o Sweden, 1990’s - PIUS (Process Inherent Ultimately Safe), low fuel enrichment, gravity fed cooling systems triggered by pressure differentials that require no pumps (borated water), 400MW o US, 1990’s –Modular High Temperature Gas Reactor (MHTGR): ceramic fuel pellets that can withstand the highest temperature of a meltdown, 150MW
Technological fix, large-scale technology, efficiency, waste, fuel
Complex Technological Systems
Complex technological systems
Modern technologies are very complex and most of the technologies are beyond the average human.
Many modern technologies need institutions and individuals o develop. As technologies becomes more complex it become more predictable. One of the consequences of this is it take longer periods of time to test and demonstrate in order to fix them. Another consequence, is its almost impossible to predict what goes wrong with technologies. New problems are always discovered, after they were developed. Another point is complexity, each part of the system relies on another part or parts for their regular actions, e.g bicycles. One of the reasons we need complex technologies is because we take existing technologies and make it more efficient, so what was simple in the beginning becomes complex after a few years. Another reason for complex technologies is to capture wider markets and consumers. Science also contributes to this issue, as science is added to technologies they become more complex and more diversified. There are very few technologies that don’t have a scientific output in them. In the 1920s new branches of technologies were opened up with the discovery f new sciences. Engineering itself has also become more complex and mathematical over time. So why do we have all this science in our technology if it makes it more complex? The development of them together allows us to develop new products. 1) technologies are too complex to develop by trial and error. No one would go about building a plane without knowing what they were doing. So science is needed in order to develop technologies.
Steam engine:
When steam engines were first built they were horribly inefficient. But they did the job because coal was really cheap around the coal mine. But over time a number of small cumulative improvements made it more efficient over time. For example, separate condenser, transfer of stroke into rotation, he added extra steam so it made it a dual acting engine, the steam also increased the pressure available. One of the consequences of this was there were more risks of boiler explosions because there was more steam being boiled at higher pressures. Watt’s engines were far more complex than early steam engines, they had to make sure that the parts fit together in order to work properly. They also required expensive materials to make them work. He made them more complex and dangerous. Modern technologies use turbines, and they operate with several thousand pounds-high pressure. They are more powerful and efficient and you could do more with them . 1) They have to be tested more to make sure you don’t make problems. 2) it also makes more training time and more skills and knowledge to operate.
Increased complexities need new skills, and regular kinds of tasks need to be improved, and this is one of the costs of complexity. As a result of this, time, money and skill investment was needed in order to change the technologies. The people had to change their technologies as well. In France, they combated technologies with standardization and the costs associated with it. There’s also a question of taking time to develop technologies. Biological technologies (drugs) are exactly like this, they are complex and need lots of testing to ensure safety. With biological things there is also the risk that they could spread diseases to the human population.
If we know that we have complex technologies how do we manage the risks?

Risk Management
The American nuclear technologies said there is a risk of accidents but the risk is small, we don’t need to worry about it. Probabilistic risk assessment (PRA)In the end the complexity of the system can make the risk assesment useless because there are many things that could happen and it might not be predictable.
Normal accidents theory (Charles perrow)
He says there will always be accidents, they are normal occurrences. Complex technologies are inherently unsafe and will always have accidents. 1) interactive complexity – the components of complex systems can interact in many ways to create accidents 2) interactive coupling – Systems tightly linked so that they don’t allow sufficient time to react to and analyze problems. Many modern technologies share these 2 characteristics.
Paradox of centralization
Centralized control is needed to coordinate complex systems, but individual control is often needed to stop accidents (TMI control room). For any technology, you need to see if the costs of the accidents will outweigh the benefits. So complex technologies shouldn’t be used because the cost of accidents are high and are going to happen.
Perception of risk
Sociologists have seen that scientist think that nuclear power is less risky than the average person. And within science there different levels. The more knowledge and familiar with the technology the least risky they think it is. Those who are further removed perceive its less risky. This is probably bad because those who know most about it should be more realistic and assess the risk right. Political ideology also tends to affects peoples risk perception. Risk evaluation has a subjective component to it, you need to judge whether something is risky or not, so ideologies and beliefs can affect someone’s judgment.
Possible solutions for risky technology
There are 3 possible solutions:
1) Human centered engineering, meaning designing technologies for human revolutions. This is a social fix. Additional information is needed to run the technologies, but too much info can cause problems. Human cognitive capacities are limited. So one way to solve that is to change the way we interface with technology in order to process this.
2) High reliability organization and management structures - Improving the management of the technologies. Prescriptive management rules has rules of how to work the technology. Ex. The military. This was the same with the nuclear science. High reliability organizations came about by saying that certain industries don’t have accidents. So they looked at them and learned from them. For example, aircraft control, what makes them safer than other sectors….. there is one set of control. You are changing the way the technology is managed.
3) Inherent safety – technological fix. Its possible to design changes to rule out accidents. The problem is that you wont get the technology that is most efficient.