![Reception and priority[edit]Joule's apparatus for measuring the mechan dịch - Reception and priority[edit]Joule's apparatus for measuring the mechan Việt làm thế nào để nói](http://viimg.ilovetranslation.com/_data/ilovetranslation_com_vi/pic/logo.gif?v=464f1bcca1398d53_2069){kind=logo}
- Văn bản
- Lịch sử
Reception and priority[edit]Joule's
Reception and priority[edit]
Joule's apparatus for measuring the mechanical equivalent of heat
For the controversy over priority with Mayer, see Mechanical equivalent of heat: Priority
Much of the initial resistance to Joule's work stemmed from its dependence upon extremely precise measurements. He claimed to be able to measure temperatures to within 1⁄200 of a degree Fahrenheit (3 mK). Such precision was certainly uncommon in contemporary experimental physics but his doubters may have neglected his experience in the art of brewing and his access to its practical technologies.[10] He was also ably supported by scientific instrument-maker John Benjamin Dancer. Joule's experiments complemented the theoretical work of Rudolf Clausius, who is considered by some to be the coinventor of the energy concept.
Joule was proposing a kinetic theory of heat (he believed it to be a form of rotational, rather than translational, kinetic energy), and this required a conceptual leap: if heat was a form of molecular motion, why didn't the motion of the molecules gradually die out? Joule's ideas required one to believe that the collisions of molecules were perfectly elastic. We should also remember that the very existence of atoms and molecules was not widely accepted for another hundred years.
Although it may be hard today to understand the allure of the caloric theory, at the time it seemed to have some clear advantages. Carnot's successful theory of heat engines had also been based on the caloric assumption, and only later was it proved by Lord Kelvin that Carnot's mathematics were equally valid without assuming a caloric fluid.
However, in Germany, Hermann Helmholtz became aware both of Joule's work and the similar 1842 work of Julius Robert von Mayer. Though both men had been neglected since their respective publications, Helmholtz's definitive 1847 declaration of the conservation of energy credited them both.
Also in 1847, another of Joule's presentations at the British Association in Oxford was attended by George Gabriel Stokes, Michael Faraday, and the precocious and maverick William Thomson, later to become Lord Kelvin, who had just been appointed professor of natural philosophy at the University of Glasgow. Stokes was "inclined to be a Joulite" and Faraday was "much struck with it" though he harboured doubts. Thomson was intrigued but sceptical.
Unanticipated, Thomson and Joule met later that year in Chamonix. Joule married Amelia Grimes on 18 August and the couple went on honeymoon. Marital enthusiasm notwithstanding, Joule and Thomson arranged to attempt an experiment a few days later to measure the temperature difference between the top and bottom of the Cascade de Sallanches waterfall, though this subsequently proved impractical.
Though Thomson felt that Joule's results demanded theoretical explanation, he retreated into a spirited defence of the Carnot-Clapeyron school. In his 1848 account of absolute temperature, Thomson wrote that "the conversion of heat (or caloric) into mechanical effect is probably impossible, certainly undiscovered"[11] – but a footnote signalled his first doubts about the caloric theory, referring to Joule's "very remarkable discoveries". Surprisingly, Thomson did not send Joule a copy of his paper but when Joule eventually read it he wrote to Thomson on 6 October, claiming that his studies had demonstrated conversion of heat into work but that he was planning further experiments. Thomson replied on the 27th, revealing that he was planning his own experiments and hoping for a reconciliation of their two views. Though Thomson conducted no new experiments, over the next two years he became increasingly dissatisfied with Carnot's theory and convinced of Joule's. In his 1851 paper, Thomson was willing to go no further than a compromise and declared "the whole theory of the motive power of heat is founded on ... two ... propositions, due respectively to Joule, and to Carnot and Clausius".
As soon as Joule read the paper he wrote to Thomson with his comments and questions. Thus began a fruitful, though largely epistolary, collaboration between the two men, Joule conducting experiments, Thomson analysing the results and suggesting further experiments. The collaboration lasted from 1852 to 1856, its discoveries including the Joule-Thomson effect, and the published results did much to bring about general acceptance of Joule's work and the kinetic theory.
Joule's apparatus for measuring the mechanical equivalent of heat
For the controversy over priority with Mayer, see Mechanical equivalent of heat: Priority
Much of the initial resistance to Joule's work stemmed from its dependence upon extremely precise measurements. He claimed to be able to measure temperatures to within 1⁄200 of a degree Fahrenheit (3 mK). Such precision was certainly uncommon in contemporary experimental physics but his doubters may have neglected his experience in the art of brewing and his access to its practical technologies.[10] He was also ably supported by scientific instrument-maker John Benjamin Dancer. Joule's experiments complemented the theoretical work of Rudolf Clausius, who is considered by some to be the coinventor of the energy concept.
Joule was proposing a kinetic theory of heat (he believed it to be a form of rotational, rather than translational, kinetic energy), and this required a conceptual leap: if heat was a form of molecular motion, why didn't the motion of the molecules gradually die out? Joule's ideas required one to believe that the collisions of molecules were perfectly elastic. We should also remember that the very existence of atoms and molecules was not widely accepted for another hundred years.
Although it may be hard today to understand the allure of the caloric theory, at the time it seemed to have some clear advantages. Carnot's successful theory of heat engines had also been based on the caloric assumption, and only later was it proved by Lord Kelvin that Carnot's mathematics were equally valid without assuming a caloric fluid.
However, in Germany, Hermann Helmholtz became aware both of Joule's work and the similar 1842 work of Julius Robert von Mayer. Though both men had been neglected since their respective publications, Helmholtz's definitive 1847 declaration of the conservation of energy credited them both.
Also in 1847, another of Joule's presentations at the British Association in Oxford was attended by George Gabriel Stokes, Michael Faraday, and the precocious and maverick William Thomson, later to become Lord Kelvin, who had just been appointed professor of natural philosophy at the University of Glasgow. Stokes was "inclined to be a Joulite" and Faraday was "much struck with it" though he harboured doubts. Thomson was intrigued but sceptical.
Unanticipated, Thomson and Joule met later that year in Chamonix. Joule married Amelia Grimes on 18 August and the couple went on honeymoon. Marital enthusiasm notwithstanding, Joule and Thomson arranged to attempt an experiment a few days later to measure the temperature difference between the top and bottom of the Cascade de Sallanches waterfall, though this subsequently proved impractical.
Though Thomson felt that Joule's results demanded theoretical explanation, he retreated into a spirited defence of the Carnot-Clapeyron school. In his 1848 account of absolute temperature, Thomson wrote that "the conversion of heat (or caloric) into mechanical effect is probably impossible, certainly undiscovered"[11] – but a footnote signalled his first doubts about the caloric theory, referring to Joule's "very remarkable discoveries". Surprisingly, Thomson did not send Joule a copy of his paper but when Joule eventually read it he wrote to Thomson on 6 October, claiming that his studies had demonstrated conversion of heat into work but that he was planning further experiments. Thomson replied on the 27th, revealing that he was planning his own experiments and hoping for a reconciliation of their two views. Though Thomson conducted no new experiments, over the next two years he became increasingly dissatisfied with Carnot's theory and convinced of Joule's. In his 1851 paper, Thomson was willing to go no further than a compromise and declared "the whole theory of the motive power of heat is founded on ... two ... propositions, due respectively to Joule, and to Carnot and Clausius".
As soon as Joule read the paper he wrote to Thomson with his comments and questions. Thus began a fruitful, though largely epistolary, collaboration between the two men, Joule conducting experiments, Thomson analysing the results and suggesting further experiments. The collaboration lasted from 1852 to 1856, its discoveries including the Joule-Thomson effect, and the published results did much to bring about general acceptance of Joule's work and the kinetic theory.
0/5000
Quầy lễ tân và ưu tiên [sửa]Joule của thiết bị dùng để đo tương đương cơ khí nhiệtTranh cãi về các ưu tiên với Mayer, xem equivalent cơ khí của nhiệt: ưu tiênPhần lớn các kháng ban đầu để làm việc của Joule bắt nguồn từ sự phụ thuộc khi đo đạc rất chính xác. Ông tuyên bố để có thể đo lường nhiệt độ trong 1⁄200 của một mức độ Fahrenheit (3 mK). Chính xác như vậy là chắc chắn không phổ biến trong vật lý thực nghiệm hiện đại nhưng nghi ngờ của ông có thể đã bỏ rơi kinh nghiệm của mình trong nghệ thuật pha cà phê và truy cập của mình để công nghệ thực tế của nó.[10] Ông cũng ably được hỗ trợ bởi công cụ-hãng sản xuất khoa học John Benjamin Dancer. Joule của thí nghiệm bổ sung công trình lý thuyết của Rudolf Clausius, người được xem là là coinventor khái niệm năng lượng.Joule đề xuất một lý thuyết động học của nhiệt (ông tin rằng nó là một hình thức của quay, hơn là tịnh tiến, năng lượng động học), và điều này đòi hỏi một bước nhảy vọt khái niệm: nếu nhiệt là một dạng của phân tử chuyển động, tại sao không chuyển động của các phân tử dần dần chết ra ngoài? Ý tưởng của Joule yêu cầu một tin rằng va chạm của các phân tử đàn hồi hoàn hảo. Chúng ta cũng nên nhớ rằng sự tồn tại của nguyên tử và phân tử không được rộng rãi chấp nhận cho một trăm năm.Mặc dù nó có thể khó khăn vào ngày hôm nay để hiểu những nét quyến rũ của lý thuyết calo, lúc đó nó dường như có một số lợi thế rõ ràng. Carnot thường thành công lý thuyết về nhiệt động cơ cũng có được dựa trên giả định lượng calo, và chỉ sau đó nó đã được chứng minh bởi Lord Kelvin Carnot rằng toán học được hợp lệ bằng nhau mà không cần giả định một chất lỏng calo.Tuy nhiên, ở Đức, Hermann Helmholtz quân ý thức cả Joule của công việc và công việc 1842 tương tự như của Julius Robert von Mayer. Mặc dù cả hai người đàn ông đã bị bỏ rơi từ Ấn phẩm tương ứng của họ, tuyên bố năm 1847 dứt khoát của Helmholtz bảo tồn năng lượng ghi cả hai.Cũng vào năm 1847, khác của bài thuyết trình của Joule tại Hiệp hội Anh tại Oxford đã được tham dự bởi George Gabriel Stokes, Michael Faraday và William Thomson sớm và bò con bị lạc, sau đó để trở thành Lord Kelvin, người đã chỉ được bổ nhiệm giáo sư triết học tự nhiên tại Đại học Glasgow. Stokes là "nghiêng để là một Joulite" và Faraday là "nhiều tấn công với nó" mặc dù ông harboured nghi ngờ. Thomson là hấp dẫn nhưng không tin.Unanticipated, Thomson và Joule gặp cuối năm đó tại Chamonix. Joule kết hôn với Amelia Grimes ngày 18 tháng 8 và các cặp vợ chồng đã đi tuần trăng mật. Sự nhiệt tình hôn nhân bất kể, Joule và Thomson sắp xếp để cố gắng thử nghiệm một vài ngày sau đó để đo lường sự khác biệt nhiệt độ giữa trên và dưới cùng của thác nước Cascade de Sallanches, mặc dù điều này sau đó đã chứng minh không thực tế.Mặc dù Thomson cảm thấy rằng kết quả của Joule yêu cầu giải thích lý thuyết, ông rút lui vào một phòng tinh thần học Carnot-Clapeyron. Trong tài khoản của mình năm 1848 của nhiệt độ tuyệt đối, Thomson đã viết rằng "chuyển đổi nhiệt (hoặc caloric) có hiệu lực cơ khí là có lẽ không thể, chắc chắn chưa" [11]- nhưng một chú thích báo hiệu nghi ngờ đầu tiên của ông về lý thuyết calo, đề cập đến của Joule "rất đáng chú ý và các phát hiện". Đáng ngạc nhiên, Thomson không gửi Joule một bản sao của bài báo của ông nhưng khi Joule cuối cùng đọc nó ông đã viết cho Thomson ngày 6 tháng 10, tuyên bố rằng nghiên cứu của ông đã chứng minh chuyển đổi nhiệt vào công việc, nhưng ông đã lập kế hoạch tiếp tục thí nghiệm. Thomson phản hồi trên 27 tháng 6, tiết lộ rằng ông đã quy hoạch thí nghiệm của mình và hy vọng cho một hòa giải của hai quan điểm của họ. Mặc dù Thomson tiến hành không có thí nghiệm mới, trong hai năm tiếp theo ông trở nên ngày càng không hài lòng với lý thuyết của Carnot và thuyết phục của của Joule. Trong bài báo của ông năm 1851, Thomson đã sẵn sàng để đi không xa hơn so với một sự thỏa hiệp và tuyên bố "lý thuyết toàn bộ sức mạnh động cơ nhiệt được thành lập trên... hai... đề xuất, sự tương ứng để Joule, và Carnot và Clausius".Ngay sau khi Joule đọc bài báo ông viết cho Thomson với ý kiến và câu hỏi của ông. Do đó, bắt đầu một sự hợp tác hiệu quả, mặc dù phần lớn epistolary, giữa hai người đàn ông, Joule tiến hành thí nghiệm, Thomson phân tích các kết quả và cho thấy tiếp tục thí nghiệm. Sự hợp tác diễn ra từ năm 1852 đến năm 1856, của nó phát hiện bao gồm các hiệu ứng Joule-Thomson, và kết quả được công bố đã làm nhiều để đem lại sự chấp nhận chung Joule của công việc và lý thuyết động học.
đang được dịch, vui lòng đợi..
Reception and priority[edit]
Joule's apparatus for measuring the mechanical equivalent of heat
For the controversy over priority with Mayer, see Mechanical equivalent of heat: Priority
Much of the initial resistance to Joule's work stemmed from its dependence upon extremely precise measurements. He claimed to be able to measure temperatures to within 1⁄200 of a degree Fahrenheit (3 mK). Such precision was certainly uncommon in contemporary experimental physics but his doubters may have neglected his experience in the art of brewing and his access to its practical technologies.[10] He was also ably supported by scientific instrument-maker John Benjamin Dancer. Joule's experiments complemented the theoretical work of Rudolf Clausius, who is considered by some to be the coinventor of the energy concept.
Joule was proposing a kinetic theory of heat (he believed it to be a form of rotational, rather than translational, kinetic energy), and this required a conceptual leap: if heat was a form of molecular motion, why didn't the motion of the molecules gradually die out? Joule's ideas required one to believe that the collisions of molecules were perfectly elastic. We should also remember that the very existence of atoms and molecules was not widely accepted for another hundred years.
Although it may be hard today to understand the allure of the caloric theory, at the time it seemed to have some clear advantages. Carnot's successful theory of heat engines had also been based on the caloric assumption, and only later was it proved by Lord Kelvin that Carnot's mathematics were equally valid without assuming a caloric fluid.
However, in Germany, Hermann Helmholtz became aware both of Joule's work and the similar 1842 work of Julius Robert von Mayer. Though both men had been neglected since their respective publications, Helmholtz's definitive 1847 declaration of the conservation of energy credited them both.
Also in 1847, another of Joule's presentations at the British Association in Oxford was attended by George Gabriel Stokes, Michael Faraday, and the precocious and maverick William Thomson, later to become Lord Kelvin, who had just been appointed professor of natural philosophy at the University of Glasgow. Stokes was "inclined to be a Joulite" and Faraday was "much struck with it" though he harboured doubts. Thomson was intrigued but sceptical.
Unanticipated, Thomson and Joule met later that year in Chamonix. Joule married Amelia Grimes on 18 August and the couple went on honeymoon. Marital enthusiasm notwithstanding, Joule and Thomson arranged to attempt an experiment a few days later to measure the temperature difference between the top and bottom of the Cascade de Sallanches waterfall, though this subsequently proved impractical.
Though Thomson felt that Joule's results demanded theoretical explanation, he retreated into a spirited defence of the Carnot-Clapeyron school. In his 1848 account of absolute temperature, Thomson wrote that "the conversion of heat (or caloric) into mechanical effect is probably impossible, certainly undiscovered"[11] – but a footnote signalled his first doubts about the caloric theory, referring to Joule's "very remarkable discoveries". Surprisingly, Thomson did not send Joule a copy of his paper but when Joule eventually read it he wrote to Thomson on 6 October, claiming that his studies had demonstrated conversion of heat into work but that he was planning further experiments. Thomson replied on the 27th, revealing that he was planning his own experiments and hoping for a reconciliation of their two views. Though Thomson conducted no new experiments, over the next two years he became increasingly dissatisfied with Carnot's theory and convinced of Joule's. In his 1851 paper, Thomson was willing to go no further than a compromise and declared "the whole theory of the motive power of heat is founded on ... two ... propositions, due respectively to Joule, and to Carnot and Clausius".
As soon as Joule read the paper he wrote to Thomson with his comments and questions. Thus began a fruitful, though largely epistolary, collaboration between the two men, Joule conducting experiments, Thomson analysing the results and suggesting further experiments. The collaboration lasted from 1852 to 1856, its discoveries including the Joule-Thomson effect, and the published results did much to bring about general acceptance of Joule's work and the kinetic theory.
Joule's apparatus for measuring the mechanical equivalent of heat
For the controversy over priority with Mayer, see Mechanical equivalent of heat: Priority
Much of the initial resistance to Joule's work stemmed from its dependence upon extremely precise measurements. He claimed to be able to measure temperatures to within 1⁄200 of a degree Fahrenheit (3 mK). Such precision was certainly uncommon in contemporary experimental physics but his doubters may have neglected his experience in the art of brewing and his access to its practical technologies.[10] He was also ably supported by scientific instrument-maker John Benjamin Dancer. Joule's experiments complemented the theoretical work of Rudolf Clausius, who is considered by some to be the coinventor of the energy concept.
Joule was proposing a kinetic theory of heat (he believed it to be a form of rotational, rather than translational, kinetic energy), and this required a conceptual leap: if heat was a form of molecular motion, why didn't the motion of the molecules gradually die out? Joule's ideas required one to believe that the collisions of molecules were perfectly elastic. We should also remember that the very existence of atoms and molecules was not widely accepted for another hundred years.
Although it may be hard today to understand the allure of the caloric theory, at the time it seemed to have some clear advantages. Carnot's successful theory of heat engines had also been based on the caloric assumption, and only later was it proved by Lord Kelvin that Carnot's mathematics were equally valid without assuming a caloric fluid.
However, in Germany, Hermann Helmholtz became aware both of Joule's work and the similar 1842 work of Julius Robert von Mayer. Though both men had been neglected since their respective publications, Helmholtz's definitive 1847 declaration of the conservation of energy credited them both.
Also in 1847, another of Joule's presentations at the British Association in Oxford was attended by George Gabriel Stokes, Michael Faraday, and the precocious and maverick William Thomson, later to become Lord Kelvin, who had just been appointed professor of natural philosophy at the University of Glasgow. Stokes was "inclined to be a Joulite" and Faraday was "much struck with it" though he harboured doubts. Thomson was intrigued but sceptical.
Unanticipated, Thomson and Joule met later that year in Chamonix. Joule married Amelia Grimes on 18 August and the couple went on honeymoon. Marital enthusiasm notwithstanding, Joule and Thomson arranged to attempt an experiment a few days later to measure the temperature difference between the top and bottom of the Cascade de Sallanches waterfall, though this subsequently proved impractical.
Though Thomson felt that Joule's results demanded theoretical explanation, he retreated into a spirited defence of the Carnot-Clapeyron school. In his 1848 account of absolute temperature, Thomson wrote that "the conversion of heat (or caloric) into mechanical effect is probably impossible, certainly undiscovered"[11] – but a footnote signalled his first doubts about the caloric theory, referring to Joule's "very remarkable discoveries". Surprisingly, Thomson did not send Joule a copy of his paper but when Joule eventually read it he wrote to Thomson on 6 October, claiming that his studies had demonstrated conversion of heat into work but that he was planning further experiments. Thomson replied on the 27th, revealing that he was planning his own experiments and hoping for a reconciliation of their two views. Though Thomson conducted no new experiments, over the next two years he became increasingly dissatisfied with Carnot's theory and convinced of Joule's. In his 1851 paper, Thomson was willing to go no further than a compromise and declared "the whole theory of the motive power of heat is founded on ... two ... propositions, due respectively to Joule, and to Carnot and Clausius".
As soon as Joule read the paper he wrote to Thomson with his comments and questions. Thus began a fruitful, though largely epistolary, collaboration between the two men, Joule conducting experiments, Thomson analysing the results and suggesting further experiments. The collaboration lasted from 1852 to 1856, its discoveries including the Joule-Thomson effect, and the published results did much to bring about general acceptance of Joule's work and the kinetic theory.
đang được dịch, vui lòng đợi..
Các ngôn ngữ khác
Hỗ trợ công cụ dịch thuật: Albania, Amharic, Anh, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ba Lan, Ba Tư, Bantu, Basque, Belarus, Bengal, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Bồ Đào Nha, Catalan, Cebuano, Chichewa, Corsi, Creole (Haiti), Croatia, Do Thái, Estonia, Filipino, Frisia, Gael Scotland, Galicia, George, Gujarat, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Hungary, Hy Lạp, Hà Lan, Hà Lan (Nam Phi), Hàn, Iceland, Igbo, Ireland, Java, Kannada, Kazakh, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Klingon, Kurd, Kyrgyz, Latinh, Latvia, Litva, Luxembourg, Lào, Macedonia, Malagasy, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Myanmar, Mã Lai, Mông Cổ, Na Uy, Nepal, Nga, Nhật, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Pháp, Phát hiện ngôn ngữ, Phần Lan, Punjab, Quốc tế ngữ, Rumani, Samoa, Serbia, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovak, Slovenia, Somali, Sunda, Swahili, Séc, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thái, Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ, Thụy Điển, Tiếng Indonesia, Tiếng Ý, Trung, Trung (Phồn thể), Turkmen, Tây Ban Nha, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Việt, Xứ Wales, Yiddish, Yoruba, Zulu, Đan Mạch, Đức, Ả Rập, dịch ngôn ngữ.
- new situations
- Tôi đang xem 1 bức tranh khá đẹp. Bức tr
- he suddenly appeared in the doorway
- miền bắc có bốn mùa xuân hạ thu đông
- People
- ,タイムアウトが発生しました。お手数ですが画面を閉じて、再度ログインしてください
- But learning vn to me is less important
- It's time someone finally said it: Most
- situations
- changeable
- often ?
- However, only today have we learnt that
- change
- feed back
- by train
- habit to become or make something better
- trang điểm
- What do you want to contest with me?
- yesterday
- อุ๊บต๊ะลิงหาทางกลับบ้านไม่เจออิอิ
- change in new situations
- It means that
- Algorithmic skeleton - A high-level para
- Ưa nhìn
