What do you think?
Rate this book
Concepts of Force
Both historical treatment and critical analysis, this work by a noted physicist takes a fascinating look at a fundamental of physics, tracing its development from ancient to modern times. Kepler's initiation of scientific conceptualization, Newton's definition, post-Newtonian reinterpretation — contrasting concepts of Leibniz, Boscovich, Kant with those of Mach, Kirchhoff, Hertz. "An excellent presentation." — Science. 1962 edition.
288 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1957
9 people are currently reading
98 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
July 25, 2020
In the present volume, Concepts of Force, Max Jammer continues his program of investigating the historical derivation of key concepts in physical science. The format resembles his previous volume on physical concepts of space; this time, he attributes the origin of the concept of force to the animistic conceptions of pre-historic man and its more abstract formulation as a personification in the gods among the Egyptians and elsewhere in the ancient near East. Jammer makes somewhat short work of the concept of force in Greek science, perhaps because it is otherwise well known.
His real analysis begins with the pre-classical mechanics of the medievals. Jammer traces the ideas of Roger Bacon, who was influenced by the Arabic astrological speculations of Albumasar and al-Kindi, and numerous other medieval scholastics through to the immediate precursors of Galileo and Kepler, when Aristotle’s teleology was replaced by John Buridan’s impetus. The modern view of force finds its first exponent in Kepler, who postulated a magnetic attraction coming from the sun that propels the planets along their orbits. Jammer gives a thorough discussion of the classical mechanics of Galileo, Huygens and Newton before turning to the dynamical alternative of Leibniz, Boscovitch and Kant. Just as the Cambridge Platonists Cudworth and More reacted to the Cartesian equation of physics with geometry, Leibniz and his followers sought to replace what they saw as an inert, lifeless mechanism with vital activity. Strictly speaking, Leibniz does not distinguish between what we call force and what we call kinetic energy. Newton himself says almost nothing about energy of any form in the Principia so it is ultimately from Leibniz that modern physics draws its ideas of conservation of energy and of the transformation of energy from one form into another. This reviewer enjoyed Jammer’s extensive treatment of Boscovitch’s dynamical system, in which centers of force in mutual interaction are more fundamental than matter itself. This section shows that Boscovitch does much more than merely propose a complicated universal force law (attractive at large distances and repulsive at short, oscillating in between), which is the context in which one most often sees him cited by less discerning writers and physicists. In contrast, Jammer’s treatment of Kant strikes this reviewer as superficial and insufficient. Kant’s Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science is, in his view, the most adequate philosophical encapsulation of the Newtonian world-view on offer.
The later chapters in the work under review sketch the positivistic turn of the nineteenth century, with Mach, Kirchoff and Hertz. Force was demoted from its constitutive role in Newton’s thought to a mere shorthand that enables one to write convenient differential equations of motion (i.e. force is nothing other than a certain quantity proportional to observed acceleration which we introduce only for the sake of convenience as a methodological intermediate). In this manner, the way is prepared for what Jammer contends is the systematic elimination of the concept of force altogether in Einstein’s general theory of relativity and in the standard model, where it is replaced by the exchange of momentum via photons, W, Z particles for the electroweak interaction and gluons for strong interactions.
In summary, Jammer manages in the present volume to keep better control over his material than he does in Concepts of Space; in the former, his conceptual demarcation of the stages in the evolution of the concept of force remains clear and the discussion does not peter off into irrelevance as one approaches the present, unlike what unfortunately happens in the latter. All around, to be recommended as a good overview of the high points, if not too exhaustively technical in detail. For that, one would want to consult the journal literature in the history and philosophy of physics.
His real analysis begins with the pre-classical mechanics of the medievals. Jammer traces the ideas of Roger Bacon, who was influenced by the Arabic astrological speculations of Albumasar and al-Kindi, and numerous other medieval scholastics through to the immediate precursors of Galileo and Kepler, when Aristotle’s teleology was replaced by John Buridan’s impetus. The modern view of force finds its first exponent in Kepler, who postulated a magnetic attraction coming from the sun that propels the planets along their orbits. Jammer gives a thorough discussion of the classical mechanics of Galileo, Huygens and Newton before turning to the dynamical alternative of Leibniz, Boscovitch and Kant. Just as the Cambridge Platonists Cudworth and More reacted to the Cartesian equation of physics with geometry, Leibniz and his followers sought to replace what they saw as an inert, lifeless mechanism with vital activity. Strictly speaking, Leibniz does not distinguish between what we call force and what we call kinetic energy. Newton himself says almost nothing about energy of any form in the Principia so it is ultimately from Leibniz that modern physics draws its ideas of conservation of energy and of the transformation of energy from one form into another. This reviewer enjoyed Jammer’s extensive treatment of Boscovitch’s dynamical system, in which centers of force in mutual interaction are more fundamental than matter itself. This section shows that Boscovitch does much more than merely propose a complicated universal force law (attractive at large distances and repulsive at short, oscillating in between), which is the context in which one most often sees him cited by less discerning writers and physicists. In contrast, Jammer’s treatment of Kant strikes this reviewer as superficial and insufficient. Kant’s Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science is, in his view, the most adequate philosophical encapsulation of the Newtonian world-view on offer.
The later chapters in the work under review sketch the positivistic turn of the nineteenth century, with Mach, Kirchoff and Hertz. Force was demoted from its constitutive role in Newton’s thought to a mere shorthand that enables one to write convenient differential equations of motion (i.e. force is nothing other than a certain quantity proportional to observed acceleration which we introduce only for the sake of convenience as a methodological intermediate). In this manner, the way is prepared for what Jammer contends is the systematic elimination of the concept of force altogether in Einstein’s general theory of relativity and in the standard model, where it is replaced by the exchange of momentum via photons, W, Z particles for the electroweak interaction and gluons for strong interactions.
In summary, Jammer manages in the present volume to keep better control over his material than he does in Concepts of Space; in the former, his conceptual demarcation of the stages in the evolution of the concept of force remains clear and the discussion does not peter off into irrelevance as one approaches the present, unlike what unfortunately happens in the latter. All around, to be recommended as a good overview of the high points, if not too exhaustively technical in detail. For that, one would want to consult the journal literature in the history and philosophy of physics.
January 15, 2009
The pay-off is this: nothing that we think is real is really real -- just functional descriptions that are an ever-evolving mix of philosophy and observation dancing their way to new (right and wrong, depending on which century you check in) insights into what constitutes our existence. If the historical account is too much, just read the introduction -- well worth your time.
This book broke open a new understanding for me of the the limited (but powerful) role of science and its continuously evolving perspective -- well researched, but still a little dry. One of several books by Jammer in this vein -- important and probably underappreciated books.
This book broke open a new understanding for me of the the limited (but powerful) role of science and its continuously evolving perspective -- well researched, but still a little dry. One of several books by Jammer in this vein -- important and probably underappreciated books.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews