Die Phlogistontheorie von Georg Ernst Stahl -. The Phlogiston Theory from Georg Ernst Stahl - Catalyst in the Development of Modern Scientific Chemistry

CHEMKON ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 75-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
Horst Remane
Keyword(s):  
Phlogiston Theory

scholarly journals James Keir of the Lunar Society

1967 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 144-154 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Royal Society ◽  
Scientific Revolution ◽  
Science And Technology ◽  
Significant Part ◽  
Phlogiston Theory ◽  
Short Account ◽  
Modern Chemistry ◽  
Lunar Society Of Birmingham

THE long career of James Keir (born in Edinburgh on 20 September 1735, elected a Fellow of the Royal Society on 8 December 1785, died at West Bromwich on 11 October 1820) effectively covered the period of the scientific revolution out of which modern chemistry evolved. Keir himself played a significant part in that revolution, as writer, experimenter, and industrialist—and, by no means least, as a frequent ‘chairman’ at meetings of the Lunar Society of Birmingham, which he helped to hold together by his tact and force of character. Although there are frequent references to Keir in books and articles dealing with the period (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), he remains relatively unknown, partly because he was overshadowed by men like Priestley and Watt, partly because he adhered too long to the phlogiston theory, and perhaps also because of his own modesty. A short account of his life, and an appreciation of his contributions to science and technology, may therefore not be out of place, particularly in view of the marked revival of interest in the Lunar Society in recent years.

Richard Kirwan's Phlogiston Theory: Its Success and Fate

Ambix ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 49 (3) ◽  
pp. 185-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seymour Mauskop
Keyword(s):  
Phlogiston Theory

Early Opposition to the Phlogiston Theory: Two Anonymous Attacks

1970 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 128-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carleton Perrin
Keyword(s):  
Weight Gain ◽  
Chemical Composition ◽  
Chemical Processes ◽  
Current Understanding ◽  
Equal Weight ◽  
Phlogiston Theory ◽  
Guyton De Morveau ◽  
Simultaneous Loss ◽  
General Fact

For French chemistry the early 1770's were lively years of discovery and controversy. Two neglected areas of research were opened up in 1772 with the publication of the Digressions académiques by Louis-Bernard Guyton de Morveau and with the first knowledge of later British pneumatic chemistry. Guyton's book established the general fact of weight-gain in metals upon calcination, thereby raising the problem of reconciling this gain with simultaneous loss of phlogiston. The spread of pneumatic chemistry, which proceeded rapidly in 1773, stimulated a renewed interest in the nature of air and its part in chemical composition. It was, of course, Antoine Laurent Lavoisier who perceived a relationship between these two developments—one which he believed would revolutionize the current understanding of chemical processes. In 1772 Lavoisier began the series of investigations which culminated in his Opuscules physiques et chimiques (1774), in which he demonstrated that weight-gain in both calcination and combustion is correlated with absorption of an equal weight of air.

Climate Science and the Phlogiston Theory

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 441-448
Author(s):  
Arthur Rorsch
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
History Of Science ◽  
Climate Changes ◽  
Fossil Fuel ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Natural Variability ◽  
Phlogiston Theory ◽  
History Of ◽  
Level Of Knowledge

On 2 February 2007 the Intergovernmental Governmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) released a “Summary for Policymakers” which is a precis – written by its representatives, not all of whom were scientists – of its longer report, due for release in May. Drafts of the as-yet unpublished main report have been widely circulated and prompted much comment but views which differ from that of the IPCC and the main authors have been largely neglected. In response to the SPM ten scientists presented an alternative report based on the IPCC's draft document and this Independent Summary for Policymakers (ISPM) was released in London on February 5. The ISPM notes the limited level of knowledge of climate sciences and comments on hypotheses neglected by the IPCC SPM, and not surprisingly its conclusions contradict those of the IPCC. The rather alarmist IPCC SPM claims that it is between 90% and 95% probable that the observed climate change since 1950 has mainly been caused by mankind and in particular by the emission of CO2 produced by the burning of fossil fuel. In contrast the ISPM states that the extent to which humans are contributing to climate change is uncertain and will remain uncertain for some time. The ISPM also points out that that the observed climate changes are still within the limits of natural variability and can be explained by natural events, and suggests that some warming might be beneficial. This paper considers this controversy from the perspective of the history of science and shows precendents for questioning science orthodoxy.

The Ghost of Sendivogius

2018 ◽  
pp. 452-481
Author(s):  
William R. Newman
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Sulfur Content ◽  
Phlogiston Theory ◽  
Chemical Revolution ◽  
Refractive Power ◽  
Late Eighteenth Century ◽  
Graphic Representations ◽  
Late Eighteenth ◽  
Century Development ◽  
Affinity Tables

This chapter builds on Newton's increasing interest in sulfur, placing his theories in the context of developments within the chymical community of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries. It provides a new look at Newton's developing ideas about affinity and his role in the eighteenth-century development of affinity tables, the graphic representations of selective attractions by materials that cause those with less affinity to precipitate. Newton's attribution of refractive power to the sulfur content of illuminated materials justifies the view that he held a chymical theory of light. Nor did this fact escape his successors. In the years directly before the Chemical Revolution of the late eighteenth century, European chymists tried to push Newton's chymistry of light further by attaching his linkage of refractivity and sulfur to the phlogiston theory championed by Georg Ernst Stahl.

scholarly journals Eight sages over five centuries share oxygen's discovery

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 370-376 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Severinghaus
Keyword(s):  
Pulmonary Circulation ◽  
Pure Water ◽  
Phlogiston Theory ◽  
Joseph Priestley

During the last century, historians have discovered that between the 13th and 18th centuries, at least six sages discovered that the air we breathe contains something that we need and use. Ibn al-Nafis (1213–1288) in Cairo and Michael Servetus (1511–1553) in France accurately described the pulmonary circulation and its effect on blood color. Michael Sendivogius (1566–1636) in Poland called a part of air “the food of life” and identified it as the gas made by heating saltpetre. John Mayow (1641–1679) in Oxford found that one-fifth of air was a special gas he called “spiritus nitro aereus.” Carl Wilhelm Scheele (1742–1786) in Uppsala generated a gas he named “fire air” by heating several metal calcs. He asked Lavoisier how it fit the phlogiston theory. Lavoisier never answered. In 1744, Joseph Priestley (1733–1804) in England discovered how to make part of air by heating red calc of mercury. He found it brightened a flame and supported life in a mouse in a sealed bottle. He called it “dephlogisticated air.” He published and personally told Lavoisier and other chemists about it. Lavoisier never thanked him. After 9 years of generating and studying its chemistry, he couldn't understand whether it was a new element. He still named it “principe oxigene.” He was still not able to disprove phlogiston. Henry Cavendish (1731–1810) made an inflammable gas in 1766. He and Priestley noted that its flame made a dew. Cavendish proved the dew was pure water and published this in 1778, but all scientists called it impossible to make water, an element. In 1783, on June 24th, Lavoisier was urged to try it, and, when water appeared, he realized that water was not an element but a compound of two gases, proving that oxygen was an element. He then demolished phlogiston and began the new chemistry revolution.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document