Was the creation of nuclear weaponry a direct result of the pressures from WWII, or was it simply the natural advancement of weapon technology that would have happened otherwise?

When and why did we start considering science as a field of study distinct from other fields of study?

AWWW YISSS.

I notice there are a few panelists who focus on alchemy! A couple questions:

• Did the esoteric/hermetic stuff associated with alchemy have anything to do with traditional European grimoires (books of magic)? How did alchemists reconcile the occult side of their practice with their religious traditions?

• People who are now popularly thought of purely as scientists and vanguards of rationalism—e. g. Boyle and Newton—also did alchemy. When and how did alchemy and science come to be considered mutually incompatible by a) practitioners and b) educated people in general?

For /u/Claym0re: Do you think that ancient Greek Mathematicians saw themselves as part of an active community of Mathematicians? Did they communicate with one another as part of efforts to advance mathematics? Are there any letters from this era between mathematicians?

Also, just briefly, do you think that the different mathematical traditions you mentioned (Egyptian, Greek, Chinese, Babylonian, and the Indus River Valley peoples) had very different practical interests involving mathemtics?

This question is for /u/Aethereus: How was chronic pain viewed and treated in your time period? With medicine and life being what it was then, I imagine that conditions like clubbed foot, arthritis, gout, and infections could bring with them a great deal of pain over a long period, even permanently. What sort of treatments were available to those that could afford it? Were there common "folk remedies" used by those without means? Were certain causes of chronic pain looked down on more than others? (for instance, I know that gout was considered a rich man's disease)

I'm considering pursuing my masters in history of science. I have just completed my senior research project on Astronomy in Antebellum America. Would any of you have suggestions on how to proceed and what schools (preferably in the Midwest USA) offer good programs in the field?

Can anyone comment on the impact of philosopher Karl Popper in the middle of the 20th century on science? In particular, how influential were his theories on the course of science? Did he break new ground in scientific philosophy, or did he merely codify practices that were already widespread in the field?

How exactly did Byzantine hospitals operate? Who constructed them/paid for their upkeep, how did they treat patients and who had access to them? What secondary sources are best in order to read further about them? What are the differences between the practice of medicine in the Byzantine world and its practice in the Roman world of the Principate?

What are the standard texts on the history of bacteriology? When I look, I find a LOT of stuff about Pasteur and Koch, but it's difficult to see where the quality is. I'm looking for something that can outline bacteriology's emergence as a field, and I'm not especially pushed if it's a more theoretically "traditional" work, just so I can get a sense of how it developed.

Also, are there canonical secondary texts on the "Chemical Revolution" in the late 18th century? I'm less interested in how bad-ass Lavoisier was than in understanding how chemistry gave scientists a new language with which to describe the universe.

Ooh, I have a bunch of math history questions.

• I was at a conference four years ago and saw this awesome talk (PDF warning) about mathematics and imperialism. The speaker talked both how mathematics influenced imperialism and how imperialism influenced mathematics. It was a very nice change from most math history talks which tend to be basically trivia.

The talk was only 20 minutes long and so couldn't go into great detail, but I was wondering if any of you had any resources for more reading like this. It was incredibly fascinating.

• On a similar note, does anyone have an opinion on Mathematics and Western Culture by Morris Kline? I've started reading it a couple times, but the author always came across a little to gung-ho about the importance of math.

• I've read a lot about zero and its origins, but what about infinity? When did infinity start getting used in mathematics and how did its use evolve?

Recently I finished reading Lost to the West: The Forgotten Byzantine Empire by Lars Brownworth. It mentions that Byzantine culture was flourishing even as the empire was falling apart. I assume this would also include science. If so, what would be some examples of scientific achievements from that place and time and how did western world and Ottomans benefited from them? Thanks!

These might delve a bit inside the realm of the 20-year rule, but here we go...

I recently finished a renewal course for Institutional Review Board/Biomedical Research training. Unfortunately, the history sections explaining the origin of the IRB process/national/international laws controlling research on human subjects were rather boring (brief mentions of Nuremberg Trials, Tuskegee Syphilis Study, and abuses in mental institutions).

If you care to dive a little deeper, what were the major events/factors influencing the creation of laws that determine how we conduct research on human subjects?

Since their creation, have the laws controlling research on human subjects successfully balanced the need for research while maintaining dedication to respect for persons, beneficence, and justice? Have there been abuses/oversights? Has there been a call to modify modern laws to allow for more/less strict oversight of human research?

I tried this one yesterday as its own post, perhaps you can fill in from the perspective of the history of science of antiquity where it overlaps with philosophy: What is the significance of Cicero's Dream of Scipio?

I recently learned that the Scientific Method is relatively new concept (i.e. developed after Newton's time). Any insight into why it took so long to formulate?

Hi, would someone please explain how the myth of Phlogiston stuck around for so long? This has always been really interesting to me.

Follow up question, I've always been interested in fraudsters in Science who somehow managed to dupe everyone to the point where the uncovering of the fraud led science to be significantly behind. In your fields, do you have an example of such a person/A famous uncovering event ?

My question is about the history of calculus. I don't actually understand calculus yet, it is something that I have decided I will learn this year.

What I would like it know, if we have any details about this, is what were Newton and Leibniz thinking as they developed calculus. I know that they came up with different methods. Newton used what he called fluxions (now called infinitesimals, another concept I don't really understand), and I'm even less familiar with Leibniz's work.

To help me understand it'll probably be useful if you can explain what calculus is for, and then if possible how Newton and/or Leibniz broke down the problems (what problems? Was it planetary orbits?) that they wanted to answer making them simple enough to be able to translate into mathematics.

I think it would be fascinating to know at a greater level of detail than is normally covered in texts on the history and philosophy of science, how the great achievements in logic, mathematics and science were finally achieved.

Please tell me if this statement is true: "The mechanical atom (say, as promoted by Boltzmann) and the chemical atom (as promoted by Dalton) were distinct hypotheses/theories until Einstein and Perrin's work in 1905, which unified these ideas."

I'm interested in how much interrelationship there was between the two theories. Dalton's work (and those after him) certainly seems to provide strong evidence that atoms are real, rather than merely useful fictions. However, many (most?) scientists continued to think of them only instrumentally (e.g., Poincare) until 1905. Is this because those scientists were thinking primarily of statistical mechanics rather than chemistry?

Any information about the evidence and development of these atomic theory (theories) would be excellent.

Thank you all for doing this AMA!

Everyone generally seems to be in awe of Newton as a genius of his time. However, The Scientists by John Gribbin presents a much less rosy view. Basically, that Leibniz and others were already discovering, or would soon discover, the same concepts which Newton is famous for. And also, that Newton was a huge dick who sabotaged and black listed contemporaries that he didn't like.

Subsequently when I've tried to argue Gribbin's view of Newton, people always come out in Newton's defense. So, who's right?

Is technology exponential or sigmoid?

To all: Is there any theory that turned out to be wrong that you are particularly fond of?

Regarding 'gravity'. When did that word (or its etymological ancestors) come to be associated with objects falling toward the Earth? Presumably before Newton, but does Aristotle use something like this term to pick out this concept? Does Buridan? Oresme?

Thanks again!

I was authoritatively told by someone awhile back that there wasn't any real contribution to modern science that can be traced to anywhere outside of ancient Europe. So ancient China, India, and the Middle East contributed nothing to modern science. How accurate is this view? What were contributions from outside of Europe before modern times, if there were any?

When I hear/read about famous historical scientists, nearly all of them are European or of European descent. Who are some of the most influential or greatest scientists from the rest of the world?

This may be better suited to /r/askphilosophy or /r/askscience, but anyway, is there really anything "scientific" about "scientific socialism", i.e. Marxism?

Another question about the history of atomism.

I am interested in a capsule summary of the corpuscular theory presented in Pseudo-Gerber's Summa perfectionis magisterii. What elements are Aristotelian, and what elements are distinctly corpuscularian, as, say, Boyle would recognize.

I'm currently reading William R. Newman's Atoms and Alchemy, which is excellent, but he doesn't systematically lay out the various theories in as much detail as I would like.

Thanks again!

The most famous scientists today are usually famous because they write popular science or appear in popular media, not necessarily because they've made huge breakthroughs in their particular field. Before the last few decades, it seems like the most famous scientists were also the most important scientists. Is my perception incorrect? Is it because many famous scientists from years past did not become famous until after their death? Is it because scientific breakthroughs are more the work of teams than of individuals nowadays? Any other reason?

This question is for /u/bemonk:

Is it true that western alchemy was systematized or developed around the 1st century BCE? I thought I read somewhere at one point that Zozimus was a pivotal figure in systematizing whatever became of the later tradition of alchemy at that point. I'm not sure if that is the typical view of the historical development of the subject though. What do you think?

I'm sorry if this sounds like a stupid question.

Where did the the theory of the four humors (yellow bile, black bile, blood, and something that I'm forgetting right now) come from? And how long did it take for medical science to discard humors as a legitimate theory?

Also, unrelated, I heard about certain Egyptian medical papyri on Wikipedia one day, and I was curious to learn more about these scrolls. What treatments were used by the Egyptians, and do some of their treatments have any medical value for modern medicine today?

To all of the specialists here, what was the first discovery that kicked off understanding in your field... or what was the defining change in thought - like germ theory or Mendelian genetics? What's the story behind yours?

/u/restricteddata: I'm curious what your thoughts are on Project Paperclip.

And speaking of Cold War stuff ... one night a few years ago I was surfing and found myself down the rabbit hole ... came across a transcript of a lecture given by one Dr. Colin Ross in 1997. I took what was in that with a grain of salt but haven't had the specific drive to research Dr. Ross or his material so I apologize if it's just straight up quack material. Figured while I'm asking some learned people I might as well see if any of you know about it.

How did the Muslims of the Islamic Golden Age in Baghdad observe and record the stars? They did not have telescopes, I assume, so did they record the position of the stars with sextants and astrolabes? Did they invent the astrolabe to solve this very problem?

Question for all: Can you share a top 3-5 list of books or articles in your field for those of us interested in learning more of this fun field?

I heard that the Church did not punish Galileo/Copericus for heliocentrism, but because they criticised the Pope? Is this true?

How (and why) did Ptolemy use the theorem that carries his name to construct astronomical tables and how accurate were his methods?

Also I've heard of people trying to use trig identities to move back and forth from the multiplication domain and addition domain and that it was in this spirit that logarithms were eventually discovered. What truth is there in this and what were the methods employed to do this using only trigonometry?