Eine handgreifliche Geschichtslüge. Wie Martin Luther zum Gegner des copernicanischen Weltsystems gemacht wurde.

Martin Luther has been severely criticized for an offhand remark about Copernicus. In the most frequently cited version of this statement, Luther is alledged to have branded Copernicus as a fool who will turn the whole science of astronomy upside down. This disparaging judgment on Luther prevails in many publications by respected historians of science of the 20th century, although since the early thirties, it has been convincingly demonstrated that the famous citation from Luther's table talk is next to worthless as an historical source, that Luther never referred to Copernicus or to the heliocentric world system in all of his voluminous writings, and that there is no indication that Luther ever suppressed the Copernican viewpoint. His attitude towards Copernicus was indifference or ignorance, but not hostility. In this paper, it is shown that the story of Luther's anti‐Copernicanism emerged in the second half of the 19th century. It was invented by Franz Beckmann and Franz Hipler, two Prussian Catholic historians who were engaged in the conflict between the German government under Bismarck and the Catholic Church (Kulturkampf), and it was disseminated by influential German and American historians like Leopold Prowe, Ernst Zinner, and Andrew D. White. In the second half of the 20th century, many historians of science relied on the authority of these authors, rather than studying the sources or the secondary literature in which it has been proved that Luther's anti‐Copernicanism is an outright falsification of history.     

Schweretheorie und Weltbild des Nikolaus von Kues: Zu ihrer vermeintlichen Modernität

Regarding his world view and his heaviness theory Nicolaus Cusanus is imputed to having used (at least to some extent) forebodings and anticipations of modern conceptions. In the dialog Idiota de staticis experimentis he imputed the quantitative points of view of modern physics programmatically. In contrast with this, this article will show that the quantitative point of view is proposed for an inapt object at least. Cusanus based his reflections on one hand on the Aristotelic theories of elements and their heaviness with ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ weight (only thus, assumed inconsistencies can be explained), on the other hand he wants to determine the essential, qualitative properties of the forma, while only their complete abstraction by reduction on the mass without properties should result in an object for comparative weighings — lately in different ways by René Descartes and Isaac Newton. The putative modernness of cusanian conceptions compared with Aristotle are based on the tradition of platonian and stoic modifications which sooner were compatible with christian ideas.     

Wissenschaftswachstum in wichtigen naturwissenschaftlichen Disziplinen vom 17. bis zum 21. Jahrhundert

The Growth of Science within Important Scientific Disciplines from 17th to 21st century. – In this paper the growth of knowledge is investigated for the disciplines of Astrophysics / Astronomy, of Physics and of Chemistry in the last centuries. In this context the main emphasis is devoted to the discussion of the growth of literature. Besides, this is also illustrated by the growth of indicators like for example important books, new discoveries in science, the chemical elements, the known chemical compounds and the number of known inorganic chemical structures. Compared to numerous earlier studies a systematic evaluation of all presently available data sources is carried out. The data are fitted by different mathematical growth models (linear, quadratic, exponential, hyperbolic). These are discussed and compared. As far as the exponential growth model is applied the doubling periods obtained have values between 11 and 32 years for the cumulative total of publications, between 24 and 98 years for that of important books, between 79 and 163 years for that of new discoveries and between 10 and 14 years for that of chemical substances. From an order of magnitude point of view this is in agreement with the results of other authors. It is however also demonstrated that the exponential growth model which is normally used is not necessarily the best to describe the growth of the data. Other models are often better suitable to explain the growth. It is shown that linear growth of the yearly publications describes the data better than exponential growth in certain epochs. In this latter case it is demonstrated that the parameter (linear slope) for the rate of increase has a constant values in certain epochs, but rises in steps from epoch to epoch by a factor of 3 to 40. After the second world war the linear growth model for the yearly publications or the quadratic growth model for the cumulative total of publications respectively delivers the best results. This is therefore used for forecasting the future.     

Globaler Pflanzentransfer und seine Transferinstanzen als Kultur‐, Wissens‐ und Wissenschaftstransfer der frühen Neuzeit

In three steps, the polyvalent phenomenon of global plant transfer will be analysed. Starting from the model of cultural transfer, the latter one will be discussed in combination with network research. Finally, the connection of various instances of transfer such as botanical gardens, ships and islands will be established. The fact that botanists take part in the process of transfer increasingly and from the middle of the 18th century onwards control the plant transfers in all phases emphasises the entwinement of science and colonialism.