2024-03-29T13:07:23Zhttps://gredos.usal.es/oai/requestoai:gredos.usal.es:10366/1477502022-02-07T16:18:36Zcom_10366_145666com_10366_4667com_10366_4666com_10366_3823col_10366_147713
From Galileo to Navier and Clapeyron
Pons, Josep Maria
Aristotelian legacy
scientific revolution
Pisan
Discorsi
beam
legado aristotélico
revolución científica
Pisano
Discorsi
viga
Galileo (1564-1642), in his well-known Discorsi (Galileo, 1638), briefly turning his attention to the fracture of a beam, starts an interesting discussion on the beam's breakage as well as its location. Could the section and breaking point of a beam have been determined beforehand? Furthermore, is it specific to the material? What Galileo did was not merely challenge a physics problem, but the prevailing knowledge of his time: namely, Aristotelianism on one hand, and Nominalism on the other. As a matter of fact, must the breakage of an element be treated as a universal or is it particular to a given material?/nThe present essay aims to prove how Galileo, confronting the structural problem and bringing it into the realm of science, was not just raising a problem but, using Salviati's words, he also established what actually takes place. Many years later, with the progress of physics, strength of materials and theory of structures, figures such as Claude Navier (1785-1836) and Benoît Clapeyron (1799-1864) confirmed once again that the Pisan turned out to be right.
/nThis article intends to combine technical fields such as strength of materials and theory of structures with others like the history of science and philosophy proper. A cooperative approach to these disciplines can be doubtlessly helpful to improve the knowledge, learning and teaching of their different curricula, giving the reader a global, holistic perspective.
/n
Galileo (1564-1642), in his well-known Discorsi (Galileo, 1638), briefly turning his attention to the fracture of a beam, starts an interesting discussion on the beam's breakage as well as its location. Could the section and breaking point of a beam have been determined beforehand? Furthermore, is it specific to the material? What Galileo did was not merely challenge a physics problem, but the prevailing knowledge of his time: namely, Aristotelianism on one hand, and Nominalism on the other. As a matter of fact, must the breakage of an element be treated as a universal or is it particular to a given material/nThe present essay aims to prove how Galileo, confronting the structural problem and bringing it into the realm of science, was not just raising a problem but, using Salviati's words, he also established what actually takes place. Many years later, with the progress of physics, strength of materials and theory of structures, figures such as Claude Navier (1785-1836) and Benoît Clapeyron (1799-1864) confirmed once again that the Pisan turned out to be right.
/nThis article intends to combine technical fields such as strength of materials and theory of structures with others like the history of science and philosophy proper. A cooperative approach to these disciplines can be doubtlessly helpful to improve the knowledge, learning and teaching of their different curricula, giving the reader a global, holistic perspective.
2021-12-17T11:16:51Z
2021-12-17T11:16:51Z
2021-11-29
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Artefactos, 10 (2021)
1989-3612
http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147750
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
application/pdf
Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca (España)
https://gredos.usal.es/bitstream/10366/147750/4/From_Galileo_to_Navier_and_Clapeyron.pdf.jpg
Hispana
TEXT
http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/CNE/1.0/
Gredos. Repositorio Documental de la Universidad de Salamanca
http://hdl.handle.net/10366/147750