The Renovation of Astronomy

关于科学发现的本质，人们常犯的一个错误是，一个特定的人、实验室、国家甚至整个文化取得科学进步往往仅仅是偶然的。根据这一理论，青霉素是在对一种特殊霉菌的偶然检查中发现的。凯库勒发现苯环的结构是因为他梦见一条蛇咬自己的尾巴。然而，如果科学家们没有“准备好”的头脑，在看到问题时就能发现可能的解决方案，那么这些发现就不会有。伊斯特伍德博士正在研究的就是这种“有准备的”头脑。然而，在他的案例中，他考察的不是凯库勒这样的单个科学家的准备，而是整个文化。他所关注的正是为什么科学在西方而不是在其他文化中兴起的关键问题。毕竟，在中世纪，中国、印度和中东的穆斯林国家比欧洲的文化先进得多。事实上，正是由于中东和北非国家把他们从希腊人那里接受和发展起来的科学传给了欧洲，西欧才走上了发展现代科学的道路。然而，正如伊斯特伍德博士指出的那样，就像凯库勒一样，西方世界必须准备好接受并处理来自中东和非洲的材料。是什么西方文化导致学者们接受了这门科学，并将其转化为现代科学？很明显，造成这种情况的不仅仅是材料。如果西方从阿拉伯学者那里获得的知识自动导致了现代科学，那么为什么阿拉伯人没有进行这种转变呢？伊斯特伍德博士在数学天文学的背景下研究欧洲是如何做好充分准备并在内部形成追求阿拉伯数学天文学的动机的。这种动机使西方不仅接受了阿拉伯人给他们的东西，而且首先将其转化为牛顿的世界观，最终转变为爱因斯坦的世界观。因此，这项研究有望解决科学文化中的核心问题：西方文明是什么导致了科学和技术的兴起？伊斯特伍德博士不会给出最终的答案，但他肯定会提供部分答案。

A common mistake people have about the nature of scientific discovery is that it is often mere chance that a particular person or laboratory or nation or even an entire culture makes a scientific advance. Penicillin was discovered, in this theory, by a chance examination of a particular mold. Kekule discovered the structure of the benzene ring because he dreamt of a snake biting its own tail. Yet none of these discoveries would have been made if the scientists did not already have a "prepared" mind that was ready to recognize possible solutions to problems when they see them. This "prepared" mind is what Dr. Eastwood is studying. In his case, though, he is examining not the preparation of a single scientist like Kekule but an entire culture. He is looking at nothing less than the critical issue of why science rose in the West rather than in other cultures. After all, in the Middle Ages, China, India, and the Muslim countries of the Middle East were far, far more advanced than the cultures of Europe. Indeed, it was only because the Middle Eastern and Northern African countries passed on to Europe the science that they had received and developed from the Greeks that Western Europe was even set on the track to develop modern science. Yet as Dr. Eastwood points out, just like Kekule, the Western world had to be prepared to receive and work with the materials they were given from the Middle East and Africa. What about Western culture led the scholars to accept this science and transform it to make what is modern science? Clearly it was not the materials alone that caused this. If the knowledge the West received from Arab scholars automatically led to modern science, then why didn't the Arabs make the transformation? Dr. Eastwood is examining in the context of mathematical astronomy how Europe was both well-prepared and had internally developed motives to pursue Arabic mathematical astronomy. This motivation led the West not only to take what the Arabs gave them but transform it into, fir st, the Newtonian and, ultimately, the Einsteinian world views. Thus, this study promises to address the central question in the culture of science: what is it about Western Civilization that leads to the rise of science and technology. Dr. Eastwood will not provide the definitive answer, but he will surely provide a part of it.