Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Second Physicist pp 137–151Cite as

Physics Research in “Poggendorff’s Annalen” in the 1840s

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 903 Accesses

Part of the book series: Archimedes ((ARIM,volume 48))

Abstract

To publish in the Annalen was almost a necessity for any physicist hoping for a university career. With few exceptions, all of the established physicists published there, most of them regularly. The journal tells us a good deal about the German researchers and the nature of their interests and work in the middle of the century. In an important respect, it was a different journal than the one Poggendorff began editing twenty some years before. New foreign physics in translations and reports still had a prominent place in it, but the German physics appearing there was no longer in its shadow. The Annalen now regularly published work by German physicists that equaled, and occasionally surpassed, the best work by foreign physicists. At the same time, German work was gaining recognition abroad.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    A. v. Humboldt to Gauss, 17 February 1833, in Alexander von Humboldt, Briefe zwischen A. v. Humboldt und Gauss. Zum hunderjährigen Geburtstage von Gauss am 30. April 1877, ed. Karl Bruhns (Leipzig, 1977), 23.

  2. 2.

    Our account of German physics in foreign publications is based on our survey of the journals mentioned. The work by German physicists appearing in the Comptes rendus of the Paris Academy of Sciences constituted a minute fraction of the journal’s contents. The German physicists who published there in the 1840s were Dove (2 papers), Holtzmann (1), Kirchhoff (2), G. Karsten (1), Magnus (2), J. R. Mayer (3), Moser (2), Plücker (3), Poggendorff (2), Reich (2), and Wiedemann (1). In the 1840s Liouville’s Journal published only three papers on mathematical physics by Germans: by Gauss (1) and Neumann (2). In the same decade, the Annales published papers by Buff (1), Dove (2), Magnus (3), Moser (1), Poggendorff (4), and A. Seebeck (1). In the subsequent period, 1850–63, the Annales published work by many more German physicists: Beer (2 and 1 with Plücker) Beetz (2), Buff (9 and 1 with Wöhler), Clausius (8), Dove (2), Eisenlohr (2), Hankel (1), Helmholtz (8 including some on physiology), Holtzmann (1), Kirchhoff (13), Knoblauch (6) R. Kohlrausch (3), Magnus (13), J. R. Mayer (1), J. Müller (2), Neumann (1), J. F. Pfaff (2), Plücker (8), Poggendorff (4), Quincke (7), Reich (3), Riess (6), Weber (1 with Kohlrausch), Wiedemann (11), and Wüllner (3); Gauss appeared with a paper on mathematical physics.

  3. 3.

    The survey of the Annalen for these years, on which the figures and discussions of the research published there are based, is our own. In 1840–1845, the ordinary professors of physics publishing in the Annalen were Buff (1 paper, 13 pages), Dove (8, 151), Fechner (6, 127), Magnus (4, 77), Moser (7, 143), J. Müller (1, 10), Muncke (1, 1), Neumann (1, 28), Osann (1, 25), C. H. Pfaff (4, 93), Pohl (1, 24), and Weber (5, 90). German physicists publishing there who later became ordinary professors were: Beetz (1, 18), Feilitzsch (3, 58), Hankel (6, 121), G. Karsten (2, 33), Kirchhoff (1, 18), Knoblauch (1, 12), Ohm (5, 98), and A. Seebeck (8, 169). Physicists at the Berlin Academy were: Poggendorff (18, 355) and Riess (10, 194).

  4. 4.

    Wilhelm von Gümbel, “Schmid: Ernst Erhard,” ADB 31 (1890): 659–61, on 660.

  5. 5.

    Theodor Scheerer, “Polykras und Malakon, zwei neue Mineralspecies,” Ann. 62 (1844): 429–43, illustrates the point.

  6. 6.

    Peter Riess and Gustav Rose, “Ueber die Pyroelectricität der Mineralien,” Ann. 59 (1843): 353–90. Emil du Bois-Reymond and Wilhelm Beetz, “Zur Theorie der Nobili’schen Farbenringe,” Ann. 71 (1847): 71–91. Anon., “Tönen beim Elektromagnetisiren,” Ann. 63 (1844): 530. Wilhelm Hankel, “Ueber die Magnetisirung von Stahlnadeln durch den elektrischen Funken und den Nebenstrom desselben,” Ann. 65 (1845): 537–68, especially on 549.

  7. 7.

    Wilhelm Hankel, “Ueber die Thermoelektricität der Krystalle,” Ann. 50 (1840): 237–50, 471–96, 605–15, on 615. Gustav Karsten, “Ueber elektrische Abbildungen,” Ann. 60 (1843): 1–17, on 5.

  8. 8.

    Richard van Rees, “Ueber die Vertheilung des Magnetismus in Stahlmagneten und Elektromagneten,” Ann. 70 (1847): 1–24. Hankel, “Ueber die Magnetisirung von Stahlnadeln,” 549.

  9. 9.

    F. C. Henrici, “Untersuchungen über einige anomale und normale galvanische Erscheinungen,” Ann. 58 (1843): 61–76, 375–91, on 390. K. W. Knochenhauer, “Versuche über gebundene Elektricität (Zweiter Artikel),” Ann. 58 (1843): 391–409, on 405–6.

  10. 10.

    Knochenhauer, “Versuche,” 405. Ernst Brücke, “Ueber das Verhalten der optischen Medien des Auges gegen Licht- und Wärmestrahlen,” Ann. 65 (1845): 593–607, on 604–6.

  11. 11.

    Ludwig Moser, “Ueber die Verschiedenheit der Licht- und Wärmestrahlen,” Ann. 58 (1843): 105–11.

  12. 12.

    Johann Müller, “Anwendung der stroboskopischen Scheibe zur Versinnlichung der Grundgesetze der Wellenlehre,” Ann. 67 (1846): 271–72, on 271.

  13. 13.

    For example, Gustav Theodor Fechner, “Ueber die subjectiven Nachbilder und Nebenbilder,” Ann. 50 (1840): 193–221, 427–70; August Seebeck, “Bemerkungen über Resonanz und über Helligkeit der Farben im Spectrum,” Ann. 62 (1844): 571–76.

  14. 14.

    Heinrich Wilhelm Dove, “Ueber inducirte Ströme, welche bei galvanometrischer Gleichheit ungleich physiologisch wirken,” Ann. 49 (1840): 72–98.

  15. 15.

    August Seebeck, “Beiträge zur Physiologie des Gehör- und Gesichtssinnes,” Ann. 68 (1846): 449–65, on 463–64. Ludwig Moser, “Ueber die Wirkungen der farbigen Strahlen auf das Jodsilber,” Ann. 59 (1843): 391–407, on 393.

  16. 16.

    Ludwig Moser, “Ueber das Latentwerden des Lichts,” Ann. 57 (1842): 1–34, on 2–3.

  17. 17.

    August Seebeck, “Beobachtungen über einige Bedingungen der Entstehung von Tönen,” Ann. 53 (1841): 417–36; “Beobachtungen über Zurückwerfung und Beugung des Schalles,” Ann. 59 (1843): 177–203. Georg Simon Ohm, “Ueber die Definition des Tones, nebst daran geknüpfter Theorie der Sirene und ähnlicher tonbildender Vorrichtungen,” Ann. 59 (1843): 513–65. August Seebeck, “Ueber die Sirene,” Ann. 60 (1843): 449–81. Georg Simon Ohm, “Noch ein paar Worte über die Definition des Tones,” Ann. 62 (1844): 1–18. August Seebeck, “Ueber die Definition des Tones,” Ann. 63 (1844): 353–68; “Ueber die Erzeugung von Tönen durch getrennte Eindrücke, mit Beziehung auf die Definition des Tones,” Ann. 63 (1844): 368–80.

  18. 18.

    In 1840–1845, the Annalen gave over 361 pages to Regnault, 229 to Knochenhauer, 214 to Faraday, 153 to Lenz, 145 to Plateau, 142 to de La Rive, 136 to Melloni, 113 to M. H. Jacobi, and 103 to Wheatstone. To look ahead, by 1874 Faraday’s papers filled 1617 pages of the Annalen, Regnault’s 696 pages, and Arago’s, Becquerel’s, Biot’s, David Brewster’s, Fresnel’s, Melloni’s, de La Rive’s, G. G. Stokes’s, and John Tyndall’s each nearly as many as Regnault’s. W. Bn. [Wilhelm Barentin], “Ein Rückblick,” Ann., Jubelband (1874): ix-xiv, on xiii.

  19. 19.

    Robert D. Purrington, Physics in the Nineteenth Century (New Brunswick, New Jersey, and London: Rutgers University Press, 1997), 53–55.

  20. 20.

    Johann Christian Poggendorff, “Ueber die galvanischen Ketten aus zwei Flüssigkeiten und zwei einander nicht berührenden Metallen,” Ann. 49 (1840): 31–72, on 36.

  21. 21.

    J. C. Poggendorff, “Zusatz vom Herausgeber,” addition to W. R. Grove, “Ueber eine Volta’sche Gas-Batterie,” Ann. 58 (1843): 202–6; Poggendorff’s addition 207–10, on 209.

  22. 22.

    Buff’s view, as described by Henrici, “Untersuchungen über einige anomale und normale galvanische Erscheinungen,” 386.

  23. 23.

    G. F. Pohl, “Ueber galvanische Ketten mit zwei verschiedenen Flüssigkeiten, und über einiges aus den neuesten, diesen Gegenstand betreffenden Untersuchungen,” Ann. 54 (1841): 515–37, on 517, 519–20.

  24. 24.

    Johann Müller, Bericht über die neuesten Fortschritte der Physik. In ihrem Zusammenhange dargestellt, 2 vols. (Braunschweig, 1849), vol. 1, 225–26.

  25. 25.

    J. C. Poggendorff, “Methode zur quantitativen Bestimmung der elektromotorischen Kraft inconstanter galvanischer Ketten,” Ann. 54 (1841): 161–91, on 161–62.

  26. 26.

    J. C. Poggendorff, “Ueber die Volta’schen Ketten mit zwei einander berührenden Flüssigkeiten,” Ann. 53 (1841): 436–46, on 443; “Ueber einen Versuch des Hrn. Daniell und die daraus gezogene Folgerung,” Ann. 56 (1842): 150–56, on 152.

  27. 27.

    Wilhelm Weber, “Ueber das elektro-chemische Aequivalent des Wassers,” Ann. 55 (1842): 181–89; Poggendorff’s commentary on Grove, “Ueber eine Volta’sche Gas-Batterie,” 209–10.

  28. 28.

    Ohm’s comment appears in a footnote to Paul Wolfgang Haecker, “Versuche über das Tragvermögen hufeisenförmiger Magnete und über die Schwingungsdauer geradliniger Magnetstäbe,” Ann. 57 (1842): 321–45, on 321–22. Gustav Magnus, “Versuche über die Spannkräfte des Wasserdampfs,” Ann. 61 (1844): 225–47, on 244–45.

  29. 29.

    Wilhelm Weber, “Ueber die Elasticität fester Körper,” Ann. 54 (1841): 1–18, for example; or Magnus, “Ueber die Ausdehnung der Gase durch die Wärme.” Poggendorff referred to Ohm’s law in this way in a footnote to a paper by C. F. Schönbein, “Notizen über eine Volta’sche Säule von ungewöhnlicher Kraft,” Ann. 49 (1840): 511–14, on 514.

  30. 30.

    The quotation is from Poggendorff’s footnote to an article by Auguste de La Rive, “Neue Untersuchungen über die Eigenschaften der discontinuirlichen elektrischen Ströme von abwechselnd entgegengesetzter Richtung,” Ann. 54 (1841): 231–54, on 236. Poggendorff, “Oeffentliche Anerkennung der Ohm’schen Theorie in England,” 180. Once established, Ohm’s law proved so useful to experimentalists that Buff, who gladly admitted that “Ohm’s theory is a highly important aid for our researches in electrical theory,” complained that it was being used too often, at every “ever so insignificant opportunity.” Henirich Buff, “Bemerkungen zu einem Aufsatze von Henrici, ‘zur Galvanometrie’ überschrieben,” Ann. 54 (1841): 408–12, on 411–12. Poggendorff answered Buff in a footnote (412), saying that one could hardly blame the “galvanician” for frequently mentioning Ohm’s law any more than one could reprove the “optician” or the “chemist” because he spoke so often of the interference formula or the atomic theory.

  31. 31.

    Magnus, “Ueber die Ausdehnung der Gase durch die Wärme,” 4, 24.

  32. 32.

    J. C Poggendorff, “Ueber die Einrichtung und den Gebrauch einiger Werkzeuge zum Messen der Stärke elektrischer Ströme und der dieselbe bedingungen Elemente,” Ann. 50 (1840): 504–9, on 504.

  33. 33.

    Poggendorff, “Methode zur quantitativen Bestimmung der elektromotorischen Kraft inconstanter galvanischer Ketten.”

  34. 34.

    Gustav Kirchhoff, “Ueber den Durchgang eines elektrischen Stromes durch eine Ebene, insbesondere durch eine kreisförmige”; J. C. Poggendorff, “Ueber ein Problem bei linearer Verzweigung elektrischer Ströme,” Ann. 67 (1846): 273–83. Kirchhoff’s work was “of interest especially for me,” Poggendorff wrote to a colleague, because it was related to a problem he and Weber had already discussed: “namely, the determination of the intensities and resistances in a wire rhombus with a wire bridge.” Poggendorff encountered this “not inconsiderable” problem in a Wheatstone differential galvanometer. Weber had already developed the necessary formulas, and Poggendorff had at first meant to publish them with Kirchhoff’s paper, but he did not because he thought it would be better if he, Poggendorff, could first confirm them with measurements. Poggendorff to Neumann, 20 June 1845, Neumann Papers, Göttingen UB, Ms. Dept.

  35. 35.

    Adolph Erman, “Bestimmung der magnetischen Inclination und Intensität für Berlin im Jahre 1846,” Ann. 68 (1846): 519–52, on 519. J. C. Poggendorff, “Ueber Hrn. De la Rive’s Hypothese vom Rückstrom in der Volta’schen Säule,” Ann. 56 (1842): 353–69, on 356.

  36. 36.

    To take an excellent example: Wilhelm Weber, “Elektrodynamische Maassbestimmungen,” Ann. 73 (1848): 193–240.

  37. 37.

    J. C. Poggendorff, “Von dem Gebrauch der Galvanometer als Messwerkzeuge,” Ann. 56 (1842): 324–44, on 328.

  38. 38.

    Rudolph Boettger, “Ueber Faraday’s neueste Entdeckung, die Polarisationsebene eines Lichtstrahls durch einen kräftigen Elektromagneten abzulenken,” Ann. 67 (1846): 290–93. The paper is dated 21 December 1845. Also, “Ueber die durch einen kräftigen Elektromagnet bewirkte, im polarisirten Lichte sich kundgebende Molecularveränderung flüssiger und fester Körper,” Ann. 67 (1846): 350–53.

  39. 39.

    J. C. Poggendorff, “Faraday’s neue Entdeckung und deren Zusammenhang mit Seebeck’s Transversalmagnetismus,” Ann. 67 (1846): 439–40.

  40. 40.

    Michael Faraday, “Neunzehnte Reihe von Experimental-Untersuchungen über Elektricität,” Ann. 68 (1846): 105–36.

  41. 41.

    German physicists commonly thought that magnetism acted on the molecules of the transparent body and not directly on light, as Faraday thought. Plücker, for example, thought that Faraday’s discovery revealed a connection between the crystal forces of the transparent body and magnetic forces, which might enable physicists to determine crystal forms by magnets (Julius Plücker, “Ueber die Abstossung der optischen Axen der Krystalle durch die Pole der Magnete,” Ann. 72 [1847]: 315–43, on 341–42).

  42. 42.

    For instance, the expression “theoretical physicist” was used in reference to Laplace and Poisson by Sohn C. Brunner in “Untersuchung über die Cohäsion der Flüssigkeiten,” Ann. 70 (1847): 481–529, on 482.

  43. 43.

    Georg Friedrich Parrot, “Zur Geschichte der Endosmose,” Ann. 66 (1845): 595–97; “Ueber den Ausfluss der tropfbaren Flüssigkeiten durch kleine Oeffnungen im Boden der Gefässe,” Ann. 66 (1845): 389–414, on 389–90. Parrot had been reproved for the “bitter, almost mocking tone” in which he had criticized “the application of mathematical analysis in physics.” He replied that he had written only against the “misuse” of mathematical analysis, “which occurs when this analysis is based on physical data that are either only hypothetical or even in contradiction with precisely executed experiments.” He scornfully called this misuse of mathematical analysis “mathematical Naturphilosophie” (Parrot, “Nachtrag,” Ann. 27 [1833]: 234–38, on 234–35).

  44. 44.

    F. C. Henrici, “Einige die Theorie und Anwendung der Elektricität betreffende Bemerkungen,” Ann. 64 (1845): 345–56, on 346–47.

  45. 45.

    F. C. Henrici, “Zur Galvanometrie,” Ann. 53 (1841): 277–94. Henrici showed that Pouillet’s laws of the galvanic circuit follow from Ohm’s theory, and he furnished a mathematical explanation of phenomena that Pohl had cited as contradicting the theory of currents. He accused Pohl of “deliberately ignoring a theory that has long been confirmed in all its assertions by the most careful experiments, which were undertaken to test it” (286).

  46. 46.

    Gotthilf Hagen, “Ueber die Oberfläche der Flüssigkeiten,” Ann. 67 (1846): 1–31, 152–72, on 9.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Eugene, Oregon, USA

    Christa Jungnickel & Russell McCormmach

Authors
  1. Christa Jungnickel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Russell McCormmach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Jungnickel, C., McCormmach, R. (2017). Physics Research in “Poggendorff’s Annalen” in the 1840s. In: The Second Physicist. Archimedes, vol 48. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49565-1_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation