Energeticism, also called energism or energetics[a] (German: Energetik),[1] is a superseded theory in science that posits that energy is the ultimate element of physical reality. Energeticism was developed during the end of the 19th century by the chemist Wilhelm Ostwald and mathematician Georg Helm. It was also promoted by physicist Ernst Mach, though his full commitment to it was sometimes ambiguous.[2] Energetiscism attempted to substitute the hypothesis of atoms and molecules by energy relations.[3]
Ludwig Boltzmann and Max Planck constantly rebutted the idea of energeticism[3] in favor of atomic theory. The program of energeticism faded away in the 20th century with the confirmation of the existence of atoms.
Origin edit
While teaching chemistry in Riga Polytechnic Institute, Wilhelm Ostwald became convinced that certain reactions could only be explained in terms of energy, without the need of invoking the hypothesis of the existence of atoms. He was inspired by Josiah Willard Gibbs's work on thermodynamics.[4] During an inaugural lecture in 1887 in Leipzig University, Ostwald outlined his program of energetics as an alternative to atomic theory. In his second edition of his textbook on physical chemistry of 1892, he stressed that energetic ideas should avoid all atomistic considerations.[4] He opposed the reduction of chemistry to mechanics and advocated for the reduction of mass and matter to energy.[4]
In parallel, Georg Helm published his energy principle in The Theory of Energy (German: Die Lehre von der Energie) in 1887, as an extension to the principle of conservation of energy. In his essay of 1890, he proposed to reduce mechanics to energetics by means of his principle. In 1892, he proposed to do the same for electricity and magnetism.[5] His principle can be written as [5]
where dU is a change in the internal energy of a system, T is the temperature, dS is a change in the entropy, p is the pressure and dV a change in volume.[4] This principle recovers the first law of thermodynamics only when the equality holds. Helm changed the equal sign into an inequality in the hope to account for irreversible processes.[4]
Lübeck debate edit
In 1895, Boltzmann who supported atomic theory in light of his recently developed statistical mechanics, organized a debate with Ostwald to be held during a scientific conference in Lübeck, Germany.[3] Boltzmann had already prepared his arguments in private correspondence with Ostwald after the publication of his book.[3] The Lübeck Scientific Conference (German: Lübeck Naturforscherversammlung) took place in September of that year, with mathematician Georg Helm and Ostwald supporting energeticism in the debate, and Boltzmann and mathematician Felix Klein supporting atomism.[3] Mach was not present.[3] Arnold Sommerfeld records his impression of the conference:[3]
The fight between Boltzmann and Ostwald resembled, both externally and internally, the struggle between a bull and a supple fencer. But the bull defeated the matador in spite of all of the latter's fencing skill. The arguments of Boltzmann broke through. We, who were then young mathematicians, all supported Boltzmann. It was quite obvious to us that it was impossible to derive the motion equations of a single mass point from an energy equation, to say nothing of optional degrees of freedom.
After the conference, Helm and Ostwald hurried to write response articles. Mach finished his book Principles of the Theory of Heat in 1886, in which he recorded that energeticism, even if flawed, was better to Boltzmann's mechanistic theories.[3] Max Planck wrote an article after the conference "Against the New Energetics", in opposition to Ostwald's theory.[3][6]
Ostwald's renunciation as a physical theory edit
Under the evidence of Jean Baptiste Perrin's experiments on Brownian motion that confirmed Albert Einstein's theory, Ostwald renounced to energeticism as physical theory in his fourth edition of Outline of General Chemistry in 1908, embracing atomic theory.[7][3] However he modified energeticism into an ontological philosophy, supported by the recently discovered Einstein's mass–energy equivalence E=mc2.[3]
Sociology and culture edit
After 1908, Ostwald redirected his philosophy to sociological and cultural phenomena as part of sociological energetics (German: Soziologische Energetik).[8] He attempted to create a hierarchy to classify the sciences and social sciences based on life, energy and order.[8]
Sociologist Max Weber oppossed Ostwald views. In 1909, Weber accussed sociological energetics of being ideological, underrating the complexity of the social sciences and overrating the importance of recasting phenomena in energetic terminology. Weber also objects to the idea of 'psychological energy' to explain psychology and accusses Ostwald of trying to derive an 'is from an ought'. [8]
See also edit
Notes edit
- ^ Not to be confused with "energetics" as used by others to refers to the study of energy and thermodynamics.
References edit
- ^ Deltete, Robert (1999). "Helm and Boltzmann: Energetics at the Lübeck". Synthese. 119 (1/2): 45–68. doi:10.1023/A:1005287003138.
- ^ Blackmore, John T. (1972). Ernst Mach; His Work, Life, and Influence. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-01849-5.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Blackburn, Simon (2016). The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-873530-4.
- ^ a b c d e Jungnickel, Christa; McCormmach, Russell (1990-09-24). Intellectual Mastery of Nature. Theoretical Physics from Ohm to Einstein, Volume 2: The Now Mighty Theoretical Physics, 1870 to 1925. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-41585-7.
- ^ a b Deltete, Robert J. (2012). "Georg Helm's Chemical Energetics". HYLE International Journal for Philosophy of Chemistry. 18.
- ^ Planck, Max (1896). "Gegen die neuere Energetik". Annalen der Physik. 293 (1): 72–78. doi:10.1002/andp.18962930107. ISSN 0003-3804.
- ^ Psillos, Stathis (2011). "Moving Molecules Above the Scientific Horizon: On Perrin's Case for Realism". Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie. 42 (2): 339–363. ISSN 0925-4560.
- ^ a b c Neuber, Matthias (2018). "Monism, Naturalism, and the "Pyramid of the Sciences":Wilhelm Ostwald's Energetic Theory of Culture". Historia Scientiarum. Second Series: International Journal of the History of Science Society of Japan. 28 (1): 19–35. doi:10.34336/historiascientiarum.28.1_19.