|
|
|
|
|
Dialogues concerning two new sciences
| Our Price |
$ 21.74
|
|
| Retail Value |
$ 27.18 |
|
| You Save |
$ 5.44 (20%) |
|
| Item Number |
1262447 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item Description...
Product Description
Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: the fulcrum is at the line bc, and in the other case at ca, while the distance at which the force is applied is the same in both cases, namely, the length bd: but in the first case the distance of the resistance from the fulcrum --- half the line ca --- is greater than in the other case where it is only half of bc. Therefore the weight T is greater than X in the same ratio as half the width ca is greater than half the thickness bc, since the former acts as a lever arm for ca, and the latter for cb, against the same resistance, namely, the strength of all the fibres in the cross-section ab. We conclude, therefore, that any given ruler, or prism, whose width exceeds its thickness, will offer greater resistance to fracture when standing on edge than when lying flat, and this in the ratio of the width to the thickness. Proposition III Considering now the case of a prism or cylinder growing longer in a horizontal direction, we must find out in what ratio the moment of its own weight increases in comparison with its resistance to fracture. This moment I find increases in propor- tion to the square of the length. In order to prove this let AD be a prism or cylinder lying horizontal with its end A firmly fixed in a wall. Let the length of the prism be increased by the addition of the portion BE. It is clear that merely changing the length of the lever from AB to AC will, if we disregard its weight, increase the moment of the force [at the end] tending to produce fracture at A in the ratio of CA to BA. But, besides this, the weight of the solid portion BE, added to the weight of the solid AB increases the moment of the total weight in the ratio of the weight of the prism AE to that of the prism AB, which is the same as the ratio of the length AC to AB. It follows, therefore, that, ...
|
Item Specifications...
Pages 192
Dimensions: Length: 8.8" Width: 5.9" Height: 0.6"
Weight: 0.6 lbs.
Binding Softcover
Release Date Aug 17, 2009
ISBN 0217826652
EAN 9780217826655
|
Availability 0 units.
|
Product Categories
Similar Products
Reviews - What do our customers think?
 | Galileo is a significant and interesting read Dec 8, 2009 |
Galileo's "Dialogue Concerning Two New Sciences" covers the basics of what is today called classical mechanics. His main topics are the cohesion and strength of materials, uniform and uniformly accelerated motion, and projectile motion. But I also appreciate Galileo's tangents: his thoughts about infinity, the speed of light, vibrations, music, and his bouncing up against the concepts of Calculus and what would be known as Newton's Laws of Motion. The "dialogue" style works well at first, but as the book progresses he nearly abandons this as apparently unworkable, and just gives proof after proof, many of which are awkward and difficult to follow (though part of my pleasure in reading it is solving those proofs that Galileo leaves out). Galileo is clearly a genius -- he doesn't get everything right, but given what he had to go on it is amazing what he was able to figure out.
This book should be read by every serious student and teacher of Physics and Engineering. | | |  | The Famous "Sun is the Center of the Universe" work of Galileo? Mar 25, 2009 |
There actually is confusion over this title. For one this is not the work where Galileo defends Copernicus (Heliocentrism) where the sun is the center of the universe or the solar system. That work is called "Dialogues Concerning Two Chief World Systems" (1632).
This work, "Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences" (1638), is about Galileo's experiments in bodies and motion.
The publisher is not wrong at all in calling this work the given title of "..Two New Sciences". If anything it is Galileo's and his original Publisher's fault for naming both works in such a similar fashion: "Dialogues Concerning Two....." The biggest difference is in the last words of the title.
For those concerned with Copernican/Aristarchus of Samos vs Aristotle/Ptolemaic dialogues (sun vs earth as the center of the universe/solar system) for which Galileo is known for please read Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems (Modern Library Science)
For those concerned with Galileo's physics of bodies and motion and what he said "they contain results which I consider the most important of all my studies" then look for Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences.
For a general sample of many of Galileo's works and related documents from his "controversy" from those who did the trials on Galileo, please read : The Essential Galileo.
A few similarities between both books by Galileo with similar titles have laid confusion to some of these reviewers:
1. as was mentioned, both begin with similar titles: "Dialogues Concerning Two....."
2. Both have the same picture of 3 men speaking
3. There are 4 days of dialogues in both books
4. The same three characters are found in both books: Salviati, Sagredo, Simplicio
These similarities between both books are what makes them so hard to distinguish for anyone who has not read either one of these works. So confusion and disappointment are expected. I too got confused until I got copies of both assuming they were both the same. I wanted a better copy of "Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences" and bought "Dialogues Concerning Two Chief World Systems" since it was cheaper (by very little). I read The Copernican heliocentric arguments that are only found in "Dialogues Concerning Two Chief World Systems" and noticed that "Dialogues Concerning Two new Sciences" was different and did not focus Copernicus at all, but instead focused on motions and bodies.
Hopefully this post clarifies and saves people from buying the wrong book. In any case, I say get both books since one is notable and important (but definitely not revolutionary since defending Copernicus was not done in an empirical fashion, but was done more in a theoretical and investigative fashion where the debating is over interpretation of previous evidences and data, not over newly generated data and results from experiments by Galileo) and the other book gives insight to the mind and experiments of Galileo along with his debates on the nature of bodies and varieties of motion.
For those interested in some the works Galileo discusses in "Dialogues Concerning Two Chief World Systems" please look at Ptolemy's Ptolemy's Almagest, Copernicus' On the Revolutions: Nicholas Copernicus Complete Works (Foundations of Natural History), and Aristarchus of Samos' Aristarchus of Samos: The Ancient Copernicus (Dover Books on Astronomy). | | | | The publisher got it right Sep 6, 2008 |
One of the foundational works of modern science, the text speaks for itself in its lucidity and its grounding in method. I review it to address a criticism leveled at this book by the reviewers below.
These reviewers have erroneously perceived that these texts were mistakenly published, and that the original intent of the publisher was to present Galileo's original papers on heliocentrism and Copernicus, "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World systems: Ptolemaic and Copernican". As the texts herein are Galileo's works on accelerated motion, the conclusion is drawn that a major mistake was made.
I believe this perception is based on marketing that associates the series with Copernicus' discoveries in particular.
The fact is that this book is part of a series, the arc of which is to present the current model of the physical world from Copernicus' discovery of the heliocentric solar system to Einstein's revelation that space and time are warped or displaced by mass and energy. Reviewers mistakenly believed that this Galilean text was intended to stand in support of Copernicus' discovery. In fact, this text is meant to show the development of the laws of motion, and is merely part of the overall series. Hawking's introduction recognizes this correctly, in contradiction to the misunderstanding of the reviewers below.
Those interested in the origins of modern science, the history of science, physics, or intellectual history may well wish to read through this gem. | | | | Good, but not copernican Oct 22, 2006 |
This is an excellent book, but I don't think it's quite what the publisher thought it was. The previous reviewer is right in saying that this book does not support Copernicus' heliocentricism in any way. It is a discussion of motion, not astronomy. I would agree with the previous review in saying that the publishers probably meant to publish Dialogues Concerning Two Chief World Systems, which does in fact discuss heliocentricism and support Copernicus. How one manages to publish the wrong book I have no idea. Did no one read this before they published it? And how on earth did Stephen Hawking not notice either and write about the wrong book?
Well, it's a good book anyway, just not what they say it is. I recommend reading it if you want to understand the developments of science (esp. motion and mechanics), but if you want to learn about the Copernican Revolution and Galileo's conflict with the church, then the book you are looking for is Dialogues Concerning Two Chief World Systems. I would also recomment Galileo's Daughter as an amazing biography of Galileo based around a correspondence between him and his daughter.
Overall grade: A for the book, F for the publisher's description. | | |  | This is the wrong book! Jun 1, 2005 |
| The publishers and Stephen Hawking evidently think they are reprinting Galileo's famous book supporting the Copernican viewpoint, "Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems". Instead, they've given us "Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences", a magnificent book (I use it as a text in my Galileo and Einstein course, see my website) BUT this book has nothing to say about planets or Copernicus -- the furthest object from earth in this book is a cannonball in flight! It's a five star book, but not if you want to find out what Galileo thought of Copernicus... | | | Write your own review about Dialogues concerning two new sciences
|
Shopping Cart (0 Items)
