Media Reviews

Handbook of Fuel Cells: Fundamentals, Technology and Applications. Wolf Vielstich, Arnold Lamm, and Hubert A. Gasteiger, Editors. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Chichester, England, 2003. 4 volumes. Figures, tables. lxxxii + 2604 pp, 22.3 ´ 28.7 cm. $1565.00. ISBN 0-471-49926-9.

Recently fuel cells, which convert chemical energy directly into electrical energy and which were initially developed in the 1960s as on-board power supply units for spacecraft, have been the focus of electrochemical research and technology development not only because of the scientifically fascinating complexity of their reactions but also because of society’s drive toward developing environmentally friendly power generation. For example, fuel cells operating at much lower temperatures than internal combustion engines avoid the production of nitrogen oxides (NOx), major pollutants emitted by conventional engines. Other hazardous emissions such as carbon monoxide are also drastically lowered in fuel cell–powered vehicles and are reduced to zero (“zero-emission vehicles”) when hydrogen is used as fuel for the polymer electrolyte fuel cell (PEFC) because water is the only exhaust product of the system.

In the search for a highly efficient, emission-free drive system, mobile automotive fuel cell units have been developed. In 2003 the first bus series using gaseous hydrogen fuel, developed by 30 companies and universities as well as enterprises from the petroleum and natural gas sectors, began operations initially in ten cities in eight European countries, and similar activities are under way in Japan and the United States.

Fuel cell technology is a highly varied, interdisciplinary field extending from the available fuels and their processing, through the fundamentals of the electrochemical processes, particularly electrocatalysis, to the numerous new concepts in systems technology for complete fuel cell aggregates, including the control of gas, water, and heat management. Thousands of articles in the field appear annually, and the number of patent applications, especially from the industrial sector, has similarly proliferated. Because recently published monographs and symposium volumes do not provide an adequate overview of the entire field, three authorities from three different countries have joined forces to produce a handbook intended to close this gap.

Wolf Vielstich of IQSC, São Carlos, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil, who habilitated in physical chemistry at the Universität Bonn in 1962, was coordinator of the first European project on the direct methanol fuel cell (DMFC) (1986–1998). His work on electrochemistry has resulted in more than 250 publications, more than 10 patents, books on fuel cells and electrochemical kinetics, and textbooks on electrochemistry. Since 1997Arnold Lamm, the holder of more than 40 patents on fuel cells, has been Senior Manager for fuel cell systems at DaimlerChrysler Research and Technology, Ulm, Germany, where his work has included the demonstration of the world’s first DMFC-vehicle, development of gasoline/diesel fuel processors for stationary and mobile applications, and development of advanced components for fuel cell propulsion systems. Hubert A. Gasteiger, since 1998 manager of stack components development at GM/Opel’s Global Alternative Propulsion Center, Mainz, Germany and of Fuel Cells Activities, General Motors Corporation, Honeoye Falls, NY, is the author of 45 publications and co-chaired the 2000 Gordon Research Conference on Fuel Cells. Vielstich, Lamm, and Gasteiger contributed five, one, and four articles, respectively, for the handbook that they edited.

This authoritative, interdisciplinary, comprehensive reference source brings together for the first time the fundamentals, principles, and current state of the art in fuel cell technology and underscores the increasing importance of and the burgeoning rate of research and development of this alternative, clean source of energy. In keeping with the worldwide nature of developments in the field, the editors and their international Advisory Board of ten members from the United States, Austria, Brazil, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom have assembled a team of 285 contributors from academic, industrial, and governmental institutions, primarily from the United States (99), Germany (73), Japan (22), Switzerland (19), Canada (13), the United Kingdom (9), Brazil (5), Austria (5), Denmark (5), South Africa (5), and lesser numbers from Argentina, the Netherlands, Israel, Italy, Russia, Chile, and Poland.

The handbook’s 170 articles range in length from one page (“What is electrocatalysis?”) to 74 pages (“History of low-temperature fuel cells,” which includes 361 references, some as recent as 2002). Both the volumes and articles are arranged topically rather than alphabetically, and their logical, consistent approach guides the reader from foundations and fundamental principles through the latest cutting-edge technology and applications.

Volume 1. “Fundamentals and Survey of Systems” (xvii + 449 pp; 24 articles; the shortest volume), provides background information on fuel cells, the fundamentals of electrochemistry, thermodynamics, and kinetics, underlying principles of mass and heat transfer in fuel cells, and, following a historical introduction, briefly presents an overview of the most important types of systems developed to date, along with their applications. The volume is divided as follows:

Part 1: “Thermodynamics and kinetics of fuel cell reactions” (6 articles)

Part 2: “Mass transfer in fuel cells” (2 articles)

Part 3: “Heat transfer in fuel cells” (3 articles)

Part 4: “Fuel cell principles, systems and applications” (13 articles)

Volume 2. “Electrocatalysis” (xix + 783 pp; 50 articles; the longest volume), deals with the most important basic phenomenon of fuel cell electrodes, viz., electrocatalysis, ranging from the theoretical fundamentals to almost all processes occurring in all the different types of fuel cells, including the current understanding of their reaction mechanisms. As the first detailed volume to be published on this crucial field, it should be of intense interest beyond the community of scientists and engineers directly involved with fuel cells and their applications. It is divided as follows:

Part 1: “Introduction” (7 articles)

Part 2: “Theory of electrocatalysis” (6 articles)

Part 3: “Methods in electrocatalysis” (11 articles)

Part 4: “The hydrogen oxidation/evolution reaction” (5 articles)

Part 5: “The oxygen reduction/evolution reaction” (11 articles)

Part 6: “Oxidation of small organic molecules” (6 articles)

Part 7: “Other energy conversion related topics” (4 articles)

Whereas Volumes 1 and 2 are separately paginated, Volume 3, “Fuel Cell Technology and Applications Part 1” (xxiii + 677 pp; 50 articles), and Volume 4, “Fuel Cell Technology and Applications Part 2” (xxiii + 695 pp; 46 articles), are considered as a single unit as shown by the consecutive pagination and consecutive division into parts. They present the current state of development of materials and systems in minute detail along with their practical applications. They also consider current predictions of potential fuel cell markets and possible further technological and economic developments, including the interplay between technological progress and possible market penetrations of fuel cell systems based on economic considerations. The advantages and disadvantages of the various fuel cell systems are discussed within this context. The volumes are divided and subdivided as follows:

Volume 3.

Part 1: “Sustainable energy supply” (5 articles)

Part 2: “Hydrogen storage and hydrogen generation”

“Development prospects for hydrogen storage” (3 articles)

“Chemical hydrogen storage devices” (2 articles)

“Reforming of methanol and fuel processor development” (3 articles)

“Fuel processing from hydrocarbons to hydrogen” (7 articles)

“Wheel-to-wheel efficiencies” (1 article)

“Hydrogen safety, codes and standards” (1 article)

Part 3: “Polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells and systems

(PEMFC)”

“Bipolar plate materials and flow field design” (7 articles)

“Membrane materials” (7 articles)

“Electro-catalysts” (5 articles)

“Membrane-electrode-assembly (MEA)” (4 articles)

“State-of-the-art performance and durability” (5 articles)

Volume 4.

Part 3: “Polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells and systems

(PEMFC)” (continued)

“System design and system-specific aspects” (3 articles)

“Air-supply components” (1 article)

“Applications based on PEM-technology” (1 article)

Part 4: “Alkaline fuel cells and systems (AFC)” (3 articles)

Part 5: “Phosphoric acid fuel cells and systems” (3 articles)

Part 6: “Direct methanol fuel cells and systems (DMFC)” (4 articles)

Part 7: “Molten carbonate fuel cells and systems (MCFC)” (4 articles)

Part 8: “Solid oxide fuel cells and systems (SOFC)”

“Materials” (5 articles)

“Stack and system design” (2 articles)

“New concepts” (3 articles)

Part 9: “Primary and secondary metal/air cells” (1 article)

Part 10: “Portable fuel cell systems” (3 articles)

Part 11: “Current fuel cell propulsion systems”

“PEM fuel cell systems for cars/buses” (4 articles)

“PEM fuel cell systems for submarines” (1 article)

“AFC fuel cell systems” (2 articles)

Part 12: “Electric utility fuel cell systems” (3 articles)

Part 13: “Future prospects of fuel cell systems” (3 articles)

The handbook includes numerous chemical and mathematical equations, diagrams, figures, tables, and photographs. In contrast to most encyclopedias, information for the entire set is contained in each volume. Every volume includes a three-page foreword by Shimshon Gottesfeld, Chief Technology Officer and Vice President for Research & Development, MTI Microfuel Cells of Albany, NY; a single-page preface by the editors; complete lists of the titles and pages of the articles in all the volumes; and a three-page glossary of abbreviations and acronyms from “a.c.” (alternating current) to “ZEV” (zero emission vehicle). Subject indexes for Volumes 1 (10 pp) and 2 (16 pp) appear in those volumes, no subject index appears in Volume 3, and a 32-subject index for Volumes 3 and 4 appears in Volume 4. Unfortunately, no cross-references seem to be included. In reference 51, Volume 1, p 211, my name is misspelled “Kauffmann,” an error to which I have become accustomed.

This handbook is an invaluable reference source for everyone working in this significant and dynamic field of science and technology as well as for electrochemists, scientists, engineers, and policy-makers involved in the ongoing quest for a nonpolluting, sustainable source of energy. It should also find a place in academic, industrial, and governmental libraries.

George B. Kauffman

California State University, Fresno, georgek@csufresno.edu

S1430-4171(04)05829-2, 10.1333/s00897040829a

That’s the Way the Cookie Crumbles: 62 All-New Commentaries on the Fascinating Chemistry of Everyday Life. By Dr. Joe Schwarcz; 14 cartoons by Brian Gamble. ECW Press: 2020 Queen Street East, Suite 200, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M4E, 2002. 273 pp, paperback, 14.0 ´ 20.9 cm. $14.95; CDN$17.95. ISBN 1-55022-520-0.

Dr. Joe has done it again! Another hit! One more fascinating read from the well-known, award-winning Hungarian-born Canadian popular-science writer. During his decades of interacting with the public, Schwarcz realized that

There are numerous misconceptions about science out there that need to be addressed. It has also become painfully clear that whenever science cannot provide an adequate answer, charlatans rush in to fill the void (p 13).

The present volume, winner of the 2003 Independent Publisher Book Award for science, is a worthy successor to his two previous attempts at demystifying science, Radar, Hula Hoops, and Playful Pigs (W. H. Freeman: New York, 1999), and The Genie in the Bottle: 64 All New Commentaries on the Fascinating Chemistry of Everyday Life (ECW Press: Toronto, Canada, 2000; for my review see Chem. Educator 2002, 7(6), 391–393; DOI 10.1333/s00897020635a). Like its predecessors, the book’s goal is

to educate and entertain the reader with up-to-date, readily understandable commentaries designed not only to help develop a feel for the workings of science, but also to provide some of the background needed to separate sense from nonsense. And there’s plenty of down-to-earth, practical scientific information here as well. You’ll learn how to remove stains from clothes, how to lower your cholesterol with oats, how to make “oobleck”—and you’ll discover why the cookie crumbles (pp 13–14).

In my opinion, Schwarcz has once again accomplished his goal.

After Schwarcz and his colleagues had demonstrated the preparation of polyurethane foam at the annual “Man and His World” exhibit, a descendent of Expo ‘67, the Montréal world’s fair, a local journalist, who had confused polyurethane foam with urea-formaldehyde foam, accused them of brewing up a potentially toxic substance. Schwarcz sent a letter to the columnist, who wrote a retraction. He soon received a telephone call from a local radio station (CJAD) asking him to comment on the “controversy.” Several weeks later they asked him to discuss some chemistry-related issues, leading to “The Right Chemistry,” a regular weekly call-in program that began in 1982 and is still on the air. The show resulted in requests to present public lectures, make TV appearances, and write newspaper columns and books.

In 1999 these efforts culminated in the founding of the McGill University Office for Chemistry and Society “to provide accurate, unbiased scientific information on various issues of public concern and [to] welcome all kinds of queries about scientific matters, particularly as they pertain to daily life” (p 13). Expanded and renamed the McGill University Office for Science and Society, it is now directed by Schwarcz, who, in addition to teaching in McGill’s Chemistry Department and Faculty of Medicine, also has regularly appeared on Canada’s Discovery Channel since 1995, TV Ontario, and Global Television and who has been writing columns for the Montréal Gazette and Canadian Chemical News since 1997 and 2000, respectively. He has made more than 600 presentations to conferences, universities, schools, and interest groups and more than a thousand presentations on TV and radio, and he is the recipient of numerous honors, including the Chemical Manufacturers Association Catalyst Award (1986), the American Chemical Society’s James Flack Norris Award (1990), and its prestigious James T. Grady-James H. Stack Award for Interpreting Chemistry for the Public (1999).

As usual Dr. Joe introduces his volume with a personal anecdote. He recalls an incident in his ninth-grade science class when he asked his teacher Mr. Labcoat (a pseudonym) a long-forgotten question. Schwarcz understood the reply, “That’s just the way the cookie crumbles,” to mean that his instructor “had no ready answer and was unwilling to search for one” (p 11). Today when he endeavors to answer people’s questions about science, Schwarcz remembers this childhood episode as a “great motivator to do the necessary research instead of offering up the easy ‘cookie’ answer” and as “a constant reminder of the limitations of our scientific knowledge” (p 11).

The 62 essays range in length from 2-1/2 pages (“Pi Water and Erect Electrons,” pp 253–255) to 8-1/2 pages (“Aspartame: Guilty or Innocent?,” pp 40–48). Most of them are 3 to 4 pages long. The first of the book’s four sections, “Healthy Science” (35 essays, 149 pp, ca. 59% of the entire book and the longest section), deals with a variety of commonplace topics of interest to almost everyone, including microwaves, radiation, cell phones, “good” and “bad” cholesterol, yogurt, probiotics (preparations containing specific microorganisms to provide beneficial health effects), osteoporosis, nutraceuticals (foods or beverages providing health benefits beyond simple nutrition), fortified foods, saccharin, aspartame (“perhaps the most widely researched food additive ever to have landed on the market”), fiber, artificial flavors, gingerbread, beer, barbecue carcinogens, heart disease, Alzheimer’s disease, hangovers, DNA, biotechnology, genetic engineering, cheese making, pesticides, allergies, dietary supplements, improving memory in aging adults, salt and high blood pressure, human growth hormone (HGH), homeopathy, dental fillings, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and dioxin. Included in this section is the essay that gives the book its title, “That’s the Way the Cookie Crumbles” (pp 114–118). The crumbling is related to the molecular structure of the ingredients: “Closely packed fats are what make for crumbly cookies and flaky pastry. They also make for clogged arteries” (p 117).

“Everyday Science” (14 essays, 50 pp, ca. 20 percent of the book), the book’s second section, is concerned with various products, such as stain removal, matches, cooking ware, nerve gases, light bulbs, nylon, natural and synthetic rubber, “oobleck” (well known to Dr. Seuss fans from his 1949 classic, Bartholomew and the Oobleck), Plexiglas, torpedoes, airbags, soap, detergents, spiders, lightning, and electricity.

“Looking Back” (7 essays, 26 pp, ca. 10 percent of the book), the third section, uses a primarily historical approach to introduce a variety of scientific topics and the persons who contributed to them. These include peanut butter, hot dogs, Lydia Pinkham’s Vegetable Compound (It’s still made but no longer contains black cohosh), William Henry Perkin’s mauve and synthetic dyes, Fritz Haber’s nitrogen fixation process and his use of chlorine as a poison gas, radium, Michael Faraday and his achievements in chemistry and physics, and phosphorus.

Schwarcz’s book’s final section, “Poppycock” (6 essays, 23 pp, ca. 9 percent of the book, the shortest section), debunks or explains such pseudoscientific or anti-scientific claims as fire walking, magic, the Kellogg brothers and their diets, Pi water, simple solutions to complex health problems, vitamin miracle cures, and Hadacol.

The reader is instantly drawn into each of the essays by their humorous, ingenious, or catchy titles such as: “An Ode to the Oat,” “The Secret Life of Bagels,” “A Toast to Toast,” “Gassing Green Bananas,” “Agitate for Ice Cream,” “Man Cannot Live on Corn Alone,” “Paprika’s Peppery Past,” “Beer Science Is Still Brewing,” “Hard Lessons about Soft Drinks,” “When DNA Come Out to Play,” “Frankenfuror” (genetically modified foods), “The Growing Growth Hormone Industry,” “Get the Lead Out” (lead poisoning), “How Many People Does It Take to Invent a Lightbulb?,” “Untangling the Web of Spider Lore,” “Mauving On” (synthetic dyes); and “The Dark Side of Radium’s Glow.”

Schwarcz offers a number of ingenious techniques for coping with life’s little problems. If you put green bananas in a bag with a yellow one, the green ones will quickly turn yellow because of the action of the plant hormone ethylene (p 60). Because banana peel contains amyl acetate, you can use it to clean your shoes (p 61). Since Coca-Cola contains phosphate, which forms a soluble complex with iron, it can be used to loosen rusty bolts and remove rust spots. You can remove rust spots on a chrome bumper with aluminum foil dipped in Coke, and you can also use it to clean a toilet bowl (p 96). Schwarcz also dismisses and debunks many similar tricks and household hints as mere urban myths.

In contrast to most popular books on science, many of the essays bear the authoritative stamp of a first-person experience and include sentences such as: “When I was in elementary school, a teacher attempted to dissuade us from chewing gum in class with the following ditty.” “I came across this product when I was doing some research into the chemistry of memory.” “Like most chemists, I like to cook. After all, what is cooking but the appropriate mixing of chemicals?” “My first trip to New York was in 1964. A couple of buddies and I decided we had to see the World’s Fair.” “I had a strange lunch the other day. A hot dog, a cracker with peanut butter, a wad of cotton candy, and an ice cream cone, all washed down with Dr. Pepper.” “I think of the Radium Girls almost every night. It happens when I check the time on my glowing watch dial—usually just after I’ve been reminded of the passing years by nature’s nocturnal call.” He also shares this diatribe with the reader: “Joe Blow [he means me] works at McGill University, once the most active hive of mind-control experimentation in the world and still very involved with the CIA. He writes for Reader’s Digest, a CIA publication. A professional prostitute on the CIA payroll. A fascist collaborator who smears antifascists for fun and profit” (p 48). Thus in addition to learning lots of practical science, especially chemistry, we learn much about Schwarcz’s family, friends, and personal life—even the condition of his prostate (he shares a complaint common to our generation).

As one who has written popular articles on chemistry and science for newspapers and magazines, I read the volume with admiration and envy. On almost every page I kept asking myself “Where did Dr. Joe unearth all these curious and little known facts?” (Of course, a popular book is not expected to include formulas, equations, or references so Schwarcz does not disclose many of his sources). For example, did you know any of the following? The Jerusalem artichoke is not an artichoke at all, and “Jerusalem” is a corruption of the Italian word girasole (turning to the sun). Montréal is the center of the bagel world, and the name came from Beugel (German dialect for “ring” or “bracelet”). The banana is the most popular fruit in North America, and it’s not a fruit but an herb. The most famous landmark in Crystal City, Texas is a statue of Popeye the sailor man. Hungary has the highest suicide rate in Europe. Szeged is the paprika capital of the world. The world’s oldest consumer-protection law (1516) ensured the purity of beer. Benjamin Franklin said, “Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.” A soda jerk (a vocation that I pursued during my undergraduate years)is so called because of the motion he made when dispensing the carbonated water. The most common kind of malnutrition in the world is iron deficiency. In Leonardo da Vinci’s painting, “The Last Supper,” an overturned salt container in front of Judas, foreshadows his betrayal of Jesus. Botulism derives from the Latin word for sausage. Half a glass of botulinum toxin can kill the world’s entire population. The madness of England’s George III was due to porphyria, an inherited condition often characterized by purple urine. In 1930 Dwight D. Eisenhower was assigned to search for an alternative source for rubber. Sodium azide, used in airbags, is more toxic than potassium cyanide. Little Miss Muffet was a real person, the daughter of a 16th-century physician who kept spiders because he liked them to decorate his rooms with spider webs. Spiders annually eat a quantity of insects equal in weight to the total human population. If a spider is high on marijuana, it loses the pattern of its web and finally abandons the task. Peanut butter was developed by a St. Louis physician (And I’ve gone through life thinking that it was invented by George Washington Carver).

Schwarcz has a way with words and an amazing talent for creating vivid images to elucidate scientific facts and concepts. As a case in point consider this analogy:

Treatment [of an unsaturated vegetable oil] with hydrogen gas allows some hydrogen atoms to be inserted into the molecule. Unfortunately, not only does this process make the fat more saturated, but it also converts some of the unsaturated fat molecules into a slightly different, although still unsaturated, form. These so-called trans-fatty acids have had the “molecular kink” taken out of them, and their long straight chains can now cluster together, behaving like the infamous saturated fats we use in cookies and fried foods (pp 117-118).

Numerous examples of Schwarcz’s sly humor abound. Three will suffice: “Henny Youngman, whom some would call a comedian, once remarked that when he read about the evils of drinking he gave up reading” (p 91). “And, as far as concerns about Alzheimer’s disease go, I’ve been cooking with aluminum pots all my life, and I can’t remember experiencing any problems” (p 176). “[Zinc sulfide] can be used for all sorts of glow-in-the-dark objects—maybe even toilet seats to make those nocturnal visits easier” (p 232).

In my review of Schwarcz’s previous book in this series, I reluctantly took him to task for the excessive number of small errors. I’m pleased to report that he has made considerable progress in this regard: “me and Betty Martini” for “Betty Martini and me” (pp 48–49); “like” (preposition) for “as” (conjunction) (admittedly, a distinction today “more honoured in the breach than the observance,” p 59); “agrobacterium” for “Agrobacterium” and “streptomyces” for “Streptomyces” (In the Linnean binomial system the first letter of the genus is capitalized, pp 105 and 192, respectively); “Da Vinci” for “da Vinci” (pp 128 and 267); “their” for “his or her” (“everyone” is singular, p 129); “phosphorous” for “phosphorus” (pp 170 and 171); “most” (adjective) for “almost” (adverb) (p 173); “Encyclopedia” for “Encyclopædia” (Britannica, pp 181 and 235); “South East” for “Southeast” (p 187); “Pieta” for “Pietà” (pp 193 and 197); “electro” for “elektron” (Greek, p 212); “saltpeter” (KNO₃) for “Chile saltpeter” (NaNO₃) (p 228); and “metal” for “nonmetal” (phosphorus, p 237). Of course, none of these peccadillos should prevent you from enjoying this delightful volume.

In my liberal use of quotes I’ve tried to give you a glimpse not only of the content but also of the flavor of this unusual book. Schwarcz’s explanations for a variety of common phenomena lucidly show the reader how the scientific method operates. In the essay titled “Yes, Scientists Are Allowed to Change Their Minds” he discloses a truth well known to us scientists but not to the general public: “Science rarely gives us conclusive answers. It is an ongoing process that attempts to remain in step with the latest research” (p 19). Similarly, his balanced treatment of risk versus benefit, for example, “Progress always comes at a cost, but if we fear the unknown, we will never get anywhere. Nothing in life is risk-free” (p 111), offers an effective and practical antidote for the current epidemic of chemophobia and anti-scientific attitudes that permeate our current society. I heartily recommend this witty, entertaining, enlightening, and modestly priced book to scientists, chemists, educators, and anyone interested in the multifaceted ways in which science impacts our everyday lives.

Those enamored with Dr. Joe’s approach to science, health, and food may be interested in two more of his books: The Healing Power of Vitamins, Minerals, and Herbs (Reader’s Digest: Montréal, 1999) and Foods That Harm and Foods That Heal (Reader’s Digest; Montréal, 1997, 2004).

George B. Kauffman

California State University, Fresno, georgek@csufresno.edu

S1430-4171(04)05830-3, 10.1333/s00897040830a

Newton’s Darkness: Two Dramatic Views. By Carl Djerassi and David Pinner. Imperial College Press: 57 Shelton St., Covent Garden, London WC2H 9HE, 2003; Distributed by World Scientific Publishing Co., Pte., Ltd.: 5 Toh Luck Link, Singapore 596224; Suite 202, 1060 Main St., River Edge, NJ 07661. 184 pp, 15.2 ´ 22.5 cm, hardcover. $24.00; £18.00. ISBN 1-86094-389-6; paperback. $16.00; £12.00. ISBN 1-86094-390-X.

Almost every poll of the public’s choice for the second millennium’s most important persons has included the name of the physicist and mathematician Isaac Newton (1642–1727). The results of a poll published in the London Sunday Times Magazine on September 12, 1999 ranked Sir Isaac first, even above Shakespeare, Leonardo da Vinci, Darwin, and other luminaries. The culminating figure of the 17th-century’s scientific revolution, he is usually considered the founder of modern science and the greatest scientist ever. (Actually, the term “natural philosopher” was used until the 19th century.) His   work   led   to   the   age  of  the   Enlightenment  [1],  but

The sculpture on the cover of the book is “Homage à Newton” by Salvador Dali.

revisionist historians contend that he did not belong to it either as a person or as an intellect.

In optics [2], Newton’s discovery of the composition of white light by means of a prism integrated the phenomena of colors into the science of light and established the foundations of modern physical optics. In mechanics, his three laws of motion—the basic principles of modern physics—resulted in his formulation of the law of universal gravitation. In mathematics, he discovered the infinitesimal calculus, which he called “the method of fluxions.” His Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica [3], colloquially called Principia, first published in 1686, is one of the most significant single works in the history of modern science. Recently, revisionist historians have debunked some of the hagiography surrounding Newton, who spent more time on alchemy and mystical theology—more than a million words on each of these endeavors—than on “scientific” pursuits [4]. Because of his religious convictions, the Arian belief that God and Christ are not of one substance, were considered heretical by the Anglican Church, he kept them secret. All these aspects of his work are examined in the plays under review here.

Understandably then, Newton is among the most thoroughly studied persons of all time, and there is no lack of book-length biographies [5] or evaluations of his work and thought [6]. When I “googled” him on the Internet, I obtained about538,000 results. In 1992 the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences was established as “an international research institute running a series of visitor programmes across the spectrum of the Mathematical Sciences” [7], and in 1998 the Newton Project was created “to make available in electronic form facsimiles and transcriptions of Newton’s manuscripts and to display their original connections, along with full documentation relating to Newton’s reading such as written notes and annotations” [8]. Yet all these efforts are couched in the standard format of documentary prose because their didactic purpose is to transmit historical and scientific information. In sharp contrast, Newton’s Darkness, consisting of “two historically grounded plays dealing with two of the bitterest struggles in the history of science,” uses the medium of theater to illuminate the darker aspects of Newton’s personality.

Numerous plays with scientific themes have been written recently—more than 20 in the last five years. The most popular of these is Michael Frayn’s 2000 Tony-winning Copenhagen (1998), reenacting Werner Heisenberg’s 1941 visit to his mentor and friend Niels Bohr in Nazi-occupied Denmark. Yet, plays involving science or scientists have a long history [9, 10], going as far back as Christopher Marlowe’s Dr. Faustus (1604), about a scientist who strikes a bargain with the Devil, and Ben Jonson’s The Alchemist (1610), lampooning the venerable pseudoscience that was the ancestor of our own chemistry. Recent “science plays” have focused on physics, possibly because of its involvement with the nuclear bomb. Pinner and Djerassi have now added two additional contributions to this genre.

In opposition to the scientific genius whom Alexander Pope credited with shedding light on Nature:

Nature, and Nature’s laws lay hid in night,

God said, “Let Newton be!” And all was light [11],

Pinner and Djerassi point out that much of Newton’s personality was dark and morally flawed. Adjectives that have been used to describe him include “remote, lonely, secretive, introverted, melancholic, humorless, puritanical, cruel, vindictive, and perhaps worst of all, unforgiving” (p 2). Even one of Newton’s most famous quotations, many of which appear in the dialogue of their plays, “If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders [sic] of Giants,” in a letter addressed to Robert Hooke, one of his bitterest enemies and usually cited as evidence of his modesty, can be interpreted as the “ultimate poisonous lacing” (p 2). (Hooke’s stature was dwarfish.)

Born on Christmas day 1642, Newton was abandoned by his mother, which left him intensely introverted and distrustful of women (He never married.) and arrogantly puritanical. In 1663 John Wickins (1640–1727), the first of two men involved in Newton’s repressed homosexual life (His Puritanism prevented him from indulging in physical intimacy.), began to room with him at Trinity College, Cambridge University, where for the next two decades the pair dabbled in alchemical experiments, which, like his religion, became part of his obsessively secret life.

Newton’s character trait that is central to both plays is his obsessive competitiveness, displayed in three of his best known conflicts, viz., with (1) physicist Robert Hooke (1635–1703), the subject of Newton’s Hooke; (2) Astronomer Royal John Flamsteed (1646–1719); and (3) German mathematician Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716), fought largely through surrogates, the subject of Calculus.

In his 1957 presidential address to the American Sociological Association, Robert K. Merton, universally acknowledged as the founder of the sociology of science and the author of a critically acclaimed book on Newton, On the Shoulders of Giants [12], pointed out that inasmuch as recognition for originality is the primary reward that scientists receive for their labors, priority disputes among scientists, far from being unusual, are and should be frequent [13, 14]. They are caused by what he called “multiple discoveries,” that is, the simultaneous discoveries of the same or similar things by two or more scientists working more or less independently [15, 16], which indicate that the institution of science is operating normally and productively. Similarly, the late historian of chemistry Aaron J. Ihde argued against the cult of the unique genius in science, the so-called “hero” concept of history, championed by Thomas Carlyle [17]. Ihde contended that the interlocking nature of scientific facts and theories makes their eventual discovery almost certain or inevitable, resulting in simultaneous discoveries [18].

Newton’s Hooke

The first of the two plays comprising Newton’s Darkness is Newton’s Hooke, the work of English playwright and director David Pinner, who was trained as an actor at Britain’s Royal Academy of Dramatic Art. He has played leading roles in English theaters and television, is the author of three novels, and has had 18 plays produced and 10 plays published, many of which were broadcast on BBC radio as well as BBC and commercial television. He has directed many plays both in the UK and the USA. For the past decade he has been Visiting Associate Professor of Drama at Colgate University, and he has recently completed a musical on Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels titled Marx and Sparks. He wrote Newton’s Hooke in close collaboration with his son, Dickon, a physicist, who suggested that he write a play about the two scientists [19].

In 1672 the 30-year-old Newton published his “Theory of Light and Colours” in the Royal Society’s Transactions. Hooke, the society’s 37-year-old Curator of Experiments, dismissed the theory in a letter, resulting in a priority battle over optics and celestial mechanics between England’s two greatest natural philosophers, which lasted for more than three decades, ending only with Hooke’s death in 1703 [20]. Newton threatened to leave the Royal Society and did not publish any of his work for two decades until the appearance of his Principia [3].

Although Hooke’s childhood was as traumatic as Newton’s, their personalities could not have been more different. Unlike the Puritan, secretive, paranoid Cambridge recluse, Hooke was a carefree and gregarious bon vivant, who had numerous affairs with women, including an incestuous relationship with his young niece, Grace Hooke (1650–?), who was his housekeeper for several years. Although Hooke was known as “London’s Leonardo” [21] because of his Renaissance-like genius (He was also an artist and architect.), Newton regarded him as a mere profligate dilettante. Hooke accused Newton of using passages of Hooke’s Micrographia to demonstrate Newton’s opposing theory of light. Not all the consequences of their feud were negative; one of Hooke’s challenges to Newton led Newton to his theory of universal gravitation.

Two years after the publication of his Principia, the 47-year-old Newton met the love of his life, the 25-year-old Swiss mathematician Nicolas Fatio du Duillier (1664–1753), with whom he pursued alchemical experiments and whom Newton’s enemies dubbed “Newton’s ape” [22]. As was the case with Wickins, their relationship was probably never consummated, but when Fatio carelessly mailed him alchemical secrets, the paranoid Newton became terrified that his enemies would learn of his obsession with alchemy and with his unacceptable religious beliefs. He broke up with Fatio, a rupture believed to have caused Newton’s nervous breakdown in the autumn of 1693. With the help of his friend Charles Montagu (1642–1715), the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Newton became Warden (1696) and then Master (1699) of the Royal Mint, where he set about the recoinage of English money. He left Cambridge and the world of science and alchemy for London, where he transformed himself from an academic recluse to a figure in society, with his beautiful niece Catherine Barton (1679–?) serving as his housekeeper and confidante.

After Hooke died, Newton, who, because of Hooke’s criticism of his “Theory of Light and Colours” had remained silent for more than three decades, published his second magnum opus, his four-volume Opticks, in 1704 [2]. He also pursued his vendetta beyond the grave; in his capacity as President of the Royal Society, he arranged for “the mysterious loss of the only existing portrait of Hooke, along with many instruments created by Hooke, never to be seen again” (p 9). Even after he had attained both wealth and prestige and was knighted by Queen Anne in 1705, he continued to wreak vengeance on fellow scientists and to send counterfeiters to the gallows. All these events and the persons involved in them are dealt with in a masterly manner in Pinner’s fascinating play, the action of which takes place in Cambridge and London, mostly in Newton’s and Hooke’s rooms during the period 1665–1703.

Calculus (Newton’s Whores)

The second and shorter play comprising Newton’s Darkness, Calculus (Newton’s Whores), is the work of Carl Djerassi [23], Professor Emeritus of Chemistry at Stanford University and one of the few American scientists to receive both the National Medal of Science (1973, for the first oral contraceptive) and the National Medal of Technology (1993, for promoting new approaches to insect control). He was inducted into the Inventors Hall of Fame in 1978. The holder of 19 honorary degrees and the author of nine monographs and more than 1200 scientific articles, he is the recipient of numerous honors, including the Othmer Gold Medal (2000), as well as the first Wolf Prize in Chemistry, and the Priestley Medal (1992) and the Gold Medal (2004), the highest honors of the American Chemical Society and the American Institute of Chemists, respectively.

Djerassi has embarked on a highly successful career in creative writing, including a tetralogy of novels that exemplify what he calls “science-in-fiction” to differentiate it from the better-known science fiction. In 1998 he undertook a projected trilogy of plays to explore a genre that he calls “science-in-theater.” His first play in this genre, An Immaculate Misconception [24a], dealt with ICSI—intracytoplasmic sperm injection—and it was translated into eight languages and published in book form in English, German, Spanish, and Swedish. Our review [24b] discussed this play as well as many of Djerassi’s other works in creative writing.

Djerassi’s second play, Oxygen, was coauthored with Roald Hoffmann, 1981 Nobel chemistry laureate and Frank H. T. Rhodes Professor of Humane Letters and Professor of Chemistry at Cornell University. It not only deviates from the current preoccupation with physics but also is the first “science play” written by two practicing scientists. In an unusual twist the play in book format appeared shortly before the world premiere, which took place at the Lyceum Theatre in San Diego, CA (April 2–7, 2001) concurrently with the 221st National Meeting of the American Chemical Society. It was translated into seven languages and has been published in English, German, Italian, and Korean [25].

The fictional premise of the play involved one of Djerassi’s favorite themes—the problem of priority, which also figures in Calculus (Newton’s Whores). To celebrate the 100th anniversary of the first Nobel Prizes, the Nobel Foundation is awarding a “retro-Nobel” Prize for great discoveries that preceded the establishment of the prizes in 1901. The Chemistry Committee quickly decides to honor the discovery of oxygen, the gas that ushered in the Chemical Revolution, but thorny questions immediately surfaced: What is discovery? Why is it so important to be first? The three candidates for the prize were the English Unitarian clergyman and chemist Joseph Priestley (1733–1804), the Swedish apothecary and chemist Carl Wilhelm Scheele (1742–1786), and Antoine-Laurent Lavoisier (1743–1794), the French chemist, tax collector, economist, and public servant—the founder of modern chemistry, who explained the true nature of combustion, rusting, and animal respiration as well as the central role of oxygen.

Djerassi’s third and final installment of his science-in-theater trilogy, Calculus [26],dealing with the infamous Newton–Leibniz priority struggle, opened at the Performing Arts Library and Museum in San Francisco, CA in April, 2003 [27]. The Stanford University Dean for Undergraduate Education provided funds for two of Djerassi’s students to assist in long-term research on historical background for the play. Joshua Bushinsky provided crucial evidence on the 11 Royal Society fellows (“Newton’s whores”) who were members of the infamous committee appointed to adjudicate the Newton–Leibniz controversy, while Tonyanna Borkovi carried out research on Colley Cibber, John Vanbrugh, and other Restoration Period theater personalities who figure prominently in the play.

Five European academics offered crucial leads to the least-known character in Calculus, Louis Frederick Bonet, the King of Prussia’s Minister to England, enabling Djerassi to “construct a plausible motive for his puzzling role as foreign member of the Royal Society’s committee” (p 183). As they did in the case of Oxygen, dramaturge Alan Drury, formerly of BBC Radio’s Theatre Department, and writer and poet Diane Middlebrook, Djerassi’s wife (a fortunate choice because the women in the play have central roles), acted as counselors. Also, Robert K. Merton, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Columbia University, provided Djerassi with valuable comments before his death on February 23, 2003 [15], a few months before the American premiere of the play.

The decades-long priority struggle between Newton and Leibniz over the invention of the calculus, in which each protagonist accused the other of piracy, differs from Newton’s other feuds in that it transcended personal priority claims by involving competing nations—with the English supporting Newton and the Germans favoring Leibniz—and was conducted largely by surrogates instead of by the principals themselves. Unfortunately, the controversy delayed the acceptance of Newtonian science in continental Europe and dissuaded British mathematicians from sharing their results with continental colleagues for a century. Also, as he had done with Hooke, Newton pursued his vengeance beyond the grave; he removed any mention of Leibniz in the final revision of his Principia.

Because no unambiguous definition of scientific priority has been agreed upon, several questions arise. As Djerassi and Hoffmann had asked in Oxygen [25], so Djerassi and Pinner ask: Should it be assigned to the first discoverer, to the one who publishes first, or to the first person to understand the nature of the discovery? With regard to the calculus, Newton was first in conception, while Leibniz long predated the secretive Newton in terms of publication. In the words of science writer William J. Broad, the struggle was “fought for the most part by the throng of little squires that surrounded the two great knights” (p 11). Djerassi’s play highlights the activities of some of Newton’s “little squires.”

The first to accuse Leibniz of plagiarism was Newton’s most fawning disciple, Nicolas Fatio de Duillier (“Newton’s Ape”) [22], but his accusation was not pursued because of his previously mentioned association with alchemy and heretic religious views. In 1708 the Royal Society’s secretary, John Keill, formally repeated the plagiarism charge, which was published in the society’s Philosophical Transactions in 1710. Leibniz, who was a longtime foreign member of the society, demanded an official retraction, so Newton, who was the President, created a commission (“a Numerous Committee of Gentlemen of Several Nations”) of society fellows to adjudicate the matter. At a society meeting of April 24, 1712 a 51-page report with references to letters and documents primarily in the possession of Newton’s correspondent John Collins was read and later published under the title “commercium epistolicum collinii & aliorum” (exchange of letters from Collins and others) completely supporting Keill’s accusation:

And by these letters and papers it appeared…that Mr. Newton had the Method in or before the year 1669, and it did not appear…that Mr. Leibniz had it before the year 1677 (p 110).

Djerassi’s stage directions call for the projection of a one-page summary of this report on the curtain or other suitable surface before the play begins.

Because Newton, as President of the Royal Society, had indirectly appointed the committee in 1712, it is not surprising that the report was biased in his favor. but there is more of “Newton’s darkness” here. Although the composition of the committee that signed the report was unacknowledged for more than a century, not only the names of the fellows but also the dates that they were appointed are now known: astronomer Edmond Halley, of comet fame; physician and writer John Arbuthnot; William Burnet; Abraham Hill; John Machin; and William Jones (all appointed on March 6); Francis Robartes, the Earl of Radnor (March 20); Louis Frederick Bonet, the King of Prussia’s Minister in London (March 27); and Francis Aston and mathematicians Brook Taylor and Abraham de Moivre (April 17).

Despite the claim that the committee was composed of “Gentlemen of Several Nations,” only Bonet and de Moivre could be considered foreigners. From the appointment dates it is obviously impossible that the last three members could have been involved in a long, complex report officially presented only a week later. Actually, Newton himself—not any of the 11 fellows—had written the report! The question of why these fellows (The Swiss mathematician Johann Bernoulli called them “Newton’s toadies,” p 155.) allowed themselves to have been so manipulated by Newton is considered in Calculus, the action of which takes place in London, mostly in a salon or a sitting room during the years 1712–1731.

Calculus offers speculative insight into the scandal through the personalities of three committee members—Arbuthnot, Bonet, and de Moivre—with most of the biographical references based on historical records. In the play within a play “about Newton’s malfeasance” (p 173) that concludes Act 1 (Act 1, Scene 6; pp 139–142), a device used earlier to great effect by Djerassi and Roald Hoffmann in Oxygen, playwrights Colley Cibber (1671–1757) and Sir John Vanbrugh (1664–1726) act the roles of Leibniz and Newton, respectively. Although the meeting between Cibber and Vanbrugh is fictional, both are historical characters whose plays form an important part of Restoration drama.

In keeping with Djerassi’s feminist concerns (He calls himself the “Mother [not the Father] of the Pill” [28].), strong, intelligent women—Lady Brasenose, a London salonnière, and Margaret Arbuthnot (?–1730), John Arbuthnot’s wife, play prominent roles in his story. The latter, in an exchange with Bonet, waxes philosophical on Newton’s flaws and those of humankind in general:

Speculating about the existence of evil in a world created by a good God does not seem idle to me. Theodicy would claim that as Man cannot be absolutely perfect, Man’s knowledge and power is limited. Thus we are not only liable to wrong action, but it is unavoidable or we would have absolutely perfect action from a less than absolutely perfect creature. How otherwise explain that God allowed Newton’s manipulations? Or do you attribute absolute perfection to Sir Isaac? (p 165).

Pinner and Djerassi have tried to show that “a scientist’s ethics must not be divorced from scientific accomplishments” (p 13), and we think that they have admirably succeeded in attaining their goal. John Arbuthnot (1667–1735), the Scottish physician to England’s Queen Anne and a member of the anonymous Royal Society Commission of 1712, asks Colley Cibber (1671–1757), English playwright, architect, theater manager, British Poet Laureate (1730), and Arbuthnot’s literary enemy:

We need unsullied heroes…and not just military ones. What purpose is served by showing that England’s greatest natural philosopher is flawed…like other mortals? Consider the laws of motion and of gravitation…of light and color…his work on celestial mechanics. Calculus was not needed for any of them. Even without the calculus, Newton would be our greatest (p 171).

Cibber replies,

Greatest natural philosopher…or paragon of probity? Why not take him for what he was: a tainted hero. Inventor of the calculus? Yes! But also corruptor of a moral calculus. And what about Leibniz…does he not deserve some defense? (p 171).

This exchange takes place in Act 2, Scene 10 (pp 169–178), which concludes the published version of Calculus, but, as Act 1, Scene 1, it opens the version of the play on Djerassi’s Web site [26].

Pinner and Djerassi explain why they chose the theatrical form to explore the darker side of Newton’s complex character:

Since we chose to concentrate on the human aspects of Newton’s persona, we felt that his personality also merited illumination through the most human form of discourse, namely dialog (p 13) [29].

Pinner and Djerassi’s plays underscore the fact that time has not changed human beings—their motivations; their emotions; desire for recognition, power, and financial compensation; concern with reputation and awards; and their social institutions. The ethical issues of ambition, competition, discovery, and priority addressed in Newton’s Darkness are as timely today as they were in the late 17th and early 18th centuries. The plots, based in part on actual history of science, are complex and absorbing, and the characters, although flawed, are interesting human beings and ring true to their historical counterparts. The main themes that we have described above are skillfully and consistently woven throughout the dialogue, which, although often didactic, is never “stuffy.”

These two theatrical efforts should help bridge the gap between C.P. Snow’s “two cultures” [30] by giving a general audience an insightful and accurate view of how scientists act and how science advances—a picture often at odds with the public’s stereotyped view of scientists as cold, unemotional, ultrarational, unselfish “do-gooders,” who are driven solely by disinterested curiosity.

In addition totheatergoers, bothplaysshould appeal to students and general readers interested in biography and the history of science and of literature. Our only caveat is that readers will better appreciate them if they read the notes before reading the plays. We give Newton’s Darkness, two enjoyable, engrossing, and above all, provocative and thought-provoking plays, an enthusiastictwo thumbs up.

References and Notes

1.       Beer, P., Ed. Newton and the Enlightenment; Proceedings of an International Symposium, Caligari, Italy, 3–5 October 1977. Vistas Astron. 1978, 22, 367–557.

2.       Newton, I. Opticks; Dover Publications: New York, 1990 (based on the 4th edition of 1730).

3.       Newton, I. The Principia, Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy; Cohen, I. B.; Whitman, A., Translators; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, 1999.

4.       Dobbs, B. J. T. The Foundations of Newton’s Alchemy or “The Hunting of the Greene Lyon”; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, 1975 and 1983; Dobbs, B. J. T. The Janus Faces of Genius; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, 1991; Manuel, F. A. The Religion of Isaac Newton; Clarendon Press: Oxford, England, 1974.

5.       Among the best of these are: Andrade, E. N. da Costa. Sir Isaac Newton: His Life and Work; Max Parris: London, 1950; Collins: London; Doubleday: New York, 1958; Greenwood: Westport, CT, 1979; Westfall, R. S. Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1980, paperback, 1993; condensed as The Life of Isaac Newton; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, 1994;

6.       Thackray, A. Atoms and Powers: An Essay on Newtonian Matter-Theory and the Development of Chemistry; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1970; Cohen, I. B. The Newtonian Revolution: With Illustrations of the Transformation of Scientific Ideas; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, 1980.

7.       The Newton Project. http://www.newtonproject.ic.ac.uk (accessed Sept 2004).

8.       Isaac Newton Resources. http://www.newton.cam.ac.uk/newton.html (accessed Sept 2004).

9.       Lustig, H.; Shepherd-Bard, K. Science as Theater. Am. Scientist 2002, 90, 550–555.

10.     For an annotated list of “science plays” with capsule summaries and bibliographical information, along with links to Internet resources for further exploration of “Science as Theater” access http://www.americanscientist.org/articles/02articles/lustig.html (accessed Sept 2004). For the difference between “science-in-theater,” in which all the science is accurate (analogous to “science-in-fiction” and “science plays,” in which the author may take liberties with the science (analogous to science fiction) see Djerassi, C. Contemporary “Science-in-Theatre”: a rare genre (Daniel Rosen Memorial Lecture). Interdisciplinary Science Reviews Autumn 2002, 27, 193–201 (http://www.djerassi.com/science-in-theater; This special issue was dedicated entirely to science and theater).

11.     Pope, A. Epitaph on Newton. In Boynton, H. W., Ed. The Complete Poetical Works of Alexander Pope; Houghton, Mifflin: Boston, MA; New York, 1902.

12.     Merton, Robert K. On the Shoulders of Giants: A Shandean Postscript: The Post-Italianate Edition; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, 1993.

13.     Merton, R. K. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL; London, England, 1973.

14.     Merton, R. K. Priorities in Scientific Discovery. Am. Sociolog. Rev. 1957, 6, 635–659; reprinted in Merton, R. K. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL; London, England, 1973; pp 286–324.

15.     Gieryn, T. F. Robert K. Merton, 1910–2003. Isis 2004, 95, 91–94.

16.     Merton, R. K. Singletons and Multiples in Scientific Discovery. Proc. Am. Phil. Soc. 1961, 5, 470–486; reprinted in Merton, R. K. The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL; London, England, 1973; pp 343–370.

17.     Carlyle, T. On Heroes, Hero-Worship, and the Heroic in History; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, 1993.

18.     Ihde, A. J. The Inevitability of Scientific Discovery. Sci. Monthly 1948, 67, 427–429.

19.     For information about Pinner’s writing log onto http://groups.colgate.edu/klatsch/archiv/pinner_folder/dphpg3.html (accessed Sept 2004).

20.     Hooke could also be contentious. He was described as a “universal claimant” because “there was scarcely a discovery in his time which he did not conceive himself to claim” [14]. Not only did he contest priority with Newton but he also claimed priority over Christiaan Huygens for the invention of the spiral-spring balance for regulating watches to eliminate the effect of gravity.

21.     Bennett, J.; Cooper, M.; Hunter, M.; Jardine, L. London’s Leonardo: The Life and Work of Robert Hooke; Oxford University Press: New York, 2003.

22.     Domson, C. A. Nicolas Fatio de Duillier and the Prophets of London; Arno: New York, 1981.

23.     Kauffman, G. B.; Kauffman, L. M. The Steroid King. The World & I 1992, 7 (7) (July), 312–319.

24.     (a) Djerassi, C. An Immaculate Misconception: Sex in an Age of Mechanical Reproduction; Imperial College Press: London, 2000; (b) Kauffman, G. B.; Kauffman, L. M. Chem. Educator 2002, 7, 245–248; DOI 10.1333/s00897020589a.

25.     Djerassi, C.; Hoffmann, R. Oxygen: A Play in Two Acts; Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, Germany; New York, 2001. For our review see Kauffman, G. B.; Kauffman, L. M. Chem. Educator 2003, 8, 164–168; DOI 10.1333/s00897030680a.

26.     http://www.djerassi.com/calculus (accessed Sept 2004).

27.     Djerassi’s fourth play, Ego, described as a “a dark comedy about a singular obsession,” directed by Frances McCain and presented by PlayBrokers with the Playwright’s Foundation, premiered as a reading on February 10, 2003 at the ODC Theatre in San Francisco, CA 94110 followed by a discussion with the author, the actors, and the director. Djerassi describes this effort as “my first experiment in ‘non-scientific’ play writing” (email to G. B. Kauffman, January 26, 2003).

28.     Kauffman, G. B.; Kauffman, L. M. “Mother” of the pill followed a winding road. The Fresno Bee, August 5, 2000, p B7.

29.     Another example of this approach also deals with the Newton–Leibniz controversy: Stengers, I. La guerre des science aura-t-elle lieu?; Le Seuil: Paris, 2001.

30.     Snow, C. P. The Two Cultures and a Second Look; Cambridge University Press: London, 1969.

George B. Kauffman and Laurie M. Kauffman

California State University, Fresno, georgek@csufresno.edu

S1430-4171(04)05831-2, 10.1333/s00897040831a

Collected Works of Sir Humphry Davy. John Davy, Editor; Introduction by David M. Knight. Thoemmes Press: 11 Great George St., Bristol BS1 5RR, UK; 22883 Quicksilver Drive, Sterling, VA 20166, 2001. http://www.thoemmes.com. 9 volumes, illustrations, figures, tables. 3885 pp, hardcover, 14.3 ´ 22.2 cm. $1275.00; £795.00. ISBN 1-85506-907-5. In the USA or Canada order from Continuum International Publishing Group, P.O. Box 1321, Harrisburg, PA 17105, USA; Phone: (800) 877-0012; FAX: (717) 541-8128; email: continuum@morehousegroup.com. Worldwide order from Jill Caldicott, Orca Book Services, Stanley House, 3 Fleets Lane Poole, Dorset BH15 3AJ, UK; Phone: 01202 665432; FAX: 01202 666219; email: jill.caldicott@orcabookservices.co.uk.

In my acceptance address for the American Chemical Society’s George C. Pimentel Award in Chemical Education, I discussed the persons and events shaping my career, spending considerable time in tribute to my first scientific hero—Humphry Davy (1778–1829), a true romantic and one of the most fascinating and exemplary chemists of all time [1]. The rags-to-riches saga of this poor Cornish youth and his rapid rise to the professorship of the Royal Institution; popular science lecturer par excellence; darling of London society (especially among the fair sex); recipient at the age of 33 of a knighthood from the Prince Regent; and president of the Royal Society, the highest position in British science, at the age of 41, made an indelible impression on my adolescent mind. What a role model for a young person determined upon devoting himself to “the central science”! Thus, I have long had a personal and professional interest in the man who successfully aspired to become the Newton of his day.

Only two years after Davy’s death, his first biography—by John Ayrton Paris—who, like others since, saw social mobility as the key to Davy’s life, appeared [2]. Not content with this effort, which T. E. Thorpe [3] considered inaccurate, disingenuous, extravagant, and insincere, Davy’s younger brother, John (1780–1868), who spent some time with Humphry in London, indignantly wrote his own biography [4], which Thorpe called partial, albeit candid, sober, and direct and stated that it frequently contradicted Paris’ biography.

Since then, a number of biographies of Davy have appeared, including a critically acclaimed one [5] by David M. Knight, Professor Emeritus of the History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Durham, a chemist himself, and a longtime authority on Davy, who recently assigned Davy a prominent role in popularizing chemistry in his Edelstein Award address at the 226th National Meeting of the American Chemical Society held in New York on September 9, 2003 [6]. The most recent book-length account of Davy and his work was written by another longtime Davy scholar, June Z. Fullmer [7]. Her account of Davy’s first 22 years proved to be her swan song, for she died on January 31, 2000 at the age of 79 after putting the finishing touches on the manuscript.

As a labor of love, John Davy edited his brother’s collected works [8] as a nine-volume work [9], the first volume of which was an abridgement of his earlier biography [4]. Long out-of-print and rare, the collection has now been reprinted as a facsimile edition with an introduction by Knight [10]. The contents of the collection are as follows:

·  Volume 1. “Introduction” by David M. Knight (pp v–xiv) [10]; “Memoirs of His Life, Chapters I-VI” (475 pp).

·  Volume 2. “Early Miscellaneous Papers, from 1799 to 1805. With an Introductory Lecture and Outlines of Lectures on Chemistry, Delivered in 1802 and 1804” (465 pp, one plate).

·  Volume 3. “Researches, Chemical and Philosophical, Chiefly Concerning Nitrous Oxide, or Dephlogisticated Nitrous Air, and Its Respiration” (343 pp, one plate, the shortest volume).

·  Volume 4. “Elements of Chemical Philosophy: As Regards the Laws of Chemical Changes: Undecompounded Bodies and Their Primary Combinations” (376 pp, 13 plates).

·  Volume 5. “Bakerian Lectures and Miscellaneous Papers from 1806 to 1815” (527 pp, 6 plates, the longest volume).

·  Volume 6. “Miscellaneous Papers and Researches, Especially on the Safety Lamp, and Flame, and on the Protection of the Copper Sheathing of Ships, from 1815 to 1828” (364 pp, 12 plates).

·  Volume 7. “Discourses Delivered before the Royal Society” (pp 1–168); and “Elements of Agricultural Chemistry, in a Course of Lectures for the Board of Agriculture, Delivered between 1802 and 1812, Part I: Lectures I–V” (pp 169–391, 10 plates).

·  Volume 8. “Elements of Agricultural Chemistry, in a Course of Lectures for the Board of Agriculture, Delivered between 1802 and 1812, Part II: Lectures VI–VIII” (pp 1–152); “Miscellaneous Lectures and Extracts from Lectures” (pp 153–365).

·  Volume 9. “Salmonia, or Days of Fly-Fishing; in a Series of Conversations: with Some Account of the Habits of Fishes Belonging to the Genus Salmo” (pp 1–205, 4 plates); “Consolations in Travel: Or the Last Days of a Philosopher” (pp 207–388).

Not only is Davy’s life succinctly surveyed in Knight’s introduction and described in detail in John Davy’s “Memoirs of His Life” (both in Volume 1), but all of his major contributions from his earliest days to his final years are contained in the subsequent volumes.

Born on December 17, 1778 in Penzance, Davy was the first of five children of an often-unemployed woodcarver, whose death when Humphry was 16 left the mother with debts that forced her to support the family by opening a millinery shop. Little in Davy’s plebian roots presaged his becoming “the most brilliant chemist of his age” or “one of the most respected and most disliked men of science ever.” He was largely self-taught, learning chemistry by reading Lavoisier’s Traité élémentaire de chimie in English translation. Apprenticed at sixteen to an apothecary-surgeon, he seemed destined to become a physician.

In 1798 Thomas Beddoes appointed Davy his assistant at his Pneumatic Institute at Clifton near Bristol, where the 20-year-old youth analyzed the oxides of nitrogen to provide John Dalton with the data to support his law of multiple proportions. In 1800 Davy’s first book, a study of the physiological effects of nitrous oxide (Volume 3) aroused considerable popular as well as scientific attention and made inhaling laughing gas a fashionable fad [11, 12]. He also published a paper, both speculative and experimental, on heat and light, agreeing with Rumford’s view that heat was a motion of particles rather than a weightless substance, “caloric,” as postulated by Lavoisier (Volume 2).

Davy became successively Assistant Lecturer in Chemistry and Laboratory Director (1801), Lecturer (1802), and Professor (1802) at the Royal Institution, which, supported by money paid to attend his public lectures, became Britain’s premier research institution. In his inaugural lecture of January 21, 1802 (Volume 2) he informed his opulent audience that science was vital to economic progress. His zeal and showmanship in popularizing his experimental discoveries in chemistry; electrochemistry, a term that he coined (As one of the founders of electrochemistry (Volume 2) and in a race with Swedish chemist Jöns Jacob Berzelius, he was the first to isolate potassium and sodium (1807) and barium, strontium, calcium, and magnesium (1808). (Volume 5)); agricultural chemistry (Volumes 7 and 8); geology (Volume 8); and catalysis brought him the patronage of influential people and made him “the first preacher of applied science.”

Davy’s inventions included the carbon arc light; miner’s safety lamp (Volume 6); and “cathodic protection” to prevent corrosion of the copper hulls of warships (Volume 6), a principle still in use today. He favored facts above theories and was skeptical of Dalton’s atomic theory. At a time when science as a career was most unusual, he became a professional scientist when only the Astronomer Royal could be so described. He achieved fame as a poet [13] as well as a chemist and natural philosopher (Volume 1). Among his friends were the Romantic bards Wordsworth, Byron, and Coleridge, who attended his lectures.

Davy was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society (1802); one of its two Secretaries (1807); and in 1820, its President (reelected in 1826). (His elegant discourses and elegies to the society appear in Volume 7.) In 1805 he received the society’s Copley Medal for his research on tanning (Volume 7). In 1810 he demonstrated that “oxymuriatic acid” was an element, which he called chlorine, and that it formed a strong acid with hydrogen, thus demolishing Lavoisier’s view that oxygen is the essential element in acids. (The name is derived from the Greek, acid former.) (Volume 5).

On April 11, 1812, being a social climber, he followed “the classic route for the country boy making good in London;” he entered into a childless and unhappy marriage with the bluestocking widow and heiress Jane Apreece, formally marking his entrance into the upper classes of class-conscious Regency society, which was governed by patronage. In 1812 he published his Elements of Chemical Philosophy, dedicated to his bride (Volume 4). In 1813, at the pinnacle of his meteoric career, he resigned his professorship and began to travel about the Continent, accompanied by his wife, his assistant Michael Faraday, and two chests of apparatus to continue his experiments. In France he elucidated the true nature of iodine (Volume 5), and in Italy he carried out some of the earliest analyses of pigments used in ancient paintings (Volume 6) and ignited a diamond to prove that it was identical with graphite (Volume 5).

Davy’s last two books (both in Volume 9), which, together with his Elements of Agricultural Chemistry, were his most popular books with the public. Salmonia: or Days of Fly Fishing (1828), containing Davy’s drawings of fish, discusses not only his favorite hobby but also his philosophical and religious views, while Consolations in Travel, or the Last Days of a Philosopher, published posthumously in 1830, consists of six dialogues presenting his views of the history of mankind and the existence of reincarnation and immortality. After 1820 his health deteriorated, and he died on May 28, 1829 in Geneva. His relatively short life was motivated by his urge to understand nature and to apply this knowledge to useful purposes. Unfortunately, he left no school of disciples to continue his work.

The Collected Works of Sir Humphry Davy reflects the scientific work and astonishing career of the greatest creative scientist in Regency Britain and one of chemistry’s brightest luminaries, which was fueled by philosophical questions on the nature of life, matter, God, thought, and immortality. It includes newly added rare illustrations and portraits not contained in the original works. It provides valuable source material for all historians of chemistry and of science, especially those concerned with the early nineteenth century, a crucial period when science was developing into a profession with individual specialties and Britain was supplanting France as a scientific center.

References and Notes

1.       Kauffman, G. B. Aus Meinem Leben: Adventures and Travels of a Chemical Educator-Historian-Researcher. Chemistry Education 1995 (January-March), 11 (3), 5–17.

2.       Paris, J. A. The Life of Sir Humphry Davy, Bart., L.L.D., late President of the Royal Society; Henry Colburn and Richard Bentley: London, 1831.

3.       Thorpe, T. E. Humphry Davy: Poet and Philosopher; Cassell & Co.: London, 1896.

4.       Davy, J. Memoirs of the Life of Sir Humphry Davy, 2 vols.; Longman Rees: London, 1836.

5.       Knight, D. M. Humphry Davy: Science and Power; Blackwell Publishers: Cambridge, MA, 1992; 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, England, 1998. For reviews see Kauffman, G. B. Chem. Eng. News 1993 (Aug 2), 71 (31), 32–33 and Chem. & Ind., 1999 (Mar 1), 5, 186–187.

6.       Knight, D. M. The 2003 Edelstein Award Address: Making Chemistry Popular. Bull. Hist. Chem. 2004, 29, 1–8.

7.       Fullmer, J. Z. Young Humphry Davy: The Making of an Experimental Chemist; American Philosophical Society: Philadelphia, PA, 2000. For a review, see Kauffman, G. B. Chem. Educator 2002, 7, 401–403; DOI 10.1333/s00897020644a.

8.       For a complete bibliography of Davy’s works see Fullmer, J. Z. Sir Humphry Davy’s Published Works; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1969.

9.       The Collected Works of Sir Humphry Davy, Bart. LL.D. F.R.S., Foreign Associate of the Institute of France, etc., Edited by His Brother, John Davy, M.D. F.R.S.; Smith, Elder and Co.: London; Vols. 1–3, 1839; Vols. 4–9, 1840.

10.     Knight’s introduction is a revised version of his article, Humphry Davy: Science and Social Mobility. Endeavour 2000, 24, 165–169.

11.     Flanagan, R.; Ramsey, J. Davy’s intoxicating effects. Chem. Br. 2000 (Oct), 36 (10), 35–36.

12.     For a discussion of James Gillray’s famous caricature of a lecture at the Royal Institution involving the administration of nitrous oxide and depicting Davy with a bellows see Kauffman, G. B.; Mattson, B.; Swanson, R. P. Celebrating Chemistry and Art: Bicentennial of a Famous Caricature. CHEM 13 NEWS, 2002 (Jan), 299, 20–22. For a color version of the caricature and information on the preparation of N₂O log onto http://mattson.creighton.edu/N2O (accessed Sept 2004).

13.     Fullmer, J. Z. The Poetry of Sir Humphry Davy. Chymia 1960, 6, 102–126.

George B. Kauffman

California State University, Fresno, georgek@csufresno.edu

S1430-4171(04)05832-1, 10.1333/s00897040832a

The Chemcraft Story: The Legacy of Harold Porter. By John Tyler. St. Johann Press: P.O. Box 241, Haworth, NJ 07641, 2003. Phone: (201) 387-1529; FAX: (201) 501-0698. Illustrations. ix + 130 pp, paperbound, 21.1 ´ 27.2 cm. $25.00 (shipping $3.00). ISBN 1-878282-27-41.

At the age of six, I became intrigued with the fascinating world of chemicals, and I informed any of my relatives who would listen of my desire for a chemistry set [1].

With this sentence I began my paean to my first chemistry set. I am far from alone in tracing my interest in chemistry to a set. Numerous chemists and scientists of my generation were inspired to a career in chemistry or science in the same manner [2–7].

One of those who grew up with these sets is John Tyler (born in 1935), a resident of Layton, NJ, who taught science at the elementary school and university levels for 33 years. Currently the owner of Colophon Books, Inc. of Ithaca, NY, a firm dealing in antiquarian books and scientific instruments, he was planning a trip to Gettysburg, Pennsylvania and noticed from a map (Figure 6, p 9) that it was close to Hagerstown, Maryland, the home of the Porter Chemical Company, the manufacturer of the chemistry and microscope sets in his collection. With the help and constructive criticism of John Porter, son of Harold Mitchell Porter (1893–1963), the founder of the Porter Chemical Company; John Frye, the Washington County [MD] librarian; the Washington County Historical Society; and other local sources of information, Tyler has written the story of the Porter family, their company, and the town of Hagerstown that “had never been shared with the world outside of Hagerstown” (p vii). He wrote the book “for those generations of scientists who got their start, as the author did, with a science kit from the Porter Chemical Company” (p ix).

On November 12, 1914, Harold M. Porter, age 22, and his older brother John J. Porter, age 35, both of Cincinnati, Ohio, signed a partnership (Figure 3, p 4) to manufacture and sell “chemical preparations and other materials and articles.” In March 1915, Harold arrived in Hagerstown, to which his brother and sister-in-law, Edith, had moved. The brothers realized that

many visually startling reactions could be performed using relatively harmless chemical compounds, and that these reactions did not require much heat. Thus, they reasoned, these experiments could be done by children, with proper instruction, and would pose minimal safety risks (pp 1–2).

Educational scientific toys were then a novel but risky concept that might not sell. With Harold in charge of marketing their brainchild, smaller and larger chemistry sets selling for 75¢ and $1.00, respectively—considerable sums at a time when the average worker earned $7 to $10 per week—were manufactured along with instruction books and offered for sale in Woodward and Lathrop, Washington, DC’s venerable department store. From such humble beginnings, the chemistry set was born, and the rest, as they say, is history.

When the Porter Chemical Company began marketing its early Chemcraft sets, Alfred Carlton Gilbert [8] had already established his company as the maker of Erector construction sets, but when he noted the Porters’ success, he added a “chemical magic” kit to his line. It was not until 1922, however, that he started to market a “serious” chemistry set, by which time Chemcraft had become the established leader of chemistry sets. The Porters began to expand their line into other areas with microscope (1934) (Figures 7 and 8, pp 14–15), mineralogy (1937) (Figure 9, p 16), “Electro-Physics” (1937) (Figure 10, p 17), “G-Man’s Science” (1937) (Figure 11, p 18), and polaroid (polariscope) (1937) kits (Figure 12, p 19).

During World War II, when the military draft removed many men from the work force, Porter Chemical had several advantages over its larger rival. Porter was still family-owned (On occasional hot summer days, the plant would shut down for the day, and buses would take the entire staff to the beach.) and could adapt to change more rapidly than Gilbert, which had been incorporated in 1929 and had to contend with stockholders’ wishes. Furthermore, Porter’s production staff was composed mostly of local housewives, whereas Gilbert’s work force suffered attrition from the departure of draft-