R. Robinson published "the electronic (electrochemical) theory of the course of organic reactions" in 1932 and became a pioneer in this field. In general, it was said by science historians,e.g.G.V.Bykov, that Robinson applied the electron shift theory of G N しewis (1916) to organic reactions. But a historical study of Robinson's theory showed me original steps for forming his own theory.
Robinson studied organic chemistry under W.H.Perkin,Jr. and synthesized many alkaloids of medicine and dye. In 1910 Robinson synthesized anhydrocotarnine phthalide from cotarnine and phthalide and examined their reaction mechanism. Investigation of the reaction mechenism led to the foundation of his electronic theory He tried to explain the cause of organic reactions not by chemical affinity but by electronic behavior of atoms and atomic groups of molecule So, he considered "reaction center" of molecules and "loose combination" of all molecules in the course of organic reactions.
This "loose combination" was expressed with a dotted line called "partial valency" in 1916 Next year, Robinson elucidated that his "partial valency" was different from J.Thiele's one and it appeared by division of normal valency. In 1920,he cleared that partial valency was attributed to activation of one or more molecule taking part in the reactions.
In 1922, this activation was distinguished into primary conjugation (on reaction) and secondary conjugation (on structure), and in 1925 the former was called "electromeric effect" and the latter "induced effect". At the same time, Robinson explained that his theory could be translated by "electron" of Thomson-Lewis-Langmuir theory but was different from their theory In short his "electron shift" included the activation in reactions. Activation in reactions was influenced by reagents,too. In 1925, all organic reactions were divided into about 10 types of conjugation which afforded active phase in reactions.
His electronic theory was summarized in 1932 and opened a new way of electronical theorization of organic reactions. Thus, studies on the reaction mechanism of the alkaloids syntheses were indispensable for the establishment of Robinson's theory.
All continuous movements of human body are composed of a series of momentary movements caused by a volitional effort on human body in Vaiśeṣika system According to Vaiśeṣika system, the mental process of a person is produced by the action between his mental system, "soul", so called ātman and his auxiliary mental organ, "mind", so called manas in his ātman. The ātman is perpetually an immovable substance which controls all mental processes. The manas is a minute substance which does not possess any mental functions, and is constantly moved by the volitional effort in the ātman in a human body.
The remembrance is produced by the bhāvanā (the power of remembrance) in the ātman through three cognitions (a kind of special contacts between ātman and manas) e.g. a strong cognition, repeated cognitions, and the special cognition to imagine a miracle. The strong cognition is a special contact beween ātman and manas caused by unusual and unexpected experiences. The repeated cognitions are special contacts between ātman and manas caused by repeated experiences.
When a person has an unusual or unexpected experience, the first strong momentary impression based on the experience forms in the ātman of the person through the strong congnition The first impression brings about a strong bhāvanā (the power of remembrance) in the ātman The remembrance based on the experience is caused by intensity of the bhāvanā in the ātman.
When a person has an ordinary experience, the first weak momentary impression based on the experience forms in the ātman through an ordinary cognition. This first impression brings about a weak bhāvanā. The intensity of the bhāvanā is accumulated in the ātman through repeated cognitions The remembrance based on the ordinary experience is caused by the increased intensity of bhāvanā in the ātman.
As I have shown in my paper,"On the Theory of Movement in Vaiśeṣika System in Ancient India"*,the movements of matter are produced by vega (the power of motion)through two special contacts, e.g.nodana and abhighāta. The nodana is impulsive contact, acting beween a mover and the moved matter. The abhighāta is an impulsive contact, separating instantaneously a colliding matter from the collided solid matter.
The above process of movements of the matter is very similar to the process of remembrance. The contact, abhighāta in the movement theory is compared with the contact of a strong cognition between the ātman and manas. The contact, nodana in the movement theory is compared with the contact of repeated cognitions between the ātman and manas. In particular, the forming-process of the vega is very similar to the forming-process of the bhāvanā. This two concepts are contained in the category of saṃskāra (the keeping power). Moreover, the saṃskāra is often used in place of vega or bhāvanā in Vaiśeṣika system. The concepts of vaga and bhāvanā should be studied by the wider concept, namely saṃskāra (a sort of potentiality).
When a bell-shaped bronze is placed with its fins in the east-west line, the directions connecting special combination of two holes point to neibourhood of the equator of the celestial shere. This enables the sun-beam to pass through the bell-shaped bronze on the day of vernal equinox. Its shape suggests that it may be used to determine the date of the vernal equinox of every year. The bell-shaped bronze may be a ritual tool of a ceremony of the vernal equinox day on the Yayoi-era of Japan. The backgrounds of this ritual custum on the social circumstances at the early period of rice production in Japan, are discussed.
AO 6770 is a very important text which treats the calculation of a compound interest among others. Many scholars have tried to make clear the mathematical meaning of the text, but in my opinion none have completely succeeded in doing so. I reexamined the text philologically and mathematically, and have arrived at the following conclusions.
1. The line 1 of the problem No.1 reads "Length and width. One (ma-la) iku. Be it (sag) a square number." The Babylonian solved this problem by transforming a square the sides of which are 10 ninda into a rectangle retaining the same area the width of which is 4 ninda. He presupposed that the answer would be 4, and confirmed it by demonstrating that the length was given in an integer through the calculation of 0;15 * 1,40.
2. Thureau-Dangin and Neugebauer's interpretation of the problem No.2 is fundamentally right. It is certain that the transformation of units in the answer was carried out, so to speak, automatically, because the rate of the compound interest was 20%. And also in the lines 13-17 we can see the special form of division which is generally used when the divisor is a so-called "irregular number", though the divisor 1;12³ in this case is not an irregular number.
3. The problem No. 3 treats a linear equation which is formulated correctly by Thureau-Dangin (though his explanation of the process of the calculation is erroneous). I translate "šapiltum"as "a result
of a calculation", that is, I translate it in the line 7 as 0; 55 which is one result of an addition but not its sum, and in the line 9 as 6 which is a result of a subtracion, namely a remainder.In the lines 6, 7 the Babylonian conducted a complicated calculation of "šu-nigin" which is the weight subtracted from the initial weight"abnum" and in the remaining lines he got the "rēš abnīya" as the final answer from the šu-nigin.