Journal of History of Science, JAPAN
Online ISSN : 2435-0524
Print ISSN : 2188-7535
Volume 54 , Issue 274
Showing 1-7 articles out of 7 articles from the selected issue
  • [in Japanese]
    2015 Volume 54 Issue 274 Pages 3-
    Published: 2015
    Released: December 14, 2020
    JOURNALS OPEN ACCESS
    The 1^<st> International Conference on Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Research (IAEA Conference) was held in 1961. Around that time, the Japanese nuclear fusion research was in its infancy. The participants and presenters for the conference were selected by the Special Committee of Nuclear Fusion of Science Council of Japan. Only one paper of the Electrotechnical Laboratory in Japan was accepted by the program committee of the Conference, but its presentation was finally canceled. As the nuclear fusion community in Japan could not contribute effectively to the 1^<st> IAEA Conference, preparation for the 2^<nd> IAEA Conference (1965) started immediately. Participants and papers to the conference were discussed in a selection committee. Because the proposed presenters overlapped with four members of the selection committee, the conclusion of the committee on the selection was not immediately supported by the Special Committee for Nuclear Fusion of JSC. After the conference, animate discussions about various future plans of nuclear fusion research started in the nuclear fusion community. In 1968, the 3^<rd> IAEA Conference was held at Novosibirsk. The progress in the conference urged Japanese fusion researchers to change their research program from fundamental studies of plasma physics to the research and development of large scale nuclear fusion devices. In the 1960's, thus, the results of the IAEA conference largely affected Japanese nuclear fusion community.
    Download PDF (964K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2015 Volume 54 Issue 274 Pages 23-
    Published: 2015
    Released: December 14, 2020
    JOURNALS OPEN ACCESS
    There are two types of astronomical instruments called gola in the ancient Indian astronomical texts. They are both used to demonstrate the movement of the heavenly bodies on the celestial sphere which is also called gola. One of them is roughly equivalent to the celestial globe which was for the first time described by Aryabhata (born 476) in his work Aryabhatiya. The other is the armillary sphere type which appeared in the works of Brahmagupta (628), Lalla (about 8^<th> century), Bhaskara II (12^<th> century), and so on. We find that Bhaskara I, in his commentary (629) on the gola chapter of the Aryabhatiya, also left a detailed description of gola which meant the armillary sphere. At the beginning of his commentary, Bhaskara says since this instrument would be useful in explaining Aryabhata's words on the spherics (gola), he would give the method of constructing and setting the armillary sphere. In this paper, we have followed the text of Bhaskara's commentary as given in the critical edition by K. S. Shukla (1976), explained the procedure of construction using the figures, and interpreted how to set it in the different places according to their latitudes. According to the interpretation, it is possible to reconstruct Bhaskara's armillary sphere. Finally we have shown the role of the armillary sphere played in the astronomical texts. As Bhaskara emphasizes, it is not the real entity but just a good expedient model (upaya).
    Download PDF (908K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2015 Volume 54 Issue 274 Pages 37-
    Published: 2015
    Released: December 14, 2020
    JOURNALS OPEN ACCESS
    The present article explores practical aspects of medieval ophthalmology in Cairo Genizah, by examining an exchange of letters (T-S 10J16.16) between two ophthalmologists (Abu Zikri and Abu 'Ali). In this document, written between the twelfth and thirteenth century, they talked about conditions and treatments of three eye diseases, i.e. ulcer of cornea (qarha fi qarniya), conjunctivitis (ramad) and trachoma (jarab). I compare their descriptions with the explanations found in major Arabic ophthalmological texts, and thereby reveal the practical dimension of their medical activity. At the stage of diagnosis, Abu Zikri's observation was based on the same pathological knowledge as described in the medieval Arabic medical texts, which was also shared by Abu 'All. However, when deciding the treatment plans, the two ophthalmologists, though still basing themselves on the same medical books, adopted different methods. Finally, at the stage of prescription, Abu 'Ali suggested the use of some medical substances that could seldom be found in the major texts. His knowledge of pharmacotherapy could come from his experiences (tajriba). Although such empirical knowledge might not have affected Abu 'All's basic physiology, its accumulation within the domain of pharmacotherapy could have influenced his decision about treatment plans.
    Download PDF (791K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2015 Volume 54 Issue 274 Pages 53-
    Published: 2015
    Released: December 14, 2020
    JOURNALS OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (498K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2015 Volume 54 Issue 274 Pages 59-
    Published: 2015
    Released: December 14, 2020
    JOURNALS OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (503K)
  • [in Japanese]
    2015 Volume 54 Issue 274 Pages 67-
    Published: 2015
    Released: December 14, 2020
    JOURNALS OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (385K)
  • 2015 Volume 54 Issue 274 Pages 71-
    Published: 2015
    Released: December 14, 2020
    JOURNALS OPEN ACCESS
    Download PDF (1015K)
feedback
Top