Last week, I had the pleasure of visiting the Linda Hall Library. Located a short walk away from the Kauffman Foundation, it is one of the premier science and technology libraries in North America. And it has an incredible collection of rare books from the history of science. While I only scratched the surface of their collection during my visit, I got to see two books that were fundamental in guiding science: Isaac Newton's Principia and Robert Hooke's Micrographia. The first introduced the theory of gravitation and much of the basic laws of physics and the second introduced a whole variety of ideas into biology, including cells.
Here's Principia:
And here's Micrographia and the famous drawing of the flea:
While scientists don't generally cite these works in their papers (they're certainly no longer cutting-edge), these books are still awe-inspiring in their breadth and depth. Which makes me wonder: how many scientists are familiar with the foundational texts of science? Or does the scientific frontier move so rapidly that not only do few of us have the time or inclination to look back into the mists of history, but many feel that it might even be unnecessary? My own perspective is that it is essential to have a sense of the history of science in order to better create its future. For example, only by understanding the history of journals and scientific publication can we really make judgments about the future of peer review. This might be too much to ask for, but all scientists should be taught at least some history of science.
Or short of that, they should be shown Hooke's flea.
Top image: **Paul Lowry/Flickr
