Sociologie fyziky

Sociology of Physics Bibliography

Seznam literatury Science Studies specificky se věnující fyzice je postupně doplňován, konečným cílem je poskytnout úplný soupis. Položky seznamu jsou řazeny chronologicky, jen v některých případech je dána přednost kritériu souvislosti (přímé reakce na určitý text jsou tak řazeny za komentovaným textem).

Poslední aktualizace: 4. 2. 2022

Monografie

Kuhn, Thomas S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. The University of Chicago Press.

Thomas S. Kuhn (1978), Black-Body Theory and the Quantum Discontinuity, 1894-1912. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Andrew Pickering (1984), Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Steven Shapin and Simon Schaffer (1985), Leviathan and the Air-Pump. Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life. Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Harry M. Collins (1985), Changing Order. Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

Trevor Pinch (1986), Confronting Nature: The Sociology of Solar-Neutrino Detection. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Sharon Traweek (1988), Beamtimes and Lifetimes. The World of High Energy Physicists. Harvard University Press.

Harry M. Collins – Trevor J. Pinch (1993), The Golem: What Everyone Should Know about Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Harry M. Collins (2004), Gravity’s Shadow: The Search for Gravitational Waves. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Harry M. Collins (2011), Gravity’s Ghost and Big Dog: Scientific Discovery and Social Analysis in the Twenty-First Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Harry M. Collins (2017), Gravity’s Kiss. The Detection of Gravitational Waves. Cambridge (Mass.) – London: The MIT Press.

Odborné články / kapitoly v knihách

Kuhn, Thomas, The Function of Measurement in Modern Physical Science. Isis, Vol. 52, No. 2 (1961), pp. 161-193

Forman, Paul. “Weimar Culture, Causality, and Quantum Theory, 1918-1927: Adaptation by German Physicists and Mathematicians to a Hostile Intellectual Environment.” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 3 (1971): 1–115.

E. Zahar, Why did Einstein’s Programme Supersede Lorentz’s? British Journal of Philosophy of Science, 24 (1973), 223-262.

H. M. Collins, The TEA Set: Tacit Knowledge and Scientific Networks, Science Studies, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Apr., 1974), pp. 165-185.

Magyar, George. „Typology of Research in Physics.“ Social Studies of Science 5, no. 1 (1975): 79-85. 

Cantor, G. N. „The Academy of Physics at Edinburgh 1797-1800.“ Social Studies of Science 5, no. 2 (1975): 109-34. 

Dolby, R. G. A. „What Can We Usefully Learn from the Velikovsky Affair?“ Social Studies of Science 5, no. 2 (1975): 165-75.

Collins, H. M., “The Seven Sexes: A Study in the Sociology of a Phenomenon, or the Replication of Experiments in Physics”, Sociology, 9 (2), 1975, pp. 205-224.

Collins, H. M., and R. G. Harrison. „Building a TEA Laser: The Caprices of Communication.“ Social Studies of Science 5, no. 4 (1975): 441-50.

Frankel, Eugene. „Corpuscular Optics and the Wave Theory of Light: The Science and Politics of a Revolution in Physics.“ Social Studies of Science 6, no. 2 (1976): 141-84. 

Brian Wynne, C.G. Barkla and the J Phenomenon: A Case Study in the Treatment of Deviance in Physics, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 6, No. 3/4, Special Issue: Aspects of the Sociology of Science: Papers from a Conference, University of York, UK 16-18 September 1975 (Sep., 1976), pp. 307-347.

Daniel Sullivan, D. Hywel White and Edward J. Barboni, The State of a Science: Indicators in the Specialty of Weak Interactions, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 7, No. 2, Theme Issue: Citation Studies of Scientific Specialties (May, 1977), pp. 167-200 

  • George Magyar, ‚Pseudo-Effects‘ in Experimental Physics: Some Notes for Case-Studies, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 7, No. 2, Theme Issue: Citation Studies of Scientific Specialties (May, 1977), pp. 241-256
  • Wallace Kantor, ‚Pseudo-Effects‘ in Experimental Physics: A Study in Mistaken Identity, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Aug., 1978), pp. 355-358
  • George Magyar, Reply to Kantor, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 8, No. 3 (Aug., 1978), pp. 358-359 

Russell Moseley, Tadpoles and Frogs: Some Aspects of the Professionalization of British Physics, 1870-1939, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 7, No. 4 (Nov., 1977), pp. 423-446

Sal P. Restivo, Parallels and Paradoxes in Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism: I – A Critical Reconnaissance, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 8, No. 2 (May, 1978), pp. 143-181 

D. Hywel White, Daniel Sullivan and Edward J. Barboni, The Interdependence of Theory and Experiment in Revolutionary Science: The Case of Parity Violation, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 9, No. 3 (Aug., 1979), pp. 303-327.

Crane, Diana. „An Exploratory Study of Kuhnian Paradigms in Theoretical High Energy Physics.“ Social Studies of Science 10, no. 1 (1980): 23-54.

  • Pickering, Andy. „Exemplars and Analogies: A Comment on Crane’s Study of Kuhnian Paradigms in High Energy Physics.“ Social Studies of Science 10, no. 4 (1980): 497-502.
  • Crane, Diana. „Reply to Pickering.“ Social Studies of Science 10, no. 4 (1980): 502-06.
  • Pickering, Andy. „Reply to Crane.“ Social Studies of Science 10, no. 4 (1980): 507-08.

Lewis, Gwendolyn L. „The Relationship of Conceptual Development to Consensus: An Exploratory Analysis of Three Subfields.“ Social Studies of Science 10, no. 3 (1980): 285-308.

Brush, Stephen G. „The Chimerical Cat: Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics in Historical Perspective.“ Social Studies of Science 10, no. 4 (1980): 393-447.

Pickering, Andrew, “The Role of Interests in High-Energy Physics: the Choice between Charm and Colour” in K. D. Knorr, R. Krohn and R. Whitley (eds.), The Social Process of Scientific Investigation, Sociology of the Sciences, Vol. 4, 1980 (1981), 107-138.

Collins, H. M. „Son of Seven Sexes: The Social Destruction of a Physical Phenomenon.“ Social Studies of Science 11, no. 1 (1981): 33-62. 

Pickering, Andrew. „Constraints on Controversy: The Case of the Magnetic Monopole.“ Social Studies of Science 11, no. 1 (1981): 63-93.

Harvey, Bill. „Plausibility and the Evaluation of Knowledge: A Case-Study of Experimental Quantum Mechanics.“ Social Studies of Science 11, no. 1 (1981): 95-130.

Pinch, Trevor J. „The Sun-Set: The Presentation of Certainty in Scientific Life.“ Social Studies of Science 11, no. 1 (1981): 131-58.

Lankford, John. „Amateurs and Astrophysics: A Neglected Aspect in the Development of a Scientific Specialty.“ Social Studies of Science 11, no. 3 (1981): 275-303. 

Rothenberg, Marc. „Organization and Control: Professionals and Amateurs in American Astronomy, 1899-1918.“ Social Studies of Science 11, no. 3 (1981): 305-25. 

Harry Collins, “The Replication of Experiments in Physics” in Barry Barnes and David Edge (eds.), Science in Context, Cambridge (MA), MIT Press, 1982.

David Gooding, „Empiricism in Practice: Teleology, Economy and Observation in Faraday’s Physics.“ Isis, Vol. 73, 1982, 46-67.

Restivo, Sal. „Parallels and Paradoxes in Modern Physics and Eastern Mysticism: II – A Sociological Perspective on Parallelism.“ Social Studies of Science 12, no. 1 (1982): 37-71.

Koester, David, Daniel Sullivan, and D. Hywel White. „Theory Selection in Particle Physics: A Quantitative Case Study of the Evolution of Weak-Electromagnetic Unification Theory.“ Social Studies of Science 12, no. 1 (1982): 73-100. 

Hoddeson, Lillian. „Establishing KEK in Japan and Fermilab in the US: Internationalism, Nationalism and High Energy Accelerators.“ Social Studies of Science 13, no. 1 (1983): 1-48.

Irvine, John, and Ben R. Martin. „Assessing Basic Research: The Case of the Isaac Newton Telescope.“ Social Studies of Science 13, no. 1 (1983): 49-86. 

  • Smith, F. Graham. „The Isaac Newton Telescope.“ Social Studies of Science 13, no. 1 (1983): 161-62.
  • Irvine, John, and Ben Martin. „The Isaac Newton Telescope.“ Social Studies of Science 13, no. 2 (1983): 321-22. 

Pickering, Andrew, “Against Putting the Phenomena First: The Discovery of the Weak Neutral Current”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol. 15, 1984, 85-117.

Bazerman, Charles. „Modern Evolution of the Experimental Report in Physics: Spectroscopic Articles in Physical Review, 1893-1980.“ Social Studies of Science 14, no. 2 (1984): 163-96.

Shapin, Steven. „Pump and Circumstance: Robert Boyle’s Literary Technology.“ Social Studies of Science 14, no. 4 (1984): 481-520.

Laurent, John. „Science, Society and Politics in Late Nineteenth-Century England: A Further Look at Mechanics‘ Institutes.“ Social Studies of Science 14, no. 4 (1984): 585-619. 

Pinch, Trevor, „Theory Testing in Science. The Case of Solar Neutrinos: Do Crucial Experiments Test Theories or Theorists?“, Philosophy of the Social Sciences 15 (1985), 167-187.

Pinch, Trevor. „Towards an Analysis of Scientific Observation: The Externality and Evidential Significance of Observational Reports in Physics.“ Social Studies of Science 15, no. 1 (1985): 3-36.

Missner, Marshall. „Why Einstein Became Famous in America.“ Social Studies of Science 15, no. 2 (1985): 267-91. 

Irvine, John, and Ben R. Martin. „Basic Research in the East and West: A Comparison of the Scientific Performance of High-Energy Physics Accelerators.“ Social Studies of Science 15, no. 2 (1985): 293-341. 

Dunford, Richard W. „The Problem of Relevant Collectivities: Solar Energy Research in Australia.“ Social Studies of Science 15, no. 3 (1985): 455-74.

Graham, Loren R. „The Socio-Political Roots of Boris Hessen: Soviet Marxism and the History of Science.“ Social Studies of Science 15, no. 4 (1985): 705-22. 

Andrew Pickering, “Against Correspondence: A Constructivist View of Experiment and the Real.” PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. 1986, Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers (1986): 196-206.

Tatarewicz, Joseph N. „Federal Funding and Planetary Astronomy, 1950-75: A Case Study.“ Social Studies of Science 16, no. 1 (1986): 79-103. 

Gillmor, C. Stewart. „Federal Funding and Knowledge Growth in Ionospheric Physics, 1945-81.“ Social Studies of Science 16, no. 1 (1986): 105-33.  „Corrigenda: Federal Funding and Knowledge Growth in Ionospheric Physics, 1945-81.“ Social Studies of Science 16, no. 3 (1986): 568. 

Gingras, Yves, and Silvan S. Schweber. „Constraints on Construction.“ Social Studies of Science 16, no. 2 (1986): 372-83.

Krieger, Martin H. „The Elementary Structures of Particles.“ Social Studies of Science 17, no. 4 (1987): 749-52.

Genuth, Joel. “Microwave Radar, the Atomic Bomb, and the Background to U.S. Research Priorities in World War II.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 13, no. 3–4 (July 1988): 276–89.

Bruno Latour, “A Relativistic Account of Einstein’s Relativity”, Social Studies of Science 18, no. 2 (1988): 3-44. 

  • Schumacher, John A. „The Observer’s Frame of Reference in Natural and Social Science: A Response to Latour.“ Social Studies of Science 18, no. 3 (1988): 523-31. 

Morus, Iwan Rhys. „The Sociology of Sparks: An Episode in the History and Meaning of Electricity.“ Social Studies of Science 18, no. 3 (1988): 387-417.

Schafer, Simon. “Glass Works: Newton’s Prisms and the Uses of Experiment.” In D. Gooding, T. Pinch, S. Schaffer, The Uses of Experiment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1989, pp. 67-104.

J. A. Bennett, “A Viol of Water or a Wedge of Glass.” In D. Gooding, T. Pinch, S. Schaffer, The Uses of Experiment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1989, pp. 105-114.

Roth, Paul and Barret, Robert, „Deconstructing Quarks.“ Social Studies of Science, Vol 20, No. 4, 1990, 579-632.

  • Nickles, Thomas, How to Talk with Sociologists (or Philosophers). Social Studies of Science, Vol. 20, 1990, 633-638.
  • Oldroyd, David R., Picking at/on Pickering: The Deconstruction of the Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 20, No. 4 (Nov., 1990), pp. 638-657 
  • Pinch, Trevor, „Deconstructing Roth and Barret. Social Studies of Science, Vol. 20, No. 4, 1990, pp. 658-663.
  • Fuller, Steve, They Shoot Dead Horses, Don’t They? Philosophical Fear and Sociological Loathing in St Louis. Social Studies of Science, Vol 20, No. 4, 1990, 664-681.
  • Pickering, Andrew, Knowledge, Practice and Mere Construction, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 20, No. 4 (Nov., 1990), pp. 682-729. + „Erratum: Knowledge, Practice and Mere Construction.“ Social Studies of Science 21, no. 1 (1991): 6. 
  • Roth, Paul and Barret, Robert, Aspects of Sociological Explanation. Social Studies of Science, Vol 20, No. 4, 1990, 729-746.

Cross, Andrew. „The Crisis in Physics: Dialectical Materialism and Quantum Theory.“ Social Studies of Science 21, no. 4 (1991): 735-59. 

  • Freire, Olival. „Comment on ‚The Crisis in Physics‘.“ Social Studies of Science 22, no. 4 (1992): 739-42. 
  • Cross, Andrew. „Reply to Freire.“ Social Studies of Science 22, no. 4 (1992): 742-44. 

Efmertova, Marcela. „Czech Physicist Jaroslav Safranek and His Television.“ Social Studies of Science 22, no. 2 (1992): 283-300.

Hicks, Diana. “Instrumentation, Interdisciplinary Knowledge, and Research Performance in Spin Glass and Superfluid Helium Three.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 17, no. 2 (April 1992): 180–204.

Gingras, Yves, and Michel Trepanier. „Constructing a Tokamak: Political, Economic and Technical Factors as Constraints and Resources.“ Social Studies of Science 23, no. 1 (1993): 5-36.

Ashmore, Malcolm. „The Theatre of the Blind: Starring a Promethean Prankster, a Phoney Phenomenon, a Prism, a Pocket, and a Piece of Wood.“ Social Studies of Science 23, no. 1 (1993): 67-106. 

Pycior, Helena M. „Reaping the Benefits of Collaboration While Avoiding Its Pitfalls: Marie Curie’s Rise to Scientific Prominence.“ Social Studies of Science 23, no. 2 (1993): 301-23. 

Jackson, Myles W. „A Spectrum of Belief: Goethe’s ‚Republic‘ versus Newtonian ‚Despotism‘.“ Social Studies of Science 24, no. 4 (1994): 673-701. 

  • Bjelic, Dusan, and Michael Lynch. „Goethe’s ‚Protestant Reformation‘ as a Textual Demonstration: Comment on Jackson.“ Social Studies of Science 24, no. 4 (1994): 703-24. 

Jansen, Dorothea. “Convergence of Basic and Applied Research? Research Orientations in German High-Temperature Superconductor Research.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 20, no. 2 (April 1995): 197–233.

Knorr-Cetina, Karin. „How Superorganisms Change: Consensus Formation and the Social Ontology of High-Energy Physics Experiments.“ Social Studies of Science 25, no. 1 (1995): 119-47.

Thomas F. Gieryn, “Boundaries of Science”, in S. Jasanoff, G. Markle, J. Petersen, T. Pinch (eds.), Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. London: Sage, 393-443.

Levin, Sharon G., Paula E. Stephan, and Mary Beth Walker. „Planck’s Principle Revisited: A Note.“ Social Studies of Science 25, no. 2 (1995): 275-83. 

Lewenstein, Bruce V. „From Fax to Facts: Communication in the Cold Fusion Saga.“ Social Studies of Science 25, no. 3 (1995): 403-36.

Merz, Martina, and Karin Knorr Cetina. „Deconstruction in a ‚Thinking‘ Science: Theoretical Physicists at Work.“ Social Studies of Science 27, no. 1 (1997): 73-111.

  • Gale, George, and Cassandra L. Pinnick. „Stalking Theoretical Physicists: An Ethnography Flounders: A Response to Merz and Knorr Cetina.“ Social Studies of Science 27, no. 1 (1997): 113-23.
  • Cetina, Karin Knorr, and Martina Merz. „Floundering or Frolicking – How Does Ethnography Fare in Theoretical Physics? (And What Sort of Ethnography?): A Reply to Gale and Pinnick.“ Social Studies of Science 27, no. 1 (1997): 123-31. 

Mitchell, Lisa M., and Alberto Cambrosio. „The Invisible Topography of Power: Electromagnetic Fields, Bodies and the Environment.“ Social Studies of Science 27, no. 2 (1997): 221-71.

Mermin, N. David. „The Science of Science: A Physicist Reads Barnes, Bloor and Henry.“ Social Studies of Science 28, no. 4 (1998): 603-23. 

  • Bloor, David. „Changing Axes: Response to Mermin.“ Social Studies of Science 28, no. 4 (1998): 624-35.
  • Barnes, Barry. „Oversimplification and the Desire for Truth: Response to Mermin.“ Social Studies of Science 28, no. 4 (1998): 636-40. 
  • Mermin, N. David. „Abandoning Preconceptions: Reply to Bloor and Barnes.“ Social Studies of Science 28, no. 4 (1998): 641-47.

Collins, H. M. „The Meaning of Data: Open and Closed Evidential Cultures in the Search for Gravitational Waves.“ American Journal of Sociology 104, no. 2 (1998): 293-338. 

Simon, Bart. „Undead Science: Making Sense of Cold Fusion after the (Arti)Fact.“ Social Studies of Science 29, no. 1 (1999): 61-85.

Collins, H. M. „Tantalus and the Aliens: Publications, Audiences and the Search for Gravitational Waves.“ Social Studies of Science 29, no. 2 (1999): 163-97.

Mitchell, Gordon R. “Whose Shoe Fits Best? Dubious Physics and Power Politics in the TMD Footprint Controversy.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 25, no. 1 (January 2000): 52–86.

Kennefick, Daniel. „Star Crushing: Theoretical Practice and the Theoreticians‘ Regress.“ Social Studies of Science 30, no. 1 (2000): 5-40. 

Hessenbruch, Arne. „Calibration and Work in the X-Ray Economy, 1896-1928.“ Social Studies of Science 30, no. 3 (2000): 397-420.

Thorpe, Charles, and Steven Shapin. „Who Was J. Robert Oppenheimer? Charisma and Complex Organization.“ Social Studies of Science 30, no. 4 (2000): 545-90. 

McCray, W. Patrick. „Large Telescopes and the Moral Economy of Recent Astronomy.“ Social Studies of Science 30, no. 5 (2000): 685-711. 

Shrum, Wesley, Ivan Chompalov, and Joel Genuth. „Trust, Conflict and Performance in Scientific Collaborations.“ Social Studies of Science 31, no. 5 (2001): 681-730. 

Thorpe, Charles. „Disciplining Experts: Scientific Authority and Liberal Democracy in the Oppenheimer Case.“ Social Studies of Science 32, no. 4 (2002): 525-62.

H. M. Collins, LIGO becomes big science, Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences, Vol. 33, No. 2 (2003), pp. 261-297

Mellor, Felicity. „Between Fact and Fiction: Demarcating Science from Non-Science in Popular Physics Books.“ Social Studies of Science 33, no. 4 (2003): 509-38. 

Kaiser, David, Kenji Ito, and Karl Hall. „Spreading the Tools of Theory: Feynman Diagrams in the USA, Japan, and the Soviet Union.“ Social Studies of Science 34, no. 6 (2004): 879-922.

Sims, Benjamin. „Safe Science: Material and Social Order in Laboratory Work.“ Social Studies of Science 35, no. 3 (2005): 333-66. 

Kaiser, David. „Whose Mass Is It Anyway? Particle Cosmology and the Objects of Theory.“ Social Studies of Science 36, no. 4 (2006): 533-64. 

Messeri, Lisa R. „The Problem with Pluto: Conflicting Cosmologies and the Classification of Planets.“ Social Studies of Science 40, no. 2 (2010): 187-214.

Sundberg, Mikaela. „The Dynamics of Coordinated Comparisons: How Simulationists in Astrophysics, Oceanography and Meteorology Create Standards for Rusults.“ Social Studies of Science 41, no. 1 (2011): 107-25.

Pinch, Trevor. „Karen Barad, Quantum Mechanics, and the Paradox of Mutual Exclusivity.“ Social Studies of Science 41, no. 3 (2011): 431-41. 

Barad, Karen. „Erasers and Erasures: Pinch’s Unfortunate ‚uncertainty Principle‘.“ Social Studies of Science 41, no. 3 (2011): 443-54.

Sundberg, Mikaela. “Creating Convincing Simulations in Astrophysics.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 37, no. 1 (January 2012): 64–87.

Mody, Cyrus C.M. „Faster-than-light Reading.“ Social Studies of Science 42, no. 1 (2012): 159-64. 

Raynaud, Dominique. „Les déterminations de la vitesse de la lumière (1676-1983). Étude de sociologie internaliste des sciences.“ L’Année sociologique 63 (2013): 359-398. [English translation on Cairn.info: Determining the Speed of Light (1676–1983): An Internalist Study in the Sociology of Science.

Wazeck, Milena. „Marginalization Processes in Science: The Controversy about the Theory of Relativity in the 1920s.“ Social Studies of Science 43, no. 2 (2013): 163-90.

Hoeppe, Götz. „Working Data Together: The Accountability and Reflexivity of Digital Astronomical Practice.“ Social Studies of Science 44, no. 2 (2014): 243-70. 

Reyes-Galindo, Luis. „Linking the Subcultures of Physics: Virtual Empiricism and the Bonding Role of Trust.“ Social Studies of Science 44, no. 5 (2014): 736-57.

Wirtén, Eva Hemmungs. „The Pasteurization of Marie Curie: A (meta)biographical Experiment.“ Social Studies of Science 45, no. 4 (2015): 597-610. 

Delfanti, Alessandro. „Beams of Particles and Papers: How Digital Preprint Archives Shape Authorship and Credit.“ Social Studies of Science 46, no. 4 (2016): 629-45. 

Findlen, Paula, and Hannah Marcus. „The Breakdown of Galileo’s Roman Network: Crisis and Community, Ca. 1633.“ Social Studies of Science 47, no. 3 (2017): 326-52. 

Baneke, David. “Let’s Not Talk About Science: The Normalization of Big Science and the Moral Economy of Modern Astronomy.” Science, Technology, & Human Values 45, no. 1 (January 2020): 164–94.