Chapter 49 fourth quarter

Ye Qisun is called the deputy director of the History of Science Committee, but in fact he is responsible for the preparatory work of the entire history of science organization.He will always be a dedicated worker and a bright-eyed strategist.When "building a stage and singing opera", he believed that the organization should not be large, and the personnel should be capable.He is very disgusted with people who are superfluous, and people who are actually hard to live up to under the great name.At the beginning of its establishment, I think there were many well-known scholars in the society at that time, but Ye Qisun insisted on serious investigations no matter how old they were or how famous they were.Therefore, he blocked a popular scholar.A scholar who returned from Japan wanted to work as an interpreter in the laboratory, but Mr. Ye insisted on taking the exam before accepting him. In January 1957, the Research Office of the History of Science was officially established, and all the staff were only 8 people.The reason why he strictly checks it is because he attaches great importance to the history of science, compiling history to make a statement, a major national event, since it is the history of science, it should be a major event for scientists, and it will have a major impact on the entire Chinese scientific community, so he is cautious.Researching the history of science may be just a career choice for others, but for Ye Qisun it is a career.

Ye Qisun loved to read historical books and classics since he was a child, and he especially liked to delve into books on mathematics, engineering and science, and could find clues from them in order to draw the law of historical development.His early mathematics papers "Criticism of Shanggong" and "A Brief History of Chinese Mathematics" are the results of his in-depth study of these ancient classics.He is even more familiar with books on ancient physics. After he arrived at the research institute, he gave lectures to the staff in the institute. , It is also the accumulation of his early years of reading.Of all the history of science preparations, his favorite was the history of astronomy.Although he is a great physicist, he believes that the independent science of physics has not been formed in ancient China, but the literature is extremely rich, and there are a lot of historical materials that can be excavated.His interest in astronomy and research methods had a profound influence on Xi Zezong, a young scholar who had just entered Taoism at that time, and Xi Zezong became Ye Qisun's out-and-out disciple.Later, Xi Zezong found traces of sunspots in the historical materials left over from ancient times, which had a great international influence.Xi Zezong is the only academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in the field of history of science, a corresponding academician of the International Academy of History of Science, and the director of the Institute of Natural Science History of the Chinese Academy of Sciences.Talking about the days with Mr. Ye, what impressed him the most, Xi Zezong replied that it was Mr. Ye's thoughts on how to manage history——

How to study the history of science?In Mr. Yeh's opinion, to describe the achievements of a scientist as unconsciously using materialism and dialectics, and to describe the failure of the same scientist as being influenced by idealism and metaphysical worldview, is not a simple division. Solving any problem is tantamount to no research.The history of science is a science. The process of human understanding of the material world is limited by various factors such as productivity levels and experimental conditions, so specific things must be analyzed in detail.To show that spiritualism and metaphysics are completely hindering the development of science, I am afraid I have to read T. Thorndike's six-volume "History of Magic and Experimental Science" (a history of magic and experimental science), which will The examples given in it are refuted one by one, and then the conclusion can be drawn.

Ye Lao advocated that the research on the history of science should have a wide range of knowledge.He is in favor of George Sarton (g.sarton, 1884-1956).This person has studied chemistry and crystallography, received rigorous training in mathematics and physics, and has mastered 14 languages ​​including Arabic and Chinese.In order to study the history of science before Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519), he wrote the collected background materials into a book called "Introduction to the History of Science" (introduction to the history of science) ), a total of three volumes and five volumes, including many Chinese scientific achievements.In his article "Four Guiding Thoughts for the Study of the History of Science", he listed the great value of Eastern thought as the third article, and believed that "Until the end of the 14th century, Easterners and Westerners worked together when trying to solve problems of the same nature." work. Beginning in the sixteenth century, they took different paths. The basic (though not the only) reason for the divergence was that Western scientists understood the method of experimentation and applied it, while Eastern scientists failed to understand it". (g. Sutton "Historical Research of Science", translated by Liu Bing et al., Science Press, 1990 edition, p. 1-9).For such an outstanding and impartial scientist, we regard him as a representative of the bourgeoisie, and say that Western bourgeois scholars wantonly belittle the achievements of ancient Chinese science. Ye Lao thinks that this approach can only be ignorance and prejudice.

Ye Qisun has deep respect for historical materialism.He has always believed that a physical scientist, especially a physical scientist who pays attention to experiments, has a natural relationship with materialism.He also knew that if the research on the history of science is guided by the materialist viewpoint, brilliant academic flowers will surely emerge, and everyone will be happy with the wind and water.But in the long history of Chinese society, the development of science and technology is not just driven by materialism.Idealism is a necessary condition for the growth of materialism. The two are mutually opposed and interdependent. If either one is lost, the opposite party will wither and degenerate.Materialism and idealism each have their own cognition and methods, which are used to reveal the secret of the generation of a certain thing, and can completely serve as conditions for each other to solve the unsatisfactory proof.In particular, scientific inventions are generated by many factors, and they must not be dragged into the simple classification of materialism or idealism, otherwise it will fall into the bias of opposing one tendency and covering up the other.In the study of the history of science, if it is said that idealism and metaphysics have completely hindered the development of science, and Western scientists are all representatives of the bourgeoisie, this is too simplistic and one-sided.Simplification and one-sidedness will affect our approach to historical reality, which is not the attitude scientists should have.

To study the history of science, one must first have a scientific attitude. It was the era of the "Great Leap Forward". Against the backdrop of a collective aphasia of intellectuals, Ye Qisun's voice seemed stubborn and clear.The standard of living can be lowered, and political treatment can be dispensed with, but he will still make his own unique voice when it comes to writing major events in the history of science in the motherland. In August 1964, a scientific seminar was held in Beijing.This is a world-class scientific symposium, many countries have sent delegations to attend the meeting, Ye Qisun was excluded.

During the meeting, Chairman Mao Zedong met with scientists from various countries, especially when he met the head of the Japanese delegation, Sakata Masahichi. Mao Zedong held the hands of the Japanese guests and said: "I have read your article "New Concepts of Elementary Particles". Well done! I agree with what you said, 'elementary particles' are not the last indivisible particles..." Mao Zedong's reliance on science and quick thinking immediately enlivened the atmosphere of the scene and shortened the distance between the host and the guest.Yu Guangyuan, who accompanied Chairman Mao Zedong in the interview, told everyone that Chairman Mao had said as early as at the Moscow Conference in 1957 that the division of one into two is a common phenomenon. Atoms are divided into nuclei and electrons, and nuclei are divided into Protons and neutrons, protons and antiprotons, and so on.Naturally, these words of Mao Zedong also became the central topic of the seminar, and many topics outside the scope of science were derived from it.Later, this scientific topic, which was originally quite academic, was used by politics. Some people even regarded these debates as class struggle or a reflection of class struggle in the party, a struggle between materialism and idealism...

In order to cope with the political situation, some scientists who were originally immersed in their profession had to come out to criticize some so-called bourgeois authorities, which had a great influence in society. Mr. Zhu Hongyuan is an example. Zhu Hongyuan is a well-known theoretical physicist in my country and has made many important achievements in the field of high-energy particle physics. Together with Mr. Hu Ning, Ye Qisun's senior student, he led and opened up a new field of theoretical research on the internal structure of particles, and his academic contributions have been commended.However, such a respected scientist, on July 3, 1965, in a report at the Beijing Science Hall, dubbed Planck, Rayleigh Kings, Einstein and other world-class physicists "idealism" , "Metaphysics" hat to criticize, and published the full text in the ninth issue of "Red Flag" magazine that year, which caused an uproar in the academic circle.

At this time, Ye Qisun, who had been silent for a long time, stood up again and published his last article in the fourth issue of "Natural Dialectics Research Communication" in 1965 with his real name and surname. Honesty - some comments 1. Famous scientists in history must be analyzed concretely and given a correct evaluation. I have a few immature opinions for discussion. (1) Comrade Zhu Hongyuan recently said that after Planck put forward the quantum hypothesis in 1900, he spent 15 years trying to eliminate the contradiction between the quantum hypothesis and the classical theory, which hindered the progress of science.There may be problems with this statement.Some of the measures Planck took at that time were to try to test how far the classical theory could go, which was necessary.Moreover, his achievements in the past 15 years have prepared the conditions for the transition from classical statistical theory to quantum statistical theory, and he has also made contributions in physics.

(2) Comrade Zhu Hongyuan also said that due to the shackles of metaphysics, it took as long as 19 years from Einstein's theory of light quantum to de Broglie's matter wave theory.This cannot be simply attributed to the late development due to the influence of metaphysics.For example, experimental conditions also need to be developed. If the electron diffraction experiment is done earlier, the wave nature of particles may also be discovered earlier.The history of science is full of examples of this kind.For example, the final discovery of cathode rays, the initial work leading to this discovery can be said from Faraday, and from Faraday to Thomson, about 50 years have passed in the middle.In the past 50 years, physicists have been working hard to improve the vacuum.Only when the degree of vacuum is increased, the effect of cathode rays can be observed, and the cathode rays can be discovered by people.It would be a bit simplistic to say that everything that was not discovered earlier due to the lack of experimental conditions is the result of metaphysical influence.

(3) Comrade Zhu Hongyuan mentioned that Rayleigh Kings was trying to "cover up" the contradictions. I am afraid there is something wrong with this statement.Rayleigh Kings, like Planck, was also trying to explore the extent to which classical theories could explain phenomena.The formula they put forward is still applicable today, and its introduction is beneficial in testing the applicability of classical theories, and is convenient for exposing the contradiction between classical theories and new experimental facts. (4) The valuation of Eddington.Eddington made epoch-making contributions in astronomy throughout his life, such as the theory of stellar evolution, the theory of the contradiction between the pressure of light (diffusion) and the gravity of stellar matter (condensation) in the evolution of stars.But he did publish many erroneous philosophical insights which led him on the wrong track in several of his works on physics.For example, regarding the constant of the fine structure of the spectrum, he used wrong theory to derive that it should be 1/137 (the denominator is an integer).Although his theory was wrong, it also pushed physicists to re-determine this constant and several basic constants related to it accurately.The experimental value of the fine structure constant is now generally accepted as 1/137.1...which negates Eddington's theory. 2. There are indeed some examples in the history of science, showing that a scientist with an idealist viewpoint or a metaphysical viewpoint has also made some important scientific contributions. Why is this so?This is a question worthy of discussion. Ye Qisun was gradually blocked from the mainstream of society at that time, and he was classified as a separate book.When the whole society is collectively speechless, more sober people look at the scenery of the broken bridge and the process of the collapse of the building with deep resentment.Their sad and angry past was compensated at this moment, and there was even a faint pleasure.However, Ye Qisun would not do this.His great charm is also manifested in such moments: a person exiled by the times, when he finds problems with the progress of the nation and the development of scientific undertakings, he will still stand up and issue warning words belonging to that era. In the fourth issue of "Natural Dialectics Research Newsletter" in 1965, Ye Qisun's thousand-character essay became the last swan song of a scientist's search for truth.It is with this article that when we retrieve that period of history, we can deeply feel the inner quality of a master in a special era.This is a height, the final scale of a test master.A person may be a leader in a certain field, but it is difficult to be called a master when weighing personal gains and losses at critical moments, saying and doing things against his will, in order to seek personal fame and fortune.That's a pretty demanding altitude.No matter how harsh it is, there are always people who can do it and some people who can't.Chen Yinke can do it, Zhao Jiuzhang can do it, but some of their contemporaries can't do it, so it's hard for us to call them masters. Ye Qisun can be called the last master in China, a perfect master.He is as high as a mountain.Mr. Chen Daisun said that "the philosopher is gone, but the demeanor will last forever".Mr. Gu Yuxiu praised that "a master of physics, his style will last forever".Mr. Li Zhengdao admired him even more, and praised Mr. Ye Qisun as "the teacher of all ages".The congratulatory speeches of these great figures were sent sincerely after Mr. Ye Qisun had been with the Yellow Crane for decades, and every sentence was full of emotion, and every word wept blood.Faced with Ye Qisun's spiritual treasure that has been annihilated, shouldn't we seriously pursue his strength of character to benefit the current era? "Natural Dialectics Research Communications" is an influential journal in the fields of science and philosophy.Sponsored by the Research Group of Dialectics of Nature, Institute of Philosophy, Chinese Academy of Sciences.Yu Guangyuan, one of the sponsors, was then the director of the Science Division of the Central Propaganda Department and the leader of the group.Yu Guangyuan, formerly known as Yu Zhongzheng, is an eighth-level graduate of the Physics Department of Tsinghua University.After Yu Guangyuan changed his career, he still kept in close contact with the alumni of the School of Science of Tsinghua University. It is precisely his role with expertise in both science and philosophy that, in that special era, limited scope It plays a delicate "balancing" role.Mr. Ye's article is the result of his "balance" in the field of thought. This also takes courage. At that time, it was the time when "class struggle was talked about every year, every month, and every day" in society, and the Ministry of Higher Education also forwarded the "Chairman Mao's Conversation Minutes". When talking about education, Mao Zedong said: "Class struggle is your one "The main subject" and "I don't know class struggle, so how can I count it as a university graduate?" In the central government, there are even more "class struggle experts" such as Kang Sheng and Chen Boda.Yang Xianzhen, who was the principal of the Central Party School at the time, expressed his dissent to the "Great Leap Forward" and "Communist style" and other practices, believing that they were the product of subjective idealism and metaphysics, and overemphasizing anything would violate the law of the unity of opposites and the law of nature, so he Put forward the concept of "the unity of opposites, the combination of two into one".Kang Sheng characterized Yang Xianzhen's ideological and theoretical debates as "anti-socialism, anti-Marxism, and anti-Chairman Mao", and he was "the spokesperson of the bourgeoisie in the party". He was imprisoned for 8 years, only in the central As many as 154 people were implicated in the party school, and 2 committed suicide. There are countless implicated people in the society.These tragedies happened around Guangyuan, and with his special status and status, it was easy for him to be caught by Kang Sheng and his ilk. If he published this article by his teacher, at that time, there would undoubtedly be If they are labeled as "anti-Party and anti-socialism", they will pull out the carrots and bring out the mud, and there will be the danger of "implicating the nine clans". "Natural Dialectics Research Bulletin" is a magazine that Mao Zedong often puts on the sidelines, and because of this reason, it has attracted the attention of the world.Mao Zedong talked about this magazine many times in public, and talked about various articles he saw in this magazine.He is a thinker, he likes to explore ideas, probably he has traveled too many peaks of thought, and sometimes he also likes to visit the field of natural science.This field is foreign to him, mysterious, and extremely challenging.He once said to his son who was studying in the Soviet Union: "When you are still young, learn more about natural science and talk less about politics. Politics is something to talk about, but at present it is better to concentrate on studying natural science... In short, pay attention to science. Only science is true knowledge, and it will be of infinite use in the future." (Gong Yuzhi's "Natural Dialectics in China", Peking University Press, 1996 edition, pp. 88-89) Mao Zedong's love for natural science is clearly on paper.But it is precisely this kind of emphasis that makes him pay special attention to the Journal of Dialectics of Nature, and often draws many associations from it.This kind of association not only provided inspiration for his poetry creation, such as "sitting on the ground and traveling 80,000 miles a day, surveying the sky to see a thousand rivers in the distance", and more often used in his attempts on social revolution.When he published his article on the conjecture of atomic theory, it was the time when his theory of class struggle and continued revolution was promoted. After the ninth issue of "Red Flag" magazine in 1965 published an album of discussions about Mao Zedong in the scientific and philosophical circles, the literary and artistic circles immediately launched criticisms of "Hai Rui Dismissed from Office". The most important overture. For such a magazine that touches people’s sensitive nerves, Mr. Ye Qisun can make a perfect curtain call as a real scientist. He should thank his students—it is said that besides Yu Guangyuan, there are also editors Gong Yuzhi and Xu Liangying. , Fan Dainian, and later He Zuoxiu, Luo Jinbai, etc., were all students of the Physics Department of Tsinghua University, or students of Mr. Ye's students. Ye Qisun, who was in charge of history in his later years, happened to be the same age as the painter Qi Baishi when he "reformed in declining years".However, Qi Baishi regained his strength in the past few years and achieved his lofty status in the history of Chinese art.However, Ye Qisun's remaining years ended in tragedy after all, which seemed to be his greatest misfortune in his later years. When writing "A Brief History of Chinese Mathematics" in his early years, Ye Qisun said, "A well-translated work will wait for the future." It has been his wish for many years to write a high-quality history of science for China.When Joseph Needham of England came to China to collect information about the history of Chinese science and technology, he did his best to assist.But after all, it was foreigners who edited books for the Chinese, so Ye Qisun couldn't help it.He said to his students many times that if foreigners are like this, why can't we Chinese?Our advantages in ancient Chinese are much greater than theirs, and we are better than foreigners in comprehensively understanding ancient Chinese science and technology and culture.He therefore stated that he would write a history of Chinese science of our own.He has been preparing for this.From the beginning of the Anti-Japanese War, wherever he went, he paid attention to collecting information on the history of science, such as rare books and pictures, classic books with pictures and shadows, and even physical remains.After liberation, his regular routine every Sunday was to go to antique bookstores and flea markets to search for treasures in the city, looking for clues about the history of science.After setting up the History of Science Group, he took great pains to purchase many reference books. When Needham visited, he saw these books and praised them greatly.In addition, he also earnestly cultivated the professionalism and academic attitude of researchers in the history of science to prepare for the future revision of history.He advocated that the history of Chinese science must be investigated and studied in the world. It is wrong to belittle oneself and be arrogant.Writing the history of science is a serious and sacred job. It is not about copying, copying what others say, listing and weaving, and not being responsible for mistakes. Writing articles must stand the test of time.Xi Zezong recalled: Ye Lao is dissatisfied with the practice of boasting China's first and first in domestic newspapers.He believes that the ancients obtained some things through intuition and guesswork, and although some of them are consistent with the discoveries of modern science, the two cannot be equated, and we cannot say how many years earlier we are all at once.Because the ancients said many wrong things while talking about the right ones, I am afraid they did not know which ones were correct and which ones were wrong.Moreover, if you look for such primitive things in foreign ancient books, there may not be any.Therefore, "the world's first" cannot be said casually, and the history of Chinese science must be studied carefully in the world. In March 1956, Needham, Wang Ling, and Plath published an article "Chinese Astronomical Clock" in the British "Nature" (see "Science Bulletin" in June 1956, pages 100-101), and then published It expanded into a monograph and became a sensation.This article puts forward an important argument that the key components (clips) of modern clocks originated from the anchor escapement in the water astronomical platform made by Su Song in the Song Dynasty in the seventh year of Yuanyou (1092).After this article was published, an expert on the history of machinery in my country immediately said that he had also noticed Su Song's contribution in the article.After reading his article, Mr. Ye said that it was a grabbing of eyebrows and beards, but he did not express its significance. The reason why Needham was able to grasp the key point was because he cooperated with Plath, an expert who is familiar with the history of Western clocks and watches.Therefore, he further strengthened his point of view that he must understand foreign countries to engage in the history of Chinese science. In the spring of 1966, he started his lecture on the history of world astronomy in the Research Office of the History of Natural Science from this point. Unfortunately, he only talked about Egypt, Babylon and Arabia, and the "Cultural Revolution" broke out. In the late period of the "Cultural Revolution", after he was released from prison, he told some people about the history of modern physics at home. Ye Lao believes that a research unit should focus on improvement. In the winter of 1955, I was going to the Purple Mountain Observatory to attend an academic conference and show him the notice.He saw that most of the schedule was to study and introduce Soviet astroevolution, and he was very disapproving.He said that it is meaningless to learn from others without combining his own actual work.The Purple Mountain Observatory should combine its own conditions and make more observations and research is the most important thing.When I went to Nanjing to convey Mr. Ye's opinion to them, the Taiwanese leaders thought it was right, and they did implement it in their work afterwards.Regarding the work of the history of science, he believes that one cannot just copy and write and list a lot of materials without having his own opinions;Writing an article must stand the test of time. Only when an article can still stand 30 years later is it considered excellent.Many things will be written in any era, but only a few can be handed down as treasures.Mr. Ye is indeed strict. Whenever I write an article for him to read, he will first ask whether it is a popular science article or an academic paper.He is not responsible for revising popular science articles at all, and advised me to write less. He thinks that the astronomical community does too much science popularization.If it is an academic article, it must be considered word by word, and often even the numbers in it must be recalculated.He pays great attention to numbers, and sometimes tells me that he saw some numbers in newspapers, but I couldn't get them directly when I went to check them, but I found out that he got them after calculations. (Xi Zezong's "Mr. Ye Qisun's Scientific Thought", see "A Generation of Teacher Ye Qisun", pp. 187-189) After a series of preparations, the History of Science Group is about to enter the harvest season.However, when this day finally came, Ye Qisun realized that he had nothing to gain and returned empty-handed. He once participated in the editor-in-chief of "History of Chinese Astronomy". At that time, collective cooperation became popular, and each participant wrote a chapter.He is the host, and he is responsible for setting the tone and setting up the airs, so he is responsible for writing the first chapter to pave the way for the people behind.He wrote very vigorously, laid out in an orderly manner, and had profound skills. He proposed to promote the development of astronomy in addition to five factors such as production economy, human curiosity, astrology, etc., and did not deliberately highlight historical materialism.Although this is a commendable and good article, it has been repeatedly rejected, and due to the needs of the situation, it has been constantly asked to change, add, delete, and go back and forth, completely losing the independent opinion and academic judgment of a scientist.His enthusiasm for writing waned so much that he didn't even know where he had written the first draft, and he didn't bother about it anymore. In 1956, Italy held an international symposium on the history of science. Two Chinese scholars were invited, one was Zhu Kezhen and the other was Ye Qisun.Relevant parties have notified Ye Qisun himself and asked him to make preparations for the visit within the specified time.But at the last moment when the trip was about to take place, relevant parties canceled Ye Qisun's visit and only allowed Zhu Kezhen to attend the meeting. There is no explanation from the parties concerned. In such an environment, Ye Qisun did not fulfill his long-cherished wish of governing history until the end.