brain sizes: Einstein's and women's
johnknight at usa.com
Sat Jul 13 01:36:35 EST 2002
"Shadow Dancer" <insomniac at winterslight.org> wrote in message
> I guess you forgot that people like Marie Curie are solely responsible for
> the use of X-rays and similar systems. I guess you did a good job of
> ignoring all the women who likewise contributed significantly to health,
> society in general. But then again, they'd skew your male-favoring
> statistics, wouldn't they?
Really? Why did Pierre write the following about the HALF of a Nobel Prize
he got (a CENTURY ago), a quarter of which was "awarded" to Marie, but ONLY
after he complained to the committee that:
A joint award is "more satisfying from the artistic point of view".
Does this *really*sound to you that Marie was "solely responsible for the
use of X-rays"?
"members of the l'Académie des Sciences, including Henri Poincaré and Gaston
Darboux, had nominated Becquerel and Pierre Curie for the Prize in Physics.
Marie's name was not mentioned."
Well, maybe not after all.
Do you have any female accomplishments more recent than a century ago?
Didn't think so.
All we've come up with is Hanoi Jane Fonda? Are you fond'a Fonda?
For almost a century, feminists have held up Madame Curie as such a paragon
of feminine accomplishments that who Pierre Curie is, that he hired her as a
laboratory assistant, that Professor Henri Becquerel received half the Nobel
Prize, that Madame Curie received only a quarter of the Nobel Prize, that
Pierre was so sick from his experiments with radiation that he couldn't
stand long enough to accept the prize, are all studiously ignored.
If this was such a breakthrough for women, where was the followup?
American textbooks proclaim that Marie Curie discovered radium. But these
textbooks fail to note that radium was discovered in 1898 by Pierre Curie
and G. Bemont, five years before the Nobel Prize was awarded to Pierre Curie
and Henri Becquerrel. It was AFTER this prize was rewarded in 1903 that
Pierre requested that Marie be added to his half of the prize because a
joint award would be "more satisfying from the artistic point of view".
That was not science--that was art.
The central fault of feminism is its rigorous dedication to half-truths
(or quarter-truths in Marie's case)
"In 1903 Marie and Pierre Curie were awarded half the Nobel Prize in
Physics. The citation was, 'in recognition of the extraordinary services
they have rendered by their joint researches on the radiation phenomena
discovered by Professor Henri Becquerel'. Henri Becquerel was awarded the
other half for his discovery of spontaneous radioactivity. In a letter to
the Swedish Academy of Sciences, Pierre explains that neither of them is
able to come to Stockholm to receive the prize. They could not get away
because of their teaching obligations. He adds, 'Mme Curie has been ill this
summer and is not yet completely recovered'. That was certaintly true but
his own health was no better. Not until June 1905 did they go to Stockholm
where Pierre gave a Nobel lecture."
"Now that the archives have been made available to the public, it is
possible to study in detail the events surrounding the awarding of the two
Prizes, in 1903 and 1911. In a letter in 1903, several members of the
l'Académie des Sciences, including Henri Poincaré and Gaston Darboux, had
nominated Becquerel and Pierre Curie for the Prize in Physics. Marie's name
was not mentioned. This caused Gösta Mittag-Leffler, a professor of
mathematics at Stockholm University College, to write to Pierre Curie. That
letter has never survived but Pierre Curie's answer, dated 6 August 1903,
has been preserved. He
wrote, 'If it is true that one is seriously thinking about me (for the
Prize), I very much wish to be considered together with Madame Curie with
respect to our research on radioactive bodies'. Drawing attention to the
role she played in the discovery of radium and polonium, he added, 'Do you
not think that it would be more satisfying from the artistic point of view,
if we were to be associated in this manner?' (plus joli d'un point de vue
"My mother was 37 years old when I was
born. When I was big enough to know
her, she was already an aging woman
who had reached the summit of renown.
And yet it is the 'celebrated scientist'
who is strangest to me - probably
because the idea that she was a
'celebrated scientist' did not occupy the
mind of Marie Curie. It seems to me
rather, that I have always lived near the
poor student, haunted by dreams, who
was Marie Sklodowska long before I
came into the world."
Eve Curie, biographer of her mother
"Pierre Curie, b. May 15, 1859, d. Apr. 19, 1906, obtained his doctorate in
the year of his marriage, but he had already distinguished himself (along
with his brother Jacques) in the study of the properties of crystals. He
discovered the phenomenon of piezoelectricity, whereby changes in the volume
of certain crystals excite small electric potentials. Along with work on
crystal symmetry, Pierre Curie studied the magnetic properties of materials
and constructed a torsion balance with a tolerance of 0.01 mg. He discovered
that the magnetic susceptibility of paramagnetic materials is inversely
proportional to the absolute temperature (Weiss-Curie's law) and that there
exists a critical temperature above which the magnetic properties disappear
"In 1903 Pierre Curie was also awarded the Davy Medal of the Royal Society
of London and appointed professor of physics at the University of Parisin
1904, and in 1905 he was elected to the French Academy of Sciences. Such
positions were not then commonly held by women, and Marie was not similarly
recognized. Pierre's life ended on April 19, 1906, when he was run over by a
horse-drawn cart. His wife took over his classes and continued her own
All of the key research was completed by Henri Becquerel, Pierre Curie,
Wilhelm C. Röntgen in 1895, Henri Poincaré, Edmond Becquerel, G. Schmidt,
Jacques Curie, Ernest Rutherford in January 1899, P. Villard in 1900, André
Debierne in 1899, and William Crookes in 1900.
What did Marie do to deserve an award?
Why did the Nobel committee allow a Nobel prize winner to add his wife to
If a century-ago award was such a breakthrough for feminist intellectuals,
where are the modern day "Madame Curie"s?
Why do feminists focus so much attention on a woman who received a quarter
of a Nobel Prize?
Why is nothing known about Prof. Becquerel who received half the prize?
Why do feminists promote so many half-truths?
What can be gained by basing an entire ideology on lies and half-truths?
Do women understand physics?
Almost a full century after Marie Curie made history, the TIMSS study
demonstrated that a statistical zero percent of American 12th grade girls
were able to correctly answer 30 physics questions which a third of the 12th
grade boys participating from 18 countries around the world answered
Only 25% of girls correctly answered Item G01 PATH OF ELECTRONS TRAVELING
THROUGH A MAGNETIC FIELD, which is exactly the percentage who would have
answered correctly if they had just guessed at this 4 part multiple choice
question. Only 22% answered Item G04 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN INDUCED CURRENT
AND VARYING MAGNETIC FIELD, which is 3% fewer than would have answered
correctly if they had just guessed at this 4 part question. Only 20%
correctly answered Item G05 DIRECTION REFRACTED RAY OF LIGHT, which is
exactly the percent who would have answered it correctly if they had just
guessed at this 5 part question. Only 18% got Item G07 ENERGY
TRANSFORMATION AND COLLISION OF CARS correct, 2% fewer than if they had just
guessed. 11% got Item G08 MECHANICAL ENERGY OF BLOCK AND SPRING SYSTEM
correct, 9% fewer than if they guessed. 17% got Item G09 DIRECTION OF
FORCES IN AMUSEMENT PARK RIDE correct, 8% fewer than if they guessed.20% got
Item G10 MINIMUM VOLTAGE NEEDED TO PRODUCE X- RAYS correct, exactly what
they would have gotten by sheer guesswork. Only 4% correctly answered Item
G11 EFFECT OF ICE MELTING ON WATER LEVEL IN AQUARIUM, only 1% higher than
the standard error of 3%. Only 1.4% (less than the standard error) got G12
CALCULATION OF MASS USING CONSERVATION OF MOMENTUM correct. 7% got Item G13
DOPPLER EFFECT AND MOVING CAR correct, but this is barely a physics question
to anyone who has seen an American highway. 2% (less than the standard
error of 3%) got Item G14 PATHS OF ALPHA, BETA, AND GAMMA RAYS THROUGH AN
ELECTRIC FIELD correct. 2% (less than the standard error) got G15 DIRECTION
OF ACCELERATION OF A BOUNCING BALL correct. 3% (about the standard error)
got G16 EFFECT OF PRESSURE ON WATER LEAKING FROM A BOTTLE correct. 1% (less
than the 3% standard error) got G18 ALPHA PARTICLES PASSING THROUGH GOLD
correct. 0% got non-multiple choice Items G19 LENZ'S LAW AND FALLING
ALUMINUM RING, and H18 TELEVISION AS PARTICLE ACCELERATOR correct. 23% got
H03 PHOTOELECTRIC EFFECT AND KINETIC ENERGY OF EMITTED ELECTRONS correct, 3%
more than just guessing. 1% got Item H04 TENSION OF STRING BETWEEN TWO
FALLING OBJECTS correct, 19% less than if they had merely guessed. 29% got
Item H06 INDUCED emf IN ROTATING COIL correct, 4% more than would have
correctly answered this 4 part question had they just guessed at it. Only
9% correctly answered Item H07 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE
WITH CONSTANT VOLUME which is 16% fewer than if they had guessed. Only 10%
got Item H08 PATH OF ELECTRONS IN ELECTRIC FIELD correct, 10% less than if
they just guessed. Only 15% got Item H09 REFRACTION AND VELOCITY OF BLUE
LIGHT correct, 5% fewer than just guessing.Only 11% correctly answered Item
H10 VECTOR SUM OF ELECTRIC FORCES, 9% fewer than if they just guessed. 3%
(the standard error) correctly answered H13 INTERPRETATION OF A FORCE VERSUS
DISTANCE GRAPH, a non-multiple choice question. Only 1% correctly answered
H14 EFFECT OF DENSITY ON THE FREEZING OF WATER, which is 24% lower than if
they just guessed. 1% (less than the 3% standard error) correctly answered
the non-multiple choice question Item H17 RESISTANCE OF A SERIES CIRCUIT
6% correctly answered Items H12 PARTICLE MOVEMENT IN A TRANSVERSE WAVE, and
H15 DE BROGLIE WAVELGTH OF A MOBILE ELECTRON which are non-multiple choice
questions which suggest that the level of understanding was just slightly
higher than the standard error s12alm95.pdf
More information about the Neur-sci