I find this thesis interesting. But I fear his view is tainted by his beliefs. For example when he talks about the atom model. Rutherford, who mentioned the Nagaoka model in the 1911 article in which he communicated the results of the Geiger and Marsden experiment, confirmed the existence of the nucleus, albeit a very small one, but demonstrated the instability of a charged ring around it (the thesis of Nagaoka) , to the point that Nagaoka himself abandoned it in 1908. So this is the reason Rutherford get the nobel. And to me it seems he considers only the anglo-american view. He don't talk about the italian history of science. No there wasn't only Galileo. And so for a lot of more european nations. The principle of science were layoud out in europeans and in this interview he didn't prove it to be a false claim. Nevertheless I want to read the complete book because I am very interested in science and history.
Nothing to take away from Rutherford but as we are taught about plum pudding model by Thompson before going into Rutherford's model...it would have been nice to read about Nagaoka too in text books....but I heard his name and work for the first time in this video. If we were taught Nagaoka 's theory too, it would be inevitable to feel that science was truly global endeavour not just European.😊
Contrary to what you seem to suggest about Bose, in our physics curriculum he was mentioned prominently, including his correspondence with Einstein. You do not mention it (but of course you know) Ramanujan, who corresponded with GH Hardy (in your alma mater?), ended up being recognized as a genius, was invented to continue work in Britain where he died (IIRC?) because of the terrible climate. And, boson is with a lower-case letter just like the fermion named after Fermi who is of course not British but from some inferior southern European background. Perhaps your view reflects an Anglo angle rather than a Continental view: back in the Netherlands, where I studied in the 1960s, there was (IIRC) a clear understanding that the various main countries had their own traditions in science. France was more mathematical especially around 1800 and beyond, Russia and Germany were connected and with their own tradition to which the Dutch and Danish were more connected than to the English and, separately, the Scottish approaches later on, in the 19'th and early 20'th century. All is different after the second world war, when the US (where I work now) became important. It's a good thing to mention these ideas again, but IMHO they weren't so unknown (of course, by those with a minimum in interest in history). Ad to the first question: those non-European contributions are not erased. Look at the names of equations: Klein-Nishina for example, where you had a Japanese student and a Jewish Swede working in Germany calculating out an equation thought up by a (catholic?) Brit (Dirac).
You have NO IDEA how colonial narrative erases the names of local scientists/discoverers - you will always call it Mount Everest, right (after the British Surveyor General of India, Sir George Everest)? Instead, it was Radhanath Sikdar, an Indian mathematician and surveyor from Bengal, who first identified Everest as the world's highest peak using trigonometric calculations. There are numerous examples like this - names forgotten in the convenience of Time. Two scientists have won the Nobel Prize in Physics for their work on the theory of the Higgs Boson, and people still do not know Boson should be Boson and not boson!
I find this thesis interesting. But I fear his view is tainted by his beliefs. For example when he talks about the atom model. Rutherford, who mentioned the Nagaoka model in the 1911 article in which he communicated the results of the Geiger and Marsden experiment, confirmed the existence of the nucleus, albeit a very small one, but demonstrated the instability of a charged ring around it (the thesis of Nagaoka) , to the point that Nagaoka himself abandoned it in 1908. So this is the reason Rutherford get the nobel. And to me it seems he considers only the anglo-american view. He don't talk about the italian history of science. No there wasn't only Galileo. And so for a lot of more european nations. The principle of science were layoud out in europeans and in this interview he didn't prove it to be a false claim. Nevertheless I want to read the complete book because I am very interested in science and history.
Nothing to take away from Rutherford but as we are taught about plum pudding model by Thompson before going into Rutherford's model...it would have been nice to read about Nagaoka too in text books....but I heard his name and work for the first time in this video. If we were taught Nagaoka 's theory too, it would be inevitable to feel that science was truly global endeavour not just European.😊
Contrary to what you seem to suggest about Bose, in our physics curriculum he was mentioned prominently, including his correspondence with Einstein.
You do not mention it (but of course you know) Ramanujan, who corresponded with GH Hardy (in your alma mater?), ended up being recognized
as a genius, was invented to continue work in Britain where he died (IIRC?) because of the terrible climate. And, boson is with a lower-case letter just like
the fermion named after Fermi who is of course not British but from some inferior southern European background. Perhaps your view reflects an
Anglo angle rather than a Continental view: back in the Netherlands, where I studied in the 1960s, there was (IIRC) a clear understanding that the
various main countries had their own traditions in science. France was more mathematical especially around 1800 and beyond, Russia and Germany
were connected and with their own tradition to which the Dutch and Danish were more connected than to the English and, separately, the Scottish
approaches later on, in the 19'th and early 20'th century. All is different after the second world war, when the US (where I work now) became
important. It's a good thing to mention these ideas again, but IMHO they weren't so unknown (of course, by those with a minimum in interest in
history). Ad to the first question: those non-European contributions are not erased. Look at the names of equations: Klein-Nishina for example,
where you had a Japanese student and a Jewish Swede working in Germany calculating out an equation thought up by a (catholic?) Brit (Dirac).
You have NO IDEA how colonial narrative erases the names of local scientists/discoverers - you will always call it Mount Everest, right (after the British Surveyor General of India, Sir George Everest)? Instead, it was Radhanath Sikdar, an Indian mathematician and surveyor from Bengal, who first identified Everest as the world's highest peak using trigonometric calculations. There are numerous examples like this - names forgotten in the convenience of Time. Two scientists have won the Nobel Prize in Physics for their work on the theory of the Higgs Boson, and people still do not know Boson should be Boson and not boson!