In this paper, we examine the period that immediately followed the invention of the Leiden jar. Historians of science have developed narrations that emphasize the role of grounding during the process of charging the jar. In this respect, this episode shows significant aspects that can be used to characterize science, scientific knowledge production, and the nature of science. From our own experimentation, we learned that grounding was not necessary in order to produce the effect. These experiences inspired us to go back to primary sources. In doing so, we came to a new understanding of the early period after Kleist's and Musschenbroek's initial creation of the effect. From our analysis, we conclude that it is not the grounding which was perceived as a major innovation (as well as a challenge) during this early period of the discussion but the concept of an electrical circuit. This understanding was fundamental in characterizing the Leiden jar as a new device challenging the then current knowledge of experimental practices in the field of electricity.
The famous inverse square law in electrostatics, first published in 1785 by C. A. Coulomb, was strongly contested during the next 40 years, especially in Germany. Therefore, at the Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg a replication of the apparatus described by Coulomb was made, and the reasons were investigated why none of his contemporaries succeeded in reproducing his results. In addition the respective theoretical concepts of Coulomb, his supporters, and his opponents were analyzed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.