S. A. Artsybyshev. Course of Physics, Part I (Mechanics and Heat).
(Approved by the Ministry of Higher Education of the USSR as a physics textbook for students of physics-and-mathematics faculties of pedagogical institutes.) Uchpedgiz, 1951, 659 pp., 571 figs., price 18 rubles.

For many years now the pedagogical community has not received textbooks on general physics for students of the physics-and-mathematics faculties of pedagogical institutes. In fact, the most recent and, it seems, the only such course was the textbook by a group of authors under the general editorship of K. A. Putilov, intended for pedagogical higher educational institutions. This circumstance is not accidental. Creating a textbook for a course that is the basic one in the curriculum for training a specialist physicist, a secondary-school teacher, is an extremely responsible and difficult task. In terms of scope, the course of general physics taught in the physics-and-mathematics departments of pedagogical institutes almost coincides with the university course. It is clear that in its scientific and ideological-theoretical level a textbook or study manual for a course forming a specialist teacher of physics must stand considerably higher than courses written for higher educational institutions with an intermediate or small physics program. The book under review is an attempt to create such a course. In our opinion, the author has not coped with the task set, having attempted to create a course for pedagogical higher educational institutions on the basis of his previously published textbooks for medical and technical higher educational institutions. A simple comparison of these textbooks with the new book shows that the presentation of the fundamental, and first of all methodological, questions of the physics course in the new textbook is merely a repetition of the corresponding paragraphs and passages from the previously published books. Thus, for example, the “Introduction” (pp. 3–12), which is extremely important for a physics course, is an exact reprint from the textbook for medical higher educational institutions (see Artsybyshev. Physics. A Textbook for Medical Students, 5th ed., 1950, pp. 5–12). The chapters devoted to physical mechanics basically repeat the exposition of the corresponding passages from Part I of S. A. Artsybyshev’s physics course for higher educational institutions, published in 1945, while individual paragraphs (§ 1, ch. 1, § 14, ch. 2) literally reproduce the content of paragraphs from his book for medical students. Thus, the author considers it possible, in presenting a number of sections of the course in a textbook for physics students taking a general physics course of more than 500 hours, to preserve essentially the same depth of exposition, the same scientific and ideological-theoretical level as in a textbook for higher educational institutions. This is a serious shortcoming of the book under review; moreover, it is a serious error on the part of the author of the book.

In his preface the author writes that he has made “an attempt to illuminate the role of Russian scientists in the development of physics and the basic principles of this science from the standpoint of dialectical materialism.” We shall not dwell on an analysis of how successfully the author solved the second task, since this question was discussed in detail in the pages of Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk in connection with criticism of another of his textbooks1. Everything said there also applies to the textbook under discussion.

Let us dwell in more detail on the author’s attempt to illuminate the role of Russian scientists in the development of physics. The author solves this large and responsible task superficially, without stopping at many outstanding works and limiting himself, in a number of cases, to a simple mention of names, which does not create in students a correct understanding of the significance of the works. Let us give a number of examples. In § 8, ch. 4 “On the Relativity of Motion” (p. 83), the name of N. I. Ki-

… Balchich, a student of the Institute of Railway Transport. Imprisoned in the Peter and Paul Fortress for participation in the murder of Alexander II, he drew up, in the form of a will, a project for the construction of a flying machine operating on the principle of reactive propulsion.

The author confines himself merely to mentioning the remarkable works of Academician S. A. Chaplygin in the field of aero- and hydrodynamics (p. 85), considering that an analysis of these works lies outside the scope of the textbook. However, in a textbook for a higher educational institution it was nevertheless necessary to speak about the essence of S. A. Chaplygin’s works. The physical meaning of Chaplygin’s theorem, which makes it possible, on the basis of the solution of an aerodynamics problem at low velocities, to find solutions of problems at high velocities; Chaplygin’s studies of the motion of a solid body in a liquid (Chaplygin’s equations), and his other works—all this the author could have discussed in a physics course, where 42 printed sheets are allotted to the first part.

As is known, our domestic school of the physics of oscillations occupies a leading place in world science. However, the author, who devoted almost 150 pages to the presentation of oscillations, waves, and acoustics (pp. 249–397), found no place to illuminate the works of this school, unless one counts the discussion on p. 357 of Prof. N. A. Umov’s work devoted to the question of the energy flux. It should be noted that the entire section of the book on oscillations and waves was written by the author anew and edited by Prof. S. N. Rzhevkin. The only Soviet scientist mentioned in this section of the textbook is Prof. S. N. Rzhevkin (p. 347), and even then in connection with a photograph of ultrasonic waves made by him under stroboscopic illumination. And this is called illuminating the role of domestic scientists in the development of physics! It is also necessary to note that, mentioning on p. 331 that “the first recording of sound was obtained in 1887 by Edison,” the author found no place for consideration of the outstanding works of domestic scientists in the field of the physics of oscillations, or even for mentioning these works.

In the second section of the book, “Heat and Molecular Physics,” the author likewise failed to reflect properly the role of domestic scientists. Let us note, first of all, that he could not show the fundamental importance of Lomonosov’s works in the creation of molecular-kinetic conceptions. He has completely failed to analyze the arguments with the help of which Lomonosov justified the existence of the motion and interaction of particles. A few words in § 4 of Chapter 23 (p. 519) on the role of Lomonosov in the development of molecular physics are completely inadequate to the real importance of his works.

In considering the equation of state of an ideal gas, the author does not even mention the name of D. I. Mendeleev, who, as is known, gave this equation the modern form called the Clapeyron equation. In the chapters devoted to thermodynamics and the kinetic theory of gases, the author does not even mention the outstanding works of Shiller on the second law, of Pirogov on the substantiation of the law of distribution of velocities, etc. Brief mentions of the scientific activity of certain scientists, given in footnotes, do not remove the overall unfavorable impression of the extent and level of the treatment in the book of the role of domestic scientists.

The contents of the first volume are divided into two sections. In the first section—mechanics (chapters 1–16)—mechanics, the motion of liquids and gases, oscillations and waves, and acoustics are considered. The second section—heat and molecular physics—is set forth in the remaining six chapters. It should be noted that the book, written in a clear language, contains an extraordinary abundance of material. The author was apparently not constrained by space. It seems to us that, when writing any textbook, even in a specialized discipline, the author must think about a careful selection of material, taking care…

first of all, the general scientific and ideological-theoretical level of the textbook. However, the selection and presentation of the material in Artsybyshev’s textbook do not meet the requirements for the thorough preparation of future teachers of physics. Let us give several examples. In § 8 of Chapter 2 (p. 45), formulating Newton’s laws, the author writes: “The three classical laws of Newton’s physics are joined by two laws of conservation, first stated by our great scientist M. V. Lomonosov.” According to Artsybyshev, it follows that the fundamental laws of natural science are an appendage to Newton’s laws; moreover, these laws of conservation are for some reason linked with classical physics! In two places in the first section, where wave interference is discussed (pp. 330 and 367), the author does not reveal the conditions under which one may speak of interference, does not speak of the necessity of constancy in time of the phase difference, and confines himself to elementary considerations about the conditions for interference maxima and minima.

The question of statistical regularities in physics, their relation to dynamic regularities, is not considered at all by the author in molecular physics, while the statistical interpretation of the second law of thermodynamics is set forth in Chapter 21, “The Second Law of Thermodynamics and Consequences from It,” at a low level. The author begins the chapter with formulations of the second law and the usual definition of the probability of an event, in which he omits the requirement, necessary in this definition, of equal possibility of occurrence of all cases (p. 471). Using the example of the isothermal expansion of a gas (p. 472), the author, in the usual way calculating the probability of the simultaneous presence of molecules in a given volume, draws an important conclusion—yet one that by no means follows from his exposition—about the possibility in principle, but the very small probability, of spontaneous compression of a gas (p. 473). The tendency of a gas to pass from a less probable state to a more probable one follows, in the author’s opinion, from the fact that “... a gas left to itself tends to occupy as large a volume as possible” (p. 473). The author does not substantiate the physical possibility of processes in which entropy decreases. On p. 477 he simply writes: “Processes contradicting this law (the second law is meant. B. Ya.) are improbable, ... although possible.” It is clear that in a textbook for physicists these questions, which are of great importance for the development in students of a materialist worldview, must be treated with the utmost completeness. Considering transport phenomena in gases, the author elaborates in detail on the phenomenon of diffusion (§ 10 of Chapter 23, p. 538), derives in the usual way the expression for the diffusion coefficient (formula 14), but does not mention even in a word that the elementary theory of diffusion gives a sharp divergence from experiment, that this theory is a crude approximation to the true theory, which takes into account violations of the velocity distribution caused by a concentration gradient. Speaking in § 1 of Chapter 19 (p. 434) about the expansion of solids upon heating and describing in detail the apparatus for determining the coefficient of linear expansion, the author does not say a single word about the physical meaning of thermal expansion, and does not even give an idea of why it actually occurs. Very many such examples could be cited. The abundance of material in a number of chapters comes at the expense of the depth of its exposition, which is necessary in a course written for physics students.

The publication of the new physics textbook by S. A. Artsybyshev has not solved the problem of creating a manual capable of satisfying the increased requirements placed on the training of future secondary-school physics teachers.

B. Yavorsky

1. “On the Philosophy in S. A. Artsybyshev’s Textbook,” Uspekhi Fizicheskikh Nauk, XLVI, issue 2 (1952). ↩