Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Epistemic Cultures in Conflict: The Case of Astronomy and High Energy Physics

  • Published:
Minerva Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The article presents an in-depth analysis of epistemic cultures in conflict by exemplifying the epistemic conflict between high energy physics (HEP) and astronomy which emerged after the discovery of “dark energy” and the accelerating expansion of the universe. It suggests a theoretical framework combining Knorr-Cetina’s concept of epistemic cultures with Whitley’s theory of dependencies in the sciences system, which explains that epistemic conflicts occur, if the strategic and functional dependency of two incommensurable epistemic cultures is suddenly growing. The pre-history of the conflict is discussed on a micro-level for the two research groups involved in the breakthrough. The analysis of the consequent epistemic conflict on a macro-level reveals that it embraces the preferred epistemic strategy, the collaboration style, the instrumental concepts and the question how social legitimacy can be generated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Her work is based on ethnographic fieldwork at two leading molecular biology groups in Germany and at the particle accelerator CERN in the 1990s.

  2. Originally the distinction had been made by the Kantian Philosopher Wilhelm Windelband for describing differences between natural and social sciences; however, we follow Krohn, who argues that this distinction is also fruitful inside the natural science.

References

  • Carroll, Sean M., William H. Press, and Edwin L. Turner. 1992. The cosmological constant. Annual Review of Astronomy & Astrophysics 30: 499–542.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crease, Robert C. 2007. Dark energy. Physicsworld. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/2007/dec/03/dark-energy.

  • Crease, Robert C. 2010a. Priority battles. Physicsworld. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/print/2010/jan/05/priority-battles.

  • Crease, Robert C. 2010b. Physical Sciences. In The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity, eds. Robert Frodeman, Julie T. Klein, and Carl Mitcham, 79–102. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronin, Blaise. 2001. Hyperauthorship: A postmodern perversion or evidence of a structural shift in scholarly communication practices? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 52: 558–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Filippenko, Alexei. 2001. Einstein´s biggest blunder? High redshift supernovae and the accelerating universe. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 113: 1441–1448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frieman, Joshua, Michael Turner, and Dragan Huterer. 2008. Dark energy and the accelerating universe. Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics 46: 385–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galison, Peter. 1997. Image and logic: A material culture of microphysics. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gläser, Jochen, Jana Bielick, Robert Jungmann, Grit Laudel, Eric Lettkemann, Grit Petschick, and Ulla Tschida. 2016. Research cultures as an explanatory factor. Österreichische Zeitschrift für Soziologie 40(3): 327–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldhaber, Gerson. 2009. The acceleration of the expansion of the universe: A brief history of the supernovae cosmology project (SCP). In Proceedings of the 8th UCLA Dark Matter Symposium.

  • Goldsmith, Donald. 2000. The runaway universe: The race to find the future of the cosmos. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking, Ian. 1983. Representing and intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hallonsten, Olof. 2007. Small science on big machines: Politics and practices of synchrotron radiation laboratories. Lund: Lund Studies in Research Policy 1.

  • Heidler, Richard. 2011. Cognitive and social structure of the elite collaboration network of astrophysics—A case study on shifting network structures. Minerva 49(4): 461–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heintz, Bettina. 2000. „In der Mathematik ist ein Streit mit Sicherheit zu entscheiden“. Perspektiven einer Soziologie der Mathematik. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 29: 339–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinze, Thomas. 2012. Creative accomplishments in science: Definition, theoretical considerations, examples from science history, and bibliometric findings. Scientometrics 95: 927–940.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinze, Thomas, Richard Heidler, Heiko Heiberger, and Jan Riebling. 2013. New patterns of scientific growth. How research expanded after the invention of scanning tunneling microscopy and the discovery of buckminsterfullerenes. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64: 829–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hobson, Michael P., George P. Efstathiou, and Anthony N. Lasenby. 2006. General relativity: An introduction for physicists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kastenhofer, Karen. 2007. Converging epistemic cultures? Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research 20: 359–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirshner, Robert P. 2004. The extravagant universe: Exploding stars, dark energy, and the accelerating cosmos. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 1999. Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, Rocky. 2007. A thousand invisible cords binding astronomy and high-energy physics. Reports on Progress in Physics 70: 1583–1595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krohn, Wolfgang. 2010. Interdisciplinary cases and disciplinary knowledge. In The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity, eds. Robert Frodeman, Julie T. Klein, and Carl Mitcham, 31–49. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krige, John. 2003. The politics of European Scientific Collaboration. In Companion to science in the twentieth century, eds. John Krige, and Dominique Pestre, 897–918. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lahav, Ofer. 2001. Large surveys in cosmology: The changing sociology. In Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy 2, ed. André Heck, 139–147. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Law, John. 1973. The development of specialties in science: The case of x-ray protein crystallography. Social Studies of Science 3: 275–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCray, W. Patrick. 2000. Large telescopes and the moral economy of recent astronomy. Social Science Studies 30: 685–711.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, Donald. 1978. Statistical theory and social interests: A case-study. Social Studies of Science 8: 35–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, Robert K. 1957. Priorities in scientific discovery: A chapter in the sociology of science. American Sociological Review 22: 635–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mody, Cyrus C.M. 2011. Instrumental community. Probe microscopy and the path to nanotechnology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Newman, Mark E.J. 2001. Scientific collaboration networks I. Network construction and fundamental results. Physical Review E 64: 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panek, Richard. 2011. The 4% universe—Dark matter, dark energy, and the race to discover the rest of reality. Oxford: Oneworld Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perlmutter, Saul. 2003. Supernovae, dark energy, and the accelerating universe. Physics Today 53: 53–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perlmutter, Saul, et al. 1999. Measurements of Ω and Λ from 42 high-redshift supernovae. The Astrophysical Journal 517: 565–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Percy, John R., and Joseph B. Wilson. 2000. Amateur-professional partnerships in astronomy. Toronto: ASP Conference Series 220.

  • Pestre, Dominique, and John Krige. 1992. Some thoughts on the early history of CERN. In Big science: The growth of large scale research, eds. P. Galison, and B. Hevly, 78–99. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riess, Adam G., et al. 1998. Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant. The Astronomical Journal 116: 1009–1038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, Jean-Rene, and Matt Mountain. 2006. The evolving sociology of groundbased optical and infrared astronomy at the start of the 21st century. In Organizations and strategies in astronomy 6, ed. André Heck, 11–37. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandell, Michelle. 2010. Astronomy and experimentation. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology 14: 252–269.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, Bart. 2002. Undead science—Science studies and the afterlife of cold fusion. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgersen, Helge. 2009. Fuzzy genes: Epistemic tensions in genomics. Science as Culture 18: 65–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, Simon. 2007. Fundamentalist physics: Why dark energy is bad for astronomy. Reports on Progress in Physics 70: 883–897.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, Simon D. M., and Rocky Kolb. 2007. The Toronto Dark Energy Smackdown: A Debate on the Future Direction of Astronomy, http://hosting.epresence.tv/CITA/1/watch/29.aspx. Accessed 10 July 2015.

  • Wray, K. Brad. 2005. Scientific authorship in the age of collaborative research. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science Part A 37: 505–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, Richard. 2006. The intellectual and social organization of the sciences, 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yonay, Yuval P., and Daniel Breslau. 2006. Marketing models: The culture of mathematical economics. Sociological Forum 21: 345–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education and Social Sciences, University of Wuppertal, Gaussstraße 20, 42119, Wuppertal, Germany

    Richard Heidler

Authors
  1. Richard Heidler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard Heidler.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Heidler, R. Epistemic Cultures in Conflict: The Case of Astronomy and High Energy Physics. Minerva 55, 249–277 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-017-9315-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11024-017-9315-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation