Two exam thesauri De corpore universim by Josip Franjo Domin, composed of 25 theses in the field of “experimental physics”, the last published in Györ in 1785 and the first published in Pecs in 1786, saw light soon after the printing of his treatise Dissertatio physica de aeris factitii genesi, natura, et utilitatibus, and expounded the core of natural philosophy in the form of a doctrine of the structure of matter, fundamental forces in nature, and general properties of physical bodies, (...) then mechanics and doctrine of gravitation, along with the basis of chemistry and astronomy. Being published in April 1785 and April 1786, they represent a turning­point in Domin’s views in natural philosophy. In the 1785 thesaurus, Domin for the first time mentions Bošković by name, and also for the first time proposes a thesis on chemistry as science. The first mention of Bošković’s surname corresponds with Domin’s transformation from a strict Boscovichian, as confirmed in the the sauri from 1778 to 1784, into a natural philosopher who comes forth with his own insights. The thesis on chemistry as “a science subordinated to experimental physics” is the fruit of Domin’s compendium on the chemistry of gases, yet, at the same time, is a programmatic step forward: Domin refers to “the simplest principles” of the bodies as molecules. In the 1786 thesaurus Domin introduces the thesis on inertia, touchstone of the then discussions in the field of natural philosophy. Therefore, “experimental physics” suggested in the thesauri title does not imply that Domin excluded natural philosophy from his considerations. Quite the reverse: as a “professor of theoretical and experimental physics, mechanics, and agriculture”, Domin is challenged by the legacy of the natural philosophy of the epoch, notably by Newton, Bošković and two Boscovichians – Leopold Biwald in Graz and Ivan Krstitelj Horvath in Tyrnau, Buda and Pest. Thus Domin either tends to mould his views in accordance with Bošković’s natural philosophy, or departs from Bošković or Boscovichians significantly, or shifts towards the natural philosophy of Newton. (shrink)

Druga knjiga Petrićeve Pancosmije potpuno nam otkriva što je Petrić mislio de continuo ili de divisibilitate quantitatis te nam ujedno nudi mnoge detalje Petrićeve neuspješne strategije pri osporavanju Aristotelovih pojmova neprekidnine i potencijalne beskonačnine. Prigovarajući Aristotelu, Petrić i ne htijući upozorava na glavne domete Aristotelova nauka o neprekidnini, ali nudi svoja, drugačija rješenja, poput zamisli o najmanjoj nedjeljivoj crti. Iako svojim rješenjima ne uspijeva postići ono što je Aristotel blistavo postigao pojmom neprekidnine u tumačenju prirode i matematike, Petrić unutar polemike (...) s Aristotelom postavlja nova pitanja kad se bavi računom s beskonačninama i genealogijom znanosti.The second book of Pancosmia provides full insight into Petrić’s view of the continuum or de divisibilitate quantitatis, offering us many details on Petrić’s futile strategy in refuting Aristotle’s notions of the continuum and the potential infinite. In his objections to Aristotle, Petrić implicitly points the major contributions of Aristotle’s doctrine of continuum, but also submits his own solutions such as the idea of the minimal indivisible line. Although his solutions failed to bring him the results as brilliant as those of Aristotle with the notion of the continuum in the interpretation of nature and mathematics, within his polemic with Aristotle, Petrić comes forward with new questions dealing with the calculus of infinite quantities and genealogy of science. (shrink)

Tijekom svoje kratke filozofske profesure na Bečkom sveučilištu i u plemićkom zavodu Collegium Theresianum , ali i potom dok je bio profesorom teologije u Beču, isusovac Josip Zanchi, riječki plemić, četiri je puta tiskao svoj udžbenik Physica particularis, koji je sadržavao raspravu iz meteorologije. U svim je tim izdanjima izlaganje o uzroku dúge započeo povijesnom bilješkom, u kojoj je sažeto prikazao de Dominisov, Descartesov i Newtonov doprinos objašnjenju dúge. Potraga za Zanchijevim izvorom u optičkim i prirodnofilozofskim djelima objavljenim nakon Newtonova (...) djela Opticks otkrila je tri newtonovca koji su također spomenuli de Dominisa: Henryja Pembertona, Voltairea i Antonija Genovesija. Njima treba pridodati i četvrtoga: Pietera van Musschenbroeka, koji je de Dominisovu ulogu u povijesti istraživanja dúge opisao pod Genovesijevim utjecajem, ali tek u posmrtno objavljenom djelu Introductio ad philosophiam naturalem .Pri sastavljaju svoje povijesne bilješke o istraživanju dúge Josip Zanchi slijedio je Newtona ili nekog newtonovca. Tvrdio je više od Newtona jer je za njega de Dominis »prvi od svih otkrio pravi uzrok dúge«, pri čem je oprezno dometnuo videtur, a objektivnije je od Newtona i nekih newtonovaca opisao Descartesov doprinos. Kad je pak studentima objašnjavao dúgu, slijedio je posljednju riječ znanosti – Newtona.Uporabom Zanchijeva udžbenika Physica particularis s de Dominisovim optičkim i meteorološkim prinosom mogli su se susresti profesori i studenti filozofije i u Hrvatskoj. Taj su udžbenik posjedovale knjižnice na dvama isusovačkim filozofskim učilištima: u Zagrebačkom kolegiju najkasnije od 1758., a u Požeškom kolegiju najkasnije od 1769. godine.While teaching philosophy at the University of Vienna and the elite school Collegium Theresianum , but also theology in the same city, Josip Zanchi, Jesuit of noble birth from Rijeka, had published four editions of his manual Physica particularis, containing also a most comprehensive meteorological treatise. In each of the four Vienna editions his elaboration on the cause of rainbow opens a historical paragraph comprising a short survey of de Dominis’, Descartes’ and Newton’s contributions to the explanation of rainbow. Search for Zanchi’s source in the works dealing with natural philosophy published after Newton’s Opticks has brought to light three Newtonians who also mentioned de Dominis: Henry Pemberton, Voltaire and Antonio Genovesi. The name of Pieter van Musschenbroek should be added to this list. He described de Dominis’ role in the history of the explanation of rainbow under the influence of Genovesi, published posthumously in his work Introductio ad philosophiam naturalem .While composing his historical paragraph on the explanation of rainbow, Josip Zanchi followed in the footsteps of Newton or a Newtonian. He exceeded Newton by stating that de Dominis was »the first to have discovered the true cause of rainbow,« carefully employing videtur in support of his argument, his description of Descartes’ contribution being more objective than that of Newton or some Newtonians. However, in his academic lectures on rainbow, he followed the latest scientific discoveries – Newton.Through Zanchi’s manual Physica particularis, Croatian professors and students of philosophy could also have become familiar with de Dominis’ optical and meteorological contribution. This manual was available in the libraries of two Jesuit philosophical schools: Zagreb College or Collegium Zagrabiense, not later than 1758, and in Požega College or Collegium Poseganum, from 1769 at the latest. (shrink)