Abstract
It has often been said that geophysics is an umbrella discipline, and that its various and varied fields remained conceptually autonomous even when configured in the mind of a single scientist. However, to what extent were these fields conceptually autonomous? Was there a single accumulation of geophysical knowledge and practices, or rather diverse traditions? Furthermore, what happens when there is a confluence of traditions rather than an independent accumulation of knowledge? Would it make sense then to talk about any conceptual autonomy and compartmentalized fields? This article examines the historical development of a geophysical specialization developed in multinational settings: crustal seismology. Rather than a conglomerate of autonomous fields, the view of geophysics as an intercalated set of inter-disciplinary fields, research schools, programs, and traditions which seem to concur in the same direction, can be applied to a large extent to geophysics of the Earth’s crust. The article shows how these elements interacted and were even transferred from one place to another. It concludes with some reflections on the institutional and procedural relations between academic geophysics, physics and geology.
Highlights
This article examines the historical development of a geophysical specialization cultivated in multinational settings: crustal seismology
Geophysics has long been regarded as an essentially stable discipline and, formed through regular stages on its way from immature to mature status. This general viewpoint has profoundly influenced the historiography of geophysics, which has often tended to regard its various sub-disciplines as watertight compartments being almost independent of one another
The purported firmness and stability of geophysical discipline begs some questions with regard to the autonomy of its sub-disciplines: autonomous to what extent and as to what? Issues of this kind have seldom been addressed in historical studies of geophysics, which too frequently tend to overlook crucial questions such as the confluence of traditions or the existence of common threads within the supposedly compartmentalized fields
Summary
This article examines the historical development of a geophysical specialization cultivated in multinational settings: crustal seismology. This article is not intended to offer an exhaustive description of the historical development of the seismological studies on the Earth’s crust; this is too large a planet for a single prospecting It suggests that certain traditions did operate in the maturation of crustal seismology which affected the evolution of this sub-discipline. The blurred limits of what I have called “crustal seismology” or even at times “crustal geophysics” do nothing but reflect the blurred nature of research fields, both in the Western world and everywhere It is well known, as showed by reference works on the history of this sub-discipline [e.g., Mooney, 2007; Agnew, 2003; Doel, 1998], that the Earth’s crust was an undefined concept up to the moment Croatian geophysicist Andrija Mohorovičić found the first seismic evidence for it in 1910. The lack of both clearly defined traditions and connections with the cores identified above makes it their inclusion inadvisable
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
