Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: the direct and precise measurement of the self - coupling between the electroweak gauge bosons in @xmath2-pair production will be a crucial step in testing the standard model of electroweak interactions and searching for physics beyond it . it will form an important part of the physics programme at lep2 and at a planned linear @xmath3-collider ( lc ) . as is well known there are three diagrams at tree level that contribute to the amplitude of @xmath4 in the standard model , one with @xmath5-channel neutrino exchange and the other two with a @xmath6 or @xmath7 in the @xmath8-channel , involving the vertices @xmath1 and @xmath0 . one can parametrise the corresponding vertex functions in order to quantify the couplings and to compare them with their form in the standard model . in the most general form respecting lorentz covariance each vertex involves seven complex form factors @xcite , three of which give couplings that violate @xmath9 symmetry .    without further physical assumptions one is thus left with 28 real parameters whose simultaneous extraction in one experiment looks quite hopeless . given the limited event statistics expected at both lep2 and the lc one will only obtain meaningful errors on a reduced number of coupling parameters at one time . this may be achieved by imposing certain constraints on the full set of coupling constants ; various suggestions for such constraints based on symmetry considerations have been made in the literature @xcite . one must however keep in mind that experimental values or bounds on couplings that have been obtained with particular constraints can not be converted into results without constraints or with different ones ; the information lost by assuming relations between couplings can not be retrieved . although imposing such constraints is certainly legitimate and can be useful we stress that a data analysis with independent couplings will be valuable , both from the point of view of model independence and the capability to compare results of different experiments . we remark that of course one can also give ( reasonably small ) errors on _ single or few _ couplings in a multi - parameter analysis . in this paper we propose a parametrisation of the couplings which is well adapted to this end , the statistical errors on the different measured parameters being approximately uncorrelated . we will work in the framework of optimal observables , a way to extract unknown coupling parameters introduced for the case of one parameter in @xcite that has since been used for various reactions @xcite . general aspects of this method , in particular its extension to an arbitrary number of parameters , as well as its application to @xmath10 production were discussed in @xcite . in this paper we investigate again the reaction @xmath11 . we concentrate here on the decay channels , where one @xmath2 decays hadronically and the other into an electron or muon and its neutrino . calculated with the born level cross section of the standard model the statistics of these channels is about 3000 events for a collision energy of @xmath12 and @xmath13 integrated luminosity , which are typical planned lep2 parameters , and about 22000 events with @xmath14 at @xmath15 , which might be achieved at the lc . a complementary source of information is the integrated cross section , which is a quadratic function of the triple gauge couplings . the combination of information from the total event rate and from observables that make use of the detailed distribution in the final state has for example been used in @xcite , where @xmath9 violation in the decay @xmath16 was investigated .    in sec . [ sec : method ] of this paper we will further develop some aspects of the method of optimal observables , in particular we will show how to apply it without the linear approximation in the coupling parameters that was used in @xcite . in sec .  [ sec : diagon ] we then propose a parametrisation of the couplings that simultaneously diagonalises certain matrices connected with our observables and with the integrated cross section . these parameters achieve two goals : their quadratic contribution to the total cross section is a simple sum of squares and the covariance matrix of the corresponding optimal observables is diagonal . the methods which we use for this purpose are borrowed from the theory of small oscillations of a system with @xmath17 degrees of freedom ( cf . e.g.  @xcite ) . our parameters correspond to `` normal coordinates '' and their use in an experimental analysis should in our view present several advantages . we give some numerical examples for @xmath2-pair production at lep2 and the lc in sec . [ sec : numeric ] and make some further remarks on how our proposal might be implemented in practice in sec . [ sec : practice ] . the last section of this paper gives a summary of our main points . the method of optimal observables has previously been presented in the approximation that the couplings to be extracted are sufficiently small to allow for a leading order taylor expansion of various expressions . here we show how to use it beyond this approximation . let us denote by @xmath18 the real and imaginary parts of the @xmath1 and @xmath0 form factors minus their values in the standard model at tree level . as the amplitude of our process is linear in these couplings we can write the differential cross section as @xmath19 where @xmath20 is a positive semidefinite symmetric matrix . @xmath21 collectively denotes the set of measured phase space variables . the integrated cross section is @xmath22 with the standard model cross section @xmath23 and coefficients @xmath24 the idea of using integrated observables is to define suitable functions @xmath25 of the phase space variables and to extract the unknown couplings from their measured mean values @xmath26 . let us give the details . from ( [ diffxsection ] ) and ( [ intxsection ] ) we obtain the expectation value @xmath27 $ ] of @xmath28 as @xmath29 - e_0[{{\cal o}}_i ] = \frac{\displaystyle \sum_{j } c_{ij } \ , g_j      + \sum_{jk } q_{ijk } \ , g_j g_k}{\displaystyle 1 + \sum_{j }      { \hat{\sigma}_{1,j } } \ , g_j + \sum_{jk } { \hat{\sigma}_{2,jk } } \ , g_j g_k}\ ] ] with the standard model expectation value @xmath30 = ( \int d\phi \ , { { \cal o}}_i s_0 ) / \sigma_0 $ ] and coefficients @xmath31 \ , { \hat{\sigma}_{1,j } }   { \hspace{6pt},}\nonumber \\    q_{ijk } & = & \frac{1}{\sigma_0 } \int d\phi \ , { { \cal o}}_i s_{2,jk } -    e_0[{{\cal o}}_i ] \ , { \hat{\sigma}_{2,jk } } { \hspace{6pt}.}\end{aligned}\ ] ] we remark in passing that the coefficients in ( [ expect ] ) can be written in a compact form as @xmath32 { \hspace{6pt},}\hspace{3em }    q_{ijk } { \hspace{0.4em } = \hspace{0.4em}}v_0[{{\cal o}}_i \ , , \ ; s_{2,jk } /s_0 ] { \hspace{6pt},}\nonumber \\    { \hat{\sigma}_{1,j } } & = & e_0[s_{1,j } /s_0 ] { \hspace{6pt},}\hspace{4.4em }    { \hat{\sigma}_{2,jk } } { \hspace{0.4em } = \hspace{0.4em}}e_0[s_{2,jk } /s_0 ] { \hspace{6pt},}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath33 = e_0[f g ] - e_0[f ] \ , e_0[g]$ ] is the covariance of @xmath34 and @xmath35 in the standard model . note that @xmath36 is symmetric and positive definite , whereas @xmath37 as a matrix in @xmath38 and @xmath39 is symmetric but in general indefinite . an estimation of the couplings can now be obtained by solving the system ( [ expect ] ) with @xmath27 $ ] replaced by the mean values @xmath26 , @xmath40 = \frac{\displaystyle \sum_{j } c_{ij } \ , g_j      + \sum_{jk } q_{ijk } \ , g_j g_k}{\displaystyle 1 + \sum_{j }      { \hat{\sigma}_{1,j } } \ , g_j + \sum_{jk } { \hat{\sigma}_{2,jk } } \ , g_j g_k }   { \hspace{6pt},}\ ] ] provided of course one has @xmath41 observables for @xmath41 unknown couplings . when the system ( [ mean ] ) is linearised in the @xmath18 it is easily solved by inversion of the matrix @xmath42 . one is however not constrained to do so and can instead solve the exact set of equations ( [ mean ] ) . by multiplication with the denominator it can be rearranged to a coupled set of quadratic equations in the @xmath18 and will in general have several solutions . some of these may be complex and thus ruled out , but from the information of the @xmath43 alone one can not tell which of the remaining real ones is the physical solution . we will come back to this point . the measured mean values @xmath43 are of course only equal to the @xmath27 $ ] up to systematic and statistical errors . we only consider the latter here , which are given by the covariance matrix @xmath44 of the observables @xmath28 divided by the number @xmath45 of events in the analysis . to convert the errors on the observables into errors on the extracted couplings we use the quantity @xmath46 \right ) n    v({{\cal o}})^{-1 } { } _ { ij } \left ( { \bar{{{\cal o}}}}_j - e[{{\cal o}}_j ] \right ) { \hspace{6pt},}\ ] ] which depends on the @xmath18 through the @xmath27 $ ] given in ( [ expect ] ) . solving ( [ mean ] ) is tantamount to minimising @xmath47 with @xmath48 , and a confidence region on the couplings is as usual given by @xmath49 with the constant determined by the desired confidence level . there are several possible choices for the covariance matrix @xmath50 in ( [ chi ] ) . it can be    1 . determined from the measured distribution of the observables @xmath28 , 2 . calculated from the differential cross section ( [ diffxsection ] ) , taking for the @xmath18 the values extracted in the measurement , 3 . calculated for vanishing couplings @xmath18 , 4 . calculated as a function of the couplings . choices 1 .  and 2 . should lead to the same results in the limit of large @xmath45 where the statistical errors on the measured @xmath44 and @xmath18 become small . comparison of the covariance matrices obtained by these two methods might indeed be helpful to rule out unphysical solutions of ( [ mean ] ) . .  in turn will be a good approximation of 2 . if the couplings are small enough . we consider possibility 4 .  as the least practical one , except maybe for the case of one coupling . for several couplings the expression of @xmath44 as a function of the @xmath18 involves tensors of rank up to four and is even more complicated than the one for the expectation values ( [ expect ] ) , and the inverse matrix is yet more clumsy . for this reason we will discard choice 4 .  in the following .    in @xcite we considered an analysis at leading order in the @xmath18 , where one uses the linearised form of ( [ mean ] ) to estimate the couplings : @xmath51 \right )   { \hspace{6pt}.}\ ] ] correspondingly the linear approximation of ( [ expect ] ) is used in the expression ( [ chi ] ) of @xmath47 which then reads @xmath52 where @xmath53 is the inverse covariance matrix of the estimated couplings @xcite . as one works to leading order in the @xmath18 one can approximate @xmath50 by its value for zero couplings , i.e.  choose possibility 3 .  above . the confidence regions @xmath54 for the measured couplings are then ellipsoids in the space of the @xmath18 with centre at @xmath55 . the optimal observables @xmath56 discussed in @xcite have the property that to leading order the statistical errors on the estimated couplings are the smallest possible ones that can be obtained with _ any _ method , including e.g.  a maximum likelihood fit to the full distribution of @xmath21 given by the differential cross section ( [ diffxsection ] ) . note that one can still use the linearised expressions ( [ linearestim ] ) and ( [ linearchi ] ) in an analysis beyond leading order . the error @xmath57 on the couplings will be given by an ellipsoid with defining matrix ( [ couplingscov ] ) , where @xmath50 is the covariance matrix at the actual values of the couplings . these errors will in general no longer be optimal , so that when the leading order approximation is not good one might obtain better errors with a different choice of observables . more importantly , however , the extracted values of the couplings are biased : averaged over a large number of experiments the measured couplings differ from the actual ones by terms quadratic in the @xmath18 . if instead one uses the full expressions ( [ expect ] ) , ( [ mean ] ) and ( [ chi ] ) one has no bias on the extracted coupling parameters , provided the number @xmath45 of events in the analysis is large enough . let us see if we can find optimal observables for this case . to this end we expand the differential cross section around some values @xmath58 of the couplings : @xmath59 the corresponding zeroth order cross sections and mean values are @xmath60 and @xmath61 = ( \int d\phi \ , { { \cal o}}_i \widetilde{s}_0 ) / \widetilde{\sigma}_0 $ ] , respectively . we then can re - express @xmath27 $ ] in ( [ expect ] ) , replacing @xmath18 with @xmath62 , @xmath63 with @xmath64 , and using new coefficients @xmath65 etc . constructed as in ( [ xsectioncoeffs ] ) , ( [ obscoeffs ] ) . making the same replacements in ( [ mean ] ) we have an alternative set of equations to extract the coupling parameters . it can be shown that for sufficiently large @xmath45 the confidence regions obtained from ( [ chi ] ) , ( [ confidence ] ) in a nonlinear analysis are again ellipsoids given by @xmath66 one can then write @xmath67 as in ( [ linearchi ] ) , but with @xmath68 of ( [ couplingscov ] ) replaced by @xmath69 where @xmath70 corresponds to an expansion ( [ newdiffxsection ] ) of @xmath71 about the _ actual _ values of the couplings . the main point of the argument is that for large @xmath45 the statistical errors on the @xmath26 become small , so that the extracted couplings will be sufficiently close to the actual ones to allow for a linearisation of ( [ expect ] ) and ( [ mean ] ) , cf . @xcite , p.695 , and @xcite . finally one can construct new observables @xmath72 from ( [ newdiffxsection ] ) . they will be optimal , i.e.  have minimum statistical error if the @xmath58 are equal to the actual values of the @xmath18 . in the appendix we show that , up to linear reparametrisations given in ( [ reparam ] ) , this is the only set of @xmath41 integrated observables that measures the @xmath41 couplings with minimum error . there is hence no choice of observables that would be optimal for _ all _ values of the actual coupling parameters . as these are unknown one can in practice not write down the truly `` optimal '' observables , but our argument tells us how one can improve on the choice in ( [ optimal ] ) if one has some previous estimates @xmath58 of the couplings ( cf . also @xcite ) . one may then choose to perform a leading order analysis as described above , linearising about @xmath73 instead of @xmath74 . a practical way to proceed could be to estimate the parameters @xmath18 at first using the linearised method around @xmath75 . suppose this gives as best estimate some values @xmath76 . then in a second step one could set @xmath77 and use the linearised method around @xmath78 to improve the estimate etc .    at this point we wish to comment on the `` optimal technique '' for determining unknown parameters in the differential cross section that has been proposed in @xcite . the `` weighting functions '' @xmath79 there depend on the actual values of the parameters one wants to extract and are thus not `` observables '' . only if one sets the unknown parameters in the @xmath79 equal to some previous estimates of them can one use these functions to weight individual events ; the better these estimates are the more sensitive the functions will be . if one does this then the set @xmath79 is equivalent to our observables ( [ newoptimal ] ) defined for some estimates @xmath58 of the coupling parameters . we finally remark that if @xmath45 is not large enough the statistical errors on the mean values @xmath26 and thus on the measured couplings might be so large that they lead into a region where a linearisation of ( [ expect ] ) is not a good approximation . the covariance matrix @xmath80 is then no longer given by ( [ newcouplingscov ] ) . moreover the errors on the couplings might be asymmetric and the shape of the confidence region defined by ( [ chi ] ) , ( [ confidence ] ) very different from an ellipsoid , so that knowledge of @xmath80 is not sufficient to estimate the errors on the @xmath18 . in such a case we can not say on general grounds how sensitive our observables are . incidentally this also holds for other extraction methods such as maximum likelihood fits , whose optimal properties are realised in the limit @xmath81 . if one is rather far from this limit the sensitivity of a method will have to be determined by other means , e.g.  by detailed monte carlo simulations . the method we have outlined can of course also be applied if one chooses to reduce the number of unknown parameters by imposing certain linear constraints on the couplings . one may still use the observables ( [ optimal ] ) corresponding to the _ full _ set of couplings but minimise @xmath47 in ( [ chi ] ) for the _ reduced _ set ; in this case one can of course not take choice 2.for @xmath50 . in general @xmath82 is then different from zero and its value indicates to which extent the particular constraints on the couplings are compatible with the data . if @xmath45 is large enough @xmath82 follows in fact a @xmath47-distribution with @xmath83 degrees of freedom for @xmath41 observables and @xmath84 independent couplings so that its value can be converted into a confidence level @xcite . we conclude with a remark on the use of optimal observables in practice . a realistic data analysis will not be good enough if the born approximation of the differential cross section ( [ diffxsection ] ) is used . both higher - order theoretical corrections , such as initial state radiation and the finite @xmath2 width , and experimental effects like detection efficiency and resolution will modify the observed distribution of the phase space parameters @xmath21 . if they are taken into account in the determination of the coefficients in ( [ expect ] ) , ( [ mean ] ) and of the covariance matrix @xmath50 they will _ not _ lead to any bias in the extraction of the couplings and their errors . while this will presumably be done with sets of generated events and might be computationally intensive one still has to determine only a rather limited number of `` sensitivity '' constants . on the other hand one needs to know the observables @xmath25 of ( [ optimal ] ) as functions over the entire experimental phase space , so that the expressions of @xmath85 and @xmath86 used to construct them will in practice be taken from a less sophisticated approximation to the actual distribution of @xmath21 in order to keep them manageable . the observables are then no longer optimal , and it will depend on the individual case which approximations of @xmath85 , @xmath86 are good enough to obtain observables with a sensitivity close to the optimal one .      in @xcite it was shown how with a suitable combination of all semileptonic @xmath87 decay channels one can define observables that are either even or odd under the discrete transformations @xmath9 and @xmath88 , where @xmath89 denotes charge conjugation , @xmath90 the parity transformation , and @xmath91 the `` naive '' time reversal operation which flips particle momenta and spins but does not interchange initial and final state . under the conditions on the experimental setup and event selection spelt out in @xcite we have two important symmetry properties :    1 . a @xmath9 odd observable can only have a nonzero expectation value if @xmath9 symmetry is violated in the reaction . 2 .   if the expectation value of a @xmath88 odd observable is nonzero the transition amplitude must have an absorptive part whose phase must satisfy certain requirements in order to give an interference with the nonabsorptive part of the amplitude . we assume in this analysis that any nonstandard physics in the reaction is due to the triple gauge vertices . in the standard model one needs at least two loops to violate @xmath9 ; to a good accuracy the triple gauge couplings are therefore the only possible source of @xmath9 violation . for our process , i.e.  @xmath3 annihilation into four fermions , an absorptive part that satisfies the requirements mentioned in point 2 .  will appear in the standard model already at next - to - leading order in the electroweak fine structure constant , either through nonresonant diagrams or through loop corrections . to leading order , however , they are only due to the imaginary parts of triple gauge couplings .    in this approximation the optimal observables ( [ optimal ] ) are @xmath9 even ( odd ) if they correspond to @xmath9 conserving ( violating ) couplings , and @xmath88 even ( odd ) if they correspond to the real ( imaginary ) parts of form factors . the coefficient matrix @xmath92 is then block diagonal in four symmetry classes of observables and three - boson - couplings :    1 . @xmath9 and @xmath88 even 2 . @xmath9 even and @xmath88 odd 3 . @xmath9 odd and @xmath88 even 4 . @xmath9 and @xmath88 odd .    in the leading order analysis one thus can treat these four classes of couplings separately and benefit from a great reduction of unknown parameters . beyond leading order , however , form factors of any symmetry can contribute to @xmath27 $ ] :    * in the integrated cross section and thus in the denominator of @xmath27 - e_0[{{\cal o}}_i]$ ] in ( [ expect ] ) couplings of all four classes enter quadratically , couplings of class @xmath93 also appear linearly ; * if @xmath28 belongs to class @xmath93 the numerator of @xmath27 -    e_0[{{\cal o}}_i]$ ] has terms linear in the couplings of this class but couplings of all four classes enter quadratically through @xmath94 ; * if @xmath28 belongs to a @xmath9 ( @xmath88 ) odd coupling then the numerator in ( [ expect ] ) is only linear in @xmath9 ( @xmath88 ) odd couplings , but it contains also quadratic terms where a @xmath9 ( @xmath88 ) odd coupling is multiplied with a @xmath9 ( @xmath88 ) even one . we remark that this leads to different behaviours of @xmath27 $ ] as one or more couplings @xmath18 become large : whereas for observables in classes @xmath95 , @xmath96 and @xmath97 the expectation value goes to zero when a coupling of the same class goes to plus or minus infinity the corresponding limit of an observable in class @xmath93 can be a positive or negative constant or zero .    in a nonlinear analysis one will therefore in principle have to consider couplings with all symmetries at the same time . in practice one might choose simpler procedures if the linear approximation is expected to be not too bad and if one wants to calculate corrections to it . one might for instance first analyse the four symmetry classes separately , neglecting in each case the contributions of the three other classes at the r.h.s . of ( [ mean ] ) and then refine the analysis of a class by taking the values obtained in the first step for the couplings in the other classes as fixed in ( [ mean ] ) .    we emphasise that even beyond the leading order approximation it is still true that a nonzero mean value of a @xmath9 or a @xmath88 odd observable is an unambiguous sign of @xmath9 violation or the presence of absorptive parts in the process , respectively . the extraction of the values of the couplings , however , becomes more involved than in leading order . we shall now propose a method to analyse the data which presents several advantages in view of the basic problem posed by the large number of unknown three - boson couplings : with limited event statistics significant error bounds can only be obtained for subsets of the coupling parameters , but imposing constraints on the couplings to reduce their number entails a loss of information that can not be retrieved . in view of this it should be advantageous to use a parametrisation of the couplings which in a given process and at a given c.m . energy has the following properties :    1 . it allows to find observables which are only sensitive to one particular coupling parameter . 2 .   the induced errors on the couplings determined from these observables are statistically independent . with this we can on the one hand give single errors for each parameter , on the other hand we can recover from the single errors the multidimensional error of the full set of couplings , having avoided the loss of information incurred by imposing constraints . from the single errors we can also directly see which combinations of couplings in more conventional parametrisations can be measured with good accuracy and to which one is rather insensitive . let us remark that in the leading order analysis there is a set of observables satisfying point 1 .  in _ any _ parametrisation of the couplings . the linear combinations @xmath98 of our optimal observables ( [ optimal ] ) are only sensitive to @xmath18 for each @xmath99 ( cf .  also @xcite ) . the errors on the couplings determined from these observables are , however , in general not uncorrelated ; in fact their correlations are the same as those obtained with the original set @xmath28 . this can be seen as follows : going from the @xmath28 to the @xmath100 we must replace @xmath101 so that we have from ( [ couplingscov ] ) @xmath102 in such a case the single errors give an incomplete picture of the situation if correlations are large . this is illustrated in fig . [ fig : correlations ] @xmath93 , where the 1@xmath103 ellipsis for two parameters is shown . their single errors are given by its projection on the coordinate axes and in our example are both rather large . some linear combinations of them are however measurable with much better precision , which one can only recognise if both errors and their correlations are given . in fig . [ fig : correlations ] @xmath95 where a set of couplings leading to uncorrelated errors is used the situation is much simpler . note also that the number of correlations , i.e.  off - diagonals in @xmath80 , is yet modest for two couplings but increases rapidly with their number . ( 0,0 )    ( 5502,3031)(889,-4805 ) ( 1981,-2401)(0,0)[lb ] ( 5131,-2401)(0,0)[lb ] ( 6391,-3706)(0,0)[lb ] ( 3241,-3706)(0,0)[lb ] ( 1116,-2006)(0,0)[lb ] ( 4176,-2006)(0,0)[lb ]    we will now first see that a parametrisation of the couplings satisfying both points 1 .  and 2 . above can be found in idealised circumstances , and then mention the restrictions one will encounter under more realistic assumptions . if the leading order analysis is a sufficiently good approximation the solution to our problem is easily found . starting from a set of couplings @xmath18 and the corresponding optimal observables @xmath28 in ( [ optimal ] ) we can go to another set @xmath104 by @xmath105 where we use vector and matrix notation . the coefficients in the expansion of the differential cross section and the optimal observables transform as follows : @xmath106 let now @xmath28 be an arbitrary set of observables related to @xmath18 and define the corresponding @xmath107 related to @xmath104 as in ( [ obstransf ] ) . then we have for the matrices relevant for our analysis the following transformation properties : @xmath108 as shown in @xcite our optimal observables satisfy @xmath109 and @xmath110 so that for them one can choose a transformation @xmath111 which diagonalises all three matrices . this new set @xmath112 of parameters obviously has the properties 1 .  and 2 . we were looking for .    beyond the linear approximation of ( [ expect ] ) the expectation value of @xmath107 will still receive contributions from several couplings . in fact there is no set of observables for which the full nonlinear expression in ( [ expect ] ) satisfies point 1 . exactly , because the denominator involves quadratic terms in _ all _ couplings , and this can not be changed by any linear transformation of the couplings . if on the other hand the statistical errors are too large the covariance matrix @xmath80 will not give a good picture of the errors as we discussed in sec . [ sec : method ] , and its diagonalisation will not ensure point 2 . in the case however where nonlinear effects in the determination of the couplings and their errors are not too large , i.e.  where the leading order expressions are a good first approximation both points 1 .  and 2 . above will still be _ approximately _ satisfied in a full nonlinear analysis . we remark that if one has some previous estimates @xmath58 of the couplings that considerably deviate from zero one may reduce nonlinear effects in the determination of the @xmath18 by working with an expansion of @xmath113 around the @xmath58 as shown in sec . [ sec : method ] ; in our diagonalisation programme one will then use couplings @xmath114 instead of @xmath18 , the matrix @xmath70 instead of @xmath115 etc .    to the extent that the observables ( [ optimal ] ) are constructed from expressions of @xmath85 and @xmath116 which are only approximations of those that determine the experimentally observed kinematical distribution the matrices @xmath115 , @xmath50 and @xmath117 will not quite be the same and can not be diagonalised at the same time . one can then diagonalise either @xmath50 or @xmath68 because they are by definition symmetric and positive definite , whereas @xmath115 is not necessarily so . again , unless such effects are large one will end up with a matrix @xmath118 that is not diagonal but has relatively small off - diagonals .    it should also be borne in mind that the covariance matrix @xmath80 only gives the statistical errors on the couplings , so that even if it is exactly diagonal the final errors may be correlated due to systematics .      the choice of transformation in ( [ couplingstransf ] ) to ( [ matrixtransf ] ) is not unique if one does not require @xmath111 to be orthogonal . we see in fact no strong argument in favour of an orthogonal transformation and remark that the various parametrisations of the @xmath1 and @xmath0 couplings in the literature are related by non - orthogonal linear transformations . the freedom to choose @xmath111 can be used to impose additional conditions on the transformation , and the one we propose here is that the transformed quadratic coefficient @xmath119 in the integrated cross section be the unit matrix . in terms of the new couplings one then has @xmath120 where we choose the numbering such that @xmath121 to @xmath122 belong to symmetry class @xmath93 introduced in sec . [ sec : symmetries ] , i.e.   they are the @xmath9 and @xmath88 even couplings . only these appear linearly in the cross section , whereas all couplings give a quadratic contribution with coefficient one . having @xmath123 leads to a convenient simplification of ( [ expect ] ) , ( [ mean ] ) . moreover , the measurement of the total cross section gives complementary information on the unknown couplings . rewriting ( [ xsectransf ] ) as @xmath124 we see that measuring a cross section @xmath125 within an error @xmath126 constrains the couplings to be in a shell between two hyperspheres with centre at @xmath127 in the space of all couplings as shown in fig . [ fig : shell ] . their radii are given by @xmath128 here @xmath129\ ] ] is the smallest value the cross section can attain ; that such a minimum exists has been pointed out in @xcite . if in ( [ radii ] ) @xmath130 is positive but @xmath131 negative the couplings are inside the hypersphere with radius @xmath132 , and if both @xmath130 and @xmath131 are negative the ansatz ( [ diffxsection ] ) for the cross section is inconsistent with the data within the error @xmath126 . ( 0,0 )    ( 4647,3843)(1339,-5473 ) ( 4231,-3391)(0,0)[lb ] ( 2611,-1726)(0,0)[lb ] ( 5986,-3661)(0,0)[lb ] ( 3401,-3796)(0,0)[lb ] ( 3601,-3166)(0,0)[lb ]    such constraints can be useful to find the physical set of couplings when the solution of ( [ mean ] ) from the measurement of the optimal observables is not unique . if they are strong enough they might even restrict the couplings to the region where ( [ mean ] ) can be linearised and thus simplify their extraction . one can of course use the information from the integrated cross section working with any set of couplings , but again the situation is particularly simple with the form ( [ xsectransf ] ) . we note that the information from the total rate is complementary to what is extracted from the mean values of our observables , which involve normalised kinematical distributions . from an experimental point of view their respective measurements will presumably have quite different systematic errors . let us also recall that the the measurement of the mean values @xmath26 times the number @xmath45 of events obtained with a fixed integrated luminosity combines the information of both @xcite . a nonlinear data analysis as presented in sec . [ sec : method ] can also be done in this case . we draw attention to the fact that unphysical solutions of equation  ( [ mean ] ) for @xmath26 and of its analogue for @xmath133 will in general be different . we shall however not elaborate on this point here . another aspect of the couplings with the property ( [ xsectransf ] ) is the following . it is well known that constant coupling parameters deviating from the standard model tree level values lead to amplitudes that violate unitarity @xcite . the coefficients @xmath134 and @xmath135 in the total cross section @xmath103 increase strongly with the @xmath3 c.m . energy @xmath136 and the couplings @xmath18 must vanish as @xmath8 becomes large to ensure a decent high - energy behaviour of @xmath103 . in our new parametrisation the quadratic coefficients in @xmath137 are energy independent , and in this sense the new couplings are at a `` natural scale '' at every energy .    to complete this section we show that a transformation with the properties we require always exists , i.e.  that we can find a matrix @xmath111 that diagonalises @xmath68 in ( [ matrixtransf ] ) and transforms @xmath138 in ( [ quadrattransf ] ) to the unit matrix . the argument is analogous if one replaces @xmath68 with @xmath50 . by construction both @xmath68 and @xmath138 are symmetric and positive definite , so our problem is the same as finding normal coordinates for a multidimensional harmonic oscillator in classical mechanics ( cf . e.g.  @xcite ) . to make this analogy transparent let us write @xmath139 and @xmath140 ; we then have to find @xmath111 so that @xmath141 with @xmath142 being diagonal . the elements @xmath143 of @xmath142 are generalised eigenvalues of @xmath144 satisfying @xmath145 where @xmath146 is the @xmath99-th column vector of @xmath111 . the solution is well known to be @xmath147 where @xmath148 is the orthogonal matrix that transforms @xmath149 to @xmath142 . of course one need not use ( [ solution ] ) in practice as there are convenient algorithms available to find @xmath111 and @xmath142 . in our numerical calculations we have used the routine ` eigenvals ` of the algebraic package maple . we will now give some numerical examples of our method described in the previous section . in this section we will stay within the framework of a leading order analysis of the observables . we start from the results in @xcite , where the sensitivity of optimal observables for semileptonic @xmath150-decays was calculated . we assume a full kinematical reconstruction of the final state , except for the ambiguity one is left with if the jet charge is not known . for the standard model cross section we use the born approximation and neglect effects of the finite @xmath2 width . to describe the triple boson couplings we take the form factors @xmath151 , @xmath152 ( @xmath153 ) of @xcite ; deviations from their standard model tree level values will be referred to as `` anomalous couplings '' . let us first look at a c.m . energy of @xmath12 , which will be attained at lep2 . the coefficient matrix @xmath115 can be found in table  4 of @xcite and in table  [ tab : coeff190 ] here we give the diagonal elements of the transformed matrix @xmath118 , ordered according to the symmetry of the corresponding observables . the one standard deviation ellipsoid is diagonal in the couplings @xmath104 , thus its intersections with the coordinate axes equal its projections on these axes . the errors @xmath154 setting all other @xmath155 to zero are then equal to the errors @xmath156 where all other @xmath155 are arbitrary . they are given by @xmath157 and are listed in table  [ tab : sens190 ] for an integrated luminosity of @xmath13 . we immediately remark that a negative diagonal element occurs in the transformed coefficient matrix , which is not allowed because @xmath158 is a covariance matrix and thus positive definite . we encounter here a problem of numerical instability : small errors in the calculation of the original matrices @xmath115 and @xmath138 can have a large effect on the smallest generalised eigenvalues @xmath159 and their eigenvectors , even to the point that eigenvalues come out with the wrong sign . this is not only a problem of our particular way of diagonalisation , but also occurs if one diagonalises @xmath115 with an orthogonal matrix ; we find that one of the usual eigenvalues of @xmath115 in the subspace of couplings with symmetry @xmath95 is negative . such instabilities can cause large errors in the matrix inversion of @xmath115 and @xmath50 . one needs @xmath160 to calculate the error on the extracted couplings as can be seen from ( [ chi ] ) and ( [ couplingscov ] ) , and large errors on @xmath161 can lead to large uncertainties in the extracted couplings , irrespective of whether @xmath161 is explicitly used to solve the system ( [ mean ] ) . one will of course aim to calculate @xmath115 and @xmath50 with best possible precision , but such an effort has limits , in particular if they are determined from simulated events and include for instance radiative corrections or detector effects . on a more fundamental level any calculation of these matrices will only be an approximation of the `` exact '' ones that correspond to the kinematical distributions seen in experiment . in this sense it seems quite inevitable that small eigenvalues ( the usual or our generalised ones ) of @xmath115 and @xmath50 and their eigenvectors are sensitive to imprecisions in the calculation and can lead to large errors or uncertainties in the data analysis . this holds of course even if one does not obtain eigenvalues with the wrong sign . we think that also in view of this a diagonalisation is useful , not because it solves the problem but because it makes it explicit ! it allows to easily identify those combinations of couplings which have small corresponding eigenvalues in @xmath115 and @xmath50 and will be the most unsafe ones in the analysis . from ( [ onesigma ] ) we see that they are those combinations for which the statistical errors will be largest . here the most unsafe coupling parameter is @xmath162 . one might thus choose to exclude it , and possibly other couplings , from the analysis and work in the remaining subspace of the @xmath104 where the numerics is more stable and where in any case the experiment is most sensitive . we will come back to this in sec . [ sec : practice ] . .[tab : lr190]diagonal elements @xmath159 of the coefficient matrix restricted to the left or right handed subspace of the couplings as explained in the text . the values in the left handed subspace differ from the corresponding ones in table 1 by at most 3% . [ cols="^ , > , > , > , > , > , > , > , > " , ]     crrrrrrrrr & & & + @xmath93 & 1.4 & 1.1 & 0.72 & 0.63 & & 0.50 & 0.17 & 0.062 & 0.044 + @xmath95 & 1.3 & 1.0 & 0.79 & 0.26 & & 0.11 & 0.083 & 0.023 & @xmath163 + @xmath96 & 1.2 & 0.58 & 0.32 & & & 0.076 & 0.031 & 0.013 & + @xmath97 & 1.4 & 1.0 & 0.83 & & & 0.24 & 0.040 & 0.026 & +    finally we remark that like in the case for @xmath12 those couplings @xmath104 which give the largest statistical errors in the optimal observable analysis are predominantly related to right handed combinations of form factors as can be seen from the comparison of tables  [ tab : coeff500 ] and [ tab : lr500 ] . let us sketch how our method of simultaneous diagonalisation might be used in practice .    1 . one first has to choose which matrix to diagonalise simultaneously with @xmath138 . these matrices need not be the same ones to be used in the data analysis itself but may be calculated under further approximations . covariance matrices for the observables and extracted couplings can be evaluated for zero @xmath18 as our entire procedure will only have its desired properties if nonlinear effects are not too large . if one uses the same approximation of the differential cross section ( [ diffxsection ] ) for the construction of the optimal observables ( [ optimal ] ) and the calculation of @xmath115 , @xmath50 and @xmath117 then the latter are all equal and can be diagonalised at the same time . otherwise one has to choose a positive definite symmetric matrix for the diagonalisation , i.e.  one of the covariance matrices . the calculation of @xmath80 or of its inverse from ( [ couplingscov ] ) involves however a matrix inversion and might suffer from numerical instabilities , so presumably the best choice will be @xmath50 . 2 .   in the next step one carries out the simultaneous diagonalisation of the chosen matrix and @xmath138 as described in sec . [ sec : simultan ] and determines the transformation matrix @xmath111 in ( [ couplingstransf ] ) to ( [ matrixtransf ] ) . at this point it will be useful to test the numerical stability of the transformed matrices , for instance by re - calculating them in the new basis of couplings or by repeating the diagonalisation procedure with slightly modified initial matrices . one might choose to discard some of the new couplings @xmath104 and the corresponding observables from the analysis if the corresponding matrix elements are found to be instable . this does not mean that one has to set these couplings to zero . from the measurement of the total cross section one will obtain limits on them , which will also allow to control the contribution they can give to the mean values of those observables that are kept in the analysis because the matrix @xmath118 is not exactly diagonal and because of nonlinear terms in ( [ mean ] ) . 3 .   in the new parametrisation of the couplings one then carries out the analysis of the data . here @xmath164 , @xmath118 , @xmath165 and the other coefficients in ( [ expect ] ) will be determined under the most realistic assumptions and with the best precision one can afford . they will not be exactly diagonal in practice , but should have small off - diagonal elements if the approximations made in step 1 .  and in the construction of the optimal observables are sufficiently good . 4 .   one can then give both single and multidimensional errors on the measured coupling parameters @xmath104 . at this stage one can also present the results in other , more conventional parametrisations of the couplings and in particular compare with the measurements of other experiments , restricting oneself to whatever subspace of couplings might have been chosen there . in the first part of this paper we have shown how to extract coupling parameters from the measured mean values @xmath26 of appropriate observables without the approximation that the couplings are small . errors on the couplings can be obtained from a @xmath47-fit of the @xmath26 . if one puts constraints on the couplings in order to reduce their number the method also gives an indication of how compatible these constraints are with the data . the `` optimal observables '' discussed in @xcite have statistical errors equal to the smallest possible ones to leading order in the coupling parameters @xmath18 . beyond the leading order approximation one can obtain more sensitive observables if one has some previous estimate @xmath58 for the couplings , expanding the differential cross section around @xmath58 instead of zero and constructing observables from the corresponding expansion coefficients . in the appendix we show that up to linear reparametrisations the choice of optimal observables is unique : any other set of observables must give bigger ( statistical ) errors .    in a second part we have proposed to perform the data analysis using a particular parametrisation @xmath104 of the couplings , which is specific to the process and its c.m .  energy . it is obtained from the initial set @xmath18 by a linear transformation which diagonalises the covariance matrix @xmath50 of the observables and transforms the matrix @xmath138 of quadratic coefficients in the integrated cross section ( [ intxsection ] ) to unity . in an idealised framework each optimal observable @xmath107 for this parametrisation is only sensitive to one coupling , and the statistical errors on the extracted couplings are uncorrelated . under realistic circumstances both properties can be approximately satisfied provided that the analysis stays in a region of parameter space where the dependence of the mean values @xmath166 on the couplings is not far from linear . various matrices are then approximately diagonal which should generally facilitate the data analysis . in particular one can directly give errors on single or a small number of couplings , which will be necessary to obtain statistically significant results with a limited number of events . at the same time one can readily present multidimensional errors in parameter space , which is essential to compare with the results of measurements that impose various different constraints on the couplings . having approximately diagonal matrices also allows to easily identify those directions in parameter space which can be measured best and those for which the statistical errors will be large and which are likely to be associated with numerical instabilities , for example in matrix inversions . one can thus recognise and seek to remedy such problems in an early stage of the analysis . the measurement of the total cross section @xmath103 gives valuable complementary information on the coupling parameters . its dependence on the couplings is particularly simple in the parametrisation we propose since the quadratic contributions are @xmath167 times the standard model cross section @xmath168 , i.e.  they have the same form for all couplings . a measurement of @xmath103 will then restrict the @xmath104 to a shell between two hyperspheres in parameter space . we have given some numerical examples of our method applied to the semileptonic decay channels in @xmath4 . in particular we find that the couplings @xmath104 which can be measured best with unpolarised beams predominantly appear in the amplitude for left handed electrons ( or right handed positrons ) , and that the @xmath104 with the largest statistical errors mainly correspond to the opposite lepton helicity . comparing our results at lep2 and lc energies we see that the coefficients in the linear contributions of the couplings @xmath104 to our observables and to the integrated cross section change much less with energy than in usual parametrisations . this is because in the new parametrisation the quadratic coefficients in the normalised cross section @xmath169 are by construction energy independent . we would like to thank ch . hartmann and m.  kocian for their continued interest in optimal observables for triple gauge couplings . we gratefully acknowledge discussions with and remarks by j.  blmlein , p.  overmann , n.  wermes , , and p.  m.  zerwas . this work has in part been financially supported by the eu programme `` human capital and mobility '' , network `` physics at high energy colliders '' , contracts chrx - ct93 - 0357 ( dg 12 coma ) and erbchbi - ct94 - 1342 , and by bmbf , grant . it was started while one of us ( md ) was at the university of cambridge , and we acknowledge support by the arc programme of the british council and the german academic exchange service ( daad ) , grant 313-arc - viii - vo / scu , which made mutual visits of the cambridge and heidelberg groups possible . in this appendix we show that the set of observables ( [ newoptimal ] ) , obtained from expanding the differential cross section about the actual values of the couplings , is unique in the sense that up to the linear reparametrisations ( [ reparam ] ) it is the only set of @xmath41 integrated observables which in the limit of large @xmath45 leads to the minimum error on the @xmath41 extracted parameters .    to keep our notation simple we give the proof for the case that the actual values of the @xmath18 are zero . the expectation value and covariance of functions @xmath34 and @xmath35 are then given by @xmath170 = \frac{\int d\phi \ , f(\phi )   s_0(\phi)}{\int d\phi \ , s_0(\phi ) }   { \hspace{6pt},}\hspace{3em }    v_0[f , g ] = e_0[f g ] - e_0[f ] \ , e_0[g ]   { \hspace{6pt}.}\ ] ] in the general case one has instead of @xmath85 the zeroth order coefficient @xmath171 ( [ newdiffxsection ] ) from the expansion about the appropriate values @xmath58 .    for large @xmath45 the covariance matrix for the extracted couplings is given by ( [ couplingscov ] ) . under a linear reparametrisation of observables , @xmath172 where @xmath173 and @xmath174 are constants and the matrix @xmath173 is nonsingular , the matrices @xmath115 from ( [ obscoeffcompact ] ) and @xmath50 transform according to @xmath175 from ( [ couplingscov ] ) we see that the covariance matrix @xmath80 is unchanged under such a transformation . for our proof we can hence restrict ourselves to observables with mean value @xmath176 = 0\ ] ] and with a coefficient matrix @xmath177 . from ( [ obscoeffcompact ] ) we then have the condition @xmath178 = \delta_{ij}\ ] ] and the error on the extracted couplings is given by @xmath179   { \hspace{6pt}.}\ ] ]    from @xcite we know that the optimal observables ( [ optimal ] ) lead to the smallest possible error on the @xmath18 , given by the cramr - rao bound . to satisfy our conditions ( [ centred ] ) and ( [ normalised ] ) we take the linear combinations @xmath180    \right)\ ] ] with @xmath181   { \hspace{6pt}.}\ ] ] we assume that the functions @xmath86 are linearly independent . otherwise some of the parameters @xmath18 are superfluous and can be eliminated ; our assumption is thus that the @xmath18 are an independent set of parameters for the anomalous couplings . linear independence of the @xmath182 guarantees that @xmath183 is nonsingular , which has tacitly been used at several instances in our paper . the set @xmath184 is related to the optimal observables @xmath185 by a linear transformation ( [ reparam ] ) and thus gives the same optimal error matrix @xmath80 . the covariance @xmath186 $ ] defines a scalar product on the hilbert space @xmath187 of sufficiently smooth functions of @xmath21 with the property @xmath188 = 0 $ ] . the functions @xmath184 span a subspace @xmath189 of @xmath187 , and we define @xmath190 as the orthogonal complement of @xmath189 with respect to the scalar product @xmath33 $ ] . any set of @xmath41 observables satisfying ( [ centred ] ) can then be written as @xmath191 with @xmath192 , @xmath193 . further decomposing @xmath194 and using the constraint ( [ normalised ] ) we obtain @xmath195 , i.e.@xmath196 finally , we have from ( [ simplecov ] ) , ( [ decompose ] ) , ( [ first ] ) @xmath197 +                n^{-1 } v_0[{{\cal o}}^{\it ii}_i , { { \cal o}}^{\it ii}_j ]   { \hspace{6pt}.}\ ] ] the first term gives the error on the couplings for the optimal observables @xmath184 , which is minimal . if the observables @xmath28 have minimal error , too , the second term must be zero , so that for each @xmath99 we have @xmath198 = 0 $ ] and thus @xmath199 which completes our proof .    in sec . [ sec : simultan ] we mentioned that instead of @xmath26 one may use the product @xmath200 measured with fixed luminosity to extract the couplings @xcite . by an argument analogous to the one of this appendix one finds that up to linear reparametrisations our observables ( [ newoptimal ] ) are again the only optimal ones . in this case linear reparametrisations have to be homogeneous , i.e.  one must have @xmath201 in ( [ reparam ] ) , since adding constants to the observables can change the induced errors on the coupling parameters . g. gounaris et al . , `` triple gauge boson couplings '' , report of the `` triple gauge couplings '' working group during the lep2 workshop 19941995 , hep - ph/9601233 , in _ physics at lep2 _ , vol .  1 , g.  altarelli and f.  zwirner eds . , cern report 1996 , and references therein          p. overmann , dortmund preprint do - th 93/24 ; + w. bernreuther , g. w. botz , d. bru , p. haberl and o. nachtmann , z.  phys . c68 ( 1995 ) 73 ; + d. bru , o. nachtmann and p. overmann , `` cp violation in radiative @xmath7 decays '' , univ . heidelberg report hd  thep9702 ( 1997 ) r. akers et al . ( opal coll . ) , z.  phys . c66 ( 1995 ) 31 ; + a. stahl , nucl . b ( proc .  suppl . ) 40 ( 1995 ) 505 ; + aleph coll . , `` search for cp violation in the decay @xmath202 '' , paper contributed to the ichep96 conference , warsaw , 2531 july 1996 , report pa 08 - 030 ; + delphi coll . , `` improved test of cp - violation in @xmath203 using optimized observables '' , paper contributed to the ichep96 conference , warsaw , 2531 july 1996 , report pa 07 - 014 ( 1996 ) ; + n. wermes , `` cp tests and dipole moments in @xmath204-pair production experiments '' , talk given at tau96 workshop , estes park , colorado , usa , 1619 september 1996 , report bonn - he-96 - 10
Abstract:

Answer: we show how one can measure anomalous @xmath0- and @xmath1-couplings with minimal statistical error using integrated observables , without having to assume that the anomalous couplings are small . we propose a parametrisation of these couplings which is well suited for the extraction of both single and many parameters , and which leads to a very simple form of the integrated cross section , from which additional information on the couplings can be obtained . hd thep9703 + cpth s4940197    anomalous three gauge boson +   m. diehl + _ department of applied mathematics and theoretical physics + silver street , cambridge cb3 9ew , great britain + present address : + centre de physique thorique + ecole polytechnique , f-91128 palaiseau cedex , france _ + and + o. nachtmann + _ institut fr theoretische physik + philosophenweg 16 , d-69120 heidelberg , germany _


Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: the period of enlightenment was a time when spanish physics , which had been lagging behind the level of the rest of europe , was able to recover . however , the political events of the end of the 18th - century , the war of independence , and then the reign of fernando vii ruined the panorama of spanish science . history was sadly to repeat itself with the spanish civil war of 1936 , which brought to nothing the efforts of physicists and mathematicians of the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries to regain the time lost during the reign of fernando vii until the `` generation of 98 '' . part of the disastrous situation during the 19th - century can be traced back to the legislation and curricular plans of spain s universities . the faculty of exact , physical , and natural sciences was not created until 1857 , with the ley ( law ) moyano . physics had been relegated to a minor faculty , that of arts , as preparation for the major faculties , and formed part of the `` philosophical institutions '' which were studied in the following order : i. history of philosophy and elements of mathematics ; ii . logic and metaphysics ; iii . general physics ; iv . special physics . all was in a latin which had become progressively less suited to teaching , so that enlightened reformers always attempted to publish textbooks in spanish . physics texts in latin were still being imposed on students even up to the time of the absolutist period of fernando vii @xcite . after the death of fernando vii , an ordinance regulating printing was promulgated in 1834 which allowed a certain freedom in publication , in particular in scientific publishing . one of the consequences of the centralization of curricular plans , such as the plan pidal , was the impulse given to the production of textbooks associated with the new programs of study . they were original productions as well as translations of foreign authors , and formed the beginning of a national scientific output which was to be of greater or lesser quality according to each particular case . the study plans usually counselled the use of certain textbooks which most closely approached the spirit of the courses . the procedure consisted in appointing committees to decide on the most suitable texts which then put forward a number of them to be chosen from .    in the meantime , europe was seeing a major change in vision towards atomism thanks to such personalities as herapath , waterston , clausius , van der waals , maxwell , and boltzmann @xcite . imponderable fluids had been abandoned as the explanation of physical phenomena , and mechanics , heat , electromagnetism , and optics had been unified by the concept of energy . teaching was based on a program of mechanical explanations @xcite . the goal of the present communication is to analyze the impact of modern ideas concerning energy and the constitution of matter on the textbooks of 19th - century spain . we have examined 45 works on general physics at secondary and university education levels , with publication dates from the mid 19th - century to the early 20th - century . one of the first things that struck us was the great similarity between the books of different authors . with centralism , teachers were encouraged to write their own textbooks and , indeed , were rewarded for doing so . at the same time , the administration s goal was for teaching to be uniform nationwide . the result was that textbooks were written essentially with the ministerio de fomento s ( ministry of development ) official program as the table of contents , and that the texts served solely to expound known science and in no way to serve as the basis for further research . there were those who , being interested in science teaching , protested about the policy concerning textbooks . representative of them was eduardo lozano y ponce de len . under the pseudonym l. opando y uceda , lozano published `` programas y libros de texto '' ( programs and textbooks ) in _ revista de la sociedad de profesores de ciencias _ @xcite , and under the pseudonym `` un extremeo '' the same article in the journal _ el magisterio extremeo _ ( _ the extremean schoolmaster _ ) @xcite . in this same journal and on the same theme , ildefonso fernndez snchez published another critical article @xcite . in his writings lozano asked for the programs to have reference strictly to the subject matter to be dealt with and not to the methods to be used , and that the programs should include suggestions of the books that were best suited to the subject , but without the obligation of following them . the immediate consequence of that educational policy was that the different editions of textbooks seemed rather to be reprintings : textbook `` immutability '' from one edition to another was astonishing . let us take two cases as example . the _ trait lmentaire de physique _ ( _ elementary treatise on physics _ ) by a. ganot was used in many spanish and european institutes ( secondary education ) and universities . the first spanish language edition dates from 1853 . the 18th spanish edition was printed in 1923 , and even as late as 1945 an edition was published in san sebastin @xcite . in all this time there were only small modifications made with respect to the first french edition . an even more extreme example , since it was a work with even more antiquated ways of putting the material than ganot , was the textbook of @xcite . the 2nd edition dates from 1851 @xcite and the 10th edition from 1870 @xcite . in these twenty years and eight new editions the work remained without a single significant change , notwithstanding the archaic ways of setting forth the subject matter of the first editions . a third example is less disappointing : _ elementos de fsica _ ( _ elements of physics _ ) by enrique iglesias ejarque . the first edition of 1897 @xcite has quite a modern manner of exposition . nevertheless , while the following editions introduce small amounts of additional material into the text , there are never any significant changes . the 8th edition dates from 1924 @xcite and the last that we can find a reference to is the 10th edition in 1933 . clearly one may conclude that physics textbooks had quite a long effective lifetime . while there was a certain degree of difficulty in introducing new material into the textbooks , the great problem was to eliminate content which was included by tradition even though it was antiquated . the case of eduardo snchez pardo , the translator of ganot s work , is significant . in the prologue to that popularly used book :    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ the editor d. crlos bailly - baillire being for his part desirous that our public in general , and the pupils of our institutes and faculties in particular , follow science in her latest advances , charged us with the translation of the latest edition of the cited treatise on physics . on taking on this commitment , with the object that the spanish edition be more complete , we judged it convenient , corresponding thereby also to the wishes of the editor , to conserve certain theories , the exposition of various experiments , and the description of some of the instruments or apparatus that had figured in earlier editions of the forementioned work , and that in the latest edition had been totally or partially suppressed . ( @xcite @xcite , p. v ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    another of the characteristics of spanish physics textbooks was their orientation to student success in tests and examinations . works that are halfway between textbook and simple program of the curriculum abound . secondary education teachers often encouraged the students to think little about the physical phenomena themselves but to learn definitions , laws , and descriptions of apparatus . as clear examples we could cite , amongst several works , the _ resumen de fsica y nociones de qumica _ ( _ a summary of physics and notions of chemistry _ ) @xcite , and _ definiciones , principios y leyes de la fsica _ ( _ definitions , principles , and laws of physics _ ) @xcite . hence , for most students learning was not meaningful but purely memorization . together with the lack of practical classes , this may have been one of the causes of spanish physics slow rate of development during the 19th - century . in order to analyze what we understand to have been the introduction of modern physics into spanish textbooks , we asked ourselves the following questions relative to the works that we consulted :    1 . [ q1]are imponderable fluids studied in the textbook ? 2 . [ q2 ] is the term caloric used to refer to heat ? 3 .   [ q3]does the concept of energy appear in a general form ? [ q4]does the mechanical theory of heat appear ? [ q5]does the kinetic theory of gases appear ? affirmative responses to the first two questions would indicate traditionalism , and to the last three , modernity . we would classify a textbook as modern if questions [ q3 ] and [ q4 ] are answered affirmatively . if the kinetic theory of gases appears as well ( question 5 ) , then we would consider the textbook to be quite complete . table [ tablei ] lists the responses to these questions for the 19th - century textbooks to which we had access . the works are ordered by publication date . when the edition is not given , reference is to the first edition . most of the works consulted belong to the library of the real sociedad econmica de amigos del pas in badajoz ( spain ) . while not exhaustive , the sample is significant , since students of the city of badajoz in the 19th - century were prepared in this centre for the entrance examinations of the schools of engineering ( high - level technical degree courses , rather than purely engineering in the english language sense ) or military academies .    . responses to the five questions posed in the text , according to the different works consulted . [ cols="<,^,^,^,^,^",options="header " , ]     some comments are necessary concerning table [ tablei ] . the books that were published in spain in the 1840s studied imponderable fluids , and dealt neither with energy , nor with the mechanical theory of heat , nor with the kinetic theory of gases . this situation was natural since these concepts were only being developed in europe at this time . however some foreign authors already did not study imponderable fluids ( neither did they use the term caloric to refer to heat ) , and their spanish translations set an example for such fluids to be abandoned . this was the case with the textbook of deguin , translated by venancio gonzlez @xcite . the translator would write his own textbook later @xcite , and despite going through numerous editions , would never abandon imponderable fluids . another textbook of a french author is @xcite , translated by florencio martn castro , although here imponderable fluids were still being studied in the original . the handbook of @xcite presents physics as a science of nature in general , including subjects such as geology and geography . this was the concept of physics that existed in europe at the beginning of the century . on the positive side , the mechanical ideal which was at the base of the development of physics in the 19th - century did indeed have a reflection in spanish textbooks . one reads in the prologue of the work of @xcite :    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (  ) effectively , all the phenomena attributed to caloric , to light , and to the electric fluid are mensurable and calculable effects ; all are attributed to forces , all consist of movements , and constitute , in sum , mechanics . ( @xcite @xcite , p. i ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    the texts that we were able to consult from the 1850s are mainly editions of the work of @xcite ( @xcite @xcite , @xcite , @xcite ) . the principal characteristic of this text was its immutability , edition after edition . although it studied imponderable fluids , the term caloric was not used , and neither energy , nor the mechanical theory of heat , nor the kinetics of gases appear in the text . the other textbook that we consulted is that of @xcite . although imponderable fluids are studied and the term caloric is used , the author briefly explains the theory of ondulations ( as the mechanical theory of heat was first known ) , and says of that theory that `` it is the one which today seems more correct '' ( p. 173 ) . this work was awarded a prize in a public competition under the auspices of the real academia de ciencias ( gaceta de madrid , 9 september 1854 ) . neither the concept of energy in a general form nor the kinetic theory of gases appear in rodrguez s text . it is interesting too that in this decade there appeared a physics textbook written in latin which followed the scholastic tradition @xcite . the textbooks of spanish authors of the 1860s were still studying imponderable fluids . they were also still using the term caloric to refer to heat , except for the editions of @xcite ( @xcite , @xcite ) , as we noted before . one french - authored textbook , @xcite , did not study imponderable fluids or use the term caloric , but then neither did it use the energy concept or the theories we are looking for . the same was the case with the textbook of @xcite , commented on above . a possible reason for these to be missing is that the translator , ramn de la sagra , used the 7th french edition . the note of modernity is found in the textbook of @xcite , in which there appears an idea concerning the mechanical theory of heat , namely the hypothesis of ondulations , although for didactic purposes the theory of emissions ( caloric ) was preferred . thus , one reads :    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ the system of ondulations is the most scientific , and the most admitted in modern physics ; but that of emission lends itself more to demonstrations , for which reason it is generally preferred for the explanation of the phenomena of the caloric . ( @xcite @xcite , p. 204 ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    the textbooks of the 1870s begin to abandon the traditional theses , and show signs of modernity . the most traditional are @xcite , an 8th edition , and @xcite . the latter already does not use the term caloric , and later editions were progressively modernized . the textbook of @xcite studies imponderable fluids , and uses the term caloric . in its treatment of radiant heat , however , the work seems very modern . as noted above for @xcite , the author prefers the caloric hypothesis for its simplicity in teaching :    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ the admissible hypothesis is at present that of ondulations , in the light of the advances in modern physics ; but as it simplifies the demonstrations , many physicists prefer the hypothesis of emission to explain the phenomena of heat . ( @xcite @xcite , p. 148 ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    the textbooks with a more modern spirit are those of @xcite and @xcite . mximo fuertes acevedo s work neither studies imponderable fluids nor uses the term caloric . but energy does not appear as a general concept either , despite the mechanical theory of heat being explained . adolphe ganot s textbook was much used in europe . the first spanish edition is of the year 1853 . we consulted the 7th spanish edition @xcite . it contains a paragraph explaining the dynamic theory of gases : gases are described as formed by elastic molecules in motion , and the elasticity of a gas at a given volume is proportional to the _ vis viva _ ( total mass of the molecules multiplied by the square of their speed ) . while making use of such concepts as this ( today , of course , replaced by kinetic energy ) , the text does not deal with energy in a general form . as is to be expected with this perspective , imponderable fluids and the term caloric have been forgotten , and the mechanical theory of heat is studied . all the textbooks of the 1880s that we consulted have abandoned imponderable fluids , with the exception of the handbook of @xcite which is already in its 10th edition . of the other works , the most traditional is that of @xcite , since it neither deals with energy in a general way nor introduces the theories we are looking for . we then have the 2nd edition of the work of @xcite , with no substantial changes from the 1st edition . we also consulted a portuguese secondary education textbook , @xcite , which has a similar perspective to those of @xcite ( @xcite , @xcite ) . the textbook of @xcite is the first of the series of books that we consulted in which energy is dealt with in a general fashion . the mechanical theory of heat is studied , but the kinetic theory of gases has still not appeared . the 7th edition of the work of @xcite has almost nothing to do with the 2nd edition that we commented on above @xcite . now , energy and the mechanical theory of heat are presented . in the prologue to the 6th edition , also included in the 7th , one reads :    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ with great insistence i have attempted in the treatment of heat to relate together all the phenomena of thermo - dynamic theory . ( @xcite @xcite , p. v ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    the outstanding textbook of this decade is that written by @xcite , published in tarragona . the author held the chair of physics and chemistry in the instituto provincial of tarragona . this is a modern text which includes the kinetic theory of gases , and in general explains physical phenomena mechanistically . in the work s prologue , the author speaks about a book of his on mechanics published in 1885 , and gives great importance to this branch of physics :    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ the criterion that has inspired this treatise responds to the necessity already recognized by all to explain the subject of physics in a single course , always preceded by a short course of mechanics as foundation and basis of the former (  ) . ( @xcite @xcite , p. 3 ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    as a continuation of thermodynamics , @xcite describes the kinetic theory of gases by following the ideas of clausius and introducing the definition of free path of a molecule as the distance travelled between two consecutive collisions . he deduces mariotte s law , obtaining the formula @xmath0 , where @xmath1 is the pressure of the gas , @xmath2 its volume , @xmath3 the number of molecules , @xmath4 the mean velocity , and @xmath5 the mass of a molecule . he also deduces avogadro s hypothesis from the kinetic theory of gases @xcite . as an indication of the little that this personality and his work have been studied , there only appears one book of @xcite in the _ collected catalogue of spain s bibliographic heritage : 19th century _ this is a textbook on elementary chemistry @xcite . the main characteristic of the books of the 1890s is that they all now treat energy in a general form , as well as the mechanical theory of heat . the textbook of @xcite simultaneously uses imponderable fluids and the term caloric , but only as additional information . a more curious case is that of @xcite whose textbook uses the term caloric without studying imponderable fluids . the work of @xcite has the interest of studying heat and light side by side , to bring out their relationship as vibratory phenomena :    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (  ) the molecular vibrations of the bodies , transmitted by the aether , produce the feelings of heat in the touch and of light in the sight . ( @xcite @xcite , p. 496 ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    other modern textbooks are those of @xcite , the pharmacist @xcite , @xcite , and @xcite . the small book of @xcite contains only definitions and principles . at no time is any idea developed , since the book s object is to serve as a collection of phrases for students to learn in preparation for their examinations . as part of these examination aids , the author prepared two plates which accompany the text , one on units and abbreviations of the decimal metric system , and another on physical units . the kinetic theory of gases does not appear explicitly , but some of its results do . for instance , one can read maxwell s law :    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ the viscosity of a gas measured by the coefficient of friction is independent of the density . ( @xcite @xcite , p. 60 ) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _    another modern work is that of @xcite . the author indicates on the first page in a footnote that the works that had been consulted were `` spanish : escriche , feli , muoz , rojas , and rodrguez largo . foreign : ganot , jamin , joubert , maxwell , and tyndall '' . the text contains a short paragraph on the theory of gases , in which bernouilli , clausius , and maxwell are cited . a kinetic interpretation of pressure is also given , but neither is the concept of mean free path introduced nor estimates of molecular speeds given . the textbook of @xcite , another modern work , has in the book dedicated to heat an article on the _ thermal constitution of gases _ , in which the kinetic theory is described . a kinetic interpretation of pressure is given , together with an explanation of high molecular velocities , including numerical estimates . a short section is dedicated to the _ height of the atmosphere _ , and another to the _ mean free path _ , in which one reads that `` crookes calls mean free path the space travelled by the molecule between two of those collisions '' . on the other hand , the kinetic theory of gases is not mentioned by @xcite . we also consulted some 20th - century books . they all had a modern perspective . the textbooks of @xcite and @xcite did not include the kinetic theory of gases . the 6th and 8th editions of @xcite ( @xcite , @xcite ) present improvements over the 1st edition . with respect to the kinetic theory of gases , a new paragraph is included to explain molecular velocities . the textbook of @xcite explains van der waals s equation of state . the last textbook that we wish to comment on is a translation of an italian book . it is the work of @xcite , a university textbook of modern physics where the kinetic theory of gases is developed completely . the topics in the book are surprising in their breadth and modernity .    as a qualitative summary , figure [ fig1 ] shows the evolution of the responses to the questions that we formulated , according to the data listed in table [ tablei ] . spain s educational policies in the 19th - century encouraged a great similarity between the general physics textbooks of different authors , although there were voices such as that of eduardo lozano y ponce de len , in discord with this policy . this situation led to the differences between the successive editions of a textbook being minimal , and as a result , the effective lifetime of these textbooks was extremely long . a noteworthy example is the spanish translation of the work of a. ganot  the 1st edition was published in 1853 and the last we know of was 1945 . likewise , there were difficulties in rooting out the antiquated content of physics textbooks . in many of them , modern and old theories shared the pages . a significant example was the case of eduardo snchez pardo , who amplified his translation @xcite with elements of old editions that had been discarded from consideration in new foreign editions . the result was to help make the recovery of spanish physics was a very slow process .    with respect to the term caloric , it was used in the spain of this period with different acceptations : as an imponderable fluid responsible for thermal phenomena ( its original meaning ) , as a synonym for heat ( the latter being understood according to the mechanical theory of heat ) , and as the cause of the phenomena of heat , whatever their nature .    also , during the analysis of the sources that were available , we found the orientation towards examination preparation to be excessive in the textbooks that we consulted . some are a simple cookbook of laws and physical phenomena that the students would have to learn if they were to pass their examination . hence , no interest was aroused in reflecting on content or in carrying out experiments in practical classes . certain textbooks shamelessly encouraged totally memoristic learning , so that content was not applied to new situations and was readily forgotten . another fact revealed by the analysis of the textbooks was the speed with which the mechanical theory of heat gained acceptance . this theory had become quite usual in many of the spanish physics textbooks well before the concept of energy had begun to be treated in a general form . while this fact seems disconcerting from today s viewpoint , it must be pointed out that both the mechanical theory of heat and the second law of thermodynamics had been proposed before the law of conservation of energy was generally accepted . the introduction of the kinetic theory into 19th - century spain occurred from approximately the 1870s onwards . in the 1880s , the theory already appears more developed in one of the textbooks that we consulted . this was the work of @xcite , which stands out for its mechanistic deductions of mariotte s law and avogadro s law . the topics dealt with concerning the kinetic theory in the textbooks that we consulted were : generalities of the theory , kinetic interpretation of pressure , molecular velocities , mean free path , height of the atmosphere , and the van der waals equation . lastly it should be remarked that we found no original contribution to kinetic theory in these spanish works of the end of the 19th - century . this work has been partially supported by the dges ( spain ) through grant no . pb97 - 1501 and by the junta de extremadura ( fondo social europeo ) through grant no . ipr98c019 . moreno gonzlez , a. : 1988 , _ una ciencia en cuarentena . evolucin de la fsica en la universidad y otras instituciones espaolas de mediados del siglo xviii a la crisis finisecular del xix _ , csic , madrid .
Abstract:

Answer: spain was a scientifically backward country in the early 19th - century . the causes were various political events , the war of independence , and the reign of fernando vii . the introduction of contemporary physics into textbooks was therefore a slow process . an analysis of the contents of 19th - century spanish textbooks is here presented , centred on imponderable fluids , the concept of energy , the mechanical theory of heat , and the kinetic theory of gases . = 10000 = 10000