Image:
More In This Article
Rufus Porter distributed the first issue of his Scientific American with a prospectus touting the periodical as being for “those who delight in the development of those beauties of Nature, which consists in the laws of Mechanics, Chemistry, and other branches of Natural Philosophy.” He promised a paper that would instruct while it amused its reader. An eccentric character, Porter was an avid inventor who viewed scientific knowledge as a way of increasing one’s practical knowledge, and, subsequently, one’s social class. Scientific American published its first weekly issue on August 28, 1845, (the magazine went monthly in 1921) and established itself as the “advocate of industry and enterprise.”
Over the past 165 years of continuous publication, Scientific American has maintained its commitment to bringing the delights of scientific knowledge to its readers, keeping them informed about cutting-edge innovations and technologies.
View the 165th anniversary slide show
See what we're tweeting about
21 Comments
Add CommentWould the invention of Gravity Control in 1967 in Canada be of any interest? How about Edison's buying the Patent of Incandescent Light for only $500 from an young Englishman Woodward in Toronto?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHow about Tesla, the greatest inventor?
You could have made this list a little bit longer.
Also, slide 13 does pay tribute to Nikola Tesla.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisslide 19 spelled imagining wrong in the last sentence. Great slide show though. I love Scientific American.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNikola Tesla was a good vegetarian, and the contributions of good vegetarians and vegans to scientific and technological development has long been underplayed.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf we can trust Wikipedia at all, Nikola Tesla in his later years became a vegetarian. In an article for Century Illustrated Magazine, he wrote:
"It is certainly preferable to raise vegetables, and I think, therefore, that vegetarianism is a commendable departure from the established barbarous habit."
Tesla argued that it is wrong to eat uneconomic meat when large numbers of people are starving; he also believed that plant food was "superior to it [meat] in regard to both mechanical and mental performance".
He also argued that animal slaughter was "wanton and cruel."
Obviously, there is no limit to power of human imagination. Anything and everything we can imagine, or even dream about; "it's doable". The problem is: That with power comes responsibility and we're still making very slow progress in this direction -- one little baby step at the time. You don't believe it!? Then, just take a long and f...g hard look at the state of the art of Weapons Of Mass Destruction(!).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisImagination, Power, Responsibility: That's where we left off (power.prayer at 03:31AM on 08/07/10; above....
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Responsibility" -- to love, to serve & protect one another; not to kill each other. But, this what we've being doing since day one of "Cain & Abel"; and the worse part: We can't seem to be able to stop this trend. In fact, we're always -- Ready, Willing & Able...on lock and load...ready to fire(!). Always ready to kill, search & destroy(!); or dye trying. God help us all if in fact we sincerely believe that: "In God We Trust".
Airplanes and outer space but not the oceans,the Challenger Expedition might have received a nod. Is it true that your publication refused to accept the Wright brothers until several weeks or months after their historic flight?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhat about DNA and the Human Genome?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI love Scientific American ...... great history really
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen you are looking into a telescope back in to the space! You do not see (as presumed) back in space billions of years, in fact, you see everything as it is in present not in the past! Past do not exist remember? In fact that little eye set, through which you look projects you billions of years into the future just momentary, (future is not here, therefore it also do not exist) it is all entropy of the present, which cannot be explained.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEverything we were told until now, about everything was just an aswamtion; time is the same here and now, as it is at the other end of the universe. Chaotic energy is indiscriminating to our intelligent existence.
Nevertheless, until someone would be able to explain how. I can remember and recall the exact video capture of myself at the age of 3-4 years old, (just as if it was yesterday?) Then I may be contemplating to endorse some ideas (I am 79 years old now)
This slide show is great! Since slide shows (and videos) can be put on the Web at relatively low cost, it would be wonderful to have slide shows on recent developments in specific fields, such as the different possible applications of nanotechnology. Or, better, include such slide shows and videos in the issues of Scientific American Digital.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHas SA thought of doing a cd version of all SA magazines similiar to NatGeo's collection?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisRethinking (redone): Digital Scientific American (DSA) or Scientific American-Digital (SA-D) would be better than Scientific American Digital (SAD), at least as far as acronyms are concerned. (My apologies for not getting it right the first time.)
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisScientific American used to be much better. With its increased emphasis on soft science (sociology and psychology) and its commentary by non-scientist science writers, including religion, it's become a populist rag.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSM used to be a much better magazine. It's more akin to Popular Science now with its emphasis on social commentary and psychology along with commentary by non-scientist science writers. I'd rather see less political and regligious commentary. I go elsewhere for that; and the bias of its writers is rather clear.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe content of your slideshows are always interesting, but the web design of your slideshows require a lot of mouse-action. The slideshows on modern websites are oriented on the slides themselves, not the site's banner. Maybe it's time to hire a web designer with his/her head in the 21st century.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCongratulations on the occasion of your 165 -th birth day! Keep always high your distinct flag and scientific quality and prestige as you did until now .
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisKeep always high your distinct flag and scientific quality and prestige as you did until now. Congratulations on the occasion of your 165-th birth day anniversary !.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNo Pasteur, discovery of penicillin,Watson & Crick? No Baltimore & Temin? Shame on you!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOther than the brain, where are the important discoveries in the fields of medical & biological sciences? Of Jenner,Lister, Pasteur, Watson & Crick, Baltimore & Temin, the story of DNA & the Human Genome Project, Aids research? I love reading Scientific American, but this history is much too heavy in the physical sciences.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSorry gelunelu but the image you see in the telescope that took light years to arrive is the image from light years ago. The image was not updated as it arrived. Your assumption is faulty.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this