一项新的学术论文由科学史家和X射线晶体学家合著，对詹姆斯·沃森关于罗莎琳德·富兰克林的历史叙述提出了重要质疑。1论文证明富兰克林在1952年5月2日就已通过第49号照片的分析计算出DNA B型螺旋的关键参数，确定DNA螺旋每转34埃含10个核苷酸碱基层。1这一发现早于沃森在1953年2月看到第51号照片后所声称的时刻。1
论文驳斥了沃森关于富兰克林未能看出第51号照片重要性的说法。1研究指出，富兰克林和戈斯林在第49号照片的分析中已经建立了螺旋解释，而拍摄于1952年5月初的第51号照片使用了与第49号照片相同的DNA样品。1第51号照片的上部分在第49号版本中被无意裁剪，富兰克林有意重新拍摄第51号照片是为了获得更清晰、适合发表的衍射图像。1
论文认为沃森及后来的评论家采用了19世纪"客观摄影"的修辞，声称自然通过照片"直接说话"，从而系统地抹去了富兰克林作为主动科学思想家的角色，错误地将其描绘成被动的技术人员。1
A scholarly paper co-authored by a science historian and X-ray crystallographer disputes James Watson's longstanding narrative about Rosalind Franklin's role in determining DNA's structure.1 The authors argue that Franklin had already calculated the key parameters of DNA's B-form helix from photograph 49, taken on May 2, 1952, and that her deliberate capture of photograph 51 in early May that year was intended to obtain a clearer, publication-ready diffraction image rather than to make a serendipitous discovery.1 According to the analysis, Franklin determined that the DNA helix completes one full turn every 34 angstroms and contains 10 nucleotide base pairs per turn on the same day photograph 49 was taken.1
The paper contends that Watson and subsequent commentators systematically erased Franklin's technical skill and scientific judgment from the historical record, mischaracterizing her as a passive technician rather than an active scientific thinker.1 Watson famously claimed that upon viewing photograph 51 in February 1953, "my mouth fell open and my pulse began to race."1 However, the research demonstrates that Franklin and her colleague Gosling had already established a helical interpretation from their analysis of photograph 49, contrary to later depictions of an accidental discovery.1 The upper portion of photograph 51 had been inadvertently cropped in the earlier version, prompting Franklin to retake the image intentionally.1 The scholars note that Watson and Wilkins employed nineteenth-century "objective photography" rhetoric, suggesting that nature spoke directly through photographs, thereby obscuring Franklin's crucial interpretive role.1
评论
还没有评论，欢迎留下第一条。