News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Do Teachers Need to Include the History of Mathematics in Their Teaching? (2003). Parent comment

Re:Do Teachers Need to Include the History of Mathematics in... by harry8 on Sunday December 25, 2016 @01:03AM (#13253171)
Always the headline is Watson and Crick. Not Franklin with some minor assistance from ...

Franklin is being brought into the "Watson and Crick" discussion. Rather than it being Franklin first, foremost and clearly most important. Let's not airbrush that her research was provided to Watson and Crick who claimed the glory without her consent.

So yeah, Franklin. Franklin is double helix.

Edit: name typo

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Do Teachers Need to Include the History of Mathematics in... by kirrent on Sunday December 25, 2016 @03:42AM (#13253481)
No one forgets that her data was taken/stolen. The fact of the matter is that she didn't come up with the final structure given her brilliant experimental work and results. The history of science is littered with forgotten people who were scooped of the glory just short of the line. Franklin is very well recognised given that she didn't discover the structure of DNA.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Do Teachers Need to Include the History of Mathematics in... by sndean on Sunday December 25, 2016 @02:26AM (#13253354)
> Always the headline is Watson and Crick. Not Franklin with some minor assistance from ...

Oddly, Wilkins is always left out too. That trio won the Nobel.

Maybe Watson and Crick were just better at selling themselves.

[ Parent | on HN ]