An early example is von Neumann's and Charney's Princeton Meteorological Project in the period 1946–53 which ended with daily numerical prediction in less than 2 hours. After this stage, the questions of long-range forecasting and general circulation of the atmosphere became of greater importance. The late 1950s saw the emergence of an alternative: were atmospheric models used mainly for prediction or understanding? This controversial debate in particular occurred during an important colloquium in Tokyo in 1960 which gathered together J. Charney, (...) E. Lorenz, A. Eliassen, and B. Saltzman, among others, and witnessed discussions on statistical methods for predictions and/or maximum simplification of dynamic equations. This phase ended in 1963 with Lorenzs seminal paper on “Deterministic non periodic flows.”. (shrink)

Through a detailed study of the group surrounding Andronov and Grekhova, this article highlights how the configuration of the interaction between techno-science, the State, and production appears to be very specific to the Soviet Union, as compared to the United States or France. We are often used to thinking of the relationship between science and its context by postulating that the core of scientific content is universal while context is variable. This study suggests rather the opposite. For indeed, the local (...) and specific nature of the scientific culture and tradition of nonlinearity in Gor'kiy must be emphasized. It is the political context of World War II and of the Cold War that forced the unification with Western science, in that they set theoretical targets and technical objectives, and stimulated the manufacture of identical products, such as radar and nuclear devices, automated systems, etc. In short, in the relationship of politics and science that is examined here, it is the politics which created unity and universality. (shrink)