Archive for History of Exact Sciences最新文献

Antonio Signorini’s contribution to the constitutive theory of non-linear elasticity is reconstructed and analyzed. Some uninformed opinions suggesting he had a minor role, lacking of significant results, are discussed and refuted. It is shown that Signorini should be rightly credited for being among the first scholars aware of the central problem of non-linear elasticity: the determination of the general form of the elastic potential.

Ptolemy reports three dated lunar eclipses observed by Hipparchus, and also refers to two more, without identifying them, which Hipparchus compared with two earlier counterparts (apparently, observed in Mesopotamia) to assess the validity of the Babylonian period relations of the lunar motion. Also, in Pliny the Elder’s Historia naturalis, we are told that a horizontal lunar eclipse (selenelion) at sunrise and moonset was reported (observed?) by Hipparchus. Reviewing a paper by G.J. Toomer in 1980, it is shown that the pairs of the eclipses were, almost certainly, the ones occurring on “31 January 486 b.c. and 27 January 141 b.c.” and “19 November 502 b.c. and 14 November 157 b.c.”; and if Hipparchus observed from St. Stephen’s Hill in Rhodes, the most probable candidate for the selenelion at moonset was the lunar eclipse of 7 February 142 b.c., although he also had the chance to observe any of the four others, occurring on 3 July 150 b.c., 10 April 145 b.c., 26 November 139 b.c., and 15 November 138 b.c., on a sufficiently elevated mountain on the island.

Ibn al-Zarqālluh (al-Andalus, d. 1100) introduced a new inequality in the longitudinal motion of the Moon into Ptolemy’s lunar model with the amplitude of 24′, which periodically changes in terms of a sine function with the distance in longitude between the mean Moon and the solar apogee as the variable. It can be shown that the discovery had its roots in his examination of the discrepancies between the times of the lunar eclipses he obtained from the data of his eclipse observations over a 37-year period in the latter part of the eleventh century and the predictions made on the basis of the lunar theories in the Mumta(textit{d{h}})an zīj (Baghdad, ca. 830) and al-Battānī’s zīj (Raqqa, d. 929), which were available to him at the time. What Ibn al-Zarqālluh found is, in fact, a special case of the annual equation of the Moon, which is applicable in the oppositions and, thus, in the lunar eclipses. The inequality was discovered independently by Tycho Brahe (d. 1601) and Johannes Kepler (d. 1630). As Ibn Yūnus (d. 1009) reports in his (textit{d{H}})ākimī zīj, Ibn al-Zarqālluh’s medieval Middle Eastern predecessors, the Persian astronomers Māhānī (d. ca. 880) and Nayrīzī (d. 922) as well as ‘Alī b. Amājūr (fl. ca. 920), were already acquainted with the problem of the eclipse timing errors, but it had remained unresolved until Ibn Yūnus provided a provisional, and incorrect, solution by reducing the size of the lunar epicycle. As we argue, the diverse ways to tackle the same problem stem from two different methodologies in astronomical reasoning in the traditions developed separately in the Eastern and Western regions of the medieval Islamic domain.

This study examines Babylonian records of the new moon interval NA (sunset to moonset on the day of first lunar visibility) and the connection of this interval to the length of the moon. I show that the NA intervals in the Normal Star Almanacs were computed using the goal-year method and were then used in turn to predict the lengths of each month of the year. I further argue that these predicted month lengths, adjusted occasionally on the basis of observation in cases where the moon’s visibility was considered marginal, formed the basis of the Late Babylonian calendar.

The manuscripts and writings of the fifteenth-century astronomer and physician Lewis Caerleon (d. c. 1495) have been largely overlooked. To fill this gap, this article focuses on his writings and working methods through a case study of his canons and table for the equation of time. In the first part, an account of his life and writings is given on the basis of new evidence. The context in which his work on the equation of time was produced is explored in detail by reviewing the three key periods of his scientific production. His heavy reliance on Simon Bredon’s Commentum super Almagesti is also analyzed. The article also provides editions of Lewis Caerleon’s canons for calculating his table for the equation of time and a critical edition of Simon Bredon’s Commentum super Almagesti, III, 22–24. In the second part of this article, we analyze the table for the equation of time derived by Lewis around 1485. In addition to the final table, there is a unique table with intermediate results that records every step of his derivation. By following and discussing the details of this derivation, we shed a new light on tabular practices in mathematical astronomy. Following Lewis in his historical mathematical procedure, we argue, offers a novel historiographical approach that allows us to identify different sources and practices used by historical actors. Therefore, beyond the exchange of parameters residing in modern mathematical analysis, this novel approach offers a promising refinement for the analysis of the transmission of knowledge across space, time, and culture.

In 1646, Francesco Fontana (1580–1656) published his Novae Coelestium Terresriumque Rerum Observationes which includes discussions of optical properties of systems of lenses, e.g., telescope and microscope. Our study of the Novae Coelestium shows that the advance Fontana made in optics could not have been accomplished on the basis of the traditional spectacle optics which was the dominant practice at his time. Though spectacle and telescope making share the same optical elements, improving eyesight and constructing telescope are different practices based on different principles. The production of powerful astronomical telescopes demanded objective lenses with much longer focal length and eyepiece lenses with much shorter focal length than the range of focal length of lenses used for spectacles, respectively. Moreover, higher standard of precision and purity of the glass was required. The transition from the practice by which optical components were chosen from ready-made spectacle lenses to lenses which were produced according to predetermined specifications (e.g., calculation of focal length) was anything but straight forward. We argue that Fontana developed the optical knowledge necessary for improving the performance of optical systems. Essentially, he formulated—based on rich practical experience—a set of rules of calculation by which optical properties of a lens system could be determined and adjusted as required.

The efflux problem deals with the outflow of water through an orifice in a vessel, the flow over the crest of a weir and some other ways of discharge. The difficulties to account for such fluid motions in terms of a mathematical theory made it a notorious problem throughout the history of hydraulics and hydrodynamics. The treatment of the efflux problem, therefore, reflects the diverging routes along which hydraulics became an engineering science and hydrodynamics a theoretical science out of touch with applications. By the twentieth century, the presentation of the efflux problem in textbooks on hydraulics had almost nothing in common with that in textbooks on hydrodynamics.

This paper concerns late 1920 s attempts to construct unitary theories of gravity and electromagnetism. A first attempt using a non-standard connection—with torsion and zero-curvature—was carried out by Albert Einstein in a number of publications that appeared between 1928 and 1931. In 1929, Tullio Levi-Civita discussed Einstein’s geometric structure and deduced a new system of differential equations in a Riemannian manifold endowed with what is nowadays known as Levi-Civita connection. He attained an important result: Maxwell’s electromagnetic equations and the gravitational equations were obtained exactly, while Einstein had deduced them only as a first order approximation. A main feature of Levi-Civita’s theory is the essential use of the Ricci’s rotation coefficients, introduced by Gregorio Ricci Curbastro many years before. We trace the history of Ricci’s coefficients that are still used today, and highlight their geometric and mechanical meaning.

A table in five columns for the radii of the Sun, the Moon, and the shadow is included in sets of astronomical tables from the fifteenth to the early seventeenth century, specifically in those by John of Gmunden (d. 1442), Peurbach (d. 1461), the second edition of the Alfonsine Tables (1492), Copernicus (d. 1543), Brahe (d. 1601), and Longomontanus (d. 1647). The arrangement is the same and the entries did not change much, despite many innovations in astronomical theories in this time period. In other words, there is continuity in presentation and, from the point of view of the user of these tables, changes in the theory played no role. In general, the methods for computing the entries are not described and have to be reconstructed. In this paper, we focus on the users of these tables rather than on their compilers, but we refer to modern reconstructions where appropriate. A key issue is the treatment of the size of the Moon during a solar eclipse which was not properly understood by Tycho Brahe. Kepler’s solution and that of his predecessor, Levi ben Gerson (d. 1344), are discussed.

This article surveys surviving evidence for the determination of geographic longitude in Latin Europe in the period between 1100 and 1300. Special consideration is given to the different types of sources that preserve longitude estimates as well as to the techniques that were used in establishing them. While the method of inferring longitude differences from eclipse times was evidently in use as early as the mid-twelfth century, it remains doubtful that it can account for most of the preserved longitudes. An analysis of 89 different estimates for 30 European cities indicates a high degree of accuracy among the longitudes of English cities and a conspicuous displacement eastward (by 5°–7;30°) shared by most longitudes of cities in Italy and France. In both cases, the data suggest a high level of interdependence between estimates for different cities in the same geographic region, although the means by which these estimates were arrived at remain insufficiently known.