Archive for History of Exact Sciences最新文献

Aristarchus’s De magnitudinis et distantiis solis et lunae was translated into Latin and printed by Federico Commandino in 1572. All subsequent editions of Aristarchus’ treatise, published by John Wallis (1688), Fortia d’ Urban (1823) and Thomas Heath (1913), followed Commandino’s work. In this article, through a philological approach to the geometric diagrams, I tracked down one of the Greek sources used by Commandino for preparing his Latin version. Commandino pays particular attention to drawing figures. This article sheds light on the interaction between mathematical skills and the drawing of geometric diagrams implemented in his Latin edition of Aristarchus’ book.

The paper brings into light and discusses a concentric solar model briefly described in Chapter 5 of Section III of ‘Abd al-Raḥmān al-Khāzinī’s On experimental astronomy, a treatise embedded in the prolegomenon of his comprehensive Mu‘tabar zīj, completed about 1121 c.e. In it, the Sun is assumed to rotate on the circumference of a circle concentric with the Earth and coplanar with the ecliptic, but the motion of the vector joining the Earth and Sun is monitored by a small eccentric hypocycle. The ratio between the distance of the hypocycle’s center from the Earth and the hypocycle’s radius is equal to the solar eccentricity in the eccentric model. The model is to account for the constancy of the apparent diameter of the solar disk as held by Ptolemy. The source of the model is unknown. Since the mechanism employed in it clearly resembles the pin-and-slot device, whose use in mechanical astronomical instruments has a long history from the Antikythera Mechanism to the medieval solar, lunar, and planetary equatoria and dials, we argue that the solar model can be positioned within this long-standing tradition and considered the result of the correct understanding of some Byzantine prototype and thus a typical example of the transmission of astronomical ideas via media of the material culture.

We consider the Geometria Practica of Christopher Clavius, S.J., a surprisingly eclectic and comprehensive practical geometry text, whose first edition appeared in 1604. Our focus is on four particular sections from Books IV and VI where Clavius has either used his sources in an interesting way or where he has been uncharacteristically reticent about them. These include the treatments of Heron’s Formula, Archimedes’ Measurement of the Circle, four methods for constructing two mean proportionals between two lines, and finally an algorithm for computing nth roots of numbers.

The manuscript UCLA 170/624 (ff. 75–76) contains Galileo’s proof of the center of gravity of the frustum of a cone, which was ultimately published as Theoremata circa centrum gravitatis solidorum in Discorsi e dimostrazioni matematiche intorno a due nuove scienze (Leiden 1638). The UCLA copy opens the possibility of giving a fuller account of Theoremata dating and development, and it can shed light on the origins of this research by the young Galileo. A comparison of the UCLA manuscript with the other extant copies is carried out to propose a new dating for the composition of the Theoremata. This dating will then be reconsidered in light of the mathematical content. The paper ends with a complete description of the content of the UCLA manuscript and the edition of Galileo’s text there contained.

This paper addresses an article by Felix Klein of 1886, in which he generalized his theory of polynomial equations of degree 5—comprehensively discussed in his Lectures on the Icosahedron two years earlier—to equations of degree 6 and 7. To do so, Klein used results previously established in line geometry. I review Klein’s 1886 article, its diverse mathematical background, and its place within the broader history of mathematics. I argue that the program advanced by this article, although historically overlooked due to its eventual failure, offers a valuable insight into a time of crucial evolution of the subject.

Gauss’ 1809 discussion of least squares, which can be viewed as the beginning of mathematical statistics, is reviewed. The general consensus seems to be that Gauss’ arguments are at fault, but we show that his reasoning is in fact correct, given his self-imposed restrictions, and persuasive without these restrictions.

In this paper, we give a thorough account of Brianchon and Poncelet’s joint memoir on equilateral hyperbolas subject to four given conditions, focusing on the most significant theorems expounded therein, and the determination of the “nine-point circle”. We also discuss about the origin of this very rare example of collaborative work for the time, and the general challenge of finding the nature of the loci described by the centres of the conic sections required to pass through m points and to be tangent to n straight lines given in position, m + n = 4, which was posed at the end of their work. In the case m = 4, i.e. when the conic sections have to pass through the vertices of a quadrilateral, the locus of centres is another conic section passing through the intersection points of the opposite sides and the two diagonals of the quadrilateral, respectively, and, as Gergonne showed analytically shortly after, through other significant points connected with the quadrilateral; this curve was later given the name of the “nine-point conic”, being a natural generalization of the above mentioned circle.