DOCSLIB.ORG

The Copernican Debate: Science Vs Science Not Science Vs Religion

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Copernican Debate: Science Vs Science Not Science Vs Religion BOOK REVIEWS || JOURNAL OF CREATION 32(1) 2018 The Copernican debate: science vs science not science vs religion religion in their opposition to the Setting Aside All Authority: Copernican geokinetic system. Giovanni Battista Riccioli and Graney argues that it was largely a the science against Copernicus science-versus-science debate, rather in the Age of Galileo than church-versus-science as often Christopher M. Graney incorrectly portrayed. University of Notre Dame, 2015 In 1651, the Jesuit Giovanni Battista Riccioli published his book New Almagest wherein he outlined 77 arguments against the Copernican John G. Hartnett system and 49 arguments in favour of it. Most arguments against the vertically. The same argument could be he book comprises 10 chapters, Copernican system could be answered, 270 pages. The last half of made for cannon balls fired in different T at that time, but Riccioli, using the then directions on Earth’s surface. These the book largely consists of two available telescopic ‘observations’ of appendices: (a) the first English types of discussions and arguments the size of stars, was able to construct carried on for a century, and even Isaac translation of Monsignor Francesco a powerful scientific argument that the Newton got involved. What we now Ingoli’s essay to Galileo (disputing pro-Copernican astronomers could know as the Coriolis force, a ‘fictitious’ the Copernican system on the eve of not answer without an appeal to the force, resulting from the rotation of the Inquisition’s condemnation of it in greatness of God. the planet on the fired or dropped 1616) and (b) excerpts from the Italian Graney largely uses Riccioli’s New objects could not be measured with the Jesuit astronomer Giovanni Battista Almagest, which argues in favour required precision in the 17th century. Riccioli’s reports on his experiments not of the Ptolemaic system but of Riccioli carried out many precise ball with falling bodies. the hybrid Tychonic system, where dropping experiments. He intended to It is interesting to note that the cover Earth is immobile at the centre of the show that there was no deviation in of the book is taken from Riccioli’s universe, the sun, the moon, and stars the path of the falling bodies but he New Almagest (1651), and it depicts circle Earth; but the planets circle failed to get any conclusive result (due both the heliocentric system (top left) the sun. Riccioli built on the work of to many unknown and uncorrected with the Tychonic hybrid geocentric Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe, and errors). Also he had argued that experts system (bottom right). built a strong scientific case against the firing cannon balls would have to Most people think that around the heliocentric system, at least through correct for Earth rotation (if Earth did time of Galileo, and the beginning of the middle of the seventeenth century, rotate). However, it was found that the Copernican revolution, opponents which was several decades after the the ‘experts’ were nowhere that good, of the heliocentric worldview were advent of the telescope. they did not have that sort of precision primarily motivated by religion or The main two arguments presented or accuracy, and so that also was an dictates from the authority of the in the book, both scientific, are thesize inconclusive argument. Roman Catholic Church. However, of stars and the effect on falling bodies. We know today that the rotation this book demonstrates that this is of Earth has to be taken into account oversimplified and mistaken. for long-range military targeting of Falling bodies The author, Christopher M. Graney, projectiles (due to the Coriolis force). uses newly translated works by anti- If Earth were rotating, then a falling Even highly accurate snipers firing Copernican writers of the time to body should hit a point on the surface over 1,000 m are required to account demonstrate that they predominantly of Earth at a definite distance from a for not only wind direction, wind used scientific arguments and not vertical line to the surface, if dropped speed, air density, and elevation, but 45 JOURNAL OF CREATION 32(1) 2018 || BOOK REVIEWS sphaera mundi (On the Sphere of the orbit is circular. Therefore if a star is World, c. 1230), the standard university close enough it should trace out a circle astronomy textbook for medieval on the sky as seen from Earth over the universities and seminaries, taught: solar year. “Also Alfraganus [9th century Thus the argument followed: if a Muslim astronomer] says that the star was seen to have a certain size least of the fixed stars which we but it was too distant to exhibit any can see is larger than the whole parallax, then it must be massively earth. But that star, compared with large, at least as large as the orbit of the firmament, is a mere point. Earth around the sun. It was argued Figure 1. Foucault’s pendulum in the Panthéon, Much more so is the earth, which that that must be the case, otherwise Paris 1 is smaller than it.” no disk for the star could be observed. Then with the invention of the The only response the Copernican also the Coriolis effect due to the telescope, it was observed that the star rotation of Earth. astronomers had to that was that God sizes were at least 10 times smaller. But is a great God and He made such In 1851, 200 years after Riccioli’s because the astronomers also observed publication of New Almagest, Léon large stars for His own glory. Riccioli solid disks for the planets out to Saturn argued that it was not the geocentrists Foucault first demonstrated his pen­ (and even phases for Venus) it was du lum in Paris. It was the first accu­ who appealed to authority but the then believed that the telescope gave heliocentrists, in their answer to the rate demonstration of the effect of the true sizes of the stars also. Based Earth rotation on falling bodies. The ‘size of stars’ argument—purely a on telescopic measurements of the star scientific argument based on the best pendulum (figure 1) swings with a sizes, Riccioli formulated a version science of their day. regular period and as Earth rotates of the Brahe argument against the Graney points out that another who the path of the pendulum successively heliocentric system and in favour of made that argument was Johann Geog moves to the left (as viewed from the geocentric Tychonic system. Lochner in his book Mathematical above) tracing out a circle. This is the This is another irony: the popular Disquisitions Concerning Astronomical effect of the Coriolis force and proof myth goes that Galileo presented his Controversies and Novelties (1614).3 of the rotation of the planet. telescope to the geocentrists, and they And the leading Polish mathematician, Interestingly, the argument used by refused to look through it. Actually, Peter Crüger, likewise thought this was Galileo and other pro-Copernicans was as science historian James Hannam an almost watertight argument against that no effect on falling bodies could pointed out: the geokinetic view.3 be detected due to common motion. “So who refused to look through Galileo used an analogy about an Ga li leo’s telescope? According to insect flying inside of a moving ship the historical record, no one did for The real size of stars at sea. But Foucault’s pendulum proves certain. The argument was over what that analogy to be invalid. they could see once they did look.”2 Ironically, the geocentrists may not And Graney shows that Galileo’s have made their own error (assuming critics did he allegedly asked, and used the telescopes gave the correct size of Sizes of stars their observations against him. stellar disks) had they been privy to The size of stars argument went With the telescope, astronomers English astronomer Horrocks’ report as follows. Sizes of stars were first looked for parallax of the distant on the 1639 transit of Venus across measured by eye, before the invention stars but were not able to detect any the sun. During his observations, of the telescope. That is what Tycho parallax. In the geocentric universe, Horrocks noted that he observed the Brahe spent much of his time doing. Earth is immobile and hence no moon passing through the stars of the That gives a ‘magnitude’ for a star, parallax would be expected. In the constellation Pleiades. As the leading catalogued as magnitudes 1 through 6, heliocentric universe, Earth orbits the dark edge of the moon passed in front with 1 the largest and 6 the smallest. sun once per year, and in so doing, over of the stars they simply winked out. Of course, large meant bright and a six-month period it moves from one They vanished suddenly, meaning they small meant dim. It was based on side of its orbit to the other. Therefore did not transition to darkness as you these ‘measured’ sizes of stars that based on trigonometry, a foreground might expect if their disk was being Tycho Brahe developed an argument star should be seen to move against the slowly covered by the dark edge of the against Copernicus. (Even before more distant background stars between moon. This meant that the ‘measured’ Brahe, Johannes de Sacrobosco’s De these two extrema. But of course the size of the stellar disks was in fact 46 BOOK REVIEWS || JOURNAL OF CREATION 32(1) 2018 spurious—due to a cause unknown pattern of maxima and minima. Since their argument against Galileo and the at the time. The sizes of the planets the lens is circular it produces a Copernican system is wrong.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The 1761 Transit of Venus and Hell's Transition to Fame
    Chapter 3 A New Node of Science in Action: The 1761 Transit of Venus and Hell’s Transition to Fame I reckon there is no one interested in astronomy who does not wait impa- tiently to learn what was observed during the recent meeting of Venus with the Sun, especially since there is no other encounter between celes- tial bodies from which we are able to ascertain with a greater degree of exactness the still unknown, or not yet sufficiently well defined, paral- laxes of the Sun and Venus. Eustachio Zanotti 17611 1 A Golden Opportunity The above assessment of Hell’s Bolognese colleague Eustachio Zanotti could hardly have been more to the point. The passage (or transit) of Venus in front of the Sun as seen from the Earth is a rare astronomical phenomenon: it comes in pairs separated by eight years, after which it does not take place for more than a whole century. The first transit of Venus observed by means of astro- nomical equipment was in 1639. Since then, transits of Venus have occurred in the years 1761 and 1769, 1874 and 1882, and 2004 and 2012—but they will not happen again until 2117 and 2125. The 1639 transit of Venus made no immediate impact and (as far is known) was only observed by two amateur astronomers in the English countryside.2 By contrast, the pre-calculated transits of 1761 and 1 Eustachio Zanotti, De Veneris ac Solis Congressu Observatio habita in Astronomico Specula Bononiensis Scientiarum Instituti Die 5 Junii mdcclxi (Bologna: Laelii e Vulpe, 1761), 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Transit of Venus, 1639 Jeremiah Horrocks and William Crabtree
    THE TRANSIT OF VENUS, 1639 JEREMIAH HORROCKS AND WILLIAM CRABTREE A Selected Bibliography Primary Sources Horrox, Jeremiah., Venus in Sole Visa, reproduced (in English) in Memoir of the Life and Labours of the Reverend Jeremiah Horrox, by Rev. Arundell Blount Whatton, pub. Wertheim, Macintosh and Hunt, 1859, pp.109-216 Secondary Sources Papers and Articles AMC, Horrocks, Jeremiah (1617?-1641), National Dictionary of Biography, pp.1267-1269 Applebaum, W., and Hatch, R.A., Boulliau, Mercator and Horrocks's "Venus in Sole Venus": Three unpublished letters, Journal for the History of Astronomy, Vol.14, part 3, No. 41, pp.174-175 […], October 1983 Applebaum, Wilbur, Horrocks, Jeremiah, Dictionary of Scientific Biography, Vol.6 (1972), pp.514- 516 Bailey, John E., Jeremiah Horrox, The Observatory, 1883, No.79, pp.318-328 Barocas, V., A Country Curate, Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 12, 1971, pp.179-182 Bulpit, W.T., Misconceptions concerning Jeremiah Horrocks, the Astronomer, The Observatory, Vol.27, September 1911, No.478, pp.335-337 (illustrations: plate facing p.335 showing Hoole Church, Carr House and stained glass memorial window at Hoole Church) Chapman, Allan, Jeremiah Horrocks, the Transit of Venus, and the 'New Astronomy' in early seventeenth-century England, Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society, Vol. 31, 1996, p.333-357 Clark, G.Napier, Sketch of the Life and Works of Rev.Jeremiah Horrox, Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, Vol.10, No.10, December 1916, pp.523-536 (illustrations:
    [Show full text]
  • Download This Article (Pdf)
    Percy, JAAVSO Volume 41, 2013 381 Book Review Received August 7, 2013 Meeting Venus—a Collection of Papers Presented at the Venus Transit Conference, Tromsø 2012 Christiaan Sterken and Per Pippin Aspaas, eds., 2013, 256 pages, paperback, ISBN 978-82-8244-094-3, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, and University of Tromsø, available in open access (http://www.vub.ac.be/STER/JAD/JAD19/jad19_1/ jad19_1.htm). On June 6, 2012, the planet Venus passed across the face of the Sun, as seen from the Earth. The brightness of the Sun (if you could measure it precisely) would have decreased by about 0.001 magnitude, adding to the Sun’s status as a variable star. More to the point: a transit of Venus (or Mercury) is a graphic demonstration of what an exoplanet transit would look like, if we had sufficient power to resolve it. Transits of Venus are brief and rare. Kepler’s and Newton’s laws made it possible to predict them. Jeremiah Horrocks was the first to observe one, in 1639, based on Kepler’s prediction, and his own refinement thereof. Edmond Halley, building on a suggestion by James Gregory, showed that it would be possible to measure the absolute size scale of the solar system by observing a transit of Venus from multiple sites across the Earth, and this led to a number of expeditions to observe the 1761 and 1769 transits, notably James Cook’s expedition to Tahiti in 1769. It was the “space race” of its day. Specifically, the project was to measure the solar parallax—the angle subtended at the Sun by the mean radius of the Earth, now known to be 8.794143 arc seconds.
    [Show full text]
  • A Calendar of Mathematical Dates January
    A CALENDAR OF MATHEMATICAL DATES V. Frederick Rickey Department of Mathematical Sciences United States Military Academy West Point, NY 10996-1786 USA Email: fred-rickey @ usma.edu JANUARY 1 January 4713 B.C. This is Julian day 1 and begins at noon Greenwich or Universal Time (U.T.). It provides a convenient way to keep track of the number of days between events. Noon, January 1, 1984, begins Julian Day 2,445,336. For the use of the Chinese remainder theorem in determining this date, see American Journal of Physics, 49(1981), 658{661. 46 B.C. The first day of the first year of the Julian calendar. It remained in effect until October 4, 1582. The previous year, \the last year of confusion," was the longest year on record|it contained 445 days. [Encyclopedia Brittanica, 13th edition, vol. 4, p. 990] 1618 La Salle's expedition reached the present site of Peoria, Illinois, birthplace of the author of this calendar. 1800 Cauchy's father was elected Secretary of the Senate in France. The young Cauchy used a corner of his father's office in Luxembourg Palace for his own desk. LaGrange and Laplace frequently stopped in on business and so took an interest in the boys mathematical talent. One day, in the presence of numerous dignitaries, Lagrange pointed to the young Cauchy and said \You see that little young man? Well! He will supplant all of us in so far as we are mathematicians." [E. T. Bell, Men of Mathematics, p. 274] 1801 Giuseppe Piazzi (1746{1826) discovered the first asteroid, Ceres, but lost it in the sun 41 days later, after only a few observations.
    [Show full text]
  • Transits of Venus: New Views of the Solar System and Galaxy
    INTERNATIONAL ASTRONOMICAL UNION UNION ASTRONOMIQUE INTERNATIONALE "I TRANSITS OF VENUS: NEW VIEWS OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM AND GALAXY PROCEEDINGS OF THE 196th COLLOQUIUM OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASTRONOMICAL UNION HELD IN PRESTON, LANCASHIRE, UNITED KINGDOM 7-11 JUNE 2004 Edited by D. W. KURTZ Centre for Astrophysics, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS V Table of Contents Preface ix Organizing committee xii Conference photograph xiii Conference participants xvi Part 1. TRANSITS OF VENUS: HISTORY, RESULTS AND LEGACY Chairs: Steve Dick & Mary Bru'ck Jeremiah Horrocks, William Crabtree, and the Lancashire observations of the tran- sit of Venus of 1639 [Keynote talk] 3 Allan Chapman ~\ Jeremiah Horrocks's Lancashire 27 John K. Walton William Crabtree's Venus transit observation 34 Nicholas Kollerstrom Venus transits - A French view 41 Suzanne Debarbat James Cook's 1769 transit of Venus expedition to Tahiti 52 Wayne Orchiston v~ Observations of the 1761 and 1769 transits of Venus from Batavia (Dutch East Indies) 67 Robert H. van Gent The 1761 transit of Venus dispute between Audiffredi and Pingre 74 Luisa Pigatto Observations of planetary transits made in Ireland in the 18th Century and the development of astronomy in Ireland 87 C. J. Butler The American transit of Venus expeditions of 1874 and 1882 100 Steven J. Dick The Mexican expedition to observe the 8 December 1874 transit of Venus in Japan 111 Christine Allen Maya observations of 13th-century transits of Venus? 124 Jesus Galindo Trejo and Christine Allen Lord Lindsay's expedition to Mauritius in 1874 138 M. T. Briick ' vi Contents Why did other European astronomers not see the December 1639 transit of Venus? 146 David W.
    [Show full text]
  • Planets Solar System Paper Contents
    Planets Solar system paper Contents 1 Jupiter 1 1.1 Structure ............................................... 1 1.1.1 Composition ......................................... 1 1.1.2 Mass and size ......................................... 2 1.1.3 Internal structure ....................................... 2 1.2 Atmosphere .............................................. 3 1.2.1 Cloud layers ......................................... 3 1.2.2 Great Red Spot and other vortices .............................. 4 1.3 Planetary rings ............................................ 4 1.4 Magnetosphere ............................................ 5 1.5 Orbit and rotation ........................................... 5 1.6 Observation .............................................. 6 1.7 Research and exploration ....................................... 6 1.7.1 Pre-telescopic research .................................... 6 1.7.2 Ground-based telescope research ............................... 7 1.7.3 Radiotelescope research ................................... 8 1.7.4 Exploration with space probes ................................ 8 1.8 Moons ................................................. 9 1.8.1 Galilean moons ........................................ 10 1.8.2 Classification of moons .................................... 10 1.9 Interaction with the Solar System ................................... 10 1.9.1 Impacts ............................................ 11 1.10 Possibility of life ........................................... 12 1.11 Mythology .............................................
    [Show full text]
  • 78. Don't Miss the Transit of Venus in 2012: It's Your Last Chance Until
    © 2011, Astronomical Society of the Pacific No. 78 • Fall 2011 www.astrosociety.org/uitc 390 Ashton Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94112 Don’t Miss the Transit of Venus in 2012: It’s Your Last Chance Until 2117 by Chuck Bueter (www.transitofvenus.org) The Travails of Le Gentil Imagine your country is sending you on a quest to resolve one of the era’s biggest questions in science. At this moment in history, the solution, the technology, and the alignment of planets have come together. For your part of the mission, all you have to do is record the instant when the edge of one small circle touches the edge of a second larger circle. Such were the fortunate circumstances of Guilliame Hyacinthe Jean Baptiste Le Gentil. The French astronomer eagerly set sail for India to witness the 1761 transit of Venus, a rare celestial alignment in which the silhouette of Venus appears to pass directly across the sun. A fleet of astronomers spread out across the globe in response to Edmund Halley’s call to time the event from diverse locations, from which the distance to the sun—the highly valuable Astronomical Unit—could be mathematically derived. Expeditions were sent around the world to observe the transit of Venus. Image courtesy of Chuck Bueter Upon Le Gentil’s arrival, the intended destination was occupied by hostile English troops, so his ship turned Johannes Kepler showed the relationship between a planet’s back to sea, where he could not effectively use a telescope. orbital period and its distance from the sun.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1761 Transit of Venus and Hell's Transition to Fame
    Chapter 3 A New Node of Science in Action: The 1761 Transit of Venus and Hell’s Transition to Fame I reckon there is no one interested in astronomy who does not wait impa- tiently to learn what was observed during the recent meeting of Venus with the Sun, especially since there is no other encounter between celes- tial bodies from which we are able to ascertain with a greater degree of exactness the still unknown, or not yet sufficiently well defined, paral- laxes of the Sun and Venus. Eustachio Zanotti 17611 1 A Golden Opportunity The above assessment of Hell’s Bolognese colleague Eustachio Zanotti could hardly have been more to the point. The passage (or transit) of Venus in front of the Sun as seen from the Earth is a rare astronomical phenomenon: it comes in pairs separated by eight years, after which it does not take place for more than a whole century. The first transit of Venus observed by means of astro- nomical equipment was in 1639. Since then, transits of Venus have occurred in the years 1761 and 1769, 1874 and 1882, and 2004 and 2012—but they will not happen again until 2117 and 2125. The 1639 transit of Venus made no immediate impact and (as far is known) was only observed by two amateur astronomers in the English countryside.2 By contrast, the pre-calculated transits of 1761 and 1 Eustachio Zanotti, De Veneris ac Solis Congressu Observatio habita in Astronomico Specula Bononiensis Scientiarum Instituti Die 5 Junii mdcclxi (Bologna: Laelii e Vulpe, 1761), 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1761'S Transit of Venus : an International Transfer of Mathematical Knowledge…
    The 1761's transit of Venus : an international transfer of mathematical knowledge…. Isabelle Lémonon (EHESS- CAK Paris) Novembertagung 2015, Turin, November, 26th-28th The 1761's transit of Venus : an international transfer of mathematical knowledge…. ...out of women's reach ? Isabelle Lémonon (EHESS- CAK Paris) Novembertagung 2015, Turin, November, 26th-28th • What is a transit of Venus ? • What for ? • How ? • Historical context • Who ? Where ? When ? • Transfer of mathematical knowledge • Transit of Venus and “eclipse of a Savante” • Conclusion What is a transit of Venus ? • Transit = one celestial body appears to move across the face of another celestial body (different apparent diameter) • Conjunction= apparent close approach between the objects as seen on the sky Diagram of transit of Venus Image of the 2012 transit taken by4 NASA's 3,4° Solar Dynamics Observatory spacecraft What is a transit of Venus ? • Predictable astronomical phenomenon • One of the rarest of these phenomena • Every 243 years, with pairs of transits eight years apart separated by long gaps of 121,5 years and 105,5 years ( orbital periods of Earth and Venus are close to 8:13 and 243:395 commensurabilities) 5 What for ? • Measurement of the distance Sun/Earth A (E.Halley 1716, Royal Society) : solar parallax a “a clarion call for scientists everywhere to prepare for the rare opportunity presented by the forthcoming transits of 1761 and 1769. […] I recommend it to the curious strenuously to apply themselves to this observation. By this means, the Sun's parallax
    [Show full text]
  • Orozco-Echeverri2020.Pdf (3.437Mb)
    This thesis has been submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree (e.g. PhD, MPhil, DClinPsychol) at the University of Edinburgh. Please note the following terms and conditions of use: This work is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, which are retained by the thesis author, unless otherwise stated. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. How do planets find their way? Laws of nature and the transformations of knowledge in the Scientific Revolution Sergio Orozco-Echeverri Doctor of Philosophy in Science and Technology Studies University of Edinburgh 2019 To Uğur In his own handwriting, he set down a concise synthesis of the studies by Monk Hermann, which he left José Arcadio so that he would be able to make use of the astrolabe, the compass, and the sextant. José Arcadio Buendía spent the long months of the rainy season shut up in a small room that he had built in the rear of the house so that no one would disturb his experiments. Having completely abandoned his domestic obligations, he spent entire nights in the courtyard watching the course of the stars and he almost contracted sunstroke from trying to establish an exact method to ascertain noon.
    [Show full text]
  • And the Ends of Jesuit Science in Enlightenment Europe
    Maximilian Hell (1720–92) and the Ends of Jesuit Science in Enlightenment Europe <UN> Jesuit Studies Modernity through the Prism of Jesuit History Editor Robert A. Maryks (Independent Scholar) Editorial Board James Bernauer, S.J. (Boston College) Louis Caruana, S.J. (Pontificia Università Gregoriana, Rome) Emanuele Colombo (DePaul University) Paul Grendler (University of Toronto, emeritus) Yasmin Haskell (University of Western Australia) Ronnie Po-chia Hsia (Pennsylvania State University) Thomas M. McCoog, S.J. (Loyola University Maryland) Mia Mochizuki (Independent Scholar) Sabina Pavone (Università degli Studi di Macerata) Moshe Sluhovsky (The Hebrew University of Jerusalem) Jeffrey Chipps Smith (The University of Texas at Austin) volume 27 The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/js <UN> Maximilian Hell (1720–92) and the Ends of Jesuit Science in Enlightenment Europe By Per Pippin Aspaas László Kontler leiden | boston <UN> This is an open access title distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-Nd 4.0 License, which permits any non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. The publication of this book in Open Access has been made possible with the support of the Central European University and the publication fund of UiT The Arctic University of Norway. Cover illustration: Silhouette of Maximilian Hell by unknown artist, probably dating from the early 1780s. (In a letter to Johann III Bernoulli in Berlin, dated Vienna March 25, 1780, Hell states that he is trying to have his silhouette made by “a person who is proficient in this.” The silhouette reproduced here is probably the outcome.) © Österreichische Nationalbibliothek.
    [Show full text]
  • The Black-Drop Effect Explained
    Transits of Venus: New Views of the Solar System and Galaxy Proceedings IAU Colloquium No. 196, 2004 c 2004 International Astronomical Union D.W. Kurtz & G.E. Bromage, eds. DOI: 00.0000/X000000000000000X The black-drop effect explained Jay M. Pasachoff1, Glenn Schneider2, and Leon Golub3 1Williams College-Hopkins Observatory, Williamstown, MA 01267, USA email: jay.m.pasachoff@williams.edu 2Steward Observatory, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA 3Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA Abstract. The black-drop effect bedeviled attempts to determine the Astronomical Unit from the time of the transit of Venus of 1761, until dynamical determinations of the AU obviated the need for transit measurements. By studying the 1999 transit of Mercury, using observations taken from space with NASA's Transition Region and Coronal Explorer (TRACE), we have fully explained Mercury's black-drop effect, with contributions from not only the telescope's point-spread function but also the solar limb darkening. Since Mercury has no atmosphere, we have thus verified the previous understanding, often overlooked, that the black-drop effect does not necessarily correspond to the detection of an atmosphere. We continued our studies with observations of the 2004 transit of Venus with the TRACE spacecraft in orbit and with ground- based imagery from Thessaloniki, Greece. We report on preliminary reduction of those data; see http://www.transitofvenus.info for updated results. Such studies are expected to contribute to the understanding of transits of exoplanets. Though the determination of the Astronomical Unit from studies of transit of Venus has been undertaken only rarely, it was for centuries expected to be the best method.
    [Show full text]