DOCSLIB.ORG

Loose, Patrice Koelsch All Rights Reserved ROGER BACON on PERCEPTION: a RECONSTRUCTION

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Loose, Patrice Koelsch All Rights Reserved ROGER BACON on PERCEPTION: a RECONSTRUCTION INFORMATION TO USERS This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material subm itted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­ graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning” the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our Dissertations Customer Services Department. 5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we have filmed the best available copy. University Microfilms International 300 N. 2EEB ROAD. ANN ARBOR. Ml 48106 18 BEDFORD ROW, LONDON WC1R 4EJ, ENGLAND 8001775 L o o s e, P a t r ic e K o e l s c h ROGER BACON ON PERCEPTION: A RECONSTRUCTION AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE THEORY OF VISUAL PERCEPTION EXPOUNDED IN THE "OPUS MAJUS" The Ohio State University Ph.D. 1979 University Microfilms International300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106 18 Bedford Row, London WC1R 4EJ, England Copyright 1979 by Loose, Patrice Koelsch All Rights Reserved ROGER BACON ON PERCEPTION: A RECONSTRUCTION AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE' THEORY OF VISUAL PERCEPTION EXPOUNDED IN THE OPUS MAJUS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Patrice Koelsch Loose, B.A., M.A. # # # * # The Ohio State University 1979 Reading Committee: proved By Ivan Boh Peter K. Machamer Robert G. Turnbull uo-Aavisers Department of Philosophy VITA September 12, 19^9 Born - Bronx, New York 1968-1971 .... Honors Program, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 197 1 .............. B.A. cum laude, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1972 .............. Phi Beta Kappa 1971-1975 .... University fellow, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 1972-1974 .... Teaching assistant, Depart­ ment of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 197 3.............. M.A. The Ohio State Univer­ sity , Columbus, Ohio 1975-1979 .... Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Augustana College, Rock Island, Illinois ii TABLE OP CONTENTS Page VITA ................................................ ii INTRODUCTION ....................................... 1 PART I Chapter 1. The Platonic Theory of V i s i o n ............ 10 2. The Aristotelian Account of Perception. 30 3. Augustine on Sense-Perception and Divine Illumination ....................... 76 4. Robert Grosseteste and the Philosophy of Light..................................... 1*11 PART II Chapter 5. The Baconian Synthesis..................... 179 BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................... 283 iii INTRODUCTION My purpose in this dissertation is to reconstruct and provide a critical analysis of the theory of perception developed by Roger Bacon in the Opus Majus. I will attempt to explicate the particular psychological, epistemic, and theological doctrines embedded in Bacon's theory of perception. I take it that Bacon's theory has two aspects. One aspect is developed in his theory of optics and the anatomy of the eye. Sight is explicated entirely in terms of geometrical figures and principles. I do not intend to lay out Bacon's theory of geometrical optics in detail in this dissertation. The significance of this aspect of perception for my purposes is the concept that sight can be geometrically characterized, and consequently, the formal causes of purely perspectival science can be known with mathematical certainty. My concern is with the other aspect of perception, namely the cognitive aspect. I shall first examine what I take to be the psychological Issues implicit in Bacon's discussion of the sensitive soul and its faculties. I will then turn to the epistemic implications of his treatment of the hierarchy of cognitive elements involved in perception. My ultimate aim is to show how the theory of perception derives from a 1 2 particular epistemic view that takes its own character and motivation from Augustinian theological concerns. I will be especially interested in the role of sensory perception as preliminary to obtaining spiritual knowledge. The scope of the Opus Majus is encyclopaedic, and Bacon’s genius is syncretic rather than innovative. Thus, in order to reconstruct and analyze Bacon's theory, it is necessary to isolate and evaluate the seminal historical antecedents that shape his work. Hence, in the first part of this dissertation I shall address myself to what I take to be the four major influences on Bacon’s theory of perception: (1) the Platonic theory of vision, (2) the Aristotel an account of sense perception, (3) the Neoplatonic theology of St. Augustine, and (4) the "light metaphysics" of Robert Grossteste. The Platonic and Aristotelian accounts of percep­ tion were of special significance to Medieval natural scientists. Both Plato and Aristotle consider seeing the superior sensory modality and thus concern themselves primarily with visual perception. The emphasis on vision as the epistemically privileged mode of perception carries over to the Thirteenth Century; consequently, my own emphasis throughout this dissertation will be on the sensory and cognitive mechanisms involved in visual perception. Again, my intent is not to provide a history of analysis of ancient theories of perception (I am not, for example, going to discuss the Epicurean account of vision) but rather, I want to focus on those aspects of these early perceptual theories that were seminal to the development of the Medieval perceptual theories of Robert Grosseteste and Roger Bacon. In the case of Bacon particularly, T will show that there is a very strong connection between the science of optics and the philosophical/theological concerns of the acquisition of knowledge. Chapter 1: In the first chapter I set out the account of perception given by Plato in the Timaeus and the Theatetus. Plato advocates an extramission theory of vision which can best be interpreted as requiring the motion of particles in place rather than the transfer of particles through space. I claim that the treatment of the processes of sensory perception must be understood as deriving from Plato’s metaphysics. The objects of sense perception are merely appearances in the unstable world of becoming, and are not objects of knowledge. This interpretation is based on arguments in the Theatetus and the Republic that perception is not knowledge. 1J Chapter 2_: In contrast to the predominantly metaphysical orientation of Plato, Aristotle approaches perception from the standpoint of the psychologist interested in the behavior of the organism interacting with its environ­ ment. My explication of the Aristotelian account of perception will follow Aristotle’s own discussion in De Anima beginning with the objects of the special sense and the common sensibles, and proceeding to the various faculties of the sensitive soul. I shall then turn to the cognitive processes, and I will discuss at length the role of the active intellect, paying particular attention to W. D. Ross’ interpretation of it as that by which one acquires knowledge of abstractions that are not presented in sense-experience. Whereas the passive aspect of nous acquires knowledge of universals exemplified by the objects apprehended by sense, the active intellect enables one to make purely theoretical inferences in metaphysics. (In the last chapter I will explain why Bacon mistakenly identifies the active Intellect with God.) Chapter 3.: I shall then proceed to the Augustinian theory of knowledge, which was to play a form&tive role in the development of medieval theology, particularly among the Franciscans. I shall discuss briefly Augustine's theory that all knowledge Is a function of the soul, and the role of memory in recognizing the objects of sensation. I will focus on Augustine’s attempt to explain the nature of sense-perception. Augustine grants that perception is not merely some modification of the sense-organ, but involves the mind's being in some significant way aware of the modification. My concern is with Augustine's attempt to explain the mind's awareness without supposing that it is somehow caused or initiated by the sense-organ, since this would violate the basic Augustinian tenet that,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On Some Borrowed and Misunderstood Problems in Greek Catoptrics
    On Some Borrowed and Misunderstood Problems in Greek Catoptrics by ALEXANDERJONES Optics was one of the first sciences to which ancient Greek mathe- maticians attempted to apply the apparatus of geometry. They were most successful in describing geometrically certain phenomena of per- spective (as in Euclid’s Optics and parts of Pappus’s Collection, Book 6),less so in catoljtrics, the study of mirrors.’ The problems typically encountered in the surviving writings on catoptrics fall into two classes: those dealing with the reflection of rays cast from a luminous source such as the sun upon minors of plane or curved surface, and those involving the projection of lines of sight from the eye by way of a minor to an object. The most basic problem of the first class, to make a burning mirror, is solved correctly in Diocles’s On Burning Mirrors (ca. 200 B.C.) with both spherical and parabolic mirrors; other prob- lems were investigated by Diocles, by Anthemius (ca. A.D. 620) in his On Paradoxical Devices, and doubtless by other authors in the cen- turies between.2 In general these problems were amenable to geo- metrical treatment in antiquity because Hellenistic geometers were equipped to study the tangent lines to a wide range of curves (or the tangent planes to analogous surfaces) and the behaviour of straight lines in a given direction or through a given point .and inflected at the curve or surface at equal angles to the tangent at the point of in- cidence. Problems of the other class, in which it was required to make an ar- rangement of mirrors or a mirror with a special curvature, such that a *Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, Victoria College, Univer- sity of Toronto, Toronto, Canada MSS 1K7.
    [Show full text]
  • Atmospheric Refraction: a History
    Atmospheric refraction: a history Waldemar H. Lehn and Siebren van der Werf We trace the history of atmospheric refraction from the ancient Greeks up to the time of Kepler. The concept that the atmosphere could refract light entered Western science in the second century B.C. Ptolemy, 300 years later, produced the first clearly defined atmospheric model, containing air of uniform density up to a sharp upper transition to the ether, at which the refraction occurred. Alhazen and Witelo transmitted his knowledge to medieval Europe. The first accurate measurements were made by Tycho Brahe in the 16th century. Finally, Kepler, who was aware of unusually strong refractions, used the Ptolemaic model to explain the first documented and recognized mirage (the Novaya Zemlya effect). © 2005 Optical Society of America OCIS codes: 000.2850, 010.4030. 1. Introduction the term catoptrics became reserved for reflection Atmospheric refraction, which is responsible for both only, and the term dioptrics was adopted to describe astronomical refraction and mirages, is a subject that the study of refraction.2 The latter name was still in is widely dispersed through the literature, with very use in Kepler’s time. few works dedicated entirely to its exposition. The same must be said for the history of refraction. Ele- ments of the history are scattered throughout numer- 2. Early Greek Theories ous references, many of which are obscure and not Aristotle (384–322 BC) was one of the first philoso- readily available. It is our objective to summarize in phers to write about vision. He considered that a one place the development of the concept of atmo- transparent medium such as air or water was essen- spheric refraction from Greek antiquity to the time of tial to transmit information to the eye, and that vi- Kepler, and its use to explain the first widely known sion in a vacuum would be impossible.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Readings in the Early History of Light
    Paul Avery PHY 3400 Aug. 23, 1999 Some Readings in the Early History of Light The Greeks In optics, Euclid's textbook (called the Optics) set the precedent. Euclid postulated visual rays to be straight lines, and he defined the apparent size of an object in terms of the angle formed by the rays drawn from the top and the bottom of the object to the observer's eye. He then proved, for example, that nearer objects appear larger and appear to move faster and showed how to measure the height of distant objects from their shadows or reflected images, and so on. Other textbooks set out theorems on the phenomena of reflection and refraction (the field called catoptrics). The most extensive survey of optical phenomena is a treatise attributed to the astronomer Ptolemy (2nd century AD), which survives only in the form of an incomplete Latin translation (12th century) based on a lost Arabic translation. It covers the fields of geometric optics and catoptrics, as well as experimental areas, such as binocular vision, and more general philosophical principles (the nature of light, vision, and colour). Of a somewhat different sort are the studies of burning mirrors by Diocles (late 2nd century BC), who proved that the surface that reflects the rays from the Sun to a single point is a paraboloid of revolution. Constructions of such devices remained of interest as late as the 6th century AD, when Anthemius of Tralles, best known for his work as architect of the Hagia Sophia at Constantinople, compiled a survey of remarkable mirror configurations.
    [Show full text]
  • Optics History As Effective Instrument for Education in Optics and Photonics
    ETOP 2009 1 Optics history as effective instrument for education in optics and photonics S.K. Stafeef and M.G. Tomilin St.-Petersburg University of Information Technologies, Mechanics and Optics, St.- Petersburg, 197101, Kronverksky Pr. 49, Russia ABSTRACT The education problem in optics and photonics is to draw young generation on the side of light, optical science and technology. The main goal is to prove the slogan that “physics is a small part of optics”: during the thousand years optics formulated the clear worldview for humanity. In fact optics is itself presents multidisciplinary collection of independent scientific arias from one hand and was a generator of new fields of knowledge from the other hand. Optics and photonics are the regions where the fundamental problems of our reality have to be solved. The mentioned functions belonged to optics during the period of civilizations development. This is a basic idea of books serial by S. Stafeev and M. Tomilin “Five Millennium of Optics” including 3 volumes. The first volume devoted to optics prehistory was edit in 2006 in Russian. Its main chapters devoted to relations between Sun and Life, the beginnings of human intelligence, megalithic viewfinders, gnomons and ancient temples orientation, archaic optical materials and elements. It also consist the optical riddles of that period. The volume II is devoted to Greek and Roman antiquity and is in the process of publishing. It consist the chapters on the beginning of optics, mathematical fundaments and applied optics evolution. Volume III would be devoted to Medieval and Renaissance optics history. The materials are used at our university in a course “The Modern Natural Science Conceptions” for students and graduate students.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. Editions Perna, Petrus. 1580. Plotini platonicorum facile coryphaei operum philosophicorum omnium libri LIV: in sex enneades distributi. Basileae: Ad Perneam Lecythum. Fabricius, Johann Albert. 1711. Bibliothecae graecae libri IV. Hamburgi: [Christiani Liebezeit]. Creuzer, Georg Friedrich, Georg Heinrich Moser, and Daniel Wyttenbach. 1835. Plotini opera omnia, Porphyrii liber de vita Plotini. 3 vols. Oxonii: e typographaeo Academico. Westermann, Anton. 1850. Porphyrius De vita Plotini apud Carel Gabriel Cobet, Diogenis Laertii de clarorum philosophorum vitis, dogmatibus et apophthegmatibus libri decem. Paris: Firmin Didot. Kirchhoff, Adolf. 1856. Plotini opera. 2 vols. Bibl. Teubneriana. Lipsiae: in aedibus B. G. Teubneri. Müller, Hermann Friedrich. 1878-80. Plotini Enneades. 2 vols. Berolini: apud Weidmannos. von Volkmann, Richard. 1883-4. Plotini Enneades, praemisso Porphyrii de vita Plotini deque ordine librorum eius libello. Bibl. Teubneriana. Lipsiae: in aedibus B. G. Teubneri. Bréhier, Émile. 1924-38. Plotin: Ennéades. 6 vols. in 7. Coll. Budé. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. Pugliese Carratelli, Giovanni. 1946. Porfirio: Vita di Plotino ed ordine dei suoi libri. Napoli: G. Machiaroli. Faggin, Giuseppe. 1947-8. Plotino: Le Enneadi e Porfirio: Vita di Plotino. 3 vols. Milano: Istituto editoriale italiano. Rev. ed. 2000, Milano: Bompiani. Henry, Paul, and Hans-Rudolf Schwyzer. 1951-73. Plotini opera. (Editio maior.) 3 vols. Museum Lessianum Series Philosophica 33-5. Bruxelles: L’Édition Universelle and Paris: Desclée de Brouwer. ———. 1964-82. Plotini opera. (Editio minor.) 3 vols. OCT. Oxonii: e typographeo Clarendoniano.
    [Show full text]
  • THE ENTRANCE of MODERN OPTICS to OTTOMAN SCIENCE by Sena Pekkendir B.S., Physics, Boğaziçi University, 2011 Submitted To
    THE ENTRANCE OF MODERN OPTICS TO OTTOMAN SCIENCE by Sena Pekkendir B.S., Physics, Boğaziçi University, 2011 Submitted to the Institute for Graduate Studies in Science and Engineeering in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Graduate Program in Physics Boğaziçi University 2015 ii THE ENTRANCE OF MODERN OPTICS TO OTTOMAN SCIENCE APPROVED BY: Prof. Levent Kurnaz ………………………... (Thesis Supervisor) Prof. İhsan Fazlıoğlu ………………………… (Thesis Co-advisor) Assoc. Prof. Burçin Ünlü ………………………… Prof. Edhem Eldem ………………………… Prof. Naci İnci ………………………… DATE OF APPROVAL: 02.07.2015 iii Dedicated to my husband Behiç and my son Ömer Melih iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First of all, I’d like to express my sincere gratitude to my thesis advisor Prof. Levent Kurnaz for teaching me how to do academic research at first by joining me to his Soft Condensed Matter Lab when I was a sophomore. Also I’m very lucky to have been attended to his lectures on History of Science for that I discovered the branch I want to spend my life with. I’m so thankful to him to encourage and support me to write a thesis on history of science. I’d like to express my gratitude to Prof. İhsan Fazlıoğlu for always forcing me to be better and for teaching me a great deal of wisdom of academy. I’m very grateful for the things I’ve learned from him and I’m lucky that I’ll continue learning from him in the upcoming years. I also would like to thank my mother Sera Sarı for being there whenever I need her and always supporting me.
    [Show full text]
  • Sources for the Philosophy of Archytas
    Ancient Philosophy 28 (2008) ©Mathesis Publications 1 Sources for the Philosophy of Archytas Archytas of Tarentum: Pythagorean, Philosopher and Mathematician King. By Carl Huffman. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Pp. xv + 665. $175.00 (cloth). ISBN 0521837464. Monte Ransome Johnson Although Archytas of Tarentum was one of the most important philosophers of the classical period, he has, like a second-rate scholar, become consigned to the oblivion of footnotes. Awkwardly, these are often footnotes to Pythagoreanism and fifth century philosophy. Yet he wrote and influenced fourth (not fifth) cen- tury philosophy; and it is an open question to what extent, or in what sense, and even whether, Archytas was really a Pythagorean. The source of the difficulties is to be found in the cruel, irrational, and occa- sionally fraudulent history of textual transmission. According to Huffman, only four genuine fragments of Archytas survive. Paucity of genuine material is a common problem in early Greek philosophy. But there is a further, special prob- lem with Archytas: the number of dubious fragments (or spurious fragments, as they are considered by Huffman) attributed to him in antiquity. While the gen- uine fragments in Huffman’s edition amount to just 73 lines, the standard edition of later Pythagorean material accumulates over 1300 lines under the name ‘Archytas’ (The Pythagorean Texts of the Hellenistic Period Collected and Edited by H. Thesleff [Åbo, 1965] 2-48). As I will argue at the end of this essay, there is hope, although it is not inspired by Huffman, that more of the material collected by Thesleff can be counted as evidence of Archytas’ thought, or at least cannot be ruled out as paraphrasing his words; they should at any rate be included in a complete edition of his philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Research on Ancient Greek Mathematical Sciences, 1998–2012
    Research on Ancient Greek Mathematical Sciences, 1998–2012 Nathan Sidoli Introduction This survey deals with research in ancient Greek mathematics and, to a lesser extent, mathematical sciences in the long first decade of the 21st century. It is modeled on the two foregoing surveys by J.L. Berggren and K. Saito and gives my personal appraisal of the most important work and trends of the last years, with no attempt to be exhaustive. My overview of the work in this period is divided into two main sections: the “Methods,” which researchers have applied, and the “Topics,” which have garnered significant research interest. Many of the methods and topics that have been addressed in this period are not new, but the emphasis has often changed in response to a changing historiography. Of course, many of the individual works I discuss utilize more than one method and address more than one topic. Hence, the placement in my paper of any particular study is necessarily somewhat arbitrary. I should mention some restrictions that must necessarily be made in such a survey. I deal only with mathematics, and some of the exact sciences insofar as they relate to mathematics, mathematical practice and mathematicians. This is a fairly arbitrary division. Ptolemy and Heron regarded themselves as mathematicians; astrologers of the Hellenistic periods were called mathematicians. A similar survey for astronomy, however, would be as long as that for mathematics, and those for mechanics and astrology would be nearly as long again. I only consider work in major European languages. In general, I restrict myself to the first decade of this century, give or take a few years on either side.
    [Show full text]
  • A Guide to Telescopes
    A Guide to Telescopes How to choose the right telescope for you Telescopes What is a Telescope? A Telescope is an instrument that aids in the observation of remote objects by collecting electromagnetic radiation (such as visible light). The word "telescope" (from the Greek τῆλε, tele "far" and σκοπεῖν, skopein "to look or see"; τηλεσκόπος, teleskopos "far-seeing") was coined in 1611 by the Greek mathematician Giovanni Demisiani for one of Galileo Galilei’s instruments presented at a banquet at the Accademia dei Lincei Galileo had used the term "perspicillum". Optical Telescopes. An optical Telescope gathers and focuses light mainly from the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum (although some work in the infrared and ultraviolet). Types of Optical Telescopes Refracting Telescopes (Dioptrics): Achromatic Apochromatic Binoculars Copyscope Galileoscope Monocular Non-Achromatic Superachromat Varifocal gas lens telescope Reflecting Telescopes (Catoptrics): Cassegrain telescope Gregorian telescope Herrig telescope Herschelian telescope Large liquid mirror telescope Newtonian o Dobsonian telescope Pfund telescope Schiefspiegler Stevick-Paul telescope Toroidal reflector / Yolo telescope Catadioptric Telescopes: Argunov-Cassegrain Catadioptric dialytes Klevzov-cassegrain telescope Lurie-Houghton telescope Maksutov telescope o Maksutov camera o Maksutov-Cassegrain telescope o Maksutov Newtonian telescope Modified Dall-Kirkham telescope Schmidt camera Refracting Telescopes: All refracting telescopes use the same principles. The combination of an objective lens 1 and some type of eyepiece 2 is used to gather more light than the human eye could collect on its own, focus it 5, and present the viewer with a brighter, clearer, and magnified virtual image 6. The objective in a refracting The objective in a refracting telescope refracts or bends light.
    [Show full text]
  • Games, Gods and Gambling : the Origins and History of Probability and Statistical Ideas from the Earliest Times to the Newtonian Era
    University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository Alberta Gambling Research Institute Alberta Gambling Research Institute 1962 Games, gods and gambling : the origins and history of probability and statistical ideas from the earliest times to the Newtonian era David, F. N. (Florence Nightingale) Hafner Publishing Company http://hdl.handle.net/1880/41346 book Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca Games, Gods and Gambling rc same author: 1 STATISTICAL PRIMER D. E. BARTON, B.Sc., Ph.D.: 2OMBINATORIAL CHANCE Signs of the Zodiac : floor mosaic, Beth-Aleph Synagogue, Palestine (5th century) Games, Gods and Gambling The origins and history of probability and statistical ideas from the earliest times to the Newtonian era F. N. DAVID, D.Sc. (University of London, University College) 1962 HAFNER PUBLISHING COMPANY NEW YORK Copyright 0 1962 CHARLES GRIFFIN & CO. LTD 42 DRURY LANE LONDON W.C.2 First Published in 1962 PRINTED IN GREAT BRpTAIN BY BELL AND BAIN, LTD., GLASOOW [S CONTINUING INTEREST AND ENCOURAGEMENT all we tell you? Tales, marvellous tales and stars and isles where good men rest, evermore the rose of sunset pales, ds and shadows fall toward the West. v beguile you? Death hath no repose and deeper than that Orient sand [ides the beauty and bright faith of those rde the Golden Journey to Samarkand. v they wait and whiten peaceably, mquerors, those poets, those so fair ; ow time comes, not only you and I, whole world shall whiten, here or there : lose long caravans that cross the plain untless feet and sound of silver bells 1 no more for glory or for gain, 8 more solace from the palm-girt wells ; le great markets by the sea shut fast calm Sunday that goes on and on, ven lovers find their peace at last, rth is but a star, that once had shone.
    [Show full text]
  • Design and Construction of a Refracting Telescope C
    31102 C. I. Onah and C. M. Ogudo/ Elixir Materials Science 80 (2015) 31102-31108 Available online at www.elixirpublishers.com (Elixir International Journal) Materials Science Elixir Materials Science 80 (2015) 31102-31108 Design and construction of a refracting telescope C. I. Onah * and C. M. Ogudo Department of Physics, Federal University of Technology, Owerri, Nigeria. ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: Most people see the telescope as the things for the movies, the science geeks and the rich Received: 29 August 2014; and affluent, but are these feelings for real? This paper on the design and construction of an Received in revised form: optical refracting telescope which is aimed at producing a low cost and portable telescope 28 February 2015; with less or no aberration effects using the materials we see around us every day goes a long Accepted: 14 March 2015; way to answer the question that the telescope is for everybody that loves astronomy. Overall implementation of this work involves knowledge of the physics of optics; lenses to be Keywords precise. As a case study I used a double convex lens and the eyepiece of a microscope for Telescope, the construction of the mini refractor telescope, my hypothesis is that using a double convex Astronomy and General Physics. is better than using a Plano-convex because the two curved surfaces will cancel out the aberration effect of the individual sides. The resultant telescope was tested during the night and during the day and was used to focus objects at a distance of about 50m from the person with less aberration effect.
    [Show full text]
  • Convexity in Greek Antiquity
    CONVEXITY IN GREEK ANTIQUITY ATHANASE PAPADOPOULOS Abstract. We consider several appearances of the notion of convexity in Greek antiquity, more specifically in mathematics and optics, in the writings of Aristotle, and in art. The final version of this article will appear in the book Geometry in History, ed. S. G. Dani and A. Papadopoulos, Springer Verlag, 2019. AMS classification: 01-02, 01A20, 34-02, 34-03, 54-03, 92B99. Keywords: convexity, history of convexity, Greek antiquity, optics, lenses, Archimedes, Aristotle, Apollonius, conics. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Geometry 2 3. Mirrors and optics 5 4. Billiards in convex domains 7 5. Aristotle 8 6. Architecture 11 References 13 1. Introduction The mathematical idea of convexity was known in ancient Greece. It is present in the works on geometry and on optics of Euclid (c. 325{270 BCE), Archimedes (c. 287{212 BCE), Apollonius of Perga (c. 262{190 BCE), Heron of Alexandria (c. 10{70 CE), Ptolemy (c. 100{160 CE), and other mathematicians. This concept evolved slowly until the modern period where progress was made by Kepler, Descartes and Euler, and convexity arXiv:1905.08519v1 [math.HO] 21 May 2019 became gradually a property at the basis of several geometric results. For instance, Euler, in his memoir De linea brevissima in superficie quacunque duo quaelibet puncta jungente (Concerning the shortest line on any surface by which any two points can be joined together) (1732), gave the differential equation satisfied by a geodesic joining two points on a differentiable convex surface. Around the beginning of the twentieth century, convexity acquired the status of a mathematical field, with works of Minkowski, Carath´eodory, Steinitz, Fenchel, Jessen, Alexandrov, Busemann, Pogorelov and others.
    [Show full text]