* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Early Estimates of the Velocity of Light
Night vision device wikipedia , lookup
Anti-reflective coating wikipedia , lookup
Ultraviolet–visible spectroscopy wikipedia , lookup
Magnetic circular dichroism wikipedia , lookup
Bioluminescence wikipedia , lookup
Retroreflector wikipedia , lookup
Speed of light wikipedia , lookup
Astronomical spectroscopy wikipedia , lookup
Atmospheric optics wikipedia , lookup
Thomas Young (scientist) wikipedia , lookup
Opto-isolator wikipedia , lookup
Rømer's determination of the speed of light wikipedia , lookup
Early of Estimates Velocity of By CARL B. the Light BOYER HE astronomical methods by which OLE ROEMERand JAMESBRADLEY demonstratedthe finite velocity of light are familiar portions of the scientific tradition. With respect to the early estimates of the speed of to which these methods led, however, there is in the history of science light an astonishing degree of uncertainty and inconsistency. It is the intention here to point out the numerical values proposed by ROEMER and BRADLEY and by their contemporaries and successors, indicating incidentally the probable origin of the present state of confusion in this connection.' Speculation as to whether light is propagated in time or is transmitted instantaneously appears to have arisen as a part of ancient scientific investigation. However, the philosophical and mathematical methods of Greek science were inadequate either to demonstrate the fact of the finite velocity of light, or, a fortiori, to furnish an estimate for this speed. Consequently orthodox scientific thought for almost two thousand years following ARISTOTLE maintained that light is transmitted instantaneously. It was during the seventeenth century of our era that an increasing enthusiasm for the experimental method led to renewed suggestions that the velocity of light might be measurably finite. GALILEOin this connection went so far as to carry out what he hoped might be an experimentumcrucis in the Baconian sense. His famous effort to detect a delay in the transmission of light signals between two observers failed when conducted over a distance of less than a mile.2 GALILEOsaid that this indicated that the propagation was extraordinarily rapid or momentary. He felt that if the experiment should fail also for observers separated by a distance of two or three miles, then one might "safely conclude that the propagation of light is instantaneous."3 1 As originally written the scope of this article was somewhat more comprehensive and included a brief summary of the historical background o6 ROEMER'S discovery and of the reception with which it met on the part of his contemporaries. Mr. I BERNARDCOHENthen apprised me of his far more extensive account of the work of ROEMER contained in an article, "The First Determination of the Velocity of Light," Isis, XXXI (1940), 327-79, which was about to appear. Mr. COHENkindly allowed me to read the proof sheets of this article so that I might rewrite my own work in the light of his. This made it possible for me to avoid an excessive duplication of such material as he had already presented and at the same time to take advantage of certain suggestions contained in his valuable paper. 2 GALILEOGALILEI, Dialogues Concerning Two New Sciences (Trans. by HENRY CREWand ALFONSO DE SALVIO,New York, 1914), pp. 42-43. 3 Ibid., pp. 43-44. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Early Estimates of the Velocity of Light If one assumes that about a thirtieth of a second is the minimum time interval distinguishable by the unaided eye, then the experiment of GALILEO could at best be said to have established for the velocity of light a lower limit of the order of some sixty mi. per sec.4 The negative result thus indicated that if the velocity of light was finite, it was far greater than that of sound, or than any with which scientists of the time were familiar. DESCARTES recognized, nevertheless, that it was possible that a measurable interval of time of propagation might be obtained if the distance were made sufficiently great. Accordingly, instead of GALILEO'S terrestrial space interval he proposed an astronomical distance-that between the moon and the earth. If light were propagated in time, he said, eclipses of the moon would be visible on the earth later than the calculated times at which the moon, earth, and sun are exactly collinear. Inasmuch as no such delay was to be detected, DESCARTESproceeded to compute a lower bound for the velocity of light. Supposing the distance of the moon to be at least fifty earth radii of 600 leagues, then if light were to traverse half a league in "one twenty-fourth of an artery beat," he calculated that it would take 5,000 beats, or at least an hour, to cover the distance from the earth to the moon and back again. However, he asserted that no delay even of half a minute was to be observed in the occurrence of eclipses.5 DESCARTES concluded from this that the in- finitely great velocity of light was established. In fact so confident was he in this that he declared himself willing to stake his entire reputation as a philosopher upon the instantaneity of light.6 DESCARTESdid not indicate how the times of collinearity were to be de- termined with accuracy independently of observations based upon the transmission of light. HOOKEasserted that even if light took "full two minutes" to pass from the moon to the earth, he knew no means of discovering this fact.7 However, if one may assume with DESCARTES that a difference of half a minute between the calculated and observed times could have been detected, this would establish for the velocity of light a lower limit of about 15,000 mi. per sec., upon the basis of figures for the lunar distance then current.8 4 The text of Saggi di naturali esperienzefatte nell'Accademia del Cimento (2nd ed., Firenze, 1691), p. CCLXV, says, "Noi in lontananza d'un miglio (che per l'andar d'un lume, e la venuta dell'altro vuol dir due) non ve l'abbiamo saputa ritrovare." However, the index to this work carries the entry, "Luce corre un spazio di 6. miglia senza tempo osservabile. pag. 265." This latter would imply a lower limit about three times as great as that of GALILEO. 5 (Euvres de Descartes (ed. by CHARLES ADAMand PAULTANNERY,12 vols. and supplement, Paris, 6 Ibid., cf. also (Euvres, VI, 97 ff.; XI, 98; I, 308. 1897-1913), I, 307-12. 7 ROBERTHOOKE, Micrographia, comprising vol. XIII of R. T. GUNTHER, Early Science in Oxford (13 vols., Oxford, 1923-38). See p. 56. 8 For these figures see LUDWIGGUENTHER, "Die Bestimmungen der Entfernungen der Sonne und des Mondes von der Erde und deren Parallaxen einst und jetzt," Himmel und Erde, XX (1908), 69-80, 11828. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Carl B. Boyer The failure of the efforts of GALILEO and DESCARTESto detect a retardation in the transmission of light was not regarded by all of their contemporaries as definitive, and the question of the velocity of light was still an open one when in 1671 ROEMER joined PICARDand CASSINIand with them made observations at Paris of the eclipses of the satellites of Jupiter. It is well known that as the result of these observations ROEMERmade the important discovery that the "second inequality" in the recurrence of the eclipses of the first satellite could be explained upon the hypothesis that light is propagated with a finite and determinable velocity. Moreover, his work furnished not only a lower bound for this speed of transmission, but provided the first definite estimate of its order of magnitude. The method of ROEMERhas been often described and is familiar to every student of the history of science, but with respect to the numerical value which resulted in this connection there is in the literature of the subject a striking want of consistency. Books on the history of science and thought-on astronomy, physics, optics-ascribe to ROEMERan almost incredible variety of figures, ranging from 120,000 to 200,000 mi. per sec.,9 or from 193,120 to 327,000 km. per sec.10The erroneous value 192,000 mi. per sec., or its equivalent in other units of measurement, is so frequently imputed to ROEMERthat it threatens to become traditional. This erroneous figure appears in THOMAS PRESTON'S classic, The Theory of Light;l1 R. W. WOOD,Physical Optics;l2 Sir G. G. STOKESOn Light;l D. M. TURNER,The Book of Scientific Discovery;14H. B. LEMON, Fr7om Galileo to Cosmic Rays;'" W. C. D. DAMPIER-WHETHAM, A History of Science;"6 and F. R. MOULTON,"The Velocity of Light.""7 This figure appears also in J. W. DRAPER, A Text-Book of Natural Philosophy,l8 but the value 198,000 mi. per sec. is attributed to ROEMERby DRAPER in History of the Intellectual Developmentof Europe.19The velocity 192,500 mi. per sec. is ascribed to ROEMERby RICHARDPOTTER,An Elementary Treatise on Optics,20 and by JOHN TYNDALL,Light and Electricity;21 190,000 mi. per sec. is imputed to him by H. BUCKLEY,A Short History of Physics,22 and by R. J. HARVEY-GIBSON, Two Thousand Years of Science.23 These values are roughly equivalent to the "remarkably precise value of 3.0 X1010 cm./sec." 9 See A. WOLF,A History of Science, Technology,and Philosophy in the 16th and 17th Centuries (New York, 1935), p. 259, for the smaller figure; F. BRAY,Light (2nd ed., reprinted, London, 1939), p. 185, for the larger. 10 See A. WOLF,loc. cit., for the smaller figure; for the larger see N. A. BOUTARIC, "La vitesse de la lumiere et les theories de l'ether," Revue scientifique, LXIII (1925), 134-41, in particular, p. 136. 13London, 1892, p. 8. 11London, 1890, 12New ed., New York, 1911, p. 17. p. 10. 16New York, 1931, p. 416. 14London, 1933, 15Chicago, 1934, p. 401. p. 92. 17Scientific Monthly, XLVIII (1939), 481-84. See p. 481. 183rd ed., New York, 1848, p. 176. 19Revised ed., 2 vols., New York, 1876. See II, 299. 20 2 vols., London, 1851. See I, 4. 22 London, 1927, p. 64. 21 New York, 1871, p. 20. 232nd ed., revised by A. W. TITHERLY,New York, 1931, p. 55. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Early Estimates of the Velocity of Light 27 ascribed to ROEMERby A. C. HARDYand F. H. PERRIN, The Principles of Optics,24as well as by L. DARMSTAEDTER,Handbuch zur Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und der Technik,25 R. H. BLOCHMANN, Licht und Wdrme,26and G. S. MONK, Light.27 Most Continental works express the result in geographical miles, and here the figure 42,000 mi. per sec.-about 193,000 English statute miles per second-is unwarrantedly given as ROEMER'Sby J. C. POGGENDORFF, Geschichte der Physik;28 AUGUSTHELLER, Geschichte der Physik;29 FERDINAND MONTET, Precis d'histoire des sciences;30HUGOSPRINGER,"Die Lichttheorie in ihrer ERNST MACH, Compendium der Physik;32 geschichtlichen Entwicklung";31 and in La science, published by LAROUssE.33 FERD. ROSENBERGER, Die Geschichteder Physik,34has ascribed to ROEMER the round figure 40,000 mi. per sec., but E. GERLAND,Wdrme und Licht,35 and E. HOPPE, Geschichte der Optik,36have imputed to ROEMERa spurious degree of accuracy by ascribing to him the values 41,936 and 41,965 mi. per sec. respectively. A few of the figures given are strikingly lower than those commonly attributed to ROEMER. The figure 120,000 mi. per sec. or 193,120 km. per sec. of A. WOLFhas already been cited above; L. B. LOEB and A. S. ADAMS, The Developmentof Physical Thought,37put it at 914,000 km. per sec.; and F. S. TAYLOR,The March of Mind,38places it as "too low by about 40 per cent." On the Continent three figures, almost identical and about equal to 133,000 mi. per sec., appear in leagues per second: MACH, Die Prinzipien der physikalischen Optik,39places it at 48,203 leagues per second; RUDOLF WOLF, Geschichte der Astronomie,40 makes this 48,203 1/3; ALEX. WERNICKE, "Die Entdeckung der endlichen Lichtgeschwindigkeit durch OLAF ROEMER,"4' puts it at 48,203 377/1141. Most of the discrepancies in such values as those cited above are unmethod based upon more doubtedly the result of calculations by ROEMER'S in his 1676 paper published is that precise modern observations.42The truth in the Journal des Sgavans ROEMER did not propose a definite value for the speed of light, beyond his introductory remark that light requires less than 24 1st ed., 4th impression, New York and London, 1932, p. 9. 25 2nd ed., Berlin, 1908, p. 143. 27 113. New and 236-37. York 1937, London, 1902, p. Stuttgart, pp. 28 29 2 vols., Stuttgart, 1882-84. See II, 211. Leipzig, 1879, pp. 653-57. 30 136. Bale, Geneve, 1915, p. Lyon, 31 Programmdes k. k. Obergymnasiumsder Benediktiner zu Seitenstetten,XLI-XLII (1907-8). See 1908, 32 Wien, 1863, pp. 194-95. 332 vols., Paris, 1933-34. See I, 62. 18. p. 34 2 parts in 1, Braunschweig, 1882-84. See II, 211-12. 35Leipzig, 1883, p. 88. 36 37 New York, 1933, p. 419. 38New York, 1939, p. 155. Leipzig, 1926, p. 49. 40 Miinchen, 1877, 39Leipzig, 1921, p. 34. p. 490. 41 Zeitschriftfiir Mathematik und Physik, Historisch-literarischeAbtheilung,XXV (1880), 1-10. See p. 4. 42 See M. E. J. GHEURYDE BRAY, "La vitesse de la lumiere," Ciel et Terre, XLIII (1927), 203-14; XLIV (1928), 23-29, 107-18, 202-8, 403-10; XLV (1929), 3-11, 82-88, 187-91; XLVI (1930), 216-23; XLVII (1931), 110-24. See XLIV, 204. 26 This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). 28 Carl B. Boyer a second of time to traverse a distance of about 3,000 leagues-i.e., a distance about equal to the diameter of the earth. His estimate for the velocity of light must be deduced from his conclusion, based on observations of the first satellite of Jupiter, that light requires about 22 minutes to traverse the orbit of the earth.43Although ROEMER'S work is readily accessible, his figure 22 minutes more often is erroneously replaced in the secondary literature in the history of science by any one of a variety of values. LANCELOT HOGBEN, Sciencefor the Citizen,44ascribes to ROEMERa value of 16 2/3 minutes; R. A. HOUSTOUN, A Treatise on Light,45 and PAUL DRUDE, The Theory of Optics,46 give 16 3/5 minutes; P. G. TAIT, Light,47 and EMILE PICARD, "L'evolution des idees sur la lumiere et l'ceuvre d'ALBERTMICHELSON,"48 place the figure at 16 1/2 minutes; H. v. MADLER,Geschichte der Himmelskunde,49and LUDWIG GUENTHER50put it at 16 min. 26 sec.; FELIX AUERBACH, "Ge- schwindigkeit des Lichts,"51 gives half the figure as 8 min. 18.2 sec.; Sir WILLIAMBRAGG, The Universe of Light,52 PRESERVEDSMITH, A History of Modern Culture,53 and H. T. STETSON, "Error in Astronomy,"54 give simply 16 minutes. GEORGE FORBES, "The Velocity of Light,"55 attributes to ROEMERan estimate of 18 minutes; the figure 14 minutes is found in J. C. FISCHER,Geschichte der Physik,56 and in A Short History of Science of W. T. SEDGWICKand H. W. TYLER.57Some authors confuse the time estimates given for the earth's orbital diameter with those for the radius.58Such inconsistencies as are evident in references to the work of ROEMER appear likewise in reports on more recent figures for the velocity of light. M. E. J. GHEURY DE BRAY59has found in the latter connection that only one in 43For further details on ROEMER'Swork, as well as a facsimile reproduction of his paper, "Demonstration touchant le mouvement de la lumiere trouve par M. ROMERde l'Academie Royale des Sciences," which appeared in the Journal des Sgavans for 1676, see COHEN, op. cit. ROEMER'Sarticle appeared also in Memoires de l'Academie Royale des Sciences depuis 1666 jusqu' a 1699 (hereafter referred to as Anc. Mem.), X, 575-77. An English translation appeared in the Philosophical Transactions, XII (1677), 89394, and is reproduced in COHEN, op. cit. English translations appear also in A Source Book in Astronomy and in A Source Book in SHAPLEYand H. E. HOWARTH, (New York and London, 1929), ed. by HARLOW 44New York, 1938, p. 317. Physics (New York and London, 1935), ed. by W. F. MAGIE. 457th ed., London, New York, Toronto, 1938, 120. p. 46Translated from the German by C. R. MANNand R. A. MILLIKAN, new impression, London, New 47Edinburgh, 1889, pp. 48-49. York, Toronto, 1929, p. 115. 48 Institut de France, Academiedes Sciences, Memoires, 2nd series, LXII (1936), 1-35. See p. 3. 50 Op. cit., p. 126, footnote. 492 vols., Braunschweig, 1873. See I, 346. 51In ERNEST GEHRCKE, Handbuch der physikalischen Optik (2 vols., Leipzig, 1926-28), I(1), 73-90. 53 2 vols., New York, 1930-34. See II, 56. 52 London, 1933, p. 206. See p. 74. 64In JOSEPHJASTROw, The Story of Human Error (New York and London, 1936), pp. 39-63. See p. 54. 65In W. SPOTTISWOODEand others, Science Lectures at South Kensington (2 vols., London, 1878-79), 56 8 vols., Gottingen, 1801-8. See II, 155-56. II, 212-26. See p. 214. Revised H. W. TYLER and R. P. BIGELOW,New York, 1939, p. 322. by 57 68See BUCKLEY,loc. cit.; also A. GUILLEMIN,Le monde physique (5 vols., Paris, 1881-85), II, 50 n. 69"Published Values of the Velocity of Light," Nature, CXX (1927), 404-5. See also his article, "The Velocity of Light. History of its Determination from 1849 to 1933," Isis, XXV (1936), 437-48. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Early Estimates of the Velocity of Light eleven figures was correctly quoted! Such a state of affairs can not but impress one with the need of exercising caution in the history of science in citations of numerical values as well as of dates of events. If one wishes to convert ROEMER'S figure of 22 minutes for the retardation of light in crossing the earth's orbit into an estimate of the velocity of light, it must be recognized that there was at the time considerable uncertainty in the figures given for the distance of the earth from the sun.60One may reasonably suppose that ROEMERwould have adopted the values resulting from the work of PICARD, RICHER, and CASSINI, in which ROEMERhimself as- sisted.61From observations of the parallax of Mars made in 1671 to 1673the very years in which ROEMER was observing the satellites of Jupiter-a solar distance of 91,600 terrestrial radii was obtained.62This was frequently more roundly expressed as 22,000 earth radii.63PICARD had in the years just previous determined the length of one degree on the earth as about 57,060 toises or 69.1 miles, corresponding to a terrestrial diameter of about 2865 leagues of 2282 toises, or a radius of about 3960 miles.64This determination was adopted by CASSINIwith the understanding that the true length of one degree might vary from 57,060 toises by 100 toises.65 The distance of the sun calculated upon this basis would be about 86,000,000 of our present statute miles. CASSINI, however, said that one commonly took the radius of the earth as 1500 leagues, so that the sun could be regarded in round figures as about 33,000,000 leagues away, allowing a million or two leagues difference.66CASSINI'Sround figure is about 91,000,000 miles, computed by taking one league as equal to 2.762 miles.67 If, now, ROEMER accepted CASSINI'S round figure, he might have inferred a velocity of light of about 50,000 leagues-or 138,000 miles-per second. If he had based his computation upon PICARD's degree of 57,060 toises and CASSINI'Ssolar distance of 21,600 earth radii, he would have obtained a value of about 47,100 leagues-or 130,000 miles-per second. It must be remembered that ROEMER'Swork did not contain such calculations. The emphasis in his paper was upon the fact of a mora luminis rather than upon the estimate of its value. Long after60See GUENTHER, Dissertatio academica, praecipua astronomorum op. cit.; also ALBERTHOLMQUIST, tentamina circa parallaxin solis, Holmiae, 1746. 61See J. B. DUHAMEL, Regiae scientiarum academiae historia (2nd ed., Parisiis, 1701), pp. 106-7. 62G. D. CASSINI,Divers ouvragesd'astronomie (Amsterdam, 1736); published as vol. V of Memoires de l'AcddemieRoyale des Sciences: contenantles ouvragesadoptezpar cetteAcademie avantson renouvellement en 1699. See pp. 147 f. This is contained also in Anc. Mem., VIII, 115. See also DUHAMEL,op. cit., p. 939. 63 See CASSINI,loc. cit., and DUHAMEL, cit., p. 205. op. 64JEANPICARD,Ouvragesde mathematique(Amsterdam, 1736); published as vol. IV of Memoires de l'Academie Royale des Sciences: contenantles ouvragesadoptez par cette Academie avant son renouvellement en 1699. See pp. 46-47. See also Anc. Mem., VII(1), 180, or DUHAMEL,op. cit., p. 100. 65 CASSINI, 66Ibid., pp.148-49. See also Anc. Mem., I, 173, and VIII, 116. op. cit., p. 47. 67See HERCULECAVALLI,Tableaux comparatifs des mesures, poids et monnaies modernes et anciens (Paris, 1874), p. 32. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). 30 Carl B. Boyer wards FONTENELLE,writing the Histoire de l'Acad6mie Royale des Sciences, remarked that, "II suit des Observations de M. ROiMER, que la lumiere dans une seconde de tems fait 48203. lieues communes de France, et 377/1141 parties d'une de ces lieues."68This passage has been seized upon by some later writers as representing the value given by ROEMERhimself.69Although it may well represent his general view in this connection, it implies a degree of accuracy which ROEMERwould most certainly disclaim. He himself conceded, in correspondence with Huygens and in a note to the Aeademie in 1677, that uncertainties made impossible an exact determination of the time for light to traverse the orbit of the earth.70Further observations, including those of markings of Jupiter, tended, nevertheless, to confirm his estimate of 22 minutes, for they indicated corrections of 12 to 14 minutes for a distance about equal to one and one-quarter times the radius of the earth's orbit.71 Inasmuch as most of his manuscripts were burned in the Copenhagen fire of 1728, one can not be certain that ROEMERdid not later make a better estimate of the time factor in this connection.72 It is well known that ROEMER'Sconclusion with respect to the finite velocity of light was not generally accepted at the time.73 CASSINIregarded it as "one of the most beautiful problems of physics,"74 but felt that the evidence was not convincing.75In this he was followed by his nephew and collaborator, J. P. MARALDI,76and by his son JACQUESCASSINI.77HOOKElikewise regarded ROEMER'Swork as inconclusive,78 and FONTENELLE,too, in 1707 renounced with regret the "ingenious and seductive hypothesis of successive propagation."79 68Anc. Mem., I, 215-16. 69See WERNICKE, op. cit.; cf. also R. WOLF,loc. cit., and MACH,Die Prinzipien der physikalischen Optik, loc. cit. The estimate given by LOEBand ADAMS,loc. cit., is very probably also derived directly or indirectly from this source. 70More than two centuries later R. A. PROCTOR (Old and New Astronomy, London, 1892, p. 281) admitted that from observations of Jupiter's satellites one can not obtain very trustworthy results. 71 See CHRISTIAAN HUYGENS, (Euvres completes (pub. by Societe Hollandaise des Sciences, 19 vols., La Haye, 1888-1937), XIX, 432-35; also VIII, 56-58. 72His student, PETERHORREBOW, who has preserved for us a small part of ROEMER'S work, was unable to indicate a closer approximation on ROEMER'S part, and indeed made matters worse in this respect by suggesting that ROEMERmight have proposed a time of more than 28 minutes (Basis astronomiae, Hauniae, 1735, p. 129). For attempts to reconstruct a portion of ROEMER'S work see COHEN,op. cit., and KIRSTINE MEYER, "Om Ole R0mers Opdagelse of Lysets T0ven; avec un resume en frangais," Det Kongelige Danske VidenskabernesSelskabs Skrifter. Series 7. Naturvidenskabeligog Mathematisk Afdeling, XII (1915), 106-45. 73See COHEN,op. cit., for an account of its reception. 74Op. cit., p. 45. 75CASSINI,op. cit., pp. 46, 435-36. 76 See Histoire de l'Academie Royale des Sciences, avec les Memoires de mathematiqueet de physique, 1707, Histoire, pp. 77-81, Memoires, pp. 25-32. Inasmuch as each volume of this work is divided into two parts with separate pagination, references will hereafter be given as follows: Hist. de l'Acad., 1707, pp. 77-81, and Mem. de l'Acad., 1707, pp. 25-32. All references are to the Paris edition. 77See infra. 78 ROBERT HOOKE, Posthumous Works (London, 1705), pp. 77-78. 79Hist. de l'Acad., 1707, pp. 77-81. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Early Estimates of the Velocity of Light 31 ROEMER was not, however, without supporters. HUYGENScited the "proof" of the finite but extremely great speed of light as an argument against the corpuscular hypothesis.80 In the opening sections of the Traitt de la lumiere-presented to the Academie in 1678 but not published until 1690-HUYGENS devoted several pages to the question of the velocity of light, including a full account of ROEMER'S demonstration.81 Although he apparently made no independent experimental determination of the speed of propagation, HUYGENSevinced a greater interest than did ROEMERin the numerical value of this velocity. The figure 22 minutes which ROEMER had given as the retardation of light in crossing the earth's orbit HUYGENS converted into an estimate of the speed of light as compared with that of sound. Taking the diameter of the earth's orbit as 22,000 terrestrial diameconsidered it as in reality about 24,000 diametersters-although HUYGENS light would traverse a distance of 1,000 earth diameters per minute or 16 2/3 diameters in a second. Adopting PICARD'Smeasure for this diameter, HUYGENS found that the indicated velocity was more than 600,000 times that of sound.82 There seems to be some confusion in secondary sources as to the figure HUYGENS gave for the velocity of sound. WILLIAMWHEWELL83 and FLORIANCAJORI84place it at 1179 Paris feet per second, but A. WOLF85 puts it at 1097 Paris feet per second. In 1669 HUYGENS himself set the speed at 1076 Paris feet per second, or about 180 toises per second.86 Although DUHAMEL reports that CASSINI, PICARD,and ROEMERin 1677 found a velocity of 183 toises per second,87 HUYGENSretained his figure of 180 in his Traite de la lumiere, and, in fact, continued to use it as late as 1694.88 This is equivalent to about 1150 English feet per second,89so that his estimate of the velocity of light is equivalent to about 131,000 mi. per sec. work NICOLAS IHARTSOEKER A few years after the appearance of HUYGENS' in his of of a similar estimate the published Essay de dioptrique. speed light in this to are not referred and HUYGENS connection, the Although ROEMER estimate is most likely based upon their work. From a time of 22 minutes for deduced the propagation of light across the orbit of the earth HARTSOEKER that the speed was more than 110,000,000 toises-about 133,000 miles-per second.90 Not all of the early estimates of the speed of light obtained by ROEMER'S method were based upon ROEMER'Sdata. DuHAMEL, ostensibly quoting from some work by CASSINIwritten in 1675-that is, before ROEMER'Sdisthe sun to the earth of from for the time the light propagation covery-gave as 10 or 11 minutes.91 This quotation indicates that CASSINI anticipated 82 Ibid., 81 Euvres, XIX, 463-69. (Euvres,X, 613. p. 469. 2 New the Inductive Sciences York, II, 33. vols., 1858), ed., (3rd of 86 84 A 8 Op. cit., p. 286. Euvres,XIX, 372. History of Physics (New York, 1906), p. 97. 87 Op. 89 See CAVALLI, 88 Euvres,XIX, 373, 469. cit., p. 161. op. cit., for conversion figures. 90 Essay de dioptrique (Paris, 1694), p. 17. 91DUHAMEL, op. cit., p. 148. 8s 83 History This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Carl B. Boyer 32 ROEMERin suggesting that the inequalities of the first satellite of Jupiter could be explained on the assumption that light travels in time, although he later abandoned this hypothesis.92 Whether or not this time estimate is genuinely to be attributed to CASSINI, it was later replaced by him by one more accurate. In his improved tables of 1693 CASSINIplaced the greatest correction in the case of the second inequality of the first satellite of Jupiter at 14 min. 10 sec., and it is this latter estimate-often quoted simply as a a round 14 minutes-which was dominant in scientific thought before the appearance of the more accurate one of BRADLEY.93 Although CASSINIdid not interpret this in terms of the propagation of light, his figure was influential nevertheless in determining many of the early estimates of the speed of light. NEWTON in the first edition of the Principia accepted "almost ten minutes" as the retardation of light from the sun.94In the opening pages of his Opticks, however, one reads that "it seems that Light is propagated in time, spending in its passage from the Sun to us about Seven Minutes of Time,"95 and later in the same work this figure is changed to "about seven or eight minutes"96-a value which appeared also in subsequent editions of the time estimate may have Principia.97 It has been suggested98that NEWTON'S in 1676 which been made upon the basis of eclipse observations by ROEMER the latter failed to cite in his paper of that year, ostensibly because he considered them less reliable than the earlier ones. It seems far more probable, however, that NEWTON'Sfigures were derived, either directly or indirectly, from those of CASSINI.NEWTON'Sfriend, EDMOND HALLEY,in 1694 published in the Philosophical Transactions a reduction of CASSINI'Stables of the first moon of Jupiter to the Julian style and the meridian of London.99Further92 CASSINI'S supposed anticipation has been generally accepted (see COHEN,op. cit., for further details), but there appears to be room for doubt as to its validity. In the first place, this report by DUHAMEL, appearing almost a quarter of a century after CASSINI'sreputed statement, represents apparently the first publication of any such claim. In the interval the discovery was generally attributed to ROEMER. Secondly, ROEMER'Sreport of 1676 clearly gives the impression that his discovery is something new. It makes no reference to any anticipation by CASSINI. Thirdly, CASSINIhimself implied the originality of ROEMER'S conjecture when in 1693 he wrote, "Monsieur ROMERexpliqua tres-ingenieusement une de ces inegalitez qu'il avoit observees pendant quelques annees dans le premier satellite, par le mouvement successif de la lumiere." (CASSINI,op. cit., p. 435, or Anc. M6m., VIII, 391). Would CASSINIhave referred in such language to a mere revival of his own discarded hypothesis? Possibly DUHAMEL was mistaken as to the date of the work from which he said he was quoting CASSINI.Almost two centuries ago P. C. LEMONNIER (Institutions astronomiques, Paris, 1746, pp. 296, 298 n.), in asserting ROEMER's "incontestable" priority, rejected this passage of DUHAMEL'SHistoria as "without date and unin93See CASSINI, op. cit., p. 475; also Anc. M6m., VIII, 430-31. telligible." 94ISAACNEWTON,Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica (1st ed., reissue, Londini, 1687), Book 95Opticks (London, 1704), Book I, Part I, Def. 2, p. 2. I, Prop. XCVI, Scholium, p. 231. 96Ibid., Book II, Prop. XI, p. 77. 97See Operaomnia (ed. by SAMUEL HORSLEY, 5 vols., Londini, 1779-85), II, 258; cf. IV, 176. 98See MEYER, op. cit., pp. 135, 144. 99Philosophical Transactions, XVIII (1694), 237-56. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Early Estimates of the Velocity of Light 33 more, HALLEYwas an ardent supporter of ROEMER'Shypothesis and sought to confirm it by independent calculations for the other satellites of Jupiter.100In this connection he seems to have adopted for the time of propagation of light across the earth's orbit the round figure 14 minutes.101JAMES POUNDlikewise reported some years later in the Philosophical Transactions that light is "found to proceed in about seven Minutes of time as far as from the Sun to the Earth."102Upon the basis of the figure 12."5 which HALLEY accepted for the horizontal parallax of the sun,103this time estimate would imply a value of some 155,000 mi. per sec. as the velocity of light. Just as HUYGENShad deduced from ROEMER'Sfigure of 22 minutes that light was about 600,000 times swifter than sound, so NEWTONin later editions of his Opticksconverted the estimate of 7 or 8 minutes, which he may have derived from CASSINI directly or through HALLEYor POUND, into an estimate of the comparative speeds of light and sound.104 Taking the distance of the sun to be about 70,000,000 miles, he concluded that the velocity of light was 700,000 times as great as that of sound, which he placed at 1140 English feet per "second minute of time."105This would result in a speed of something over 150,000 mi. per sec., a figure agreeing roughly with that implied by HALLEY and better than that of HUYGENS, in spite of the poor solar distance upon which it was based. Had NEWTONhere made use of CASSINI'S estimate of the distance of the sun, he would have arrived at a value for the velocity of light close to that accepted at present. The popularity of NEWTON'Soptical and astronomical works during the eighteenth century may well account in part for the present confusion with 100Ibid., pp. 239, 254 ff. 101EDMOND HALLEY, Astronomi dum viveret regii tabulae astronomicae (Londini, 1749). This work is without pagination, the value 14 minutes being cited in the notes (Viri reverendi D. JACOBIBRADLEY, in has suuas satellitum tabulas notae) introducing the tables of conjunctions of the first satellite. It has been mistakenly stated (See COHEN,op. cit., p. 355) that HALLEYproposed a time of 8 1/2 minutes as more correct for the retardation of light from the sun. This is probably the result of a misinterpretation of a calculation by HALLEY(Philosophical Transactions, XVIII (1694), p. 256) in which an observed inequality of 18 1/2 minutes is stated as corresponding to 13 minutes as calculated from ROEMER'S estimate and to 8 1/2 according to CASSINI'S tables. 102"New and Accurate Tables for the Ready Computing of the Eclipses of the First Satellite of Jupiter, by Addition Only," Philosophical Transactions, XXX (1717-19), 1021-34. See p. 1034. In these tables, purporting to be an improvement of CASSINI'S, POUNDrecalculated the values for the second equation to correspond to a maximum inequality of 14 minutes instead of the 14 min. 10 sec. of CASSINI. See p. 1030. 103 "Methodus singularis qua solis parallaxis sive distantia a terra, ope Veneris intra Solem conspiciendae, tuto determinari poterit," Philosophical Transactions, XXIX (1714-16), 454-64. See p. 458. 104Perhaps it is because this work, found in Book III, Query 21, does not appear in the 1704 edition that it has been stated erroneously by T. J. J. SEE ("Historical Sketch of OLAUSROEMER,"Popular Astronomy, XI, 1903, pp. 225-38) that the first edition of NEWTON'S Opticks contains no allusion to the work of ROEMER.In this connection HARVEY-GIBSON (op. cit., p. 54) has quite incorrectly stated that "NEWTONmade no attempt at estimating the rate at which light travels. Every one thought that light 105 Operaomnia, IV, 224-25. was instantaneous." This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Carl B. Boyer 34 respect to ROEMER'Sestimate of the velocity of light. In the Opticks one reads: Light is propagated from luminous Bodies in time, and spends about seven or eight minutes of an hour in passing from the Sun to the Earth. This was observed first by ROMER, and then by others, by means of the Eclipses of the Satellites of Jupiter.106 This reference appears to have left the impression that the time figures given were to be imputed to ROEMERalong with the discovery of the method. A similar ambiguity is found in SMITH'SOpticks of 1738 where one reads that: made a noble discovery of a method for determining the velocity of light; by Mons. ROEMER which it was concluded and confirmed by long experience that light is shot from the sun to the earth in 7 or 8 minutes of time.107 In the article "Lumiere" in the Encyclopedie one reads that ROEMERand NEWTONhave shown beyond a doubt that light takes about seven minutes to reach the earth.108 In 1772 PRIESTLEY said that CASSINI and ROEMER concluded "that light was about 14 minutes in crossing the earth's orbit."109 also ascribed the figure 14 minutes to ROEMER, but CONDORCET DELAMBRE110 set it at 16 to 18 minutes and BAILLYconfused matters still further by asserting that ROEMERfirst placed the figure at 11 minutes, later adopting 14 minutes."' Throughout the early eighteenth century the figures 7 and 8 minutes given by NEWTON were cited far more frequently than were the 2 minutes of ROEMERand the 14 min. 10 sec. of CASSINI.These were coupled with numer- ous solar distance factors so diverse as to imply velocities of from 100,000 to more than 200,000 mi. per sec.112 The work of BRADLEY furnished an unexpected confirmation of ROEMER'S hypothesis and also brought into prominence a new time estimate, but it too was subject to the equivocal factor of the solar distance. Astronomical aber106 Opticks (1704), Book II, Prop. XI, p. 77. 107ROBERTSMITH,A CompleatSystem of Opticks (Cambridge, 1738), p. 437. 108Encyclopedie, ou dictionnaire raisonne des sciences, des arts et des metiers. (Edition exactement conforme a celle de PELLETin quarto, Berne and Lausanne, 1780), XX, 442. 109JOSEPH PRIESTLEY, The History and Present State of Discoveries Relating to Vision, Light, and Colours (London, 1772), p. 139. 110J. B. J. DELAMBRE,Astronomie theoriqueet pratique (3 vols., Paris, 1814), III, 496. 111J. A. N. C., marquis de CONDORCET,(Euvres completes (21 vols., Brunswick and Paris, 1804), I, 139-40. J. S. BAILLY,Histoire de l'astronomiemoderne (3 vols., Paris, 1779-85), II, 417, 421 (note a). 112See J. J. SCHEUCHZER,Physica oder Natur-Wissenschafft (2 parts, Zurich, 1729), I, 101, for 7 or 8 minutes and 100,000 mi. per sec. See JACQUESROHAULT,Physica (trans. into Latin by SAMUEL CLARKE,4th ed., Londini, 1718), p. 186, footnote, for 7 minutes and a distance of 50,000,000 miles. See A Compendiousand MethodicalAccount of the Principles of Natural Philosophy (London, BENJ. WORSTER, A Course of Lectures in Natural Philosophy (2nd ed., London, HELSHAM, 1722), p. 164, and RICHARD 1743), pp. 287-88, for 7 or 8 minutes and 70,000,000 miles. See [J. A.] abbe NOLLET,Legons de physique experimentale(vol. V, 4th ed., Paris, 1768), pp. 47-48, for 7 to 8 minutes and 32 to 33 million leagues. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Early Estimates of the Velocity of Light 35 ration yielded the speed of light relative to that of the earth in its orbit. The observations of BRADLEY indicated an angle of aberration of about 20. "2, from which he computed that the velocity of light is 10,210 times-often later taken as a round 10,000 times-the earth's orbital speed.113As in the case of ROEMER,so also here values for the velocity of light have incorrectly been attributed to BRADLEY. F. BRAY114places his estimate at 193,000 mi. per sec.; TYNDALL11 puts it at 191,515 mi. per sec.; HopPE116 sets it at 41,200 geographic miles per second. BRADLEY, however, did not set down a figure for the absolute velocity of light, but his work was significant in that it afforded a remarkably accurate figure for the retardation of light from the sun. Whereas the value 11 minutes given by ROEMERwas excessive, the estimates of between 7 and 8 minutes given by CASSINIand others were too small. As BRADLEYsaid, his computed figure of 8 min. 12 or 13 sec. was "as it were a Mean betwixt what had at different times been determined from the Eclipses of Jupiter's Satellites."117Moreover, this is but some half dozen seconds less than the value accepted at the present time."8 A corresponding accuracy with respect to the velocity of light is not, however, to be imputed to BRADLEY. HALLEYreported that from observations of Mars made in 1719 POUND and his nephew BRADLEYdemonstrated that the sun's parallax was not more than 12" nor less than 9".119 Such a latitude in the solar distance would be reflected in a correspondingly great margin of errorin the computed appears to have velocity of light. From new observations in 1721 BRADLEY obtained a mean of 10" 1/3 for the solar parallax,120which would correspond to a distance of about 79,100,000 miles and a consequent value of 161,000 mi. per sec. for the velocity of light; but BRADLEY did not explicitly suggest such a figure. Unfortunately the accuracy of BRADLEY'S work could not at the time be fully appreciated. Some astronomers reduced his time estimate to a round 8 minutes and others continued to accept still smaller values for the retardation of light from the sun. JACQUES CASSINI in 1740 adopted for the "second equation of conjunctions" his father's tables of about half a century earlier, in which the maximum inequality was 14 min. 10 sec.121This time factor, combined with his estimate of the distance of the sun as 300 times that of the moon,122would have indicated a speed of light of the order of 170,000 113 "An Account of a New Discovered Motion of the Fixed Stars," Philosophical Transactions, XXXV Miscellaneous Worksand Correspond(1727-28), 637-61. See p. 653. This appears also in JAMESBRADLEY, ence (Oxford, 1832), pp. 1-15. A facsimile reproduction appears also in connection with an article by GEORGE SARTON,"Discovery of the Aberration of Light," Isis, XVI (1931), 233-65. 114Op. cit., p. 186. 116Op. cit., p. 59. 117BRADLEY, 115Op. cit., p. 21. loc. cit. 118SARTON,op. cit., p. 235. 119BRADLEY, Miscellaneous Works and Correspondence,p. IV. 120Ibid., 121JACQUES CASSINI,Tables astronomiques (Paris, 1740), p. 211. p. 353. 122 Ibid., preface, p. x. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). 36 Carl B. Boyer mi. per sec. CASSINI,however, did not so interpret it, but ostensibly shared his father's view that the table of inequalities had merely empirical significance and did not indicate that light is propagated in time. Other men, nevertheless, accepted the explanations of ROEMERand BRADLEY, although discrepancies in estimates of the speed of light continued to be wide. In the Histoire de l'Academiefor 1737 the velocity is in one connection given simply as more than 10,000 leagues per second,123but in reporting in the same year on BRADLEY'S work a speed of more than 4,000,000 leagues per minuteabout 184,000 mi. per sec.-is deduced from CASSINI'Sround 33,000,000 leagues and BRADLEY'S retardation, taken roundly as 8 minutes.124In the MNmoires for this same year DORTOUSDE MAIRAN placed the velocity of light "according to the observation of ROEMER" at more than 800,000 times that of sound,125but EULER at about the same time set it at about 622,000 times as great as that of sound.126EULER was, with the possible exception of FRANKLIN, the only great scientist of the eighteenth century who seriously advanced the wave theory of light. In this connection he carried out calculations127on the density and elasticity of the luminiferous medium as determined by the velocity of light, analogous to those made earlier by NEWTON.128 His computations were based upon the fairly accurate figure of 8 minutes129 for the transmission of light from the sun, but for the solar parallax he adopted the excessive value 13",with a consequent distance of 311,234,300,000 Paris feet-or about 62,700,000 miles.130Inasmuch as EULER took the velocity of sound to be 1040 Paris feet per second,3l this indicated a velocity of light about 622,000 times that of sound, or about 131,000 mi. per sec. Thus, in spite of the accuracy of BRADLEY'S time figure, the speed of light as determined from the data of EULER is about the same as that indicated by the earlier figures of ROEMERand HUYGENS. The lack of consistency in estimates of the velocity of light proposed during the eighteenth century is apparent from numerous sources. MUSSCHENBROEK in 1731 referred to NEWTON'S Opticksin reporting 14 minutes as the retardation of light in crossing the earth's orbit,132but before the end of the decade he had adopted BRADLEY'S figure of 8 min. 13 sec. for light from the sun.133 MUSSCHENBROEK accepted a solar distance of 24,000 earth radii of 19,615,782 Paris feet and hence should have arrived at a speed of about 193,000 mi. per 123Hist. de l'Acad., 1737, p. 103. 124Ibid., pp. 76-79. 125 J. D. DEMAIRAN,"Discours sur la propagation du son," MEm.de l'Acad., 1737, pp. 1-58. See p. 36. 126LEONHARD EULER, Opuscula varii argumenti (Berolini, 1746), pp. 193 ff. 127 129EULER, op. cit., p. 195. 128NEWTON,Operaomnia, IV, 224-25. Op. cit., pp. 196 ff. 130EULER, op. cit., p. 195. 131Ibid., p. 915; cf. pp. 193-94, 207. 132PETRUS VAN MUSSCHENBROEK,Tentamina experimentorum naturalium captorum in academia del cimento (2 parts, Lugduni Batavorum, 1731), II, 184. 133Essai de physique (trans. from the Flemish by PIERREMASSUET,2 vols., Leyden, 1739), II, 506. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Early Estimates of the Velocity of Light 37 sec. Instead, however, he calculated in terms of a time factor of only 8 minutes and deduced, with an amazing disregard of the inherent uncertainties, a speed of 980,809,933 1/3 Paris feet-or about 198,000 miles-per second.134 This figure appeared not only in the numerous editions and translations of MUSSCHENBROEK'S physical works,135but also in the books of others as late as 1777.136Another velocity figure popular during the eighteenth century was that of 164,000 mi. per sec., derived from BRADLEY'S time factor and a solar distance of 80,000,000 miles. This appeared in the astronomies of FERGUSON137 and was repeated by others138 as late as 1813. A number of other figures of about this order appeared about the middle of the eighteenth century. G. W. KRAFFT,Praelectiones academicaepublicae in physicae,139derived a velocity of 42 earth radii per second-about 166,000 mi. per sec.from BRADLEY'S time factor and a solar distance of 20,618 terrestrial radii. ETIENNE MONTUCLA,Histoire des mathematiques,l40 employing a time of from 8 to 9 minutes and a distance of 22,000 earth radii, estimated the speed at 43 earth radii per second. This is practically the same as the speed of 170,000 mi. per sec., or 680,000 times that of sound, deduced by B. MARTIN, Philosophia Britannica: or a New and ComprehensiveSystem of the Newtonian Philosophy,14lfrom a time of 8 min. 13 sec. and a distance of 82,000,000 miles. R. J. BoscoVICH, Dissertatio de lumine, gave the speed more accurately as more than 180,000 mi. per sec.,142but this was the result of a compensation of errors, deduced as it was from a solar distance of 22,000 terrestrial radii of 4,000 miles and a time factor of only 450 seconds. The transits of Venus in 1761 and 1769 were observed to imply a solar distance of from 91,000,000 to 97,000,000 miles,143and as a result the margin of error in estimates of the speed of light was correspondingly reduced. Nevertheless, although discrepancies in the distance factor had become smaller, those in the time factor continued to be relatively large. The older figure of 7 minutes derived from the work of CASSINI had not been displaced completely by the better one of BRADLEY. However, whereas estimates of the 134Ibid., p. 509. 135See for example, Elementa physicae (rev. ed., Lugduni Batavorum, 1741), pp. 356-58; also The Elements of Natural Philosophy (trans. from the Latin by JOHNCOLSON, 2 vols., London, 1744), II, 53-55. 136See J. R. SIGAUD DELAFOND, Elemens de physique (4 vols., Paris, 1777), IV, 113-14. 137See JAMES FERGUSON, Astronomy explained upon Sir Isaac Newton's Principles (1st American ed., rev. by ROBERTPATTERSON, Philadelphia, 1806), pp. 109-10. 138 GEORGE The History of Astronomy (London, 1767), pp. 191, 307, gives this figure and cites COSTARD, in this connection. The same figure appears also in TIBERIUS CAVALLO, FERGUSON The Elements of Natural or Experimental Philosophy (1st American ed., 2 vols., Philadelphia, 1813), II, 58. 139 3 parts, Tubingae, 1750-54. See III, 80. 140 New ed., 4 vols., Paris, 1799-1802. See II, 580. 141 2nd ed., 3 vols., London, 1759. See II, 273. 142 Romae, 1749, p. 30. This is in rough agreement with the time and distance factors in his Theory of Natural Philosophy (Latin-English ed., from the text of the 1st Venetian ed. of 1763, Chicago and London, 143PROCTOR, 1922), pp. 330-33. op. cit., p. 274. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). 38 Carl B. Boyer velocity of light previously had tended to be too low, those based on the new values for the distance of the sun almost invariably were too high. SAMUELHORSLEY,in defending the corpuscular theory against FRANKLIN'S doubts in view of the prodigious swiftness of propagation, assigned in 1770 a value of 381,092,323 London yards-or almost 217,000 miles-per second to the speed of light.144This excessive estimate resulted from his adoption of the took figure 7 minutes as the retardation of light from the sun, for HORSLEY the parallax of the sun as 9", about half a second less than that given by CASSINI. In this very same year RICHARD PRICE placed the delay of light from the sun at 8.2 minutes,145the result of BRADLEY, which, in terms of a parallax of 9", would have implied practically the velocity accepted at present. About this time PRIESTLEY accepted a distance of 92,000,000 miles and a time of 7 minutes,146implying a velocity about that given by HORSLEY. A few years later a speed of 202,083 mi. per sec. was deduced by GEORGE ATWOOD,An Analysis of a Course of Lectures on the Principles of Natural Philosophy,l47from 97,000,000 miles and 8 minutes. G. C. LICHTENBERG, adopted BRADLEY'S 8 min. 13 sec. and gave Anfangsgriindeder Naturlehre,148 the velocity as more than 44,336 geographic miles-about 204,000 statute miles-per second, or more than 975,146 times that of sound. A somewhat smaller figure of 198,000 mi. per sec. is implied by the 95,173,100 miles and 8 minutes of WILLIAM ENFIELD, Institutes of Natural Philosophy.l49 About this time there appeared several other apparently independent determinations of the time factor upon which estimates of the velocity of light depended. BoscoVICHgave a time of 486 seconds which, together with his solar parallax figure of 8"1/2, implied"15a speed considerably above that which he had proposed earlier and about that indicated by ENFIELD. In his popular works on astronomy J. E. BODEadopted 8 min. 7 1/2 sec. as the retardation of light from the sun, deducing from this a velocity 902,000 times that of sound or 41,000 geographic miles-about 189,000 statute miles -per second.51 Somewhat later DELAMBRE, upon the basis of a study of 144 "Difficulties in the Newtonian Theory of Light, Considered and Removed," Philosophical Transactions, LX (1770), 417-40. See pp. 418-19. 145"On the Effect of Aberration of Light on the Time of a Transit of Venus over the Sun," Philosophical 146PRIESTLEY, Transactions,LX (1770), 536-40. See p. 540. op. cit., p. 140. 147London, 1784, pp. 243, 251-52. 148 4th ed., Gottingen, 1787, pp. 567-68. 149 London, 1785, pp. 287, 298-99. The persistence about this time of still lower figures is shown in the speed of 3,333,000 leagues-about 154,000 miles-per second or 400,000 times that of sound carelessly given by J. H. POTT,Des El6mens(2 vols., Lausanne, 1782), I, 317. 150See BoscoVIcH, Opera pertinentia ad opticam et astronomiam (5 vols., BASSANI;Venetiis, 1785), V. 429-30, 436-37. 151Kurzgefasste Erlduterungder Sternkunde (2 parts, Berlin, 1778), I, 246-47. This edition places the velocity of light at 900,000 times that of sound, but later editions replace this with the figure 902,000. See, e.g., 2nd ed., Berlin, 1793, I, 356. BODE'S time figure quite possibly was calculated from the work This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Early Estimates of the Velocity of Light 39 eclipses of the satellites of Jupiter, gave this time factor as 8 min. 13.2 sec.152This figure, more often taken simply as the 8 min. 13 sec. of BRADLEY and sometimes falsely ascribed to RoEMER,153 was widely adopted during the first half of the nineteenth century, and the range of values suggested for the velocity of light was consequently considerably reduced. In terms of DELAMBRE'Sestimate of 8.'56 as the most probable solar parallax,154a velocity about 194,000 mi. per sec. is indicated, and estimates tended to cluster rather closely about this. In English works the values 190,000 mi. per sec.,155 199,500 mi. per sec.,156195,000 mi. per sec.,157and 200,000 mi. per sec.158appeared during the first half of the nineteenth century. In German books the velocity generally was expressed in round figures as 40,000 geographic miles -about 184,000 statute miles-per second,159although other values up to 42,000 also appeared.160In France the accepted round figure became 70,000 leagues-about 194,000 miles-per second,161although toward the middle of the century roughly equivalent figures, such as 77,076 and 79,572, appeared in leagues of 4,000 meters.162Sometimes the velocity was expressed comparatively in terms of that of sound, with the figure 900,000 times as great most frequently cited.163 In spite of the fact that the time factor of 8 min. 13 sec. was generally adopted during the early nineteenth century, estimates of the velocity of of BRADLEYon the basis of 20", instead of 20." 2, as the angle of aberration. Such a calculation had been given some years earlier by LEMONNIER (op. cit., pp. 300-1). 152Histoire de l'astronomie moderne vols., Paris, (2 1821), II, 653. 153 See the citations to MADLER and GUENTHER given above. 154Astronomictheoriqueet pratique, II, 507. See also III, 105, 121, for DELAMBRE'Suse of 8 min. 13 sec. 155MARY SOMERVILLE,On the Connectionof the Physical Sciences (from the 7th London ed., New York, 1846), p. 30. 156 DENISON OLMSTED,An Introductionto Natural Philosophy, vol. II (4th ed., New York, 1840), p. 223. 157JAMES RENWICK, Familiar Illustrations of Natural Philosophy (New York, 1840), p. 311. 158MARGARETBRYAN, Lectureson Natural Philosophy (London, 1806), p. 217; E. S. FISCHER, Elements of Natural Philosophy (trans. by JOHN FARRAR, Boston, 1827), p. 230. 159 K. W. G. KASTNER, Grundriss der Experimentalphysik (2nd ed., 2 vols., Heidelberg, 1820-21), II, 413-14; ANDREAS BAUMGARTNER,Die Naturlehre (3 vols., Wien, 1824), II, 10; H. W. BRANDES, Vorlesungeniiber die Naturlehre (3 parts, Leipzig, 1830-32), II, 65-66; C. S. CORNELIUS,Die Naturlehre (Leipzig, 1849), p. 318. 160 JOH. MULLER, Lehrbuchder Physik und Meteorologie (2nd ed., 2 vols., Braunschweig, 1844-45), II, 351. 161E. PECLET, Trait6 e6lmentairede physique (2nd ed., 2 vols., Paris, 1832), II, 257; C. DESPRETZ, Traite elementairede physique (6th ed., Bruxelles, 1840), pp. 361-62; G. LAME,Cours de physique (2nd ed., 3 vols., Paris, 1840), II, 114. 162For the figure 77,076 see FRANCOIS ARAGO, (Euvres completes (ed. by M. J. A. BARRAL, 17 vols., Paris and Leipzig, 1854-62), XVI, 401-2; for 79,572 see C. S. M. POUILLET,lelmens de physique experimentale (2nd ed., 2 vols., Paris, 1832), II(1), 213-14, and LEON FOUCAULT,Recueil des travaux scientifiques (ed. by C. M. GARIEL, Paris, 1878), p. 187. 163ALEX. BERTRAND,Lettressur la physique (2 vols., Paris and Leipzig, 1824-25), II, 220; also BRANDES, loc. cit.; KASTNER, loc. cit., gives the figure 750,000 times that of sound. This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c). Carl B. Boyer 40 light continued to indicate a margin of error of some 5 per cent as a consequence of inaccuracies in determining the solar parallax. This serves to indicate how great was the need for new terrestrial methods for the determination of this constant, so important in both physics and astronomy. Whether because of the lack of a satisfactory theory of light or because of the practical difficulties inherent in the astronomical procedures, very little interest in the precise determination of the speed of light appears to have been manifested before about the middle of the nineteenth century. Most early estimates were given only incidentally and with no claim to accuracy. This is in striking contrast with the appearance of scores of scientific papers devoted solely to this subject following the work of FIZEAU and FOUCAULT. With the perfection of their experimental procedures the very factors which formerly had operated to make uncertain the estimates of the speed of light now inversely could themselves be determined far more accurately in terms of terrestrial measurements of this velocity. Brooklyn College This content downloaded from 139.184.014.159 on October 18, 2016 00:12:26 AM All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).