The Final Synthesis: Jérôme Lalande

Chapter
Part of the Sources and Studies in the History of Mathematics and Physical Sciences book series (SHMP)

Abstract

Dunthorne and Mayer had both firmly established the existence of the moon’s secular acceleration, but differed in their determination of its size. Furthermore, neither Dunthore nor Mayer had provided a fully justified term for the effect of the moon’s secular equation in their lunar tables: Dunthorne gave a detailed description of how he had derived the coefficient of the secular equation, but presented it as a correction to his existing lunar tables. Mayer, by contrast, had fully incorporated the moon’s secular acceleration into his lunar tables, but had not given a detailed explanation of how he had derived its size. Further confusion existed over whether the sun’s motion was also subject to a secular correction. Euler had reasoned that resistance to the motion of a heavenly body by the æther would cause such an acceleration in the Earth’s motion and had included a secular term in his solar tables, but Mayer claimed that the ancient observations provided no evidence for a solar equation. Such was the state of the subject when astronomy’s great opportunist, Jérôme Lalande, made a bid to have his name attached to the definitive solution to the problem. It was evident that determining whether the sun and moon were subject to a secular acceleration, and if so, what was its magnitude was going to become an important problem both for the construction of accurate astronomical tables—something that was gaining in importance because of the role of lunar distance measurements in determining geographical longitude—and in testing the ability of Newton’s gravitational theory to explain the motion of bodies in the solar system. Lalande’s paper on the secular equations, published in 1757, was successful in bringing the study of the size of the moon’s secular acceleration using historical records to an end for the next several decades. As I will show, however, Lalande was extremely lucky in this outcome as the arguments presented in his paper scarcely ­justify the faith placed in his result.

Keywords

Refraction Egypt Rabie 

References

  1. Mayer, Tobias, 1753, ‘Novae Tabulae Motuum Solis et Lunae’, Commentarii Societatis Regiae Scientiarum Gottingensis 2, 383–430.Google Scholar
  2. Amiable, L., 1889, Le Franc-Maçon Jérôme Lalande (Paris: Charavay Frères).Google Scholar
  3. Chapin, S. L., 1988, ‘Lalande and the Length of the Year; Or, How to Win a Prize and Double Publish’, Annals of Science 48, 183–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Delambre, J.-B., 1827, Histoire de l’Astronomie au Dix-Huitième Siècle (Paris: Bachelier).Google Scholar
  5. Dumont, S., 2007, Un Astronome des Lumières: Jérôme Lalande (Paris: l’Observatoire de Paris & Vuibert).Google Scholar
  6. Gapaillard, J, 2010, ‘Lalande à Berlin et sa correspondance avec Euler’, in G. Boistel, J. Lamy and C. Le Ley (eds.), Jérôme Lalande (1732–1807): Une Trajectoire Scientifique (Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes), 87–107.Google Scholar
  7. Grant, R., 1852, History of Physical Astronomy from the Earliest Ages to the Middle of the Nineteenth Century (London: Henry G. Bohn).Google Scholar
  8. Monod-Cassidy, H., 1980, Jerome Lalande: Journal d’un Voyage en Angleterre 1763, Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century 184 (Oxford: The Voltaire Foundation).Google Scholar
  9. Toomer, G. J., 1984, Ptolemy’s Almagest (London: Duckworth).MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Wilson, C., 1985, ‘The Great Inequality of Jupiter and Saturn: From Kepler to Laplace’, Archive for History of Exact Sciences 33, 15–290.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Egyptology and Ancient Western Asian StudiesBrown UniversityProvidenceUSA

Personalised recommendations