Lenses and Waves
Lenses and Waves
Lenses and Waves
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
106 CHAPTER 3<br />
considered a useful task in itself. In the preface cited above, Huygens sings<br />
the praise of the invention of the telescope. It had served the contemplation<br />
of the heavenly bodies tremendously <strong>and</strong> had revealed the constitution of the<br />
universe <strong>and</strong> our place in it. “What man, unless plain stupid, does not<br />
acknowledge the gr<strong>and</strong>eur <strong>and</strong> importance of these discoveries?” 220<br />
Huygens’ interest in scientific instruments was not exceptional. The form<br />
it took was exceptional. Huygens gave a particular twist to the idea that<br />
theory could be used to improve the telescope. Instead of deriving an ideal<br />
solution to the problem of spherical aberration, he applied his mathematical<br />
underst<strong>and</strong>ing of real, spherical lenses. Gaining a theoretical underst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />
of the telescope was not that hard for a Huygens; applying it to solve<br />
practical problems proved a more tricky business. With his clocks he was<br />
more successful. His theoretical knowledge of circular motion enabled him<br />
to design an isochronous pendulum. Still, the usefulness of the cheeks was<br />
rather limited. He had to rack his brains considerably to find means to make<br />
his clocks seaworthy – with or without cheeks.<br />
Instruments may not have guided Huygens’ other pursuits as they did in<br />
dioptrics, they certainly were important to him. He published part of his<br />
studies of circular motion in the guise of a treatise describing <strong>and</strong> explaining<br />
his isochronous pendulum clock. One might say that Huygens used<br />
instruments to present himself <strong>and</strong> his scientific knowledge. This would ally<br />
with the way he emphasized, in Systema saturnium, the quality of his<br />
telescopes. It would also offer a (partial) explanation of the fact that he did<br />
not publish Dioptrica despite repeated requests. The book would lack a vital<br />
element: an impressing innovation of the telescope. The invention he had<br />
placed his hopes on – a configuration of spherical lenses neutralizing<br />
spherical aberration – had turned out to be worthless.<br />
220 OC13, 439. “Quae magna et praeclara esse quis nisi plane stupidus non agnoscit?”
Change language