27.06.2013 Views

Lenses and Waves

Lenses and Waves

Lenses and Waves

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

126 CHAPTER 4<br />

It is beyond dispute that Kepler was crucial to the development of<br />

seventeenth-century optics. With his seminal work, he gave the study of<br />

optics a new start at the beginning of the seventeenth century. What his<br />

influence was exactly is harder to determine. As a result of the advent of<br />

corpuscular conceptions of nature, his explanation of the nature of light was<br />

outdated almost immediately. On the level of theories <strong>and</strong> mathematical<br />

concepts his influence is clear: his theory of image formation <strong>and</strong> of vision<br />

were the starting-point of all subsequent studies. However, his contribution<br />

was largely obscured by the uncredited adoption of his ideas by Descartes<br />

most notably. On the level of methodology the matter is less clear. Descartes<br />

called Kepler his “first teacher in Optics”, but what he had been taught he<br />

did not say. 74 He did not, for one thing, adopt Kepler’s c<strong>and</strong>or as regards the<br />

way he discovered things. Seventeenth-century savants found Kepler’s<br />

Renaissance conceptions hard to take <strong>and</strong> the odor of mysticism that<br />

surrounded him seems to have been responsible for the fact that few<br />

referred to Kepler directly. As regards the way mathematical reasoning could<br />

be applied to underst<strong>and</strong> natural phenomena, he was quickly overshadowed<br />

by Descartes <strong>and</strong> Galileo. Huygens, in particular, was silent on Kepler as<br />

regards his approach to optics.<br />

4.1.3 THE LAWS OF OPTICS IN CORPUSCULAR THINKING<br />

The new philosophies of the seventeenth century came to see light as an<br />

effect of some material action. As a consequence, the mechanical analogies<br />

used in perspectivist accounts of reflection <strong>and</strong> refraction were put in a<br />

different light. Discussions of motions <strong>and</strong> impact regarding the causes of<br />

reflection <strong>and</strong> refraction were now connected directly with the essence of<br />

light. Yet, accounting for the nature of light was not integrated with<br />

mathematical analysis of the behavior of light rays at one go. This is evident<br />

in Descartes’ account of refraction in La Dioptrique, a peculiar amalgam of<br />

perspectivist <strong>and</strong> mechanistic reasoning. In La Dioptrique Descartes made<br />

public the sine law, which he had discovered in Paris in the late 1620s during<br />

his collaborative efforts to realize non-spherical lenses (see section 3.1). How<br />

exactly he arrived at the sine law remains a subject for debate, but it is certain<br />

Descartes did not discover it along the lines of his account in La Dioptrique.<br />

Descartes’ account of refraction is difficult to comprehend in twentiethcentury<br />

parlance. A quick detour via the correspondence of Claude Mydorge,<br />

one of his Parisian collaborators, will be enlightening for modern readers. In<br />

a letter to Mersenne from around 1627, Mydorge used a rule to calculate<br />

angles of refraction, given the angles of one pair of incident <strong>and</strong> refracted<br />

rays (Figure 39). If FE-GE is the given pair, the refraction EN of HE is found<br />

in the following way. Draw a semicircle around E that cuts EF in F. Draw IF<br />

parallel to AB, <strong>and</strong> from I drop IG parallel to CE, cutting EG in G. Draw a<br />

second semicircle around E through G. Now draw HM, cutting the first<br />

74 AT 2, 86 (to Mersenne, 31 March 1638).

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!