27.06.2013 Views

Lenses and Waves

Lenses and Waves

Lenses and Waves

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

28 CHAPTER 2<br />

the book. In the same way, he argued, all the points of the sun project<br />

overlapping images of the aperture (Figure 14). The resulting image has the<br />

shape of the sun, albeit with a blurred edge. In the projection of an eclipse,<br />

the image of the shadow of the moon is partially overlapped by the image of<br />

the sun. Consequently, the diameter of the moon seems too small. In chapter<br />

two of Paralipomena, Kepler had solved the apparent anomaly of pinhole<br />

observations in principle, building on the previous chapter, he elaborated the<br />

exact solution in the eleventh <strong>and</strong> final chapter.<br />

Image formation<br />

Kepler came to the conclusion that there were more problems in<br />

perspectiva, in particular its core, the theory of vision. In chapter five of<br />

Paralipomena, he elaborated a new theory of vision on the basis of his newly<br />

gained underst<strong>and</strong>ing of image formation. In its fourth section, Kepler listed<br />

the defects of existing theories of vision, the most important being a wrong<br />

underst<strong>and</strong>ing of the anatomy of the eye <strong>and</strong> of the mathematics of image<br />

formation. Perspectivist theories considered the lens the sensitive organ of<br />

the eye, whereas recent anatomical investigations had demonstrated,<br />

convincingly according to Kepler, that the retina receives images from<br />

objects. He himself had shown the defects of the perspectivist underst<strong>and</strong>ing<br />

of image formation, calling Witelo by name, <strong>and</strong> he now went on to<br />

reconsider the optics of the eye.<br />

In perspectivist theory, each point of an object emits rays of light in each<br />

direction. This, however, raises the problem how a sharp image can be<br />

perceived, that is: how a one-to-one relationship between a point of the<br />

object <strong>and</strong> a point of the image in the eye is established. According to<br />

Alhacen there can be only one point in the eye where a ray from a point of<br />

the object can be perceived. He stated that this must be the one entering the<br />

eye perpendicularly (<strong>and</strong> thus perpendicular to the lens). He explained that<br />

the other rays are refracted by the eye, therefore weakened, <strong>and</strong> thus do not<br />

partake in the formation of the image. 61 In medieval optics, images were<br />

therefore taken to be produced by single rays from each point of the object.<br />

Kepler saw no reason to differentiate between weak <strong>and</strong> strong rays. He did<br />

not see, for that matter, why refraction would weaken a ray. In his view, all<br />

rays emitted by a point should somehow partake in the formation of an<br />

image. In the case of pinholes this resulted in a fuzzy image, but what about<br />

the sharp images by which we generally see the world?<br />

Kepler’s answer was that the cone of rays coming from one point is<br />

somehow brought to focus on the retina. Following certain recent<br />

anatomical observations he considered the retina as the sensitive organ of<br />

the eye, in contrast to perspectivist theory that had assigned the power of<br />

visual perception to the crystalline humor. According to Kepler, the various<br />

humors of the eye can be regarded as one refracting sphere. In the fifth<br />

61 Alhacen, Optics I, 68 (book 1, section 17) <strong>and</strong> 77 (book 1, section 46).

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!