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.

38 CHAPTER 2<br />

minute or First Draught of the Optiques” of 1646 (the most complete<br />

elaboration of his optics) included several chapters on lenses <strong>and</strong><br />

telescopes. 101 He did not, however, make the most of his knowledge of the<br />

sine law. The account consisted of qualitative theorems – without proof <strong>and</strong><br />

often dubious – which applied mostly to single rays refracted by lenses.<br />

Despite the presence of an exact law of refraction, Hobbes’ account (if<br />

published) would have been no match for Dioptrice.<br />

With the exact law of refraction established <strong>and</strong> published, the road<br />

might seem open for a follow-up of Dioptrice in the form of an exact theory<br />

of the dioptrical properties of spherical lenses. It was not to be, for various<br />

reasons. First of all the sine law became generally known <strong>and</strong> accepted only<br />

around 1660. 102 This delay may have been caused by a slow distribution of<br />

Descartes’ works – <strong>and</strong> this maybe partly because La Dioptrique was written<br />

in French – or the bad odor his ideas were in. As late as 1663, in Optica<br />

promota, Gregory showed that the ellipse <strong>and</strong> hyperbola are aplanatic without<br />

using the sine law. In 1647, Cavalieri extended the theory of Dioptrice to some<br />

more types of lenses, using Kepler’s original rule. As the title Exercitationes<br />

geometricae sex suggests, this was an exercise in mathematics not aimed at<br />

furthering the underst<strong>and</strong>ing of the telescope. In this regard, Cavalieri was<br />

not an exception.<br />

Further, <strong>and</strong> more importantly, mathematicians addressed questions<br />

raised in Kepler’s Paralipomena rather than in his Dioptrice, to wit abstract<br />

optical imagery pertaining to Kepler’s theory of image formation, <strong>and</strong> the<br />

‘anaclastic’ problem that had been put in a different light by that theory. The<br />

anaclastic problem, or ‘Alhacen’s problem’, is closely related to the<br />

determination of aplanatic surfaces: to find the point of reflection or<br />

refraction of a ray passing from a given point to another. 103 When all rays are<br />

considered, as is relevant in Kepler’s theory of image formation, to find these<br />

points means determining the aplanatic surface. In this theory images are<br />

formed by the focusing of bundles of rays, <strong>and</strong> in most cases of reflection<br />

<strong>and</strong> refraction the image of a point source will not be a point. The properties<br />

of these images became an important subject of study in seventeenth-century<br />

geometrical optics. In Optica promota, Gregory extended the theory of<br />

Paralipomena with his contributions to the theory of optical imagery <strong>and</strong> his<br />

determination of aplanatic surfaces. From this viewpoint, La Dioptrique<br />

embroidered on Paralipomena rather than Dioptrice.<br />

The seventeenth-century study of these topics reached its highpoint in<br />

the lectures Barrow <strong>and</strong>, later, Newton delivered at the university of<br />

Cambridge. Barrow’s lectures were published in 1669, those of Newton<br />

remained unpublished during his lifetime. With Huygens’ dioptrical work<br />

101<br />

Stroud, Minute, 20; Prins, “Hobbes on light <strong>and</strong> vision”, 129-132. On Hobbes’ derivation of the sine<br />

law, see section 5.2.1.<br />

102<br />

Lohne, ”Geschichte des Brechungsgesetzes”, 166.<br />

103<br />

Huygens worked on it in 1671-2, see page 160.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!