the rise of astronomy in america.pdf

8/14/2019 the rise of astronomy in america.pdf

1/27

looking up

the riseof astronomyin americaStepheng brush

How shal l we study the deve lopmen t of science in America?Fifteen years ago H un te r Dupree announced to the American His

torical Association that the field of the History of American Science had"found itself. It had doneso, he claimed, because historians, followingthe advice of Arthur Schlesinger, Sr., had recognized the central role ofsciencein recent American history and had refused to let their ignoranceof science prevent them from writing about it. Reject ing the d em an dof George Sarton (founder of the history of science discipline in theUnited States) that they should be "deeply familiar with at least onebranch of today's science" and "should have a m ore superficial acq uain tance with various other branches," Dupree and his colleagues decidedthat they could dispense with such scientific training and perhaps didnot even need to have an interest in the subject matter of science at all;their subject was the scientists and their relat ion to society.1

One consequence of this at t i tude was D upr ee's con clusion th at historians of "American science" need not worry about whether the contr i bu t ions of American scientists were of any impor tance to science itself,as judged by scientists in other countries; "since sciencehas mean t mu chto American civilization, the indebtedness would not change if a watertight proof were made that American civilization had been woefullyinep t or even a complete failure in its cont r ibu t ions to science."2 T h u s

41


2/27

American science is to be studied because of i ts role in American society;the European reputat ion of an American scient ist does him no good athome (unless he can convert i t into the cash and prestige that goes witha Nobel Prize).

The opposing view, presented just as forcefully at about the sametime but sti l l held by only a minority of historians, is that there is nosuch thing as American science.3 Science is the search for knowledge,and if the knowledge is valid it must be independent of the nationalityof the person who discovered it . Unless there is a distinctively Americanmethod for co nd uc ting scientific research, talkin g abou t "A m erican science" is a rather artificial designation which makes no more sense thancreating such categories as "young science" or "male science" or "right-handed science" to describe science engaged in by persons with thesecharacteristics.

"The history of American science," from this viewpoint, could beconsidered a legitimate subfield, not of the history of science, but ofA m erican history at least if i t is stud ied w itho ut rega rd to science asan international activity. If the development of American society is theprimary object of interest, one can certainly ask what role was playedby persons who were considered scientists, even if no one outside thecoun try had ever he ard of them . O ne can study the pop ula t ion ofAmerican scientiststheir institutions, journals, salaries, education, psychological characterist ics, etc.without worrying about whether theirresearch had any recognized value in the world scientific community.All this is quite worthwhile, but i t is not the history of science unless onecan establish the place of those Americans in the international scientificcommunity; i f they had any ambit ions as scientists, they ha d to look tothat community for problems worth solving and for recognit ion whenthey had solved them.

Being myself a believer in pluralism, I would not want to discourageProfessor Dupree and his fellow historians of American science fromcontinuing what they have been doing so competent ly and enthusiast ically for the last two or three decades although I lean toward the secondview poin t in my own research. Bu t whe n I look at the way science ispresented by American historians, in textbooks, articles and lectures, Iam disturbed to see a considerable amount of distortion even by theirown criteria. "Science" seems to m ea n only the atom bo m b, socialDarwinism and various inventions that have changed our dai ly l ives.The historian seems to assume that the great majority of Americans, l ikethe majori ty of historians, have no interest in knowledge about naturefor its own sake, but think of science only as it affects their safety, religious beliefs or personal comfort.

42


3/27

imajor american contributions to astronomy, 1801-1950

To come to the subject of this paper, I think historians have greatlyunderest imated the interest of Americans in astronomy, and have neglected to consider the question of how the United States managed torise to world leadership in a relatively "pure" branch of science (practical applications such as navigation were not enough to account for thisphenomenon) well before the immigration of European scientists in the1930s, which is usually credited with producing our postwar superiorityin fundamental research.A glance at some of the most pop ula r U.S. history textbooks pub lishedduring the past two decades shows that while science is generally accorded a few pages, astronomy is barely mentioned at all ; the reader isled to believe that there is no significant difference between the contribut ions of John Winthrop and Maria Mitchel l , on the one hand, andthose of George Ellery Hale and E. P. H ub bl e, on the other. W orsethan that is the complete neglect of American astronomy in the latenineteenth century, which, I hope to show, was the most remarkableperiod in its history. Even the Encyclopedia of Am erican History (1976),which attempts to present a systematic l ist of major American contributions to astronomy, fails to mention the three most important Americanastronomers of that period (see below, Table 4) and ignores the mostim po rtan t discovery to which Am ericans con tr ibuted (Tab le 3). Butthe general American historian can hardly be blamed for such oversights when there is no comprehensive survey of the history of Americanscience in its relation to wor ld science to wh ich he can turn . If he looks,for example, at George Daniels' Science in Am erican Societyan excellent book, based firmly (a little too firmly, some would say) on recentscholarshiphe will find only one page on astronomy out of about 200on the period from 1800 to 1915.4

If we expect authors who lack any detailed knowledge of astronomyto include that subject in their surveys of U.S. history, and indeed if wewant to discuss the rise of American astronomy at all, we must be explicitabout what were the most important astronomical discoveries in America,and who were the American astronomers most highly regarded in Europe.For this purpose I have made a survey of the major events in astronomyand the major astronomers, during the period 1800-1950, together withan attempt to determine how many of them can be called American,Having an idea of where the Americans stood on the international scenewill provide some of the necessary perspective to discuss what they weredoing and will make it more meaningful to ask questions such as "whydid American astronomy make such spectacular advances in the late

43


4/27

nin ete en th an d early twe ntieth centuries?" It is qu ite possible tha t theanswer involves certain special features of American society in this period; I am not trying to disparage the role of social factors in the historyof science. My p oi nt is simply t ha t one can no t even ask the questionunless one has some reason to think that astronomy advanced morerapidly in the United States than in other countries at that t ime.In Tables 1, 3 and 5, I have listed ten major events in astronomy foreach 50-year period from 1800-1950, together with the people responsiblefor the events an d their nationa li t ies. Th ese l ists have been com piledby going throu gh several books on the history of astronom y. T o avoidbias in favor of Americans, I have used books by non-American-born authors .5 Of course, I can no t prove th at these are the most importantevents in those periods; al l I am doing is presenting an assumption whichis sufficiently exp licit th at anyo ne ma y criticize it. T h e ran k or de rin gof even ts, like the selection of events, repre sents a valu e jud gm en t, th atis , my interpretation of the collective judgment of these authors.

O ne gen eral criticism can be m ad e of all these lists: the au tho rs aremostly astronomers rather than historians, and they tend to judge the importance of earl ier events in the l ight of present-day knowledge ratherth an historical context. Th is is wh at historians call the "W hig in terpr etation"the past is seen through the eyes of the present.6 Two examplesare Fraunhofer 's discovery of the dark l ines in the solar spectrum(T ab le 1) and the first steps tow ard rad io astronomy by Jansky and Re be r(Table 5); only with the advantage of hindsight can we recognize thatthese discoveries were destined to open up major new areas of research.But I don' t think this kind of bias has much effect on the nationalcomparisons.Notice that I use "event" in a broad sense, to include the gradualdevelopment of apparatus, techniques and theories as well as observational discoveries that occurred at a definite time. Also, I have sometimes grouped together events that seem closely related. When severalpe op le are involv ed in the same event, the assignme nt of fractional cred itis somewhat arbitrary; generally the first name listed is the one usuallygiven most of the credit, except where a slash (/) indicates equal shares.As will be seen, the main conclusions do not depend on the accuracy ofthese details.A separate compilation has been made of ten major astronomers ineach period (Tables 2, 4 and 6). These lists are subject to all thequalifications mentioned above for the lists of events, with the addit ional complication that some careers overlapped two periods. In suchcases, I first assigned the person to one period on the basis of the completion of his major works, then gave him full credit for all his workregardless of date. I t should be noted that two astronomers who werehighly regarded at the beginning of the nineteenth centuryLaplaceand Will iam Herschelwere completely eliminated by this process since

44


5/27

their most important work was done in the late eighteenth century.Piazzi just barely escaped elimination by making his discovery of Cereson January 1, 1801. In spite of such artificialities, I think it is useful tohave separate l ists of astronomers and events. Progress depends on thosewho devote their l ives to persistent high-quali ty, but unspectacular work,as well as on those who are lucky enough to make glamorous discoveries.Olbers , Argelander , Encke, Barnard, Zol lner , Newcomb, Lyot , Baade,Oort and Kuiper al l made a number of s ignif icant contr ibut ions butwere overshadowed by the fame of others. Conversely, several of the major events, such as the introduction of spectrum analysis or the development of relativity theory, are credited to people who were not consideredastronomers at al l .

I t is obviou s from the tables tha t Ge rma ny enjoyed un qu estio ne dleadership in astronomy during the first half of the nineteenth century,bu t suffered a prec ipitous dec line thereafter, m itigated by the con tributions of physicists (Kirchhoff, Hemholtz and Einstein). German physics,as is well kn ow n, was adv ancin g rapid ly after 1840. T h e B rit ish reache dtheir astronomical peak in the 1860s and 1870s; their reputation waspreserved in the twentieth century by Eddington and other theorists notnamed in Table 6. The French lost their high standing in physicalscience after the death of Laplace (1827) and never recovered it despitethe isolated triumphs of LeVerrier and Poincar in celestial mechanics.Among the smal ler countr ies , I ta ly provided some important work inthe nineteenth century, but was replaced by Holland in the twent ieth.

One could argue, with some justification, that American contributionshave been underrated by the non-American authors whose judgmentsare sum ma rized here. T h e work of W . C. Bon d an d especially his sonG. P. Bond in stellar photography deserves a place in Table 1, as doesthe solar research of C. A. You ng an d S. P. Lang ley in T ab le 3. T h edevelopment of photoelectric photometry by J. Stebbins might well havebeen added to Tab le 5, a long with the Cha mb erl in-M oulton "planetesi -mal hypothesis" for the origin of the solar system, in which I have aspecial interest.7 B ut I prefer to leave the tables as they stand an d usethese omissions as evidence that the tables indicate the minimum levelof American achievement in each period.After completing this survey and preparing Tables 1-6, I receivedDie ter B . He rrm ann ' s new book, Geschichte der Astronomie von Herschel

bis Hertzsprung (Berlin, 1978). Since it is based on m ore ex tensive historical research than most of the other histories of astronomy I had consulted, rather than simply average i t in with them I decided to useH errm ann 's judg m ents as an inde pen den t check. Th is can be done"objectively" since he presents as an appendix a chronological list ofninety-two events in astronomy from 1801 to 1931. A national breakdown of his Chronik is given in T ab le 7. M akin g allowan ce for somepro-German bias, we see that his l ist confirms the general pattern of a

45


6/27

TABLE 1Major Events in Astronomy, 1801-1850

1. D i s t a n c e s o f s t a r s b y p a r a l l a x m e a s u r e m e n t sF. W . Bessel G e r m a n ) , F . G . W . S t ruve G e r m a n / R u s s i a n ) , T h o m a s H e n d e r s on Br it ish)2 . D i s c o v e r y o f Ne p t u n e , r e s u l t i n g f r o m t h e o r e t i c a l c a l c u l a t i o nU . J . J . L e V e r r i e r French)3 . Da r k l i n e s i n s o l a r s p e c t r u m , b e g in n in g o f a s t r o n o m ic a l s p e c t r o s c o p yJ o s e f v o n F r a u n h o f e r G e r m a n )4 . - y e a r p e r i o d i c i t y o f s u n s p o t sS a m u e l He in r i c h S c h wa b e G e r m a n )5 . F i r s t a s t e r o i d , Ce r e s : d i s c o v e r y , o r b i t c a l c u l a t i o nG iu s e p p e P ia z z i I t a l i a n ) , K. F. Gauss G e r m a n )6 . I m p r o v e m e n t s i n t e l e s c o p e g la s s , c l o c k d r i v e , e t c .J o s e f v o n F r a u n h o f e r G e r m a n )7 . S h o r t - p e r i o d c o m e t , s h o w in g a p p a r e n t e f f e c t o f r e s i s t i n g m e d iu mJ . F. Encke G e r m a n )8 . P o we r f u l t e l e s c o p e s h o w in g s p i r a l s h a p e o f n e b u la e , e t c .W i l l i a m Parsons , Ear l o f Rosse Br i t ish)9 . De t a i l e d m a p o f m o o nW i l h e l m B e e r a n d J o h a n n M a d l e r G e r m a n )10 . Survey o f s ta rs in Sou thern H emis phereJ o h n He r s c h e l Br it ish)

TABLE 2Major Astronomers, 1801-1850

1 . F r i e d ri c h W i l h e l m B ESS EL ( 1 7 8 4 - 1 8 4 6 ) G e r m a n2 . J o h n F r e d e r ic k W i l l i a m H E RS C H EL ( 1 7 9 2 - 1 8 7 1 ) British3 . F r i e d ri c h G e o r g W i l h e l m S T R U VE ( 1 7 9 3 - 1 8 6 4 ) G e r m a n /R u s s ia n4 . W i l l i a m P a r s o n s, E a r l o f ROSSE ( 1 8 0 0 - 1 8 6 7 ) British5 . F r i e d ri c h W i l h e l m A u g u s t A R G E L A N D E R ( 1 7 9 9 - 1 8 7 5 ) German6 . J o h a n n F r a n z E N C K E ( 1 7 9 1 - 1 8 6 5 ) G e r m a n7 . G i us ep p e P I A Z Z I ( 1 7 4 6 - 1 8 2 6 ) I t a l i a n8 . J o s e f v o n F R A U N H O F E R ( 1 7 8 7 - 1 8 2 6 ) G e r m a n9 . H e i n r i c h W i l h e l m M a t t h i a s O LB ER S ( 1 7 5 8 - 1 8 4 0 ) G e r m a n

10 . U r b a in J e a n J o s e p h L E V E RRI E R ( 1 8 1 1 - 1 8 7 7 ) French


1 . De v e lo p m e n t o f s p e c t r u m a n a l y s i sG . R . K i r c h o f f G e r m a n ) , R . W . B u n s e n G e r m a n )2 . De t a i l e d s p e c t r a o f s t a r s ; Do p p le r s h i f t i n d i c a t i n g s p e e d sW i l l i a m H u g g i n s Br i t ish)3 . C la s s i f i c a t i o n o f s t e l l a r s p e c t r aA n g e lo S e c c h i I t a l i a n ) , H . W . V o g e l G e r m a n ) , E . C . P icker ing A m e r i c a n ) ,A n t o n i a M a u r y A m e r i c a n ) , W i l l i a m i n a F l e m i n g B r i t i s h /A m e r ic a n )4 . S u r f a c e f e a t u r e s o f M a r s , e s p e c ia l l y c a n a l sG i o v a n n i S c h i a p a r e l l i I t a l i a n )5 . S t u d y o f s u n : p r o m in e n c e s , s p e c t r a , h e l i u mP. J . C . Janssen F r e n c h ) / N o r m a n L o c k y e r Br it ish)6 . T h e o r y o f c o n t r a c t i n g g a s e o u s s p h e re ( t h e r m o d y n a m ic s )H e r m a n n v o n H e l m h o l t z G e r m a n ) , W i l l i a m T h o m s o n , L o r d K e l v i n B r i t i s h ) ,J . H . L a n e A m e r i c a n ) , A u g u s t R i t t e r G e r m a n )7 . A p p l i c a t i o n s o f p h o t o g r a p h yL . M . R u t h e r f u r d A m e r i c a n ) / H e n r y D r a p e r A m e r i c a n ) / D a v i d G i l l B r i t i s h ) /W a r r e n d e l a Ru e B r i t i s h ) / A . A . C o m m o n B r i t i s h ) / I saac Rober t s B r i t i s h ) /J a m e s K e e le r A m e r i c a n )8 . S u r v e ys o f s t e l l a r m a g n i t u d e sE. C . P icker ing A m e r i c a n ) , Ch a r l e s P r i t c h a r d B r i t i s h ) , G u s t a v M u e l l e r G e r m a n ) ,P a u l K e m p f G e r m a n )9 . Co n s t i t u t i o n o f S a t u r n ' s r i n g s

J . C . M a x w e l l British), Edoua rd Roche F r e n c h ) , J a m e s K e e le r A m e r ic a n )10 . L u n a r t h e o r yP . A . Ha n s e n G e r m a n ) , C . E . De la u n a y F r e n c h ) , G . W . H i l l A m e r i c a n ) ,J . C . A d a m s B r i t i s h ) , S im o n N e w c o m b C a n a d i a n / A m e r i c a n )


7/27

TABLE 4Major Astronomers, 1851-19001. W i l l i a m H U G G I N S ( 1 8 2 4 - 1 9 1 0 ) Brit ish2 . A n g e l o S E C CH I ( 1 8 1 8 - 1 8 7 8 ) I ta l i an3 . J o s ep h N o r m a n L O C K Y ER ( 1 8 3 6 - 1 9 2 0 ) Brit ish4 . G i o v a n n i V i r g i n i o S C H I A P A R E L L I ( 1 8 3 5 - 1 9 1 0 ) I t a l i an5 . E d w a r d C h a r le s P I C K E R I N G ( 1 8 6 7 - 1 9 1 9 ) A m er i can6 . P i e r re Ju l e s C e sa r JA N S S E N ( 1 8 24 - 1 9 0 7 ) French7 . J o h n C o u c h A D A M S ( 1 8 1 9 - 1 8 9 2 ) Brit ish8 . J o h a n n K a r l F r ie d r ic h Z O L L N E R ( 1 8 3 4 - 1 8 8 2 ) G er m an9 . S im o n N E W C O M B ( 1 8 3 5 - 1 9 0 9 ) C a n a d i a n / A m e r i c a n

1 0 . E d w a r d E m e rs o n B A R N A R D ( 1 8 5 7 - 1 9 2 3 ) A m er i can


1 . T h e o r y o f s t e l l a r s t r u c t u r e a n d e n e r g y t r a n s f e rA r t h u r E d d i n g t o n B r i t i s h ) , R o b e r t E md e n S w i s s / G e r m a n ) ,K a r l S ch w a r zsch i l d G e r m a n ) , Ja me s Je a n s B r i t i s h ) , H . N . Russe l l A m e r i c a n ) ,A r t h u r S ch u s t e r Bri t ish)2 . D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f d i s t a n ce s , p e r i o d - l u m i n o s i t y r e l a t i o n f o r C e p h e i d va r i a b l e sH e n r i e t t a L e a v i t t A m e r i c a n ) , E j n a r H e r t sp r u n g D a n i s h ) , H a r l o w S h a p l e y A m er i can )3 . R e cess io n o f g a l a x i e s , d i s t a n ce - v e l o c i t y l a w , e xp a n d i n g u n i ve r seE . P . Hubb le A m e r i c a n ) , V . M . S l i p h e r A m e r i c a n ) , A . A . F r i e d m a n n R uss i an ) ,M . L . H u m a s o n A m er i can )4 . C l a ss i f i ca t i o n o f s t a r s , d w a r f s a n d g i a n t s , co l o r - l u m i n o s i t y d i a g r a m a s b a s i s f o r t h e o r y o fs t e l l a r e vo l u t i o nE j n a r H e r t zsp r u n g D a n i s h ) , H . N . Russe l l A m e r i c a n ) , A n n i e J . C a n n o n A m e r i c a n ) ,A n t o n i a M a u r y A m e r i c a n )5 . Co nst ru c t i on o f l a rge te lescopesGeorge El le ry Hale A m er i can )6 . S i ze , sh a p e a n d d i f f e r e n t i a l r o t a t i o n o f M i l ky W a y g a l a xyH a r l o w S h a p l e y A m e r i c a n ) , B e r t i l L i n d b l a d S w e d i s h ) , J . H . O o r t D u t ch )7 . B e g i n n i n g s o f r a d i o a s t r o n o myK. G . Jan sky A m e r i c a n ) / G r o t e R e b e r A m er i can )8 . R e l a t i v i t y t h e o r yA l b e r t E i n s t e i n G er m an)9 . G r o u p i n g o f s t e l l a r mo t i o n s in t o t w o s t r e a msJ . C . K a p t e y n D u t ch )10 . T h e o r y o f i o n i za t i o n e q u i l i b r i u m a n d i t s a p p l i ca t i o n t o i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s t e l l a r sp e c t r aM . N . S a h a I n d i a n ) , C e c i li a P a y n e [ - G a p o s c h k i n ] B r i t i sh / A m er i can )

TABLE 6Major Astronomers, 1901-19501 . G e o r ge E l le r y H A L E ( 1 8 6 8 - 1 9 3 8 ) A m er i can2 . A r t h u r S t a n le y E D D I N G T O N ( 1 8 8 2 - 1 9 4 4 ) Brit ish3 . H a r l o w S H A P L E Y ( 1 8 8 5 - 1 9 7 2 ) A m er i can4 . H e n r y N o r r i s R U SS EL L ( 1 8 7 7 - 1 9 5 7 ) A m er i can5 . E d w i n P o w e l l H U B B L E ( 1 8 8 9 - 1 9 5 3 ) A m er i can6 . J a c o b C o r n el iu s K A P T E Y N ( 1 8 5 1 - 1 9 2 2 ) Dutch7 . W a l t e r B A A D E ( 1 8 9 3 - 1 9 6 0 ) G e r m a n / A m e r i c a n8 . Ja n H e n d r i k O O R T ( b . 1 9 0 0 ) Dutch9 . Gera rd Pe te r KU I PER (19 05 -19 73 ) D u t c h / A m e r i c a n

1 0 . B e r n a r d L Y O T ( 1 8 9 7 - 1 9 5 2 ) French

sudden rise of American astronomy in the period 1851-1900. (The onlyAmerican events he notes in the period 1801-1850 are the founding ofHarvard College Observatory and the ini t iat ion of Gould 's AstronomicalJournal, both of which can be considered important only in retrospect.)Probably no one will be surprised to hear that the United States had

47


8/27

risen to world leadership in ast ronomy by the mid -twent ieth century,b u t the rapidi ty of the ascent is rem ark ab le. Start in g from essentiallyzeroat thebeg inn ingof then ine teen th century , theAm er icans hadovertaken theGermans toju m p in to second place by the end of that centuryand were already challenging the Brit ishfor the top spot. The discoveriesannounced by 1930 were sufficient to put theU ni te d States ah ead of allother countr ies; the development of radio ast ronomy and the constructionof the200-inch telescope p rep are d thewayforad ditio na l discoveries(notall ofthe m A m erican ) after 1945.

The Europeans acknowledged American pr imacy, sometimes by remarks on thepu bl ic record and significantly by coming to the Uni tedStatesto dotheir research. Even before the great "intellec tual m igr atio n"of the1930s, astronom ers w ere visi t ing Am erican observatoriesandstayingas long aspossible, or,when they re turned hom e, compla ining abouttherelatively inadequate facil i t ies in their own countr ies , whi le adm iringtheway theAm ericans obtaine d andused their inst rum ents .8

iithe founding parents

The ear ly phaseof American ast ronomy, toab ou t 1876,may becharacterized as a per iod in which Am ericans bro ug ht themselves up to thelevel of Euro pean knowledge andbegan to show their ap t i tude in theuseof new technology. I will describe this period bybriefly m en tion ingsix peop le. No ne of themcan becalled an ast ronomer of the first ra n kby world s tandards, but they show howthings got started. The groupconsistsof two Yankeesa glassmakerand a female l ibrar ian; a wealthyT BLE 7

National Distribution of Events in Astronomy, 1801 -1931as listed in Herrmann s Geschichte der Astronomie

Percentage of events in each per iodC o u n tr y 1 8 0 1 - 1 8 5 0 1 8 5 1 - 1 9 0 0 1 9 0 1 - 9 3 1G e r m a n y 61 30 31Great Br i ta in 11 7 4United Sta tes 7 29 37France 5 13 0I t a l y 7 10 0Russia 5 3 3A u s t r i a 4 0 3Greece 0 2 0Switzerland 3 3N e th e r la n d s 0 0 7Denmark 4South Afr ica 0 0 1India 3Estonia 0 0 1Sweden 0 0 1Canada 2

4 8


9/27

New Yorker; a chemist who immigrated from England; a white and ablack from Maryland.Benjamin Banneker (1731-1806), the black, attracted considerable attention because of the intellectual distance he had to travel from hisown origins (though his father had already escaped the status of slaveryand become a landh older) rathe r than his ul t im ate achievements. H ema de a clock in 1753 w itho ut, app aren tly, ever hav ing seen one, a ndstartin g in 1792, he publish ed an alma nac wh ich involved a stronom icalcalculations on a fairly high level. His example showed that a blackcould reach a level of scientific and mathematical competence far abovethat of the average white.9Alvan Clark (1804-1887) perfected the glassmaker's art of making

optical instruments at his factory in Cambridgeport, Massachusetts; hebecam e know n as a ma ker of high-q uality telescope lenses. H is son,Alva n G rah am Clark (1832-1897), wo rked w ith him and in 1862, wh iletesting an eighteen-and-a-half-inch objective later installed at the Dearborn Observatory in Chicago, discovered the dark companion of Siriuspredicted by Bessel; this was the first "white dwarf to be discovered.Clark telescopes were responsible for much of the success of Americanastronomy in the latter part of the nineteenth century and after.10 T h eBritish astronomer William Huggins bought a Clark object-glass in 1858and used it for some of his discoveries.11John William Draper (1811-1882), born in England, studied chemistry at University College London and became interested in the chemicaleffects of light. After em igra ting to V irginia in 1832, he ob tain ed amed ical degree and in 1839 became professor of chemistry and na tu ra lphiloso phy at the college of New York Un iversity. H e took up the newinvention of photography, made one of the first photographic portraitsof a person and took one of the first good pictures of the moon (1840).

In 1844 he took the first ph ot og ra ph of a diffraction spe ctru m . In 1847he showed that incandescent solids emit a continuous spectrum of radiation with rays of increasing refrangibility (that is, increasing frequency)as the temperature increases; i t was by trying to determine the natureof this spectrum that Max Planck was led to the quantum theory in 1900.In 1874 D rap er pub lished a best-selling book, History of the Conflictbetween Religion and Science, largely a polemic against the effortsof theologians to obstruct research.12

John Draper's son, Henry Draper (1837-1882), was also known forwork in astronomical photography; he married Mary Anna Palmer,daughter of Court land Palmer, who had made a fortune in the hardwarebusiness and in New York real estate. After Henry Draper's death, Mrs.Draper used the family wealth to support astronomical work at theHarvard College Observatory, especially the survey of stellar spectraorganized by E. C. Pickering (see below). Antonia Maury, one of the

49


10/27

women whose work at Harvard will be discussed shortly, was a granddau ghte r of Jo hn W il l iam D rape r; H enr y was her uncle.1 3Another pioneer of astronomical photography was Lewis MorrisR ut he rfu rd (1816-1892), a we althy New York am ate ur. In th e 1860s hedeveloped a practical method for photographing the spectra of the sunand stars so as to reveal a large number of Fraunhofer l ines which areno t visible w ith the ord inary spectroscope. H e m ad e diffraction gratingswhich he distributed to other astronomers; these were superseded in the1880s by those made at Johns Hopkins Universi ty by Henry Rowland. 1 4The net effect of the introduction of photographic methods was tomake it possible for astronomers to take large numbers of observationsin a fairly routine way at night, then analyze the results during the day,often with the help of assistants who were not professional astronomers.This is one way astronomy became "Big Science," involving team research; i t is also one reason why opportunities were opened up for womenin astronomy, even if at first their jobs were fairly routine and tedious. 1 5

The first woman in American astronomy was Maria Mitchell (1818-1889). She was l ibraria n at the Athen eum in Na ntucke t , Massachusetts ,when she discovered a comet with her telescope in 1847. For this shewon a prize established in 1831 by the King of Denmark for the firstcom et to be discovered w ith a telescope. As a res ult of the pu blic itygenerated by this event, she gained some recognition from the scientificcommunity; after being employed for several years by the NauticalAlmanac Office to compute ephemerides of Venus, she became Professorof Astronomy and Director of the Observatory at the new Vassar Collegefor women.1 0Daniel Kirkwood (1814-1895) was the first American to make hisreputat ion in theoret ical astronomy. Born in Maryland, he held variouspositions as schoolteacher and administrator before being appointed professor of m ath em atic s at In di an a U nivers ity in 1856. In 1849, he prop ose da formula relating the rotations and orbits of planets similar to Kepler 'sthird ("harmonic") law for their revolution periods and distances; theapparent success of this formula in revealing a new regularity in the solarsystem earned him, for a brief t ime, the ti t le of "the American Kepler."1 7Kirkwood was for several years a strong supporter of Laplace's nebularhypothesis for the origin of the solar system, and the "Kirkwood gap"in the asteroid belts, for which he is now best known, were originallythought to demonstrate yet another regulari ty in support of Laplace'stheory.18 Kirkw ood is the una ckn ow ledge d o riginato r of on e of themodern explanat ions for the direct ion of planetary rotat ion. 1 9 Bu t helater rejected the nebular hypothesis and provided two of the most convincing arguments against i t .20For the most part , these six pioneers were self-educated in astronomy,worked alone and had no inst i tut ional support unt i l af ter they hadestab lished th eir re pu tat ion s. It was still extrem ely difficult to becom e

50


11/27

a professional astronomer in America, as Cleveland Abbe found whenhe tried in the 1860s.21 Yet Americans were quick to learn the new techniques that were revolut ionizing astronomyspectroscopy and photographyand they were beginning to have excel lent telescopes avai lable. 22As Simon Newcomb put i t , "The born astronomer, when placed in command of a telescope, goes about using it as naturally and effectively asthe babe avails itself of its mother's breast." 23 In one sm all subfieldAmericans had already taken the lead; by 1876 they had discovered moreasteroids than any other country.24Insofar as the early development of American astronomy can beattributed to social or cultural factors, the factors seem to be the onesoften associated w ith this pe riod of A m erica n history: a dem ocratic

openness to bright , energet ic people without professional t raining orcertification by the establishment and an emphasis on practical skillsand technology. B ut the va lidity of these factors as ge ner al causes isundermined by the growing importance of Harvard and the "California-W isconsin axis" in astronomical research an d e duca t ion 2 5 and the successof astronomers l ike Newcomb and Kirkwood in abstract theoret ical investigations.

iiithe transition to big astronomy

T h e year 1877 m arke d a turn ing point in Am erican astronomy. T h eopposition (close approach) of Mars provided the opportunity for twosensational discoveries. Asaph Hall (1829-1907) had recently been putin charge of a twenty-six inch Clark refracting telescope at the NavalObservatory in Washington, D.C. It was at that t ime the largest in theworld. Hall discovered the two moons of Mars, confirming a "predict ion" made by Jonathan Swift in Gulliver's Travels (1727).26 One moon,Phobos, is so close to the planet that it revolves in less than eight hours,tha t is, less tha n the period of rota tion of M ars. T h is fact did n ot agreewith the accepted theory of the origin of planets and satelli tes, and thusHall 's discovery was part of the American assault on the nebular hypothesis (an assaul t which culminated in the work of Chamberl in andMoulton; see note 7).

T h e oth er discovery of 1877 was m ade in Italy b ut exp loited inAm erica: Sch iaparelli 's detailed exa m ina tion of the surface of Marsrevealed markings which he cal led "canal i ." The word real ly means"channels" in Italian, but the press seized on the idea that they werecanals constructed by intelligent beings. Percival Lowell (1855-1916)pursued this idea and was responsible for creating much of the widespreadfascination with "life on Mars" which continues to the present day. 27Indeed if the most pragmatic criterion of whether a hypothesis is taken

51


12/27

seriously is willingn ess to spen d bi llion s of do llars to test it, then surelythe question "is there life on Mars?" ranks among the leading scientificproblems of all t ime, and we have Percival Lowell to thank for makingit so.Lowell was a wealthy New Englander who could finance his ownresearch and t ha t of oth ers. H e was one of the first astrono m ers to acton the notion that observatories must be located someplace where atmospheric conditions are favorable for seeing, that is, away from urbancenters. So he established the Lowell Observatory at Flagstaff, Arizona,in 1894. In addition to elaborating on Schiaparelli 's "canali," Lowelldescribed periodic darkenings of certain regions of Mars, which seemedto be correlated w ith th e change in size of the polar "ice cap ." H e in

terpreted the darkening as a seasonal growth of vegetation, stimulatedby water melting from the icecaps and flowing through the canals, whichappeared to be more prominent at those t imes.Lowell a lso believed that there must be another planet beyond Nept une , and organized a search for it at his observatory. T h an ks to hispersistence and his contagious enthusiasm for this project, another planetwas in fact discovered after h is dea th, by Clyde T o m b au g h i n 1930. Itsname , Pluto, though of legitimate classical origin (Greek/Roman god ofthe underworld), was chosen to commemorate Percival Lowell by itsfirst two letters.28Lowell 's real achievement, not always appreciated by other astronomers , was to arouse popular interest in astronomy and thus gain supportfor research whose results were not so easy to un de rsta nd . H e was anexcellent writer and speaker, a master of literary style as well as a competent as t ronomer and mathemat ic ian .The years after 1877 saw the beginnings of major collaborative research programs and the construction of huge new telescopes in the

United States. These projects were successful because of the enthusiasman d organizing talents of a han dfu l of astronom ers an d th e av ailabilityof money. Massive support for astronomy came from several Americanswho had made their fortunes by methods which they, or the public, considered somewhat unethical; philanthropy al lowed them to acquire social respectability and even immortality by giving them the means tohave their names associated with a famous educational or scientific ins t i tut ion. Astronomy in part icular appealed to those who were curiousabout the mysteries of the universe.29James Lick, a Pennsylvania piano and organ maker, went to California during the Gold Rush and made his money by land speculat ion.It is said that he first wanted to build a pyramid for himself, bigger thanthat of Cheops, but was eventually persuaded to endow the biggest telescope in the world so that it could be determined whether there areanim als living on the m oo n. In any case, the money was available after1876, and the trustees of the Lick estate decided to buy a thirty-six-inch

52


13/27

Clark refract ing telescope and construct an observatory on Mount Hamilton near San Francisco.30T h e Lick Observatory was bu ilt in 1888 and was im me diately p u t togood use by its first resident astronomers, James Keeler (1857-1900) andEd w ard Em erson B arn ard (1857-1973). Keeler m easu red speeds of neb ulae using the Doppler effect and obtained detai led photographs showingthe spiral st ructure of many nebulae. 3 1 Barnard discovered a fifth satelli teof Ju pi te r in 1892, an d bega n a ma jor pro ject to ph oto gra ph the M ilkyWay.George Ellery Hale (1868-1938) of Chicago was the one person mainlyresponsible for the construction of the observatories and telescopes whichhave dom inate d twentieth-century astronomy : the Yerkes Observatory

at Williams Bay, Wisconsin (opened in 1897); the Mt. Wilson Observatorynear Pasadena, California (1904), and the Palomar Observatory, also inSouthern California, completed with its famous 200-inch telescope in1948. H e also help ed to establish the Ca lifornia In stitu te of T ech nolo gyas a major center of scientific research in the western United States. 32Hale's father manufactured hydraul ic elevators and was able to purchase good enough telescopes to encourage his son's early interest inastronom y. George was largely self-educated in astronomy th ou gh heha d a bach elor 's degree from M I T . H is own research was prim arily concerned w ith the physical prop erties of the sun. In 1889 he inv en ted a"spectrohel iograph" to photograph solar prominences and measure theinten sity of a single spectral line in va rious pa rts of the sun. H is m ajo rdiscovery was the magnetic properties of sunspots; he found a twenty-three-year cycle in which the magnetic polarity is reversed.33Hale promoted the idea that the goal of astronomy should now beto say what a heavenly body is, as well as where it is. Today this seemsobviou s, bu t it was not so in the m id-n inete en th c entury. Au gust Co m te,

the French philosopher who founded "positivism," asserted in 1835 thatreliable knowledge of the universe beyond our solar system would beforever unattainable, so it is futile even to speculate about the nature ofthe stars.34 H ere as in ma ny other cases "positivism " turn ed o ut to beshortsighted "negativism"; astronomers were busily analyzing the chemistry of the stars only a few decades after Comte issued his dogmaticpron oun cem ent . N ot only could one ident ify the elements responsiblefor spectral l ines, one could also learn something about the physicalconditions of the stars (temperature, magnetic fields, for example) byexamining the fine structure of those lines. Thus spectrum analysis became an important part of astrophysics, a new science in which Halewas one of the leaders.85

In 1892, H al e was ap po int ed associate professor of astrophysics at thenew University of Chicago. Shortly after this, Hale learned from AlvanClark that the forty-inch blanks for lenses for a planned new telescope,ordered by the University of Southern California, were available for

53


14/27

sale; the original order had been cancelled because the collapse of theland boom in Southern California had wiped out the value of the property wh ich ha d been don ated to pay for the telescope. H ale need ed300,000 to buy and mount the lenses and install them in a suitablebu ild ing , and so he searched for a do no r. H e found C harles Ty sonYerkes, a s treetcar tycoon who apparently wanted to improve the reputation he had acquired from shady dealings (he was known as "Yerkes theBoodler"), and persuaded him that cold cash would put his name onthe best telescope in the w orld. Yerkes was con vinced : "You shall hav eall you nee d if you'll only lick the Lic k " After some hagg ling, th e Ob servatory was built; not only was the telescope lens four inches biggerthan the one at Lick, but Hale made sure that it included a physicallaboratory with facilities for developing photographs and doing spectroscopic experiments .3 0

In 1904, Hale obtained $150,000 from the institution founded byAndrew Carnegie, the Scottish-American industrialist who made hism illions in steel. Carneg ie had w ritten a mag azine article in 1889, expressing his ideas on philanthropy; impressed by the Lick Observatory,he wrote that "If any millionaire be interested in the ennobling studyof astronomy . . . here is an example which could well be followed, forthe progress made in astronomical instruments and appliances is so greatand continuous that every few years a new telescope might be judiciouslygiven to one of the observatories upon this continent, the last being always the largest and best, and certain to carry further and further theknowledge of the universe and of our relation to it here upon the earth." 3 7With the Carnegie money, Hale buil t the Mt. Wilson Observatorynear Pa saden a. His father ha d already given him a disk for a sixty-inchreflecting telescope in 1896, but no funds were available at Chicago tomount it; now he was able to use it , starting in 1908, and launched apro gra m of studyin g stellar spectra. At M t. W ilson he also did his workon the magnetic fields of sunspots.Hale then persuaded John D. Hooker, a Los Angeles businessman,to give the m one y for a 100-inch telescope at Mt. Wilso n. O ne of th eearly spectacular results was obtained by using A. A. Michelson's interferometer with this telescope to measure the diameter of the "red giant"star Betelgeuse; Francis Pease and J. A. Anderson found that it is 300million miles. Though it does not appear on my list (Table 5), this featwas very impressive at the time; Eddington included it in his list of thesix mo st im po rta nt discoveries in astrono my du rin g the 100 years upto 1922.38Hale's last major project was the Palomar Observatory, started in1928 w ith a gra nt of six m illion dollars from the Rockefeller Fo un da tion .Hale did not live to see its completion (1948), but it undoubtedly contributed to his reputat ion as the most important astronomer in the firs tpart of the twentieth century (Table 6).

54


15/27

Not all astronomers approved of the use of capitalist profits tofinance their work. In 1906 M ary Bird resigned her po sition as D irectorof the Smith College Observatory because the College accepted moneyfrom Carnegie and Rockefeller.39

ivthe role of women

Another person who helped to convert astronomy to the "Big Science"style and the physical approach was Edward Charles Pickering (1846-1919). Like Hale, he is known not so much for his own discoveries asfor his talent in organizing institutions in which other people couldm ake discoveries (see no te 13). H e was a physicist at M I T (one of th efirst to organize a laboratory course for undergraduates in the UnitedStates) when he was appointed Director of the Harvard College Observatory, starting in 1877. His major goal was a comprehensive surveyof the brightness (and later the spectra) of all stars. In 1887 his br ot he rWilliam Henry Pickering (1858-1938) joined the Observatory staff andbecame the first Director of the Harvard southern observatory, establ ished in Peru in 1891. Will iam developed the methods of photographingspectra and discovered the ninth moon of Saturn in 1899 (its retrogrademotion was yet another blow against the nebular hypothesis).

Just as Humphry Davy is supposed to have said that his most important scientific discovery was Michael Faraday, one might say thatEd wa rd Pickerin g's most im po rta nt scientific discovery was wo me n. T h eHarvard Observatory had already ini t ia ted a policy of hiring women ascomputers in 1875, but they were not allowed to make photometric observations in the unheated telescope shelter during the first major survey(1879-1882) because "the fatigue and the exposure to the cold in winterare too great for a lady to undergo," as Pickering explained. 40 Later,the development of photographic methods, the improvement of physicalfacilities at the Observatory and a change in male attitudes allowedwomen to take a more prominent role in research there.

There is a story, not very plausible, that Pickering's initial use ofwom en was a result of his violent tem per: his m ale assistant got bo redwith the tedious work of classifying spectra and became too careless, soPickering said, "Damn it, my cook can do a better job than that." 4 1His cook was Williamina Paton Fleming (1857-1911), who emigratedwith her husband from Scotland to Boston in 1878. She found employment as a domestic servant in Pickering's house, separated from herhusband and gave birth to a son named Edward Pickering Fleming in1879. Pickering, impressed by her intelligence, gave her an additionalpart-time job at the Observatory, and she started to work full time therein 1881. Although she began as a copyist and computer, she eventually

55


16/27

classified 10,351 stars for the Henry Draper Mem orial Catalogue (1890).She was put in charge of giving assignments to the corps of womencomputers and in 1899 was given an official Harvard appointment asC ura tor of Astronom ical Ph oto gra phs . H er classification system for stars,as revised by Annie Jump Cannon (see below), is the one now in use.42Pickering, pleased with the work done by the first woman he hired,published in 1882 a pamphlet on variable stars which was expressly designed to interest wom en in astronom y. His m igh t be called the first"affirmative action" program in science although it was motivated in partby the stereotyped belief that women are best suited for tedious routinework which requires great at tention to detai l . 4 3 In fact that is whatastronomy needed at the time since in studying the stars, one has to

deal with a large number of small pieces of information which must beclassified before new the ories can be established. In this respect, stellarastronomy around the end of the nineteenth century, like biology in theeighteenth century, conformed fairly well to the Baconian conceptionof science as systematic observation and classification, though (like nineteenth-century biology) it was soon to break out of that mold with grandevolutionary schemes and bold conjectures.44In addit ion to Will iamina Fleming, three other women made major

contributions to s tel lar astronomy during the Pickering era at Harvard.The next, Antonia Caetana de Paiva Pereira Maury (1866-1952), was notvery happy with the role of diligent computer and refused to fit herselfint o the reg ular ro uti ne sched ule of the Observatory. She was the nieceof Henry Draper (whose name was associated with the ongoing star-catalogue project through the financial support of his widow) and granddaughter of John Will iam Draper (see above). She graduated fromVassar in 1887 and joined the staff in 1888. Edward Pickering had justfound that the spectral lines from the star Mizar (in Ursa Major) aresometimes double and sometimes single. This could be attributed toorbital motion around another star, and thus it was the first discoveryof a "spectroscopic binary." Antonia Maury confirmed this discoveryand the next year discovered another spectroscopic binary, Beta Aurigae,by herself.

Maury's major work was the classification of 681 bright stars, published in 1897. Although she didn't classify as many stars as Fleming orCannon, and her classification scheme was not as generally accepted byother astronomers as theirs was, she did recognize one kind of distinctiontha t turn ed out to be qu ite significant. She propo sed a subdivision, calledthe "c" division, for stars with very narrow, sharply defined hydrogen and"Orion" (helium) lines and with very intense calcium lines.45The Danish astronomer Ejnar Hertzsprung (1873-1967), working at

Potsdam, based his discovery of dwarf and giant stars on Maury's classificat ion. According to his interpretat ion, the "c" divis ion contained giant

56


17/27

stars of very great lum inosity. T hi s type plays an im po rta nt ro le in th e"Hertzsprung-Russel l diagram" and in theories of stel lar evolut ion. 46A nn ie J u m p Ca nn on (1863-1941) gra du ate d from W ellesley Collegein 1884, bu t di dn 't take up as tronom y unt il ten years later. She join edthe Observatory staff in 1896 and stayed there the rest of her life, beingappointed Curator of Astronomical Photographs in 1911. She classifiedmore than 200,000 stars for the Henry Draper Catalogue, including virtually all stars brig hte r tha n the nin th m ag nitu de . She was the firstwoman to receive an honorary degree from Oxford University, in 1925;not un til 13 years after tha t did H ar va rd recognize he r with a su itabletitle, "W il l iam C ranc h Bo nd As tronom er." She revised the Flemingclassification system, establishing the present order of spectral types desig

na ted by letters in the seque nce: O B A F G K M. (Students n owmemorize this sequence by means of the mnemonic phrase, proposed byH enr y Norris Russel l , "O h Be A Fine G irl , Kiss Me ") I t was adoptedby the Internat ional Solar Union in 1910 and is known as the "HarvardSpectral Classification."47 (In 1922 the Inte rna t ion al Astronomical U nio nfinally recognized Maury's "c" classification by adding this as a prefix tothe letter for the spectral type.)Henrietta Swan Leavitt (1868-1921) graduated from Radcliffe in 1892

and took a permanent position at the Observatory in 1902, later becoming chief of the pho togra phic pho tom etry de par tm ent . She was in chargeof the project to establish stellar magnitudes by photography and specialized in variable stars, of which she discovered about 2400. On thebasis of detailed study of one particular group known as the Cepheidvariables, photographed at the Harvard southern observatory in Peru,she proposed in 1908 the general rule that brighter variables have longerperiods. Since in this particular group all of the stars were assumed to beat the same distance, this meant that the intrinsic brightness (luminosity)was directly correlated with the period of variation. 4 8

Hertzsprung was the first to recognize that this period-luminosityrelation could be used to measure stellar distances; it is only necessaryto have a good direct measurement of the distance of the Cepheid variables, and the Leavitt formula can then be used to find distances of othervariables. By this m eth od H ertz spru ng was able to m ake the first reasonable estim ate of the distance of the Small Mage llanic Clou d. (Jo hnFlerschel had studied the Magellanic Clouds from the observatory at theCape of Good Hope in 1834-38 and thought they were outside our galaxy,bu t othe r astronom ers did not accept this suggestion.) H ertz spr un g estimated a value of 30,000 light years in 1913. In 1922, Harlow Shapley(1885-1972) and Donald Menzel at Harvard used a similar method toestimate the distance to the Large Magellanic Cloud and found the result110,000 light years (later reduced to 85,000). Shapley then used theCepheid variables and the period-luminosi ty relat ion to construct a theory

57


18/27

of the size and shape of our galaxy and the distance scale for othergalaxies.49Meanwhile, Vesto Melvin Slipher (1875-1969) was studying the spectraof spiral nebulae at the Lowell Observatory, using the Doppler effect toestimate their speeds. He found that, of fifteen nebulae studied in theyears 1912-1917, thirteen are receding from us and only two are approaching. The accumulat ing evidence that these nebulae are real ly separategalaxies far outside the Milky Way was capped by the discovery ofCepheid variables in the Andromeda nebula in 1923-25. This feat wasaccomplished by Edwin Powell Hubble (1889-1953) using the 100-inchtelescope at M t. W ilson. W ith the help of the L eavit t -Hertzsprung -Shapley method he estimated its distance as 900,000 light years. 50

With this and other evidence on speeds and distances of galacticne bu lae, H ub bl e was able to establish in 1929 one of the mo st startl in gcorrelation s of tw entieth-ce ntury science: the galaxies are, on th e average, fleeing from us at a speed pr op or tion al to the ir distance. T hi ssimple relat ion is the basis of the "expanding universe" concept and oftheories such as the "big bang" cosmogony.51T h er e is no nee d to go furth er in to the tw entieth cen tury. By 1930,Am erican a stronom y ha d risen as far as i t could: to the to p.I suggest a result of this achievement which I cannot prove in abrief article: American research in other areas of science was stimulate d by the success of astron om y. T h is effect has bee n describ ed in o nevery important case by Robert Seidel; he shows how astronomers established a "research spirit" at the University of California and helped topromote faculty research in physics and chemistry in the early decadesof the twentieth century.5 2 Scientists elsewhere in the United States musthave been encouraged by the feats of astronomers to believe that Americans could do first-rate work and overtake the Europeans if they tried

hard enough. As pioneers of "big science," the astronomers also laid thefoun dation s for future financial su pp ort of othe r sciences: they propagated the idea that basic research often requires very expensive equipment and the organization of large teams of people and convinced thepu blic as well as w ealthy dono rs tha t such research is w orth w hile. In thisway, the rise of American science in general can be partly credited toastronomy.In this paper I have not at tempted to answer the quest ions that historians of "American science" or readers of this journal are l ikely to ask.Eor example:(1) Is the concept of "professionalization" valid here, oras NathanReingold has recent ly suggested 53should one classify astronomers instead as "researc hers," "pr ac tit ion ers " an d "cultivators"? Surely onewan ts to dist inguish between am ateurs like Lewis M. R uth erfu rd andPercival Lowell, who became researchers able to compete with the pro-

58


19/27

fessionals on more than equal terms, and those who remained cultivators,discovering an occasional come t or rep or ting on va riable stars. Similarly,one wants to note that a professional l ike Annie Jump Cannon couldevolve from a practit ioner into a researcher when the scientific community wasn't looking.(2) What role did the organization of scientific societies play in prom otin g the growth of Am erican astronomy? O r did they reta rd tha tgrowth by enforcing methodological conformity and discouraging mavericks?54(3) Did the removal of astronomy from school curricula around 1900 53have any effect on recruitment into or support for the discipline in thetwentieth century?

(4) Did the internat ional reputat ions of American astronomers givethem any special power to influence the policies of their institutions orthe attitudes of their society?(5) Was astronomy one of the few routes to achievement and intellectual gratification open to scientifically talented women in the latenin ete en th century? (Did the rise of Am erican physics come too late totake advantage of this situation?)(6) Were the socioeconomic conditions that favored support for astronomy in late nineteenth-century America duplicated in other countr iesat other t imes with comparable results? How do these conditions differfrom those favorable to sciences with more direct practical application?Un less one has some way to tell w ho we re the successful researc hersand when the discipline was making most rapid progress, there is nopo int in even asking these questions. M oreover, they are question s tha tshould also be asked about other countries; in view of the results presented in section I, i t appears that comparative studies should focus onGermany, whose precipi tous decl ine in the late nineteenth century provides such a striking contrast not only with the rise of American astronomy, but also with the rapid advances in German physics and chemistryduring the same period.

V

postscript: the last quarter-centuryIn view of the widespread belief that American science and technology

have begun to decline during the past decade, partly because of cutbacksin government support and part ly because of public host i l i ty and indifference, i t would be interesting to compile another table for the period1951-1975. Unfortunately, sources of the kind used in preparing Tables1-6histories of astronomy written by non-Americans, from which judgments as to the most important discoveries and astronomers can bederive d are difficult to find for this pe riod . T h e best source for this

59


20/27

purpose is a survey conducted by the Nat ional Science Foundat ion, inresponse to a Congressional recommendat ion in 1976 that the Nat ionalScience Board should "study the support of innovative research" by theFo un da tion . A pa ne l of twenty-eight astronom ers was asked to l ist "th emo st s ignif icant innov at ions s ince ab ou t 1955" inclu ding " theoret ical developments, empirical f indings and discoveries, developments in instrum enta t ion, dev elopme nts in analyt ical meth od ." O n the basis of repl iesfrom sixteen of those queried, a list of twenty-two innovations was compi led.5 6 An un pu bl ish ed doc um ent gives a com pilat ion of the nu m be rof t imes each inn ov atio n was m en tion ed togeth er with othe r details.57

The following l ist of the four most important events in astronomydu rin g the perio d 1955-1974 is based on the Natio na l Science F ou nd ati onsurvey; as will be seen, it should be considered to give an upper limiton the Am erican co ntrib utio ns for the pe riod 1951-1975. Nam es arelisted in alpha betic al order. W he n a second na tion ali ty is given, i t usuallyindicates only the place where the work was done.Quasars and pulsars each received twelve votes; X-ray sources and background radiat ion were each ment ioned eleven t imes.There are two major reasons why this l ist is not quite comparablewith the ones given for earl ier periods. First , the panelists who madethe judgments are probably most ly American though they are not ident i fied in the rep or t of the survey. Second, the gap b etwe en 1950 an d 1955,though i t might seem relatively small in t ime, hides a development thatsome ast ronomers would consider one of the f ive most important innovations during the period 1951-1975: radio astronomy. 58 W e must notlet this fall through the crack, having included "beginnings of radio astron om y" as one of the ten m ajor events in the perio d 1901-1950. O ursources for that period emphasized the work of the Americans Janskyand Reber, but all assessments of postwar astronomy give great weightto the British wo rk (A. C. B. Lovell , J. S. He y, Ma rtin Ryle, F. G rah amSmith) with some mention of Australians such as J. L. Pawsey andB. Y. Mills.

TABLE 81.5 Quasars

Jesse L . Greenste in A m e r i c a n ) , T h o m a s A . M a t t h e w s C a n a d i a n / A m e r i c a n ) ,A l l a n R . S a n d a g e A m e r i c a n ) , M a a r t e n S c h m i d t D u t c h / A m e r i c a n )1.5 Pulsars

S . J o c e l y n B e l l B r i t i sh ) , T h o m a s G o l d A u s t r i a n / A m e r i c a n ) ,A n t h o n y H e w i s h B r i t i sh ) , F r a n c o P a c in i I t a l i a n / A m e r i c a n )3 . 5 X - Ra y S o u r c e s : E x t r a s o la r , Ga la c t i c & E x t r a g a la c t i c

H e r b e r t F r i e d m a n A m e r i c a n ) , R i c c a r d o G ia c c o n i I t a l i a n / A m e r i c a n ) ,He r b e r t Gu r s k y A m e r i c a n ) , F ranc is R . Pao l in i A m e r i c a n ) ,Bruno R. Rossi I t a l i a n / A m e r i c a n )3 . 5 M i c r o w a v e B a c k g r o u n d R a d i a t i o n ( 3 K )

A r n o A . P e n z i a s G e r m a n / A m e r i c a n ) , R o b e r t W . W i l s o n A m er i can )

60

t i ef o r1st

t i efo r3 rd


21/27

Even allowing for some nationalistic bias, we must still conclude thatAmerican astronomy was responsible for about half of the major eventsdu rin g the past qu ar te r century. If the British are given m ost of th ecredit for the development of radio astronomy in the period 1946-1955,this together with the discovery of pulsars puts them in second place, buta substantial dis tance behind the Americans.It is not possible to compile a meaningful listing of major astronomersfrom the data in the NSF survey; almost all of the twenty-two innovationsinvolved more than one person, and only three astronomers (Sandage,Schwarzschild, Hoy le) pa rtici pa ted in m ore th an one of them. If eachinno vatio n is weigh ted by the nu m be r of t imes m ention ed, and credit isassigned by dividing that weight by the number of astronomers involved,Penzias and Wilson come out with the highest score.In its report to Congress, the National Science Board stated that NSFhad supported, wholly or in part, 29 percent of the twenty-two innovations in astronomy. Two of the major advances discussed above involvedNSF support, but that was for only one of the four astronomers involvedin the discovery of pulsars (Pacini), and partial support for one of thefive wh o studied X-ray sources (Fried m an). Su pp ort for th e most important discovery in which Americans or American facilities were involved, quasars, can be considered part of the financial as well as scientific legacy of George Ellery Hale since the work was done at the HaleOb servatories in California. T h e rocket research on X-ray sources wassponsored primarily by the United States Air Force while the discoveryof background radiat ion was supported entirely by the Bell TelephoneLaboratories as part of a research program related to satellite systems.

That American astronomers have not had to rely entirely on governm en t supp ort of their research is fortu nate . A wide variety of reasonsfor doing and financing astronomy has guaranteed that the enterprisecontinues after attaining a certain level of success. Americans do nothave a unique method for doing astronomy, but in the last hundred yearsthey seem to have been able to stimulate and combine better than othercultures the essential factors for success: creative thinking, hard work,money and organizations that could utilize all available talent, femaleas well as male.

Universi ty of Maryland

61


22/27

notesTh is ar t ic le is a revised vers ion of my Sigma Xi Bic ente nni al Le ctu re del ivered a tJ u n i a ta Co l l ege , P o in t P a rk Co l l ege , S a in t J os eph ' s Co l lege , and S ac red H ea r t U n ive r s i tydu r ing O c tob er and N ovem ber 1976 . I t i s bas ed on r e s ea rch s uppo r ted by the N a t ion a lS c ience F ou nda t ion ' s H is to ry an d P h i lo s ophy o f S c ience P ro g ra m. I am g ra te fu l toseveral col leagues for sugges t ions and cr i t ic ism, especia l ly Richard Berendzen, DavidD e V o r k i n , M i c h a e l A ' H e a r n a n d M i c h a e l M e n d i l l o . T h e i n f o r m a t i o n a b o u t t h e N a t ion al Science Fo un da t io n Survey used in sect ion iv was k indly pro vid ed by Car los E.Kruytbosch of the Off ice of P lanning and Pol icy Analys is .

1 . A . H un te r D u pree , "T h e H is to ry o f A m er ican S c ienceA F ie ld F inds Itself, AmericanHistorical Review 71 (1966) , 863-874; A r th ur M. Schles inger , "A n Ame rica n His to r ia n Looks a tS c ience and Techno logy ," Isis 36 (1946) , 162-166; Geo rge Sar ton , " I s i t Poss ib le to T ea ch theHis tory of Science?" A Guide to the History of Science (W al th am , M as s . , 1952) , 60 (quo ted byD u p r e e , op. cit., 865).

2 . D u p r e e , op. cit., 863.3 . " . . . t he re i s no s uch th i ng as A m er ican h i s to ry a lone . W ho be li eves , f o r exam ple , ina s epa ra te in te l l ec tua l en t i ty k now n as 'A mer ican s c ience '? Cer ta in ly no t my co l l eague w hoteaches a h is tory course so labe l led a t a nearb y un ivers i ty . . . , " W alt er [now Su san] F . Ca nn on ," H i s t o r y a t t h e S m i t h s o n i a n , " Smithsonian Journal of History 1 (196 6), 65-72.4 . R ic hard B . M or r i s , d . , Encyclopedia of American History, B ice n tenn ia l Ed i t io n (N ewYork, 1976) , 783-787. T h e l is t of 500 No tab le Ame rican s inclu des th i r t y- th ree sc ient is ts b utnone o f them a re a s t ronomers , w i th the pos s ib le excep t ion o f Ben jamin Banneker w ho i siden t if i ed a s a "m ath em at i c i a n an d as t ronom er" thou gh no t c r ed i t ed w i th any o r ig ina l cont r ib ut io ns to e i the r f ie ld . Ibid., 969, 979 .) Th e "p op u la r U .S . H is to ry t ex tbo oks " exa min edw ere : S . E . M or i s on a nd H . S. Com mag er , The Grow th of the American Republic, Vol. 2(New York, 1962) ; N. M. Blake, A History of American Life and Thought (New York, 1963);S . E. Morison, The O xford History of the American People (N ew Y ork , 1965); R i ch a rdH ofs tad te r , Wi l l i am M i l l e r and D an ie l A aron , The Structure of American History, seconded i t ion (Eng lew ood C li ff s, N .J . , 1973); J o hn M . B lu m, Ed m un d S . M orga n , Wi l l i e Lee Ros e ,A r thu r M . S ch lesinger , J r . , K e nne th M . S tam pp and C . V ann W ood w ard , The National Experience: A History of the United States, th i rd ed i t ion (N ew Y ork , 1973) ; R i ch a rd N . Cu r ren t ,T . H a r r y W i l l i a m s a n d F r a n k F r e i d e l , American History: A Survey, four th edi t ion (New York,1975); Rober t K e l l ey , The Shaping of the American Past (Englewood Cliffs , N.J ., 1975).

G eorge H . D an ie l s , Science in American Society: A Social History (New York, 1971);" A c k n o w l e d g m e n t , " Science 175 (197 2), 124-125.5 . Th e p roce dure u s ed w as :(1) Search for all avai l able boo ks on h is tory of as t rono my wh ich covered th e f if ty-year per iod .(2 ) E l im ina te thos e by A m er ican au th o r s . Tw o pa r t i a l excep t ions w ere m ade : O t to S t ruvean d G era rd de V aucou leu r s w ere bo r n in Rus s ia and F ranc e , r e s pec t ively , and came to theUnited S ta tes as adul ts ; both make a ser ious ef for t to g ive proper credi t to sc ient is ts f rom al lcountr ies in their works on the h is tory of as t ronomy ci ted below.(3) In read ing each book , com pile a prel im ina ry l is t of u p to ten d iscover ies wh ich theau tho r s eems to cons ide r mos t impor tan t fo r each pe r iod . A f te r a p r e l imina ry l i s t o f abou tfif teen discoveries is pr ep ar ed by co m bi ni ng these lis ts , i t is necessary in some cases to go bac kto check whether an author ment ioned a t a l l some discovery that the o thers cons idered s ignif icant . T he n, for eac h au th or , the mos t imp or tan t d iscovery in the per iod is cou nted f if teenpoi nts , nex t ten , the n n in e, e ight , e tc . dow n to two poin ts for tent h ( if he me nt io ns th atma ny) ; a l l o the r s me n t ion ed a r e given one po in t . T h e r eas on fo r th i s pa r t i c u la r a s s ignmen tof points is th at m os t autho rs g ive the impress ion th at on e d iscovery in a per iod is s ignif icant lymo re im po r tan t than any o the r s . " Im po r ta nc e" i s e s t ima ted by o rde r of appea ranc e , s pace

devoted to topic and use of qu al i ta t i ve adject ives .(4) A sepa rate l i s t i s m ai nt a i ne d for nam es of a l l as t rono me rs me nt io ne d reg ardless ofwh at d iscoveries they mad e; the same pro ced ure as above is used to com put e the ran k ord ero f imp or tan ce , bu t s omew h a t g r ea te r w e igh t is g iven to the amo un t o f s pace devo ted to theper s on .Ot he r aspects of the me thodo logy are presen ted in the text . I t i s obvious ly des i rable tosecure an independent repl icat ion of the resul ts before they are taken ser ious ly .T ab le 1 is based on the fo l lowing sources : Agnes Clerke, A Popular History of Astronomyduring the Nineteenth Century, 4 th ed . (Lo ndo n, 1902); A. S . Ed din gto n, "A Cen tury ofA s t ronomy, Nature 105 (1922), 815-817; H . C. Ki ng , Exploration of the Universe: The Storyof Astronomy (Lon don , 1964); P a t r i ck M oore , The Developm ent of Astronomical Thought

62


23/27

( E d in b u r g h , 1 9 6 9 ) ; A . Pa n n e k o e k , A History of Astronomy (New York , 1961) [ t ran sla te d f romDe Groei van ons Werelbeeld ( Am s te r d a m , 1 9 51 ) ] ; Ch a r l e s -A lb e r t Re i c h e n , A History ofAstronomy (Geneva , 1963); Ru dolf Th ie l , And T here was Light: The Discovery of the Universe(New York , 1957) [ t ransla ted f rom Und es ward Licht ( H a m b u r g , 19 5 6 ) ]; Ge r a r d d e Va u -c o u le u r s , Discovery of the Universe (New York , 1957). T ab le 2 i s base d on the Clerke a ndVaucouleurs books, and a lso Giorg io Abet t i , The H istory of Astronomy (New York, 1952)[ t r a n s l a t e d f r om I t a l i a n ] ; An g u s Ar m i t a g e , A Century of Astronomy (Lo ndo n , 1950) ; andH . M a c P h e r s o n , Makers of Astronomy (Oxfo rd , 1933).T a b le 3 is b a se d o n t h e wo r k s of Ar m i t a g e , C le r k e , E d d in g to n , K in g , M o o r e , Pa n n e k o e k ,Re ic h e n , T h ie l a n d Va u c o u le u r s , a n d a l so Re g in a ld L . Wa te r f i e ld , A Hundred Years ofAstronomy (New York , 1938); an d Ern st Z inner , Astronomie: Geschichte ihrer Problme(M unc hen , 1961). Ta b l e 4 i s based on the books of Ab et t i , Arm i tage , Clerke , M acP hers on ,an d Vaucouleu rs , an d a lso W . Alf red Pa r r , "A Shor t His to ry o f As t rono my ," in T . E . R.Ph i l l ips and W. H. Steavenson , eds . , Hutchinson's Splendour of the Heavens, Vol . I I(London, 1923), 972-976.T a b l e 5 i s b a se d o n t h e b o o k s o f Ab e t t i , A r m i t a g e , K in g , M o o r e , Pa n n e k o e k , Re i c h e n , a n dVa u c o u le u r s (op cit.), on Ot to St ruve and Vel ta Zebergs , Astronomy of the 20th Century (NewYork , 1962) and on H. Spencer Jones , "Ast ronomy," in A. E . Heath , d . , Scientific Thoug ht

in the Twentieth Century (Lon don , 1951) , 57-78 . T ab le 6 i s based on the works o f Ab et t i ,Ar m i t a g e , S t r u v e a n d Va u c o u le u r s .At ten t ion shou ld be ca l led to the li s t o f im po r ta n t tw en t ie th -cen tu ry d iscoveries pub l ishe dby the na t ive -born Am er ican a s t rono mer H ar lo w S hap ley , bu t h is l i s t i s no t very mu ch d if fe ren t f rom T ab le 5 ; he g ives more weigh t to re la t iv i ty , the theory o f evo lu t ion o f ch emica l e le ments, the discovery of Pluto and the discovery of magnetic f ields in sunspots ( the last twob e in g Am e r i c a n c o n t r i b u t io n s ) . See h i s a r t i c le s , "As t r o n o m ic a l H ig h l ig h t s of t h e Ha l f - C e n tu r y , "Review of Popular Astronomy 56 (Ja n.-F eb. , 1962), 28-30, an d (w ith sim ilar t i t les) IrishAstronomical Journal 5 (1959 ), 190-194; Science Newsletter (Nov . 25, 1961), 350. Shap ley 's l istwas o r ig ina l ly p repared , wi th adv ice f rom h is co l leagues , fo r the purpose o f compi l ing h isSource Book in Astronomy 1900-1950 (Cambr idge , Mass . , 1960) and therefore shou ld be takenas a se r ious a t tempt to eva lua te the major as t ronomica l even ts in th is per iod .6 . The phrase was o r ig ina l ly used by Herber t But te r f ie ld in h is c r i t ique o f the wr i t ing o fBr i t i sh const i tu t iona l h is to ry , to descr ibe the tendency o f h is to r ians to judge even ts on thebasis o f whether they represen ted p rogress toward l ibera l democracy ; see The Whig Interpretation of History (Lon don , 1931) . In recen t years h is to r ia ns of sc ience have used "w higg ism "as a label for the tendency of scientists to judge histor ical events and earl ier scientists on thebasis o f p resen t -day theor ies . See , fo r example , H. F . Kearney , Science and Change 1500-1700(New York , 1971) , 17-22; h is book i l lus t ra tes the dang ers o f the opp osi te ex t reme , ph i lo soph is ingabout sc ience wi thou t unders tand ing i t s techn ica l aspec ts .Another way in which whigg ism migh t d is to r t these l i s t s i s suggested by the fo l lowingcom men t o f a re fe ree : " T he l i s ts o f ma jor a s t ronom ers cou ld be charac te r iz ed m ore as l i st sof the discoveries of m ajo r ph en om en a t ha n as l ists necessari ly of the mo st em ine nt profess iona l as t ronom ers of the i r t im e, espec ia l ly fo r the ear ly per iods . Airy in Eng lan d i s anexam ple o f a p ro mi ne n t p rofess iona l le ft ou t . Pro bab ly there was some genera l tendency fo r

profess iona l as t ronome rs to be engaged in rou t ine s ta r su rveys , leav ing i t to am ate urs an d toless fully enga ged profes sionals to mak e more often the sta r t l i ng new discoveries, especiallywhen amateurs led in the deve lopment o f new ins t ruments up to the twen t ie th cen tu ry ."7. Stephe n G. Brus h , "A Geolog is t am ong Ast ronom ers: T he Rise an d Fa l l of the Cha mb er -l i n - M o u l to n Co sm o g o n y , " Journal for the History of Astronomy 9 (19 78) , 1-41, 77-104.8 . A. Fowler , "Spec t roscop ic Ast ronomy," Nature 104 (1919), 234-235. F . W . Dys on, "A dvances in Ast ronomy" ( lec tu re in 1921) , Royal Institution Library of Science, Vol. 2 (NewYork, 1970), 239-242. T hi el (op. cit., n o t e 5 ) , 318-321. Re m a r k s a b o u t t h e su p e r io r i t y o ffo re ign fac i l i t ies a re somet imes mot iva ted by a des i re to ob ta in more suppor t fo r en te rp r isesa t hom e, ra th er th an by ob jec t ive jud gm en t ; wh at is s ign i f ican t is tha t the Br i t i sh an d Ge rma nsbega n to po i n t to Am er icans ra t her th an ea ch o ther fo r th is purpo se .9. Silvio A. Be din i , The Life of Benjamin Banneker (New York, 1972). I hav e delib erate lyomit te d a l l o f the ear l ie r h is to ry of Amer ican as t ron omy . For a gene ra l su rvey , see Astronomy

4 ( Ju ly 1976) . A concise bu t comprehensive account o f deve lopments in the ear ly n ine teen thc e n tu r y h a s r e c en t ly b e e n p u b l i sh e d b y De b o r a h Je a n W a r n e r , " As t r o n o m y in An te b e l lu mAm e r i c a , " i n N . Re in g o ld , d ., The Sciences in the American Context: New Perspectives(W ash in g ton , D.C. , 1979), 55-75 . She a rgues th a t th e 1834 pub l ica t ion o f Joh n Hersc he l ' sTreatise on Astronomy was an im po r ta n t s t imu lus to as t ron omic a l ac t iv i ty in the Un i te d Sta tes .10. D e b o r a h J e a n W a r n e r , Alvan Clark Sons: Artists in Optics (W ash ing t on , D.C . , 1968) .11. Wi l l i a m Hu g g in s , "T h e Ne w As t r o n o m y : A Pe r so n a l Re t r o sp e c t , " The Nineteenth

Century 41 (1897), 907-929.12 . Do n a ld F l e m in g , John W illiam Draper and the Religion of Science ( P h i l a d e l p h i a ,1950). On D rape r ' s ro le in the h is to ry o f the rad ia t ion law see S . G. Brush , The Kind of

63


24/27

Motion We Call Heat (A m s te rdam, 1976) , 480-481, 514 . S ee a l so D an ie l N orm an , " J o hnW i l l i a m D r a p e r ' s C o n t r i b u t i o n t o A s t r o n o m y , " The Telescope 5 (193 8), 11-16.13 . C h a r l e s A . W h i t n e y , " D r a p e r , H e n r y , " Dictionary of Scientific Biography 4 (1971),178-181. Bess ie Zaban Jones and Lyle Gif ford Boyd, The Harvard College Observatory: TheFirst Four Directorships 1838-1919 (Cam br idge , M as s . , 1971) . H o w a rd P lo tk in , "E dw ard C .P icke r in g , the H en ry D ra per M em or ia l , and the Beg inn ings o f A s t rophys ics in A me r ica , "Annals of Science 35 (1978), 365-377.14 . D e b o r a h J e a n W a r n e r , "L e w i s M . R u t h e r f u r d : P i o n e e r A s t r o n o m i c a l P h o t o g r a p h e r a n dS pec t ros cop i s t , " Technology and Culture 12 (197 1), 190-216.

15. J ones and Boyd , op. cit., Ch ap te r X I . M rs . M . F lem ing , "A F ie ld fo r W om an ' s W ork inA s t r o n o m y , " Astronomy and Astro-Physics 12 (189 3), 683-689.16 . P h e b e M i t c h e l l K e n d a l l , Maria Mitchell: Life, Letters, Journals (Free por t , N .Y. , 1971[ r ep r in t o f 1896 ed . ] ) . H e len Wr i gh t , Sweeper in the Sky (New York, 1949).17 . R o n a l d L . N u m b e r s , " T h e A m e r i c a n K e p l e r : D a n i e l K i r k w o o d a n d h i s A n a l o g y , "Journal for the History of Astronomy 4 (1973), 13-21.18. D a n i e l K i r k w o o d , " O n t h e N e b u l a r H y p o t h e s is , a n d t h e A p p r o x i m a t e C o m m e n s u r a b i li t yo f the P lane ta ry P e r iods , " Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronom ical Society 29 (1869), 96-102. B r i a n G . M a r s d e n , " K i r k w o o d , D a n i e l , " Dictionary of Scientific Biography 7 (1973),

384-387.19 . D an ie l K i rkw ood , "O n Cer ta in H armon ies o f the S o la r S ys tem," American Journal ofScience, ser . 2 , 38 (1864) , 1-18. Kirk woo d sugges ted th at th e t ida l force of th e sun ac t ing ona f lu id proto-planet , whatever might be i ts or ig inal d i rect ion of ro ta t ion , would force i t in tos ynchronous ro ta t ion and r evo lu t ion ( l ike tha t o f the moon) ; th i s w ou ld amoun t to a s lowro ta t ion in the fo rw ard d i r ec t ion ( i .e . t he s ame as the d i r ec t ion o f o rb i t a l m o t ion ) w h ichw ou ld be acce le r a ted on fu r the r coo l ing and con t r a c t ion o f the p la ne t . C f. G . P . K u ip e r ,"On the Or ig in of the Solar Sys tem," in J . A. Hynek, d . , Astrophysics (New York, 1951), 403 .20 . A no the r theo r is t w as J o na th an H o me r La ne (1819-1880). W hi le w ork ing a t theO f f i ce o f Weigh t s and M eas u res ( l a t e r the N a t iona l Bureau o f S tandards ) , he s tud ied thethe rmodynamics o f a ho t gas eous s phere con t r ac t ing under the ac t ion o f i t s ow n g rav i ty .H e s how ed tha t a s the s phere r ad ia te s hea t in to s pace i t con t r ac t s , bu t the hea t genera ted by

the con t r a c t ion exceeds tha t lo s t by r ad ia io n s o i t ge ts ho t t e r . Th i s r e s u l t w as an im po r ta n ts tep in the deve lopm nt of the theory of s tars , bu t Lan e never fo l lowed i t up af ter pub l ish ingh i s one pap er on the s ub jec t in 1870. N . Re ing o ld , "Lan e , J on a th an H o m er , " Dictionary ofScientific Biography 8 (1973) , 1-3 ; T . J . J . See, "H is t or i ca l Sketch of J . Hom er L an e, " PopularAstronomy 14 (1906), 193-206; A. J . Me ado ws, Early Solar P hysics (Ox ford , 1970), 81 , 257-276[ r ep r in t o f Lane ' s paper in American Journal of Science'].21 . N or r i s s S . H e the r ing ton , "C leve land A bbe and a V iew of S c ience in M id -N ine teen th -C e n t u r y A m e r i c a , " Annals of Science 33 (1976) , 31-49. As la te as 1896, G. W. Hi l l com plain edtha t A mer ican l ib r a r i e s st i ll l acked the mos t im po r ta n t E uro pea n books an d memoi r s in h i sspecia l f ie ld ; see "R em ark s on the progress of celes t ia l me chan ics s ince the m idd le of thec e n t u r y , " Bulletin of the American Mathem atical Society, Series 2, ? (1896), 125-136. Ab be'sf a i lu r e may be con t r as t ed w i th the success o f ano the r A mer ic an w ho ma nag ed to ove rcomes imi lar d if f icul ties in the same per iod ; see Ar th ur N orb erg , "S im on New com b's Ear ly As tron o m i c a l C a r e e r , " Isis 69 (1978), 209-225.F u r th e r in fo rma t ion on th i s s ub jec t may be found in M arc Ro the nbe rg ' s P h .D . D is s e r ta t ion ,The Educational and Intellectual Background of American Astronomers, Bryn Ma wr Col lege,1974 . There a r e in te r es t ing r emarks on the popu la r i za t ion o f a s t ronomy in the a r t i c l e byJ e a n n e E . B i s h o p , " U n i t e d S t a t e s A s t r on o m y E d u c a t i o n : P a s t , P re s e n t , a n d F u t u r e , " ScienceEducation 61 (1977), 295-305.22 . D e b o r a h J e a n W a r n e r , " T h e A m e r i c a n P h o t o g r a p h i c a l S o c i e t y a n d t h e E a r l y H i s t o r yo f A s t ronomica l P ho tog raphy in A mer ica , " Photographic Science and Engineering 11 (196 7),3 4 2 - 3 4 7 . D a n i e l N o r m a n , " T h e D e v e l o p m e n t o f A s t r o n o m i c a l P h o t o g r a p h y , " Osiris 5 (1938),560-594. David F . Musto , "A Survey of the American Observatory Movement , 1800-1850,"Vistas in Astronomy 9 (1967), 87-92. Elia s Lo om is, The Recent Progress of Astronomy; Especially in the United States (New York, 1850) , Ch ap ter IV; "As tron om ical Ob servator ies in the

U n i t e d S t a t e s , " Harper's New Monthly Magazine 13 (1856) , 25-52. Ro be r t P . Multhauf," H o l c o m b , F i tz , a n d P e a t e : T h r e e 1 9 t h - c e n t u r y A m e r i c a n T e l e s co p e M a k e r s , " U.S. NationalMuseum Bulletin 228 (1962) , 155-184. W. C. Ruf us , "A s tron om ical Observ ator ies in the U ni t edStates Pr ior to 1848," Scientific Monthly 19 (1924) , 120-139. D. B. H er m an n, "Z ur S ta t is t ikv o n S t e r n w a r t e n g r u e n d u n g e n i m 1 9. J a h r h u n d e r t , " Die Sterne 49 (1973), 48-52. T ru dy E. Bell ," H i s t o r y o f A s t r o p h o t o g r a p h y , " Astronomy 4 (Jul y 1976), 66-79.23 . S imon N ew comb, "S ome A s pec t s o f A mer ican A s t ronomy," in R . M . La F o l l e t e , d . ,The Making of America, Vol . 7 (Chic ago, 1906) , 80 . A s imilar m et ap ho r for the sc ient is t ' smo t iva t ion can be found in B i s hop S pra t ' s History of the Royal Society (Lo ndo n, 1667; repr in ted , S t . Louis , Missour i , 1958) , 344.24. Of 166 as tero ids know n, for ty-nine were d iscovered in the Un i te d S ta tes . Cha r les A.

64


25/27

Young , "Address o f the Vice Pres iden t , Sec t ion A," Proceedings of the American Associationfor the Advancement of Science 25 (1876), 35-48.25 . D o n a ld E . Os t e r b r o c k , "T h e Ca l i f o r n i a -Wisc o n s in Ax i s i n Am e r i c a n As t r o n o m y ," Skyand Telescope 51 (1976), 9-14, 91-97. O n the rela t ion s betw een professiona ls an d ama teu rs seeM a r c Ro th e n b e r g , "R e o r g a n iz in g Am e r i c a n a s t r o n o m y , 1 8 97 - 19 1 1 ," p r e se n t e d a t t h e XV I n t e r national Congress of History of Science, Edinburgh, 1977 ( in press) . As late as 1891 anam ate ur assoc ia ted wi th a ma jor observa to ry cou ld ma ke an imp or t an t d iscovery . S . C.Ch and ler , an ac tu ary employ ed by a l i fe insuran ce compa ny who was a "vo lun te er observ er"a t Harvard , es tab l i shed the 14-month per iod o f the f ree nu ta t ion o f the Ear th ' s ax is("C han dler wo bbl e") . See So l in I . Ba i ley , The History and Work of Harvard Observatory1839 to 1927 (New York, 1931), 266-267. E. C. Pickering also encouraged systematic observat ion o f var iab le s ta r s by amateurs ibid., 189).26. Hal l , the son o f a Connect icu t c lock manufac tu rer , a t tended Centra l Col lege in Mc-Graw vi l le , New York , whe re "he met Chloe Ange l ine St ickney , a f ra il b u t de te rm ined suf frag is t ,wh o t a u g h t m a th e m a t i c s wh i l e c o m p le t i n g h e r se n io r y e a r . Ha l l was a m o n g h e r p u p i l s , a n dshe soon bec am e his f iancee." After thei r m arr ia ge he stu die d astro nom y an d in 1862 foun da job a t the Na val Observa to ry . "A year a f te r h is a r r iv a l , a p ro fessorsh ip in ma them at icsopen ed a t the Na val Observa to ry . Ha l l , be l iev ing the o ffice shou ld seek the man , s implywai te d , bu t unkn ow n to h im , h is wife p ropose d h is na me by le t te r to the super in te nde n t o fth e o b se r v a to r y , a n d Ha l l wa s g iv e n th e p o s i t i o n . "Owe n Gin g e r i c h , "Ha l l , Asa p h , " Dictionary o f Scientific Biograph y 6 (1972), 48-50. A cco rding to Ang elo H al l , Chloe sacrificed herown p lans fo r a sc ien t i f ic career in o rder to p romote her husband ' s ; see An Astronomer's Wife(Bal t imore , 1908) .Owen Ginger ich , "The Sa te l l i tes o f Mars : Pred ic t ion and Discovery ," Journal of theHistory of Astronomy 1 (1970), 109-115.27. Norr iss S . Hether ing ton , "Lowel l ' s Theory o f L i fe on Mars ," Leaflets of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific N o . 501 (M arch 1971) . A. Law rence Lowel l , Biography ofPercival Lowell (New York , 1935). Br ian G. Ma rsden , "Low el l , Perc iva l , " Dictionary of Scientific Biography 8 (1973), 520-523 . W il l iam G raves Ho yt , Lowell and Mars (Tucson , 1976) .Accord ing to a recen t psychoanaly t ic in te rp re ta t ion , Lowel l ' s observa t ion o f the Mars cana lswas the resu l t of sub l im ated voyeur is t ic impulses an d unreso lved oed ip a l conf l ic ts . See Char lesK. Hof l ing , British Journal of Medical Psychology 37 (1964), 33-42.

28. M a r s d e n , op. cit. C lyde W . To m ba ug h , "Re min isce nces of the Discovery o f Pl u t o , "Sky and Telescope 19 (1960), 264-270 . W il l iam Stuckey , "T he M an who Discovered Pla ne t X ,"Science Digest 78 (2) (August 1975), 54-61. Mor ton Grosser , "The Search fo r a Plane t BeyondN

the rise of astronomy in america.pdf

Documents