|
I was wandering around aimlessly in a book store when I happened to come upon this fascinating book. It is very well written and extremely entertaining, while at the same time very enlightening and educational. With all the problems the expedition faced they nevertheless set out to accomplish their mission.
The author does a wonderful job in this book melding the scientific with the entertainment because this book does both jobs very well.This book details how and who set out to truly measure the Earth. The author does this by telling the very fascinating story in a way that focuses on the many dramatic events that occurred while adding the data here and there.This is an amazing story that is very well written. Before this book I knew nothing at all about how the metric system came about, and so I was amazed to hear this story.
What this author does very well is giving the reader the scientific and mathematical data, while at the same time not bogging the story down for those readers (such as my self) who are not so scientifically inclined. What is so fascinating about the story is when this scientific expedition occurred. France was in turmoil and the scientific (astronomical) community was in as much disarray as the rest of the nation.
If you were ever interested in how or why we measure things the way we do then you have to read this book. This is just my kind of book; the kind that educates me without my knowing it.
Through triangulation they will gather enough information to calculate the height of France, and then by observing stars they will determine their latitude.The heart of the book is the story of the two men. It's a scientific history book, but it was primarily a well-executed biography that was interesting from start to finish. It is discovered early on by Méchain that he has made an error in measurements, and this tortures him throughout the entire seven-year expeditions. The scientists of the time decide to use a standard based on the circumference of the Earth, so that it may be a measurement "for all time, for all people".
At its core, the book is a biography of the two men - contrasting their methods and ideas, comparing their mental state, and commenting on their separate journeys. The only trouble is, they must measure the height of France in order to calculate the size of the Earth. So, the Academy of Sciences commissions two men - Jean Baptiste Joseph Delambre and Pierre Méchain - to head in opposite directions and measure several angles on their way across the country. What a fascinating read this turned out to be. Much of it helps to put things in context, but some of it is overly descriptive and takes away from the main study.I highly recommend this one to anyone with an interest in the Metric system, the French revolution, biographies, or scientific history. The difference between the two is astounding and is continually reiterated by the separate account of their adventures.
The author has reviewed thousands of logbooks, personal correspondence, and biked across France to effectively capture the story. It's gripping, interesting, and highly accurate.In fact, the only downside that I can see is that there is so much covered in this book that it is almost hard to find the focus.
It can be heavy reading in some points, though the author does his best to explain the principles behind the calculations. During the midst of the French Revolution, the citizens want to impose a standard of measurement to replace the 200,000+ units in place throughout France.
But the author frequently takes a break from the characters to talk about other issues - the local resistance to an all-encompassing measuring system, for instance, or the meaning of "error" to an 18th century scientist. Delambre is a capable young scientist who, despite obstacles and setbacks, manages to easily cover his ground and efficiently complete his half of the mission.
Méchain, however, is a member of the old regime of scientists - he does not allow his assistants any freedom, hides his errors, ties his reputation to his results, and generally wastes time. It's all very fascinating, and certainly is directly connected to the story of the Metric system, but often it is difficult to tell if the book is about the men, their measurements, or their country.
I thought it was excellent and am very interested in Alder's other books.
Is Alder suggesting that Delambre and Mechain are the ones who calculated the meter. Here I feel it is necessary to quote the following paragraph, taken from the prologue, to express several of my viewpoints:"Together, these documents reveal a remarkable story. If simple statistical theory existed during this time, it would deduce Mizar's observation as an outlier. In this historical account I find myself confused by many of the messages that he is sending forth. They reveal that Mechain-despite his extreme caution and exactitude-committed an error in the early years of the expedition, and worse, upon discovering his mistake, covered it up.
Some who read this book may gather that it is about a "hidden error that transformed the world", for me it was a book that did not live up to its billing, and kept me second guessing myself and the author's intent throughout. He is bound by his profession to seek and give truth. However, by the time I finished the book I was thoroughly perplexed by this conclusive statement. All things considered, I was disappointed that the book did not fulfill its promise. When Alder stated, "the meter calculated by Delambre and Mechain falls roughly.2 millimeters short", I passed over it with some caution. As I recall in Alder's own words, "the single factor that made the greatest difference to the final determination of the meter was based on the very data they had been sent to supercede." Moreover, what is Alder implying by falling short.
"The historian owes the dead nothing but the truth." Quoting Delambre in this instance, Ken Alder makes it known that he is conscious of the ethical responsibility that historians are required to uphold. In this book, I believe that Alder may be over-dramatizing the importance of some of the information presented. If he had subscribed to Delambre's methodology, he would have checked his measurements according to two stars, which would have agreed, and he would have been on his way. The next paragraph continues to make shocking revelations. The meter, it turns out, is in error, an error which has been perpetuated in every subsequent redefinition of its length, including our current definition of the meter in terms of the distance traveled by light in a fraction of a second."Starting from the beginning, we first see Alder use his words to imply that his error was a mistake and by covering it up was something even worse. Mechain was so tormented by the secret knowledge of his error that he was driven to the brink of madness. In fact, it was his keen attention to detail that produced observational inconsistencies. In the end, he died in an attempt to correct himself.
However, anyone who as gifted as he is, is certainly capable of persuading his audience, especially an audience who has no intent to seek out inconsistencies. If this were true and Mechain did botch the survey, how would this error get translated or `perpetuate' to the distance traveled by light in a fraction of a second. Do we now know the correct distance from the equator to the pole and it is an unchanging fixed measure. Even if it is not, he is responsible for the fabric of this ballyhoo. I would argue that Mechain did not commit an error at all.
Covering up this so-called error is another shadow that Alder casts at this early juncture at Mechain's expense. I can only hope that it is not written by Alder himself. As a historian himself, I have little doubt that he has intentionally wavered from this oath, nor do I believe that he ever attempted to suppress information. My reaction to the prologue, as I am sure most readers might be, is that the meter being in error is a very significant discovery, and without equivocation - Mechain is to blame for this discrepancy. What is Alder's source or foundation in making a statement like this or any of these haphazard remarks. If I had not read this portion of the book, I may have not had anything critical to say about it. I think it is degrading to promote a book about science in such a way as to trick readers into thinking it's something that it's not. We are also made aware that Delambre said the following in regards to Mechain, "if he dissimulated a few anomalous results which he feared would be blamed on his lack of care or skill, if he succumbed to the temptation to alter several series of observations., at least he did so in such a way that the altered data never entered into the calculation of the meridian." Finally, Alder chooses to lead into a statement explicitly stating that the meter, as we know it today, is in error.
I also think that the context, organization and generalization that Alder expresses can also mislead the common day reader or the critical reader for that matter. I was also intrigued by the world's perception in this time period and how the revolution marked the demise of some predominant theocentric misconceptions, which, in my mind, precipitated the end of the `savant' and gave rise to the scientist. In fact, the first three stars were in agreement, it was a fourth star, Mizar, an obscure star located on the horizon, that put him in disagreement. We know from Delambre and Mechain's dialog that Mechain consistently told his colleague of this error. I think it is an accurate historical account of what took place and I enjoyed seeing some of the incipient stages of globalization come into view.
And if you don't know this material, you may not want to be faced with the math (believe me).The discussion on the repeating 'theodolite' was great, as were the trials and tribulations of triangulation. This part hasn't changed in nature, just the current details.The second is the analysis of the personalities of the two central characters. I greatly enjoyed this book. The first is the discussion on the search for a 'universal' system of measurement. This was quite apart from the normal risks of the job, such as falling off cliffs and towers, exposure, unhappy locals, etc. If you've ever measured angles on a mountain top, you'll know just what the author is getting at. The discussion of the 'error' is fascinating.
Having worked in Antarctica for a year and seen people dealing with the stress of isolation, the story was very real to me: I almost knew those guys, albeit in different times and guises. While there have been complaints about a lack of example calculations and discussion of details of how it was done, there is enough in here for someone familiar with this type of work to figure it out. Alder does bring them to life. A great achievement for an historian, who, we presume, may not have done this kind of work.There are two other really good parts of this book. It places the metric system in a context, not as the be-all and end-all, but as a serious effort to solve a serious set of problems. And the stress was real: these guys ran the risks of close encounters with Madame Guillotine, wars, disease, politics, the works. Thank heavens for GPS, a technology that is possible only because of the foundation work of geodesists like Mechain and Delambre.Enjoy this book, as a history of measurement and geodesy, a history of a major surveying achievement, and a vivid study of personalities under real stress.
There is a wealth of information that is generally little known. An appendix with some example calculations would have been welcome. I'm sorry Mr. And the precision to which they worked was very great, requiring either reams of trigonometric tables or very tedious calculations for every trig function they used.It took me a long time to read this book, because I spent a lot of time on the Internet trying to find references to how they performed their calculations. How many of us knew that the most advanced nation in the world, the USA, is one of few hold-outs in the world (along with N. Korea, for instance) that have not accepted metrication -- and screwed up a very expensive Mars landing expedition as a consequence.Why only three stars. I have no hesitation in recommending this book to just about any interest or level of scientific knowledge or background. It is a great wonder to me how these guys managed to do all these detailed calculations when all they had was stylus and paper.
Alder, having researched all the original papers, missed an oportunity to enlighten us. How about a web site reference to the detailed mathematics. I think how they did the calculations to the precision they were able would have been at least as interesting a story.Perhaps you can add this as a sequel, Mr. OK, so this was not intended as a text book and if it had been packed with all the geometry it would not have sold as well. How many of us knew that metrication was a unifying factor beyond simply the impaired meter measurement. Surprisingly I found nothing significant.
Alder, but I bought your book primarily because I wanted to know how the two guys did it -- but you didn't tell me in any detail. But even so, surely we should have been provided with some access. So Mr. Alder.
|
