|
|
|
|
|||||
|
||||||
From: Jim Hickey (no email)
Date: Tue May 02 2006 - 09:03:11 EDT
I've followed the discussion regarding the different methods of reducing lunar sights with great interest. It is fascinating why one method should prevail over another.
My personal preference, assuming I had only a choice of a graphical method like Margetts, a tabular method or a slide rule type method. I would choose the slide rule method first, graphical second and the tabular last. Clearly I would be out in left field compared to the norm.
Certainly one can argue that memory work and performing tasks more by wrote was the order of the day in that era. If this were the case, learning a tabular method that lead to a definitive answer would not be such a big task even if one method was a few steps more or less.
In this day and age we have so many memory aid to help us along. As well, we seem to be more systematic thinkers. Just try and teach and elderly person how to use a computer and you will likely find a person who will want to memorize the steps to do a task as opposed to leaning the system that opens up the whole deal.
It is sort of like Einstein, when asked why he did not memorize phone numbers, he responded that he knew how to use a phone book. I wonder what method he would have liked?
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Frank Reed <>
To:
Sent: Mon, 1 May 2006 22:16:35 EDT
Subject: Re: Easy Lunars in 1790
From Kelly's Spherics, 1796:
"other ingenious [graphical] methods have been since contrived, but the most
approved performance of th graphic kind is that lately executed by Mr.
Margetts; a work of great labour, ingenuity, and correctness."
He doesn't say, 'run out and buy it'. Maybe he should have! Instead, he
offers a simple graphical solution of his own.
Ken, you wrote:
"Did Nathaniel Bowditch become famous because he had made a simpler method
for clearing lunars?"
Not so much, I would say. In the 20th century, the importance of his "new
method" has been significantly exaggerated in various accounts of his life. But
his streamlined method, the one I have called "Bowditch's Principal Method"
was definitely less tedious and probably saved a minute of work on each
clearing. Every little bit helps.
-FER
42.0N 87.7W, or 41.4N 72.1W.
www.HistoricalAtlas.com/lunars
|