fresnel augustin jean biot jean bapiste arago (1 Ergebnisse)

Hardcover. Zustand: Very Good. No Jacket. 1st Edition. First Edition of a 'major controversy . . . one that marks the first public encounter between a selectionist and a wave theorist' (Buchwald, 1989, p. 214) -- Fresnel and Biot -- that also involved their contemporaries Arago and Ampère. 'The nasty confrontation between Arago and Biot that Fresnel so vividly described marks an epoch in the history of the wave theory' (Buchwald, p. 238). Entire volume offered. 448 pp; plates (2 folding). Contemporary boards. Edges slightly worn, else Very Good. Fresnel's 'Calcul des teintes' paper, as it is referred to by Jed Z. Buchwald in his The Rise of the Wave Theory of Light: Optical Theory and Experiment in the Early Nineteenth Century (1989; the bibliographic entry for the paper is 1821c), was reprinted in Vol. I, pp. 609-653 of Fresnel's Oeuvres (1827). In this paper Fresnel 'detailed his new hypothesis that light is always asymmetric' (Buchwald, p. 390). Biot's paper is reprinted in Fresnel's Oeuvres (pp. 569-590), as is Arago's (591-600); the trio forms much of the basis for Buchwald's discussion of the complex problems -- and Fresnel's eventual solution -- of diffraction, polarization, etc., on pp. 212-62. On pp. 227-8, Buchwald quotes a passage from Fresnel 1821c, 611-12, then follows: 'However, with this hypothesis alone one cannot explain any better than before why Fresnel's and Arago's rules [for the interference of polarized light] work. Moreoever, as it stands one would be at a loss to explain why the asymmetry sometimes rotates and sometimes does not -- whereas before one could at least understand that a wave might have both a longitudinal and a transverse component. Accordingly Fresnel did not introduce this new hypothesis without also suggesting a unifying physical interpretation for it: namely, that the asymmetry in question occurs entirely in the plane of the wave, so that light waves are always completely transverse. Fresnel carefully emphasized this idea in the spring of 1821, and it is worth quoting from him at some length because it is the only evidence we have from near the period when he developed his new understanding [my emphasis].' Buchwald then quotes from Fresnel 1821c, 635-36, and follows, "Implicit in this physical hypothesis is a new, and difficult, understanding of the function of the principle of interference, one that permits it to be used in a very general manner" (p. 229). Buchwald begins chapter 9, 'A Case of Mutual Misunderstanding', by quoting the letter from Fresnel to his brother Léonor that 'so vividly described' the Arago-Biot confrontation, then adds, 'Scarcely two years after Fresnel had won the prize for his diffraction memoir, the Academy ordered printed, over Biot's explicit and public objections, Fresnel's account of chromatic polarization. The members did not accept the report, but apparently only because Arago had insisted that they do so (and he in any case had the report printed in the Annales almost immediately [Arago and Fresnel 1821] [pp. 80-101 in the volume offered here; pp. 553-68 in Fresnel, Oeuvres]. This was a stunning personal victory for Arago and a stinging public defeat for Biot. Years before, Biot had snatched the field away from Arago; now, by proxy at least, Arago took it back. . . . The events that culminated in this bitter confrontation are somewhat tangled, in part because Fresnel's memoir was not printed until the Oeuvres. Instead, Arago printed Fresnel's 'Calcul des teintes' in three parts in the Annales. However, at the end of his report Arago remarks that the first memoir discussed in it was submitted to the Academy on 7 October 1816, and it was followed by 'a supplement' on 19 January 1818. There were in addition several notes that Fresnel gave to Arago and Ampère (almost certainly just shortly before the report was written)' (Buchwald, p. 238; the remainder of the chapter, pp. 239-51, discusses Arago's and Biot's polemical reports).