arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 1704.05661

Francesco Fontana and his "astronomical" Telescope

Abstract

In the late 1620s the Neapolitan telescope maker Francesco Fontana was the first to observe the sky using a telescope with two convex lenses, which he had manufactured himself. Fontana succeeded in drawing the most accurate maps of the Moon's surface of his time, which were to become popular through a number of publications spread all over Europe but without acknowledging the author. At the end of 1645, in a state of declining health and pressed by the need to defend his authorship, Fontana carried out an intense observational campaign, whose results he hurriedly collected in his Novae Coelestium Terrestriumque rerum Observationis (1646), the only book he left to posterity. Fontana observed the Moon's main craters, as the crater Tycho which he named Fons Major, their radial patterns and the change in their positions due to the Moon's motions. He observed the gibbosity of Mars at quadrature and, together with the Jesuit G.B. Zupus, he described the phases of Mercury. Fontana observed the two - and occasionally three - major bands of Jupiter, and inferred the rotation movement of the major planets Mars, Jupiter and Saturn, arguing that they could not be attached to an Aristotelian sky. He came close to revealing the ring structure of Saturn. He also suggested the presence of additional moons around Jupiter, Venus and Saturn, which prompted a debate that lasted more than a hundred years. In several places of his book Fontana repeatedly claimed to have conceived the first positive eyepiece in 1608, providing a declaration by Zupus to have used his telescope since 1614. This declaration is still the oldest record mentioning such a device. We finally suggest that the telescopes depicted in the two Allegory of Sight by J. Brueghel the Elder belonging to Albert VII might have been made by Fontana, and that he might have inspired the Sight by Jusepe Ribera (c. 1616).

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Paolo Molaro. 2017-04-19. Francesco Fontana and his "astronomical" Telescope. https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.05661

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Scientific Promise

Scientists constantly face decisions about what lines of research to pursue. This Element introduces the philosophical debate about scientific pursuitworthiness. It explains how it can be rational to pursue a theory even if the theory is less well supported than its rivals, and it discusses existing philosophical frameworks for guiding pursuit decisions. The Element also develops a new perspective. Existing accounts focus predominantly on theories, while experiments are largely neglected. This is an important shortcoming. Theoretical promise depends on experimental promise, and experimental promise raises questions of its own. Drawing on the epistemology of experimentation, the Element advances an account of experimental pursuitworthiness. It is argued that such pursuitworthiness depends on experimental virtues like a clear signal and simplicity of design. Moreover, the kinds of uncertainty that constrain the assessment of scientific pursuits are examined. Finally, the Element highlights open questions in the philosophy of scientific pursuitworthiness.

physics.hist-ph

Is Black Hole Evaporation Prediction Friendly?

Manchak and Weatherall (2018) formulate the black hole information paradox as a failure of predictability in black hole evaporation spacetimes, diagnosed by non-global hyperbolicity. I offer a strategy for resolving this paradox. I argue that failures of predictability in black hole evaporation are not well diagnosed by non-global hyperbolicity. I then consider two weakenings of global hyperbolicity: prediction and retrodiction friendliness, the failure of which could ground a new paradox. However, deidealized black hole evaporation models can be prediction and retrodiction friendly. Therefore, the information paradox cannot be based upon failures of global hyperbolicity, nor either retrodiction or prediction unfriendliness.

physics.hist-ph

The Crab Nebula progenitor: recovering the 1054 AD supernova event as galactic Gamma-ray burst

In 1054 AD a daytime star appeared in the constellation of Taurus, for three weeks, and it was reported in various sources from Europe to China/Japan: it was one of the few documented galactic supernovae of the last two millenia. This paradigm has been established about sixty years ago, as the comprehension of the physics of supernovae progressed with enough observational data. The Gamma-ray bursts were discovered in the same period, but only in the past few years have their observations become daily and their distances have been fully understood as cosmological. After the explosion, the exponential decay of the luminosity in gamma-rays and X-rays has been followed with telescopes onboard dedicated satellites. Also the exponential decay of the afterglow's optical and radio frequencies have been observed with the largest optical and radio telescopes. Within the binary-driven hypernova framework, successful in explaining all the observed phases of the Gamma-ray bursts, the universal exponential decay can be extended to 1000 years after the burst, to account for the present values of Gamma and X-rays as well as optical and radio frequencies of the Crab Nebula. Both the daytime visibility of the burst, and the simultaneous radiation plagues appeared in Constantinople and Cairo is a strong evidence of the presence of Gamma-rays in the lower atmosphere, coming from the same source originating the Crab nebula. The association to the daytime visibility of that star and the following plague meets exactly the etymology of the word dis-aster, bad star.

physics.hist-ph