9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great story but not much new info..., July 28, 2001
The story of the discovery of the planet Neptune is one of the most fascinating in the era of modern astronomy. Kepler's laws of planetary motion and Newton's unprecedented mathematical description of the law of universal gravitation allowed predictions of planetary positions to an accuracy of arcseconds.
In view of this successful mathematical description, Uranus' misbehavior was so bad that it was proving to be a continual embarrassment to astronomers, and the drive to find a solution was strong in the early to mid 19th century. The story of Adams in England, Le Verrier in France, and Galle in Germany has been told many times, and will be familiar to fans of the history of astronomy. Standage's retelling of the story is a good read, but probably adds little to Grosser's 'The Discovery of Neptune' (1962). An interesting facet Standage adds to the picture has to do with the title of his book. The 'file' in question belongs to George Airy (a notoriously fastidious record keeper). It contained correspondence, news clippings, etc., on the issue of the discovery of Neptune. Conspiracy theorists abounded in the years after the discovery, and some made the claim that Airy was in cahoots with Le Verrier in suppressing Adams' work to ensure that the credit would go to the Frenchman. Apparently Airy's file disappeared at some point during the last 20 years or so, renewing the conspiracy theorists' energies. Standage informs us late in his book that the file eventually turned up among the papers of a recently deceased former astronomer of the Greenwich Observatory. Examination of the file proved that there was no collusion.
This incident deserves further mention. Standage does not name the astronomer who had the file, nor the circumstances under which it was 'borrowed.' Nor does he elaborate on what was found there, other than exonerating Airy of the charge of conspiracy to suppress Adams' findings. Just who did have the file, and for how long? My own brief research revealed that an historian of science named Dennis Rawlins has written several articles about this situation, claiming a cover-up on the part of English astronomers, and alleging that the Neptune file contains a copy of Adams' original paper in which his position prediction is off by more than 12 degrees, and that a faction of 'Cambridge' astronomers is conspiring to keep the contents of the file suppressed.
I contacted two historians of science, one at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and one at Harvard. Neither knows of any evidence as to the truth of these allegations, and both attest that Rawlins tends to gravitate toward farfetched notions that mainstream science regards with suspicion. In fact, Rawlins doesn't publish his papers in mainstream journals, but in his own self-published journal 'Dio.'
At any rate, Standage's treatment of the issues was disappointingly brief and left me wondering if he was unable to dredge up any additional info himself.
Standage doesn't end the story with the discovery of Neptune and the international fallout over credit that ensued. He goes on to add the modern planet seekers, those who look for - and find - planets around other stars. Their challenge may be technically greater - to discern the minute wobbles of distant stars and infer the existence of planets, but they also have superior tools. Standage draws the parallel between their task, and the way Adams and Le Verrier inferred the existence of Neptune mathematically long before it was seen by astronomers. The comparison is perhaps valid, but the modern search for extrasolar planets certainly carries none of the intrigue of the Neptune story, where the search was carried out with paper and pencil and little more.
Standage's book is a good read, particularly for those unfamiliar with the details of the story. However, I would still recommend Grosser's book as the better account (minus the modern info), but I would even more highly recommend Richard Baum and William Sheehan's excellent 'In Search Of Planet Vulcan: The Ghost In Newton's Clockwork Universe,' a book which retells the Neptune story, possibly better than either Grosser and Standage, and adding the historical context of the planet Vulcan search as well.
I was frustrated upon finishing this book. I wished Standage had done the digging necessary to really tell the story behind the "file." Hopefully more will come to light of the contents of Airy's Neptune File, and will be published in some still unwritten account.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
6 of 6 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Review of the Neptune File, December 1, 2000
Tom Standage's The Neptune File is an account of the simultaneous discovery of the planet Neptune in 1846 by two mathematicians, John Couch Adams and Urbain Jean-Joseph Le Verrier, as well as the subsequent controversy over their rival claims. Adams and LeVerrier used different mathematical methods to predict the position of the planet based upon perturbations in the orbit of Uranus, marking the first time the position of a planet was deduced rather than fortuitously discovered. Unfortunately, when the planet was actually sighted based on the predictions, this led to a situation where both mathematicians had a simultaneous stake in the discovery and a international uproar resulted as France and England pressed their representative's rival claims. While the actual material on Neptune itself is perhaps a little too lean to bear an entire book, Standage sets his story carefully in context, taking us through the entire history of planet hunting, from the chance discovery of Uranus to recent discoveries of extra-solar planets, peppering the story with lively sketches of all the important figures, as well as anecdotes, theories, and predictions. The Neptune File is both accesible, intelligent popular science and an interesting account of the personalities involved in the discoveries that pushed back the frontiers of the universe from the 18th to the 20th centuries.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
6 of 7 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Terrific Discovery. (And I'm talking about the book!), August 12, 2001
I actually picked up this book in a used bookstore and read the back cover. The facts surrounding the discovery of the planet were new to me. (Kind of embarrassing really that I had never heard it before. Remind me to contact the secondary school I attended!!) In any event, I was enamored by the discriptions on the back cover and bought it for around four or five bucks. I read it in less than a day, which for me is an extreme rarity. I usually spend my time in the "shallow end" of the literary pool, reading books that can only be described as "easy" reads. This is one of the most entertaining books I've read in years. Unfortunately, I lent the book to someone who had more of a background in astronomy who must have known the book's true value and I haven't seen the book (or the guy) since. So I'm back here to purchase another copy. This time I am much more certain of my investment.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
