Part 2

In a word, then, all the purely arithmetical, trigonometrical, and logarithmic tables already mentioned, are necessary, either immediately or remotely, for this purpose. But in addition to these, a great number of tables, exclusively astronomical, are likewise indispensable. The predictions of the astronomer, with respect to the positions and motions of the bodies of the firmament, are the means, and the only means, which enable the mariner to prosecute his art. By these he is enabled to discover the distance of his ship from the Line, and the extent of his departure from the meridian of Greenwich, or from any other meridian to which the astronomical predictions refer. The more numerous, minute, and accurate these predictions can be made, the greater will be the facilities which can be furnished to the mariner. But the computation of those tables, in which the future position of celestial objects are registered, depend themselves upon an infinite variety of other tables which never reach the hands of the mariner. It cannot be said that there is any table whatever, necessary for the astronomer, which is unnecessary for the navigator.

The purposes of the marine of a country whose interests are so inseparably connected as ours are with the improvement of the art of navigation, would be very inadequately fulfilled, if our navigators were merely supplied with the means of determining by Nautical Astronomy the position of a ship at sea. It has been well observed by the Committee of the Astronomical Society, to whom the recent improvement of the Nautical Almanac was confided, that it is not by those means merely by which the seaman is enabled to determine the position of his vessel at sea, that the full intent and purpose of what is usually called Nautical Astronomy are answered. This object is merely a part of that comprehensive and important subject; and might be attained by a very cheap publication, and without the aid of expensive instruments. A not less important and much more difficult part of nautical science has for its object to determine the precise position of various interesting and important points on the surface of the earth,--such as remarkable headlands, ports, and islands; together with the general trending of the coast between well-known harbours. It is not necessary to point out here how important such knowledge is to the mariner. This knowledge, which may be called Nautical Geography, cannot be obtained by the methods of observation used on board ship, but requires much more delicate and accurate instruments, firmly placed upon the solid ground, besides all the astronomical aid which can be afforded by the best tables, arranged in the most convenient form for immediate use. This was Dr Maskelyne's view of the subject, and his opinion has been confirmed by the repeated wants and demands of those distinguished navigators who have been employed in several recent scientific expeditions.

Among the tables directly necessary for navigation, are those which predict the position of the centre of the sun from hour to hour. These tables include the sun's right ascension and declination, daily, at noon, with the hourly change in these quantities. They also include the equation of time, together with its hourly variation.

Tables of the moon's place for every hour, are likewise necessary, together with the change of declination for every ten minutes. The lunar method of determining the longitude depends upon tables containing the predicted distances of the moon from the sun, the principal planets, and from certain conspicuous fixed stars; which distances being observed by the mariner, he is enabled thence to discover the time at the meridian from which the longitude is measured; and, by comparing that time with the time known or discoverable in his actual situation, he infers his longitude. But not only does the prediction of the position of the moon, with respect to these celestial objects, require a vast number of numerical tables, but likewise the observations necessary to be made by the mariner, in order to determine the lunar distances, also require several tables. To predict the exact position of any fixed star, requires not less than ten numerical tables peculiar to that star; and if the mariner be furnished (as is actually the case) with tables of the predicted distances of the moon from one hundred such stars, such predictions must require not less than a thousand numerical tables. Regarding the range of the moon through the firmament, however, it will readily be conceived that a hundred stars form but a scanty supply; especially when it is considered that an accurate method of determining the longitude, consists in observing the extinction of a star by the dark edge of the moon. Within the limits of the lunar orbit there are not less than one thousand stars, which are so situated as to be in the moon's path, and therefore to exhibit, at some period or other, those desirable occultations. These stars are also of such magnitudes, that their occultations may be distinctly observed from the deck, even when subject to all the unsteadiness produced by an agitated sea. To predict the occultations of such stars, would require not less than ten thousand tables. The stars from which lunar distances might be taken are still more numerous; and we may safely pronounce, that, great as has been the improvement effected recently in our Nautical Almanac, it does not yet furnish more than a small fraction of that aid to navigation (in the large sense of that term), which, with greater facility, expedition, and economy in the calculation and printing of tables, it might be made to supply.

Tables necessary to determine the places of the planets are not less necessary than those for the sun, moon, and stars. Some notion of the number and complexity of these tables may be formed, when we state that the positions of the two principal planets, (and these the most necessary for the navigator,) Jupiter and Saturn, require each not less than one hundred and sixteen tables. Yet it is not only necessary to predict the position of these bodies, but it is likewise expedient to tabulate the motions of the four satellites of Jupiter, to predict the exact times at which they enter his shadow, and at which their shadows cross his disc, as well as the times at which they are interposed between him and the Earth, and he between them and the Earth.

Among the extensive classes of tables here enumerated, there are several which are in their nature permanent and unalterable, and would never require to be recomputed, if they could once be computed with perfect accuracy on accurate data; but the data on which such computations are conducted, can only be regarded as approximations to truth, within limits the extent of which must necessarily vary with our knowledge of astronomical science. It has accordingly happened, that one set of tables after another has been superseded with each advance of astronomical science. Some striking examples of this may not be uninstructive. In 1765, the Board of Longitude paid to the celebrated Euler the sum of L.300, for furnishing general formulæ for the computation of lunar tables. Professor Mayer was employed to calculate the tables upon these formulæ, and the sum of L.3000 was voted for them by the British Parliament, to his widow, after his decease. These tables had been used for ten years, from 1766 to 1776, in computing the Nautical Almanac, when they were superseded by new and improved tables, composed by Mr Charles Mason, under the direction of Dr Maskelyne, from calculations made by order of the Board of Longitude, on the observations of Dr Bradley. A farther improvement was made by Mason in 1780; but a much more extensive improvement took place in the lunar calculations by the publication of the tables of the Moon, by M. Bürg, deduced from Laplace's theory, in 1806. Perfect, however, as Bürg's tables were considered, at the time of their publication, they were, within the short period of six years, superseded by a more accurate set of tables published by Burckhardt in 1812; and these also have since been followed by the tables of Damoiseau. Professor Schumacher has calculated by the latter tables his ephemeris of the Planetary Lunar Distances, and astronomers will hence be enabled to put to the strict test of observation the merits of the tables of Burckhardt and Damoiseau.

The solar tables have undergone, from time to time, similar changes. The solar tables of Mayer were used in the computation of the Nautical Almanac, from its commencement in 1767, to 1804 inclusive. Within the six years immediately succeeding 1804, not less than three successive sets of solar tables appeared, each improving on the other; the first by Baron de Zach, the second by Delambre, under the direction of the French Board of Longitude, and the third by Carlini. The last, however, differ only in arrangement from those of Delambre.

Similar observations will be applicable to the tables of the principal planets. Bouvard published, in 1803, tables of Jupiter and Saturn; but from the improved state of astronomy, he found it necessary to recompute these tables in 1821.

Although it is now about thirty years since the discovery of the four new planets, Ceres, Pallas, Juno, and Vesta, it was not till recently that tables of their motions were published. They have lately appeared in Encke's Ephemeris.

We have thus attempted to convey some notion (though necessarily a very inadequate one) of the immense extent of numerical tables which it has been found necessary to calculate and print for the purposes of the arts and sciences. We have before us a catalogue of the tables contained in the library of one private individual, consisting of not less than one hundred and forty volumes. Among these there are no duplicate copies: and we observe that many of the most celebrated voluminous tabular works are not contained among them. They are confined exclusively to arithmetical and trigonometrical tables; and, consequently, the myriad of astronomical and nautical tables are totally excluded from them. Nevertheless, they contain an extent of printed surface covered with figures amounting to above sixteen thousand square feet. We have taken at random forty of these tables, and have found that the number of errors acknowledged in the respective errata, amounts to above three thousand seven hundred.

To be convinced of the necessity which has existed for accurate numerical tables, it will only be necessary to consider at what an immense expenditure of labour and of money even the imperfect ones which we possess have been produced.

To enable the reader to estimate the difficulties which attend the attainment even of a limited degree of accuracy, we shall now explain some of the expedients which have been from time to time resorted to for the attainment of numerical correctness in calculating and printing them.

Among the scientific enterprises which the ambition of the French nation aspired to during the Republic, was the construction of a magnificent system of numerical tables. Their most distinguished mathematicians were called upon to contribute to the attainment of this important object; and the superintendence of the undertaking was confided to the celebrated Prony, who co-operated with the government in the adoption of such means as might be expected to ensure the production of a system of logarithmic and trigonometric tables, constructed with such accuracy that they should form a monument of calculation the most vast and imposing that had ever been executed, or even conceived. To accomplish this gigantic task, the principle of the division of labour, found to be so powerful in manufactures, was resorted to with singular success. The persons employed in the work were divided into three sections: the first consisted of half a dozen of the most eminent analysts. Their duty was to investigate the most convenient mathematical formulæ, which should enable the computers to proceed with the greatest expedition and accuracy by the method of Differences, of which we shall speak more fully hereafter. These formulæ, when decided upon by this first section, were handed over to the second section, which consisted of eight or ten properly qualified mathematicians. It was the duty of this second section to convert into numbers certain general or algebraical expressions which occurred in the formulæ, so as to prepare them for the hands of the computers. Thus prepared, these formulæ were handed over to the third section, who formed a body of nearly one hundred computers. The duty of this numerous section was to compute the numbers finally intended for the tables. Every possible precaution was of course taken to ensure the numerical accuracy of the results. Each number was calculated by two or more distinct and independent computers, and its truth and accuracy determined by the coincidence of the results thus obtained.

The body of tables thus calculated occupied in manuscript seventeen folio volumes.

As an example of the precautions which have been considered necessary to guard against errors in the calculation of numerical tables, we shall further state those which were adopted by Mr Babbage, previously to the publication of his tables of logarithms. In order to render the terminal figure of tables in which one or more decimal places are omitted as accurate as it can be, it has been the practice to compute one or more of the succeeding figures; and if the first omitted figure be greater than 4, then the terminal figure is always increased by 1, since the value of the tabulated number is by such means brought nearer to the truth. The tables of Callet, which were among the most accurate published logarithms, and which extended to seven places of decimals, were first carefully compared with the tables of Vega, which extended to ten places, in order to discover whether Callet had made the above correction of the final figure in every case where it was necessary. This previous precaution being taken, and the corrections which appeared to be necessary being made in a copy of Callet's tables, the proofs of Mr Babbage's tables were submitted to the following test: They were first compared, number by number, with the corrected copy of Callet's logarithms; secondly, with Hutton's logarithms; and thirdly, with Vega's logarithms. The corrections thus suggested being marked in the proofs, corrected revises were received back. These revises were then again compared, number by number, first with Vega's logarithms; secondly, with the logarithms of Callet; and thirdly, as far as the first 20,000 numbers, with the corresponding ones in Briggs's logarithms. They were now returned to the printer, and were stereotyped; proofs were taken from the stereotyped plates, which were put through the following ordeal: They were first compared once more with the logarithms of Vega as far as 47,500; they were then compared with the whole of the logarithms of Gardner; and next with the whole of Taylor's logarithms; and as a last test, they were transferred to the hands of a different set of readers, and were once more compared with Taylor. That these precautions were by no means superfluous may be collected from the following circumstances mentioned by Mr Babbage: In the sheets read immediately previous to stereotyping, thirty-two errors were detected; after stereotyping, eight more were found, and corrected in the plates.

By such elaborate and expensive precautions many of the errors of computation and printing may certainly be removed; but it is too much to expect that in general such measures can be adopted; and we accordingly find by far the greater number of tables disfigured by errors, the extent of which is rather to be conjectured than determined. When the nature of a numerical table is considered,--page after page densely covered with figures, and with nothing else,--the chances against the detection of any single error will be easily comprehended; and it may therefore be fairly presumed, that for one error which may happen to be detected, there must be a great number which escape detection. Notwithstanding this difficulty, it is truly surprising how great a number of numerical errors have been detected by individuals no otherwise concerned in the tables than in their use. Mr Baily states that he has himself detected in the solar and lunar tables, from which our Nautical Almanac was for a long period computed, more than five hundred errors. In the multiplication table already mentioned, computed by Dr Hutton for the Board of Longitude, a single page was examined and recomputed: it was found to contain about forty errors.

In order to make the calculations upon the numbers found in the Ephemeral Tables published in the Nautical Almanac, it is necessary that the mariner should be supplied with certain permanent tables. A volume of these, to the number of about thirty, was accordingly computed, and published at national expense, by order of the Board of Longitude, entitled 'Tables requisite to be used with the Nautical Ephemeris for finding the latitude and longitude at sea.' In the first edition of these requisite tables, there were detected, by one individual, above a thousand errors.

The tables published by the Board of Longitude for the correction of the observed distances of the moon from certain fixed stars, are followed by a table of acknowledged errata, extending to seven folio pages, and containing more than eleven hundred errors. Even this table of errata itself is not correct: a considerable number of errors have been detected in it, so that errata upon errata have become necessary.

One of the tests most frequently resorted to for the detection of errors in numerical tables, has been the comparison of tables of the same kind, published by different authors. It has been generally considered that those numbers in which they are found to agree must be correct; inasmuch as the chances are supposed to be very considerable against two or more independent computers falling into precisely the same errors. How far this coincidence may be safely assumed as a test of accuracy we shall presently see.

A few years ago, it was found desirable to compute some very accurate logarithmic tables for the use of the great national survey of Ireland, which was then, and still is in progress; and on that occasion a careful comparison of various logarithmic tables was made. Six remarkable errors were detected, which were found to be common to several apparently independent sets of tables. This singular coincidence led to an unusually extensive examination of the logarithmic tables published both in England and in other countries; by which it appeared that thirteen sets of tables, published in London between the years 1633 and 1822, all agreed in these six errors. Upon extending the enquiry to foreign tables, it appeared that two sets of tables published at Paris, one at Gouda, one at Avignon, one at Berlin, and one at Florence, were infected by exactly the same six errors. The only tables which were found free from them were those of Vega, and the more recent impressions of Callet. It happened that the Royal Society possessed a set of tables of logarithms printed in the Chinese character, and on Chinese paper, consisting of two volumes: these volumes contained no indication or acknowledgment of being copied from any other work. They were examined; and the result was the detection in them of the same six errors.

It is quite apparent that this remarkable coincidence of error must have arisen from the various tables being copied successively one from another. The earliest work in which they appeared was Vlacq's Logarithms, (folio, Gouda, 1628); and from it, doubtless, those which immediately succeeded it in point of time were copied; from which the same errors were subsequently transcribed into all the other, including the Chinese logarithms.

The most certain and effectual check upon errors which arise in the process of computation, is to cause the same computations to be made by separate and independent computers; and this check is rendered still more decisive if they make their computations by different methods. It is, nevertheless, a remarkable fact, that several computers, working separately and independently, do frequently commit precisely the same error; so that falsehood in this case assumes that character of consistency, which is regarded as the exclusive attribute of truth. Instances of this are familiar to most persons who have had the management of the computation of tables. We have reason to know, that M. Prony experienced it on many occasions in the management of the great French tables, when he found three, and even a greater number of computers, working separately and independently, to return him the same numerical result, and that result wrong. Mr Stratford, the conductor of the Nautical Almanac, to whose talents and zeal that work owes the execution of its recent improvements, has more than once observed a similar occurrence. But one of the most signal examples of this kind, of which we are aware, is related by Mr Baily. The catalogue of stars published by the Astronomical Society was computed by two separate and independent persons, and was afterwards compared and examined with great care and attention by Mr Stratford. On examining this catalogue, and recalculating a portion of it, Mr Baily discovered an error in the case of the star, χ Cephei. Its right ascension was calculated wrongly, and yet consistently, by two computers working separately. Their numerical results agreed precisely in every figure; and Mr Stratford, on examining the catalogue, failed to detect the error. Mr Baily having reason, from some discordancy which he observed, to suspect an error, recomputed the place of the star with a view to discover it; and he himself, in the first instance, obtained precisely the same erroneous numerical result. It was only on going over the operation a second time that he accidentally discovered that he had inadvertently committed the same error.

It appears, therefore, that the coincidence of different tables, even when it is certain that they could not have been copied one from another, but must have been computed independently, is not a decisive test of their correctness, neither is it possible to ensure accuracy by the device of separate and independent computation.

Besides the errors incidental to the process of computation, there are further liabilities in the process of transcribing the final results of each calculation into the fair copy of the table designed for the printer. The next source of error lies with the compositor, in transferring this copy into type. But the liabilities to error do not stop even here; for it frequently happens, that after the press has been fully corrected, errors will be produced in the process of printing. A remarkable instance of this occurs in one of the six errors detected in so many different tables already mentioned. In one of these cases, the last five figures of two successive numbers of a logarithmic table were the following:--

35875 10436.

Now, both of these are erroneous; the figure 8 in the first line should be 4, and the figure 4 in the second should be 8. It is evident that the types, as first composed, were correct; but in the course of printing, the two types 4 and 8 being loose, adhered to the inking-balls, and were drawn out: the pressmen in replacing them transposed them, putting the 8 above and the 4 below, instead of vice versa. It would be a curious enquiry, were it possible to obtain all the copies of the original edition of Vlacq's Logarithms, published at Gouda in 1628, from which this error appears to have been copied in all the subsequent tables, to ascertain whether it extends through the entire edition. It would probably, nay almost certainly, be discovered that some of the copies of that edition are correct in this number, while others are incorrect; the former having been worked off before the transposition of the types.

It is a circumstance worthy of notice, that this error in Vlacq's tables has produced a corresponding error in a variety of other tables deduced from them, in which nevertheless the erroneous figures in Vlacq are omitted. In no less than sixteen sets of tables published at various times since the publication of Vlacq, in which the logarithms extend only to seven places of figures, the error just mentioned in the eighth place in Vlacq causes a corresponding error in the seventh place. When the last three figures are omitted in the first of the above numbers, the seventh figure should be 5, inasmuch as the first of the omitted figures is under 5: the erroneous insertion, however, of the figure 8 in Vlacq has caused the figure 6 to be substituted for 5 in the various tables just alluded to. For the same reason, the erroneous occurrence of 4 in the second number has caused the adoption of a 0 instead of a 1 in the seventh place in the other tables. The only tables in which this error does not occur are those of Vega, the more recent editions of Callet, and the still later Logarithms of Mr Babbage.

The Opus Palatinum, a work published in 1596, containing an extensive collection of trigonometrical tables, affords a remarkable instance of a tabular error; which, as it is not generally known, it may not be uninteresting to mention here. After that work had been for several years in circulation in every part of Europe, it was discovered that the commencement of the table of co-tangents and co-secants was vitiated by an error of considerable magnitude. In the first co-tangent the last nine places of figures were incorrect; but from the manner in which the numbers of the table were computed, the error was gradually, though slowly, diminished, until at length it became extinguished in the eighty-sixth page. After the detection of this extensive error, Pitiscus undertook the recomputation of the eighty-six erroneous pages. His corrected calculation was printed, and the erroneous part of the remaining copies of the Opus Palatinum was cancelled. But as the corrected table of Pitiscus was not published until 1607,--thirteen years after the original work,--the erroneous part of the volume was cancelled in comparatively few copies, and consequently correct copies of the work are now exceedingly rare. Thus, in the collection of tables published by M. Schulze, the whole of the erroneous part of the Opus Palatinum has been adopted; he having used the copy of that work which exists in the library of the Academy of Berlin, and which is one of those copies in which the incorrect part was not cancelled. The corrected copies of this work may be very easily distinguished at present from the erroneous ones: it happened that the former were printed with a very bad and worn-out type, and upon paper of a quality inferior to that of the original work. On comparing the first eighty-six pages of the volume with the succeeding ones, they are, therefore, immediately distinguishable in the corrected copies. Besides this test, there is another, which it may not be uninteresting to point out:--At the bottom of page 7 in the corrected copies, there is an error in the position of the words basis and hypothenusa, their places being interchanged. In the original uncorrected work this error does not exist.