Kaiser, Frederick Kaiser, Frederik - Springer Link

K

Kaiser, Frederick ▶ Kaiser, Frederik

Kaiser, Frederik Petra Heijden Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

Alternate Names ▶ Kaiser, Frederick; ▶ Kaiser, Friedrich

Born Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 10 June 1808 Died Leiden, the Netherlands, 28 July 1872 Frederik Kaiser directed the Leiden Observatory from 1837 until his death in 1872. His contributions to Dutch astronomy included the foundation of a completely new observatory building in Leiden (in 1860, the first of its kind in the Netherlands) and the introduction of statistics and precision measurements in daily astronomical practice. Moreover, he was a gifted teacher and a skillful popularizer of astronomy. Kaiser was the oldest boy of eight children born to Johann Wilhelm Keyser and Anna Sibella Liernur. His parents were immigrants from Nassau-Dietz in Germany. Kaiser’s father, a teacher of German, died in 1817 when Frederik

was 8 years old. Kaiser was then raised by his uncle, Johan Frederik Keyser, a municipal employee and teacher of mathematics in Amsterdam. Keyser was a member of several learned societies and was known as a proficient amateur astronomer; he is said to have been the first to give a reasonable determination of the geographical coordinates of Amsterdam. In his young nephew Frederik, Keyser discovered a talent for mathematics and observational astronomy, and he decided to teach him the trade. When Keyser himself died in 1823, the 15-year-old Kaiser took over his uncle’s job as a teacher of mathematics; with his uncle’s books and instruments, he further educated himself in the science of astronomy. By then, he had already published his first article, reporting his calculations of an occultation of the Pleiades by the Moon. Kaiser owed much to his uncle’s colleagues for his university career. While the Dutch government could not provide Kaiser with a scholarship, ▶ Gerard Moll, director of the Utrecht University Observatory and a former pupil of Keyser, found a place for Kaiser as an observer at the Leiden Observatory, then a small construction on top of the academy building. His was the first professional post as observer in the country (1826). But to his disappointment, Kaiser found the observatory’s instruments old and broken, its structure unstable, and he did not get along well with its director, Pieter Johannes Uylenbroek, who was uninterested in practical astronomy. Kaiser borrowed a telescope and conducted better observations at home.

T. Hockey (ed.), Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers, DOI 10.1007/978-1-4419-9917-7, # Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

K

1152

Kaiser earned his bachelor’s degree in mathematics and physics in 1831; the same year he married Aletta Rebecca Maria Barkey. The couple had one daughter and four sons, of whom one died in infancy. The third son, Pieter Jan Kaiser, later became an astronomer and succeeded his father as instrument controller for the Dutch Navy. Better astronomical times were in store for Kaiser in 1835, when he received an honorary doctorate from the University of Leiden for his work on Halley’s comet (IP/Halley). This study included an improved prediction of the comet’s perihelion passage and a highly valued popular book on the subject. Kaiser’s recognition was followed by his appointment as lecturer and director of the observatory in 1837, extraordinary professor of astronomy (the first Dutch professoriate in astronomy) in 1840, and ordinary (full) professor in 1845. Thus, Kaiser found himself in a position to make the most necessary changes to the observatory. He improved the construction of the building and purchased some new, high quality instruments, including a 6-in. Merz refractor. He also developed a master plan for what he called the “revival of Dutch astronomy.” Kaiser’s notion encompassed (1) promotion of the practice of astronomy at Leiden University by providing better education, (2) instruction of the general public by means of popular works, and (3) increasing international awareness of Dutch astronomical research through publication. Kaiser’s long-term efforts in this enterprise made him the key figure in the professionalization of nineteenth-century Dutch astronomy. A series of fundamental observations was commenced in 1840. Kaiser concentrated on positional astronomy and continued this as the observatory’s policy throughout his life. He was the first to introduce statistical methods and precision measurement in Dutch astronomy, and wrote several works on the use of the micrometer and the determination of the “personal equation” of the observer. Kaiser also became known for his lectures in popular astronomy and his many articles in

Kaiser, Frederik

popular magazines. His writings were often accompanied by complaints about the state of astronomy in the Netherlands, which helped to foster public opinion for the science of astronomy. In that context, Kaiser’s most appreciated work was De Sterrenhemel (1844–1845), an overview of astronomical theory and practice for the layman. It appeared in two volumes and four editions; parts of it were translated into German, Danish, and French. Kaiser’s public persona was of considerable benefit in raising the funds for a new observatory. He had long planned a new, up-to-date building, based on models from Germany and the Pulkovo Observatory (Saint Petersburg, Russia). The Dutch government, however, was not eager to support his initiative. After many years of fruitless lobbying, a national fundraising campaign for Kaiser’s observatory was inaugurated. It was successful, and when the government provided the remaining funds, a fully equipped observatory building was finished (1860), the first of its kind in the Netherlands. Instruments included a stateof-the-art meridian circle by Pistor and Martins and a 7-in. Merz refractor. The staff was enlarged with an extra observer and some calculators. Kaiser then initiated an extensive observational program. From 1864 to 1868, the fundamental parameters of some 180 stars were measured, followed by 202 stars for the Europ€ aische Gradmessung (European Geodetic Survey). The results were published in 1868. Further work at the observatory was done on micrometer measurements of binary stars and planetary diameters, comets, and the rotation period of Mars. Between 1870 and 1876, the observatory participated in the observation of zones for the star catalog of the Astronomische Gesellschaft. Kaiser had occupied astronomy-related functions as supervisor of the geodetic survey of the Dutch East Indies (1844–1857), as the founding director of the institute that controlled the calibration of instruments for the Dutch Navy (1858), and as a Dutch delegate and board member in the Europ€ aische Gradmessung (1867). He was a member of the Royal Dutch Academy of Sciences, the Holland Society of Sciences, the Royal

Kaluza, Theodor Franz Eduard

Astronomical Society, the Prussian Academy of Science, and the Astronomische Gesellschaft. In 1845, he was awarded the Dutch knighthood. Kaiser’s health had always been precarious. After a severe illness in 1867, he had to abandon his nightly observational routine. The death of his wife in 1872 dealt him a second blow, from which he did not recover. Kaiser was succeeded as director of the observatory by ▶ Hendrik van de Sande Bakhuyzen. Many a scientist of the next generation was stimulated by Kaiser’s lectures. Among his students we find the astronomers Van de Sande Bakhuyzen, ▶ Martin Hoek, and Jean Abraham Chretien Oudemans, who completed their doctoral research at Leiden Observatory. Also inspired by Kaiser’s teachings were ▶ Hendrik Lorentz, Johannes Bosscha (later director of the Delft Polytechnical Institute), and chemist Johannes Diderik van der Waals. Thus, Kaiser initiated the dissemination of a new level of precision in Dutch science. Craters on the Moon and Mars are named for Kaiser. His papers may be found at the Leiden Observatory and Leiden University Library, the Archief van de Rijkscommissie voor Geodesie (Delft), and the Instituut voor Maritieme Historie (the Hague).

Selected References Minnaert, M. G. J. (1973). “Kaiser, Frederik.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 209–210. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Oudemans, J. A. C. (1875). “Levensschets van Frederik Kaiser.” Jaarboek der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen: 39–104. van de Sande Bakhuyzen, H. G. (1911). “Frederik Kaiser.” In Nieuw Nederlandsch biografisch woordenboek, edited by P. C. Molhuysen and P. J. Blok, pp. 1239–1241. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff. van Geer, P. (1872). Frederik Kaiser: Een woord van herinnering, uitgesproken bij de heropening der academisch lessen. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff. W. T. L. (1873). “Professor Frederik Kaiser.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 33: 209–211.

1153

K

Kaiser, Friedrich ▶ Kaiser, Frederik

Kallipos ▶ Callippus of Cyzikus

Kaluza, Theodor Franz Eduard Ian T. Durham Saint Anselm College, Manchester, NH, USA

K Born Ratibor (Racibo´rz, Poland), 9 November 1885 Died Go¨ttingen, (Germany), 19 January 1954 German mathematician Theodor Kaluza, together with ▶ Oskar Klein, gave his name to the Kaluza-Klein theories of physics in which space-time has five dimensions rather than the four of ▶ Albert Einstein’s equations of general relativity. Kaluza studied at Ko¨nigsberg (now Kaliningrad, Russia), receiving a doctorate in 1910 for a thesis on a mathematical topic called Tschirnhaus transformations. He remained at Ko¨nigsberg as a Privatdozent (lecturer) for nearly 20 years (a very long period in this lowlevel position) until, at the urging of Einstein, the University of Kiel appointed him to a minor professorship. Kaluza finally became full professor at the University of Go¨ttingen in 1935, dying very shortly before he would have retired. The idea for which Kaluza was remembered appeared in a 1919 letter to Einstein, in which he suggested writing the field equations of general relativity in five dimensions. The new equations contained within them Einstein’s original

K

1154

four-dimensional theory plus a new piece that turned out to be exactly the theory of light (electromagnetism) of ▶ James Maxwell. The fifth dimension was in the shape of a cylinder, assumed by Kaluza to be of macroscopic size. Two years later, Einstein communicated the paper for publication. It was widely thought to be too mathematical to have any connection with the real world. In 1926, Klein heard of Kaluza’s work from Wolfgang Pauli, and, while describing it as a shipwreck, really made only one major change. The cylindrical fifth dimension was curled up in a ball the size of the Planck length, 1033 cm, making it undetectable. But this meant that it did not violate any experiments. The outcome of this work was a new branch of field theory known as the Kaluza-Klein theory. The Kaluza-Klein theory held some interest in theoretical physics for a few years, but by the 1930s the theory was dead at least temporarily. A renaissance occurred in the early 1980s when many physicists realized the power multidimensional analysis held. What they did was to extend Kaluza-Klein theory to N dimensions allowing them to add symmetry to hyperspace. When these N dimensions were curled up like the fifth dimension in the KaluzaKlein theory the celebrated Yang-Mills field of the Standard Model of particle physics popped out of the equations! This marked the beginning of the very active fields of superstring theory and supergravity. Thus Kaluza’s legacy lives on today in these theories as well as in the KaluzaKlein theory itself. A version with N ¼ 11 became quite popular near the turn of the century. The lowest-mass Kaluza-Klein particle is a possible dark matter candidate.

Selected References Kaku, Michio (1994). Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey through Parallel Universes, Time Warps, and the 10th Dimension. New York: Doubleday. Kaluza, Theodor (1921). Sitzungsberichte Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften 96: 69. Whittaker, Sir Edmund (1953). A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity. Vol. 2, The Modern Theories. New York: Harper.

Kama¯l al-Dı¯n al-Turkma¯nı¯

Kama¯l al-Dı¯n al-Turkma¯nı¯: Kama¯l al-Dı¯n Muhammad ibn Ahmad ˙ Mustafa¯ ibnҁUthma¯˙n ibn Ibra¯hı¯m ibn ˙ ¯˙ al-Ma¯ridı¯nı¯ al-Turkma¯nı¯ al-Hanafı ˙ I˙hsan Fazlıog˘lu Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

Born Cairo, (Egypt), 1314 Died probably G€ ulistan (Guliston, Uzbekistan), after 1354 Kama¯l al-Dı¯n al-Turkma¯nı¯ was one of several writers who wrote a commentary to ▶ Jaghmı¯nı¯’s al-Mulakhkhaṣ fı¯ҁ ilm al-hay’a al-bası¯ṭa. Most of his other writings are in the fields of history and fiqh and uṣu¯l (Islamic law and jurisprudence). There is much confusion regarding his education, life, and date and place of death. However, we do know that Kama¯l alDı¯n al-Turkma¯nı¯ was born and spent some time in Cairo (where he undoubtedly benefited from the scientific environment), and that he also lived much of his life in Mardin (now in southeastern Turkey). He came from a family that was actively engaged in scientific work; most likely he was first educated by his father Ahmad, known as Ibn ˙ al-Turkma¯nı¯, who was an astronomer who had written a commentary on ▶ Kharaqı¯’s astronomical treatise al-Tabṣira fı¯ҁ ilm al-hay’a. Kama¯l al-Dı¯n al-Turkma¯nı¯’s Commentary to the Mulakhkhaṣ was written in September 1354 in G€ulistan/Saray, the capital city of the Golden Horde State, and was offered to Ja¯nı¯ Beg Khan (reigned: 1349–1352); the work is a significant indication of how widespread and established the Islamic scientific heritage had come to be. The Commentary was used as a textbook for studying ҁ ilm al-haya (theoretical astronomy) throughout the Ottoman Empire and Persia for many years. At least ten copies of the work can be found today in Turkey’s manuscript libraries (the oldest copy being Atıf Efendi Library MS 1707/2, 11b-223a). In addition, Fası¯h al-Dı¯n Muhammad al-Ku¯hista¯nı¯ ˙ (died: 1530), who was a student of ▶ ҁAlı¯ al-Qu¯shjı¯, wrote a supercommentary on Kama¯l

Kamien´ski, Michal

al-Dı¯n al-Turkma¯nı¯’s Commentary. This represents an important indication of the continuous tradition of studying hay’a within the Samarqand school of mathematicians and astronomers.

Selected References Bag˘dadlı, ˙Ismail Pas¸a (1955). Hadiyyat al-ҁ a¯rifı¯n. Vol. 2, Istanbul: Milli Eg-ition Baliaylign Yayinlare, p. 157. Brockelmann, Carl (1937). Geschichte der arabischen Litteratur. Suppl. 1, Leiden: E. J. Brill, p. 865. Ibn Qutlu¯bugha¯, al-Qa¯sim ibnҁAbd Alla¯h (1962). Ta¯j altara¯jim. Baghdad, p. 44. Ka¯tib Cˇelebı¯ (1943). Kashf al-zunu¯nҁ an asa¯mı¯ al-kutub ˙ wa-’l-funu¯n. Vol. 2, cols. 1749, 1819, 2018. Istanbul: Milli Eg-ition Baliaylign Yayinlare. Kahha¯lah,ҁUmar Rida¯ Muҁ jam al-mu’allifı¯n. Vol. 1: 309; Vol. 8: 288. Beirut. Rosenfeld, B. A. and Ekmeleddin Ihsanog˘lu (2003). Mathematicians, Astronomers, and Other Scholars of Islamic Civilization and Their Works (7th-19th c.). Istanbul: IRCICA. p. 252.

Kamala¯kara Narahari B. Achar University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA

Born Va¯ra¯nası¯, (Uttar Pradesh, India), ˙ circa 1608 Kamala¯kara was born into a learned family of scholars from Golagra¯ma, a village on the northern bank of the river Goda¯varı¯. Kamala¯kara ˙ ha, himself a scholar. was the second son of Nrsim ˙ His family later moved to Va¯ra¯nası¯. Many mem˙ bers of Kamala¯kara’s family were illustrious astronomers, many of whom were also original discoverers. All of them have contributed to the literature on astronomy. Kamala¯kara learnt astronomy from his elder brother Diva¯kara, who compiled five works on astronomy. Kamala¯kara cites from Diva¯kara’s works. Kamala¯kara’s major work, Siddha¯ntatattvaviveka, was compiled in Va¯ra¯nası¯ at about ˙ 1658 and has been published by Sudha¯kara Dvivedi in the Va¯ra¯nası¯ series. This work consists ˙

1155

K

of 13 chapters in 3,024 verses in different meters and treats such topics as mean positions and true positions of planets, shadows, elevation of the Moon’s cusps, rising and settings, eclipses, etc. Although this text borrows heavily from Su¯ryasiddha¯nta, it contains some things not found in other texts. For example, Kamala¯kara states that the pole star we see at present is not exactly at the pole. He has assumed a value of 60 units for the radius of the Earth and gives values for sines at 1 intervals. Kamala¯kara also gives a table for finding the right ascension of a planet from its longitude. According to D. Pingree, he presents the only Sanskrit treatise on geometrical optics. His other works include Séṣava¯sana¯ and Saurava¯sana¯. Kamala¯kara was bitterly opposed to Munı¯s´vara, the author of Siddha¯ntasa¯rvabhauma.

Selected References Kamala¯kara (1885). Siddha¯ntatattvaviveka, edited with notes by Sudha¯kara Dvivedi and Muralidhar Jha. Benaras Sanskrit Series, Vol. 1. Benaras.; 2nd ed. 1924–1935. (Another edition is due to Gan˜ga¯dhara Mis´ra, Lucknow, 1929.) Pingree, David. Census of the Exact Sciences in Sanskrit. Series A. Vol. 2 (1971): 21a-23a; Vol. 3 (1976): 18a; Vol. 4 (1981): 33a-33b; Vol. 5 (1994): 22a. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. — (1981). Jyotihsá¯stra. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. ˙

Kamien´ski, Michal Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Born Russia, 24 November 1880 Died 18 April 1973 Michal Kamien´ski trained in astronomy at Pulkovo Observatory near Saint Petersburg. He went to work at the observatory of Warsaw University, eventually becoming its director. In 1944 the Nazis burned the observatory.

K

K

1156

Kanka

In 1933 Kamien´ski pointed out that the mean motions of comets both increase and decrease with time. Thus, changes in comet orbits could not be accounted for by a resisting medium. Kamien´ski also was interested in chronology.

Selected Reference Anon. (1974). Michael Kamiesn´ki. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 15: 48.

Kanka Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Flourished Ujjian, (Madhya Pradesh), India, circa 770 According to tradition, Kanka was brought to Baghdad by the caliph to teach the Arabs Hindu astronomy. Kanka carried with him the Bra¯hmasphuṭasiddha¯nta of ▶ Brahmagupta.

Selected Reference Srinivasiengar, C. N. (1967). The History of Ancient Indian Mathematics. Calcutta: The World Press, Ltd.

Kant, Immanuel J€urgen Hamel Universit€at Landau, Landau in der Pfalz, Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany

Born Ko¨nigsberg (Kaliningrad, Russia), 22 April 1724 Died Ko¨nigsberg (Kaliningrad, Russia), 12 February 1804

Kant, Immanuel. Courtesy of History of Science Collections, University of Oklahoma Libraries, Small Portraits Collection

Immanuel Kant, one of the greatest philosophers of modern times, was one of the first to envision a Newtonian cosmogony. Born into a family of artisans, Kant studied philosophy, mathematics, and theology at the University of Ko¨nigsberg and began his career as a private tutor. In 1755 he received his habilitation (higher doctorate) from Ko¨nigsberg where he became a lecturer and later, in 1770, professor of logic and metaphysics. One of the founders of classical German philosophy, Kant had an enduring influence on the development of European philosophy from Johann Fichte to ▶ Georg Hegel and Karl Marx. His most famous works are his “Critiques”: Critique of Pure Reason (1781), Critique of Practical Reason (1788), and Critique of Judgment (1790). Kant was concerned with scientific problems well into his old age. The most interesting of his writings for astronomy, however, are those he composed up to 1755: on “The True Estimation of Living Forces,” on “Whether the Rotation of

Kant, Immanuel

the Earth Has Undergone Change over Time,” on “Whether the Earth Is Growing Old,” and finally, the Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens: Or Essay on the Constitution and Mechanical Origin of the Entire Universe, Derived from Newtonian Principles. Right from the first of these, Kant was beginning to work out his “dynamic” view of nature. This view developed further into his ideas on the opposition of contrary forces and also, since it posited a fundamental bond between matter and motion, contradicted some of the theological conceptions of eighteenth century theism. The earliest application of these ideas led Kant to consider the dynamic interrelationship within the Earth-Moon system. In particular, the Earth’s spheroidal shape pointed to the conclusion that before it rose out of “chaos,” Earth had existed in a fluid state. Development and decline are a natural process. From the start, accordingly, Kant was concerned about explaining the Earth in terms of not only its being but also its becoming. In order to determine the origin and evolution of the planetary system as presented in the Universal Natural History, Kant first considered its structure. The stability of the system is ensured by means of the critical opposition of gravitation and centrifugal force – a claim that indicates what Kant means by the phrase in his subtitle derived from Newtonian Principles. And determining the structure of the planetary system offered in turn the possibility of addressing its history. Thus, like ▶ Georges Leclerc (Comte de Buffon), Kant proceeded by deriving a system’s development from its structure, on the theory that a common cause must have given rise to these phenomena. According to Kant, the path of development inscribed in these structures began in a state in which the primal matter of Sun, Moon, planets, etc. was so dispersed that it filled the entire universal space. But because matter itself is active, the cosmic state of rest lasted only momentarily. The elements have the inherent capacity to set each other in motion;

1157

K

they are their own source of life. Matter itself instantly strives to evolve. The dispersed elements of a denser sort, by means of attractive force effective spherically about them, draw to themselves all matter of lesser specific gravity. In this process, according to Kant, the repulsive force prevents a complete implosion. Thus, in the center of this cloud, there forms an aggregation of matter, from which the Sun came into existence. Other particles of matter striving toward the center collided with each other and, so diverted into other paths, formed the planets and (by an extension of the same process) the planetary satellites. Kant’s postulating such long stretches of development not only contradicted his readers’ conceptions of biblical creation but also entailed “a process spanning millions of years and centuries, before the developed state of nature in which we find ourselves achieved the perfection it has now arrived at.” Indeed, Kant presumes that the process whereby the worlds came into being is still carrying on, for many of the heavenly bodies have not yet arrived at their states of perfection. In addition, Kant applied the Solar System’s principles of origin to the sidereal realm, asserting that the stars are nothing but “suns and centers of similar systems.” Thus, he succeeded in drawing a connection between the Solar System and the stars, which led still further outward to the Milky Way. This Kant explained as a disklike, lens-shaped cluster of stars, with individual stars concentrated along the plane of the galactic equator – analogous to the Solar System. This proposal had already been put forward by ▶ Thomas Wright in 1750, and Kant himself identifies Wright’s work, which likewise rests upon Newtonian physics, as having powerfully inspired a number of his ideas. However, Kant took one step further out into the cosmos, postulating a similarity between our stellar system and other such cosmic structures, namely, the nebulae. In this manner, “the entire universe, the totality of nature,” presents itself “as a single system held together by the forces of attraction and repulsion.”

K

K

1158

Kant was aware of the broad significance of his proposed natural history of objects and systems in the cosmos. He posited his ideas in contradistinction to those of ▶ Isaac Newton, who “claimed that the hand of God has established this order directly, without the application of the forces of nature.” In opposition, Kant selfconfidently declares: “I relish the enjoyment, unaided by arbitrary fictions, of seeing a wellordered Totality producing itself under the direction of thoroughgoing laws of motion – a Totality so resembling the one we now behold that I cannot help but prefer it to those fictions.” Expressed in these words is a novel religious conception, the new theology of Deism, in whose framework the influence of a personal God upon the unfolding of the world is considered superfluous and inoperative, with God being granted merely the function of first mover of the laws of nature. In an appendix to the Universal Natural History Kant dealt extensively with the muchdiscussed question concerning other inhabited worlds. Kant views the origin of life as a product of the evolution of the heavenly bodies themselves, not as an independent act of creation or as a secondary phenomenon. Nevertheless, he also recognized that life is bound up with particular external conditions that do not obtain everywhere nor at all times. Life forms on other planets would develop in a manner corresponding to whatever conditions prevail there, especially as these relate to a planet’s distance from the sun, the period of its rotation, and so on. Accordingly, there could be life forms whose state of development far exceeds, or has not yet reached, the level of humankind. Kant knew that he lacked decisive proof for his proposal concerning cosmic evolution. On the other hand, his work demonstrates what results a paucity of empirical data, combined with fruitful intuition, can achieve results that precede strict scientific proof by decades. So at first, Kant’s theory remained just a scientific hypothesis, which nevertheless attracted great attention from astronomers, particularly at the end of the eighteenth century. In the period around 1800, the research of

Kapteyn, Jacobus Cornelius

▶ Pierre de Laplace and ▶ William Herschel strongly reinforced this reception. About 1870, ▶ Friedrich Zo¨llner, among others, drew assistance from Kant in the working out of his astrophysically based theory concerning the evolution of the heavenly bodies. Acknowledgments Translated by Dennis Danielson.

Selected References Hamel, J€ urgen (1979). Zur Entstehungs-und Wirkungsgeschichte der Kantischen Kosmogonie. Mitteilungen der Archenhold-Sternwarte. Vol. 6, no. 130. BerlinTreptow: Archenhold-Sternwarte. — (1993). “Wissenschaft auf Abwegen? Ideologie und Wissenschaft in der Wirkungsgeschichte der Kantschen Kosmogonie bis um 1800.” In GrenzUberschreitung: Wandlungen der Geisteshaltung, dargestellt an Beispielen aus Geographie und Wissenschaftshistorie, Theologie, Religions-und Erziehungswissenschaft, edited by Heyno Kattenstedt, pp. 33–50. Bochum: Universitaetsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer. Hoskin, Michael A. (1963). William Herschel and the Construction of the Heavens. London: Oldbourne. Kant, Immanuel (2005): Allgemeine Naturgeschichte und Theorie des Himmels. Edited by J€ urgen Hamel. Frankfurt: Deutsch (Ostwalds Klassiker der exakten Wissenschaften; 12). € Zo¨llner, Johann Karl Friedrich (1872). Uber die Natur der Cometen: Beitr€ age zur Geschichte und Theorie der Erkenntniss. Leipzig: Wilhelm Engelmann, esp. pp. 426–482.

Kapteyn, Jacobus Cornelius Adriaan Blaauw Groningen, The Netherlands

Born Barneveld, the Netherlands, 19 January 1851 Died Amsterdam, the Netherlands, 18 June 1922

Adriaan Blaauw: deceased.


Kapteyn, Jacobus Cornelius. Courtesy of Kapteyn Astronomical Institute of the University of Groningen, The Netherlands

Dutch astronomer Jacobus Kapteyn made his most important contributions to the study of stellar statistics, i.e., the determination of the numbers and types of stars in different parts of space and their motions. His name is attached to the Kapteyn selected areas (particular directions in the sky that are informative for studying stellar statistics) and to the so-called Kapteyn universe (his reconstruction of the stellar distribution, which put the Sun very near the center of a rather small galaxy). The former are still used. Kapteyn was the son of Gerrit J. and Elisabeth C. (neé Koomans) Kapteyn, who conducted a school for boys. Jacobus married Catharina Elise Kalshoven. They had a son and two daughters, one of whom married ▶ Ejnar Hertzsprung. At the age of 16, Kapteyn passed the entrance examination for the University of Utrecht. There he studied mathematics and physics, receiving a PhD (magna cum laude) in 1875 with a thesis on the vibration of a membrane. Kapteyn accepted a staff position at Leiden Observatory in 1875. As a result, he made astronomy a career; he was appointed in 1878 to the newly instituted professorship of astronomy and

1159

K

theoretical mechanics at the University of Groningen. Kapteyn created, and became director of, the Astronomical Laboratory at Groningen in 1896 and held both positions until his retirement in 1921. Kapteyn’s major contributions were in the domain of galactic research. His work presented the first major step after those of ▶ William and ▶ John Herschel. At the time that Kapteyn initiated his ambitious, systematic program, the execution of which would become his life’s work, the problem of the space distribution of the stars was still tantamount to the problem of the structure of the Universe. It was not known yet that the galaxy was only one of the countless stellar systems that populate the universe. Milestones in Kapteyn’s research were the discovery, in 1904, of the so-called star streams, the determination of the stellar luminosity function, the study of isolated, loose groups of massive, hot B-stars, and the model of the Galaxy presented in his article “First Attempt at a Theory of the Arrangement and Motion of the Sidereal System” (published in the Astrophysical Journal of May 1922). Even before he made his discovery of the star streams, Kapteyn had accomplished a major reference work known as the Cape Photographic Durchmusterung [CPD] in collaboration with ▶ David Gill, director of the Royal Observatory in Cape Town, South Africa. Since the University of Groningen (in spite of Kapteyn’s request) could not provide him with a telescope, he offered to Gill to undertake at Groningen the measurement of stellar positions on photographic plates taken by Gill. Their purpose was to provide for the southern sky the data on stellar positions and brightness, which for the northern sky had been measured by visual – not photographic – means several decades earlier by ▶ Friedrich Argelander at Bonn Observatory and known as the Bonner Durchmusterung. For these measurements, Kapteyn devised an unconventional method using a theodolite, thus obtaining equatorial coordinates directly and skipping the intermediate phase of rectangular coordinates. The CPD, published in three volumes in the years 1896–1900 after 13 years of collaboration,

K

K

1160

contains 454,875 stars between the South Celestial Pole and the declination 18 . This project may be regarded as the first step toward the establishment of Kapteyn’s unique astronomical laboratory that soon would gain international fame. As a first step in the estimation of the distances of the stars, a conventional method used the stars’ proper motions, i.e., their displacements on the sky. A large proper motion is a strong indicator of proximity of the star to the Earth; small proper motions generally indicate remoteness. Kapteyn applied this method using improved proper motions partly measured at his laboratory. This led to a major discovery: It had been assumed, more or less tacitly, by earlier investigators that stellar motions are similar to molecular motions in that they show no preferential direction. Kapteyn discovered that this is not so: A preferential direction exists which he interpreted as evidence for relative motion between two intermingled stellar populations. The full understanding of this phenomenon came in the 1920s in the context of the dynamical theory of the notation of the galaxy. For the exploration of the structure and dimensions of the galaxy, Kapteyn devised statistical methods using large numbers of stars with known apparent magnitudes, colors, proper motions, and trigonometric parallaxes. In order to arrive at an unbiased yet sufficiently limited sample, he proposed a scheme called The Plan of Selected Areas, according to which these data would be assembled for all stars within the limits of observation in 206 small areas evenly distributed on the sky. The proposal met with considerable response, so that eventually 43 observatories collaborated in one way or another. After Kapteyn’s death, Commission 32 of the International Astronomical Union was created for the supervision and extension of the project. Kapteyn’s ultimate aim was the determination of the stellar density distribution in the galaxy. Observational data required were the numbers of stars at different apparent magnitudes in different directions, combined with the distribution of their proper motions. The approach was essentially numerical; no model was presupposed. An important intermediate quantity to be determined


was the “Luminosity Function,” which describes the distribution of the intrinsic luminosities of the stars contained within a given volume of space. It has proven to be a most important piece of information for the study of the so-called Initial Luminosity Function, the distribution of stellar luminosities, and hence of stellar masses – at the time of their birth. According to Kapteyn’s model, arrived at around the year 1921, the Galaxy showed a disk-like structure with the Sun located close to the center. Its greatest extension was in the direction of the Milky Way (about 30,000 light years). Its smallest dimension (about 5,000 light years) was in the directions of the galactic poles. The latter result, which might be called the “thickness” of the galaxy, has been confirmed and refined by later authors including Kapteyn’s pupil ▶ Jan Oort. However, Kapteyn’s results for the position of the Sun and the extent of the system in the directions perpendicular to the pole have been found to be spurious because he neglected the absorption of light by interstellar matter. Kapteyn was aware of the problem of the possible existence of such matter and vigorously pursued methods to identify it through its reddening effect on the colors of distant stars but without conclusive results. Kapteyn received numerous honors from scientific societies and universities all over the world. He was a celebrated lecturer to audiences of all kinds. At the invitation of ▶ George Hale, founder of the Mount Wilson Observatory, Kapteyn paid annual visits of several months duration to Mount Wilson until these were interrupted by World War I. He firmly believed it to be the duty of scientists to bridge gaps caused by political developments and was deeply shocked when, upon termination of the war, the Central Powers were excluded from newly created international organizations. The archives of the Kapteyn Institute of Groningen University contain notebooks used by Kapteyn in the years 1907–1922, in which he jotted down quick calculations and drafts for articles and letters. Also kept here are copies of the correspondence of Kapteyn with leading astronomers all over the world.

Ka¯shı¯: Ghiya¯th (al-Milla wa-) al-Dı¯n Jamshı¯d ibn Masҁu¯d ibn Mahmu¯d al-Ka¯shı¯ [al-Ka¯sha¯nı¯] ˙

Selected References Blaauw, Adriaan (1973). “Kapteyn, Jacobus Cornelius.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 235–240. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Blaauw, Adriaan and T. Elvius (1965). “The Plan of Selected Areas.” In Galactic Structure, edited by Adriaan Blaauw and Maarten Schmidt, pp. 589–597. Vol. 5 of Stars and Stellar Systems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. De Sitter, W. (1932). “Life-work of J. C. Kapteyn.” In Kosmos. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 52–77 of Chap. 4. Eddington, A. S. (1922). “Jacobus Cornelius Kapteyn.” Observatory 45: 261–265. Gill, David and J. C. Kapteyn (1896–1900). “The Cape Photographic Durchmusterung.” Annals of the Cape Observatory 3–5. Kapteyn, J. C. (1875). “Onderzoek der trillende platte vliezen” (Investigation of the vibration of a membrane). Ph.D. thesis, University of Utrecht. — (1914). “On the Individual Parallaxes of the Brighter Galactic Helium Stars in the Southern Hemisphere.” Astrophysical Journal 40: 43–126. — (1918). “On Parallaxes and Motion of the Brighter Galactic Helium Stars between Galactic Longitudes 150 and 216 .” Astrophysical Journal 47: 104–133, 146–178, 255–282. — (1922). “First Attempt at a Theory of the Arrangement and Motion of the Sidereal System.” Astrophysical Journal 55: 302–328. Kapteyn, J. C. and P. J. van Rhijn (1920). “On the Distribution of the Stars in Space Especially in the High Galactic Latitudes.” Astrophysical Journal 52: 23–38. Macpherson, Hector (1933). Makers of Astronomy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, Chap. 8. Pannekoek, A. (1922). Naturwissenschaften 10: 967–980. (An extensive obituary.) Paul, E. Robert. (1986). “J. C. Kapteyn and the Early Twentieth-Century Universe”. Journal for the History of Astronomy 17: 155–182. — (1993). The Life and Works of J. C. Kapteyn. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. (An annotated but not fully reliable translation of the biography written in Dutch by Kapteyn’s daughter Henrietta Hertzsprung-Kapteyn.) Pickering, Edward C., J. C. Kapteyn, and P. J. van Rhijn (1918–1924). “Durchmusterung of Selected Areas.” Annals of the Astronomical Observatory of Harvard College 101–103. Seares, F. H., J. C. Kapteyn, and P. J. van Rhijn (1930). Mount Wilson Catalogue of Photographic Magnitudes in Selected Areas 1–139. Washington, DC: Carnegie Institution of Washington. Van der Kruit, P. C. and K. van Berkel (eds.) (2000). The Legacy of J. C. Kapteyn: Studies on Kapteyn and the Development of Modern Astronomy. Dordrecht:

1161

K

Kluwer Academic Publishers. (A symposium report that contains a wide range of articles on Kapteyn’s life and work.) Von der Pahlen, E. (1937). Lehrbuch der Stellarstatistik. Leipzig: J. A. Barth. (Chap. 8 contains an excellent account of the interrelation between the various projects carried out by Kapteyn.)

Ka¯shı¯: Ghiya¯th (al-Milla wa-) al-Dı¯n Jamshı¯d ibn Masҁu¯d ibn Mahmu¯d ˙ al-Ka¯shı¯ [al-Ka¯sha¯nı¯] Petra G. Schmidl Institut f€ur Orient und Asienwissenschaften Abteilung Islamwissenschaft, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms Univerist€at Bonn, Bonn, Germany

Died Samarqand, (Uzbekistan), possibly 22 June 1429 al-Ka¯shı¯ was one of the most accomplished and prolific scientists at the Samarqand Observatory, which itself was one of the preeminent scientific institutions of the fifteenth century. al-Ka¯shı¯ was born in Ka¯sha¯n in Northern Iran and had long worked on astronomical problems before finding a patron. Despite being a physician (as he mentions at the end of his Risa¯la dar sharh-i a¯la¯t-i ˙ raṣd), he tells us in his Zı¯j (astronomical handbook with tables) that he had lived in poverty in various cities of Central Iran, mostly in his hometown. al-Ka¯shı¯ first found patronage in Herat at the court of Sha¯h Rukh, son of Tı¯mu¯r and father of ▶ Ulugh Beg. On 2 June 1406, al-Ka¯shı¯ was back in Ka¯sha¯n, where he witnessed an eclipse of the Moon, as he did also in 1407 as well as in 1416 at which time he presented his book Nuzhat al-hada¯ʾiq. Presumably between 1417 and 1419, ˙ Ulugh Beg invited al-Ka¯shı¯ to Samarqand. It was most likely in 1420 that he made the long journey north to Samarqand, where he joined the scientific circle at the residence of the prince. Under Ulugh Beg’s sponsorship, al-Ka¯shı¯ finally obtained a secure and honorable position, becoming the prince’s closest collaborator and

K

K

1162


consultant. In the introduction of Ulugh Beg’s Zı¯j, al-Ka¯shı¯ is singled out for praise. When the observatory was founded in 1420, al-Ka¯shı¯ took part in its construction, organization, and provision, as well as in the preparation of Ulugh Beg’s Zı¯j. During this time, he traveled with the royal retinue to Bukha¯ra¯, as he mentions in the letters to his father. al-Ka¯shı¯, the most prominent of the scholars associated with Ulugh Beg’s learned staff, spent the rest of his life as a distinguished scientist in Samarqand, where he died, leaving incomplete the observations required for Ulugh Beg’s Zı¯j. Although al-Ka¯shı¯ wrote a number of important mathematical treatises, this article will concentrate on his astronomical works. It is worth mentioning, though, that he was a remarkable computational mathematician whose calculations of sin 1 (correct to 18 decimal places) and p (correct to 16 decimal places) were to remain unsurpassed for some time. Probably while living in Ka¯sha¯n, al-Ka¯shı¯ wrote two minor astronomical treatises. The first, entitled either Sullam al-sama¯ʾ or Risa¯la kama¯liyya, dealt with the sizes and distances of the celestial bodies. Completed on 1 March 1407, it is dedicated to a vizier named Kama¯l al-Dı¯n Mahmu¯d and preserved in several ˙ copies. The second is the Mukhtaṣar dar ҁilm-al hayʾat, a compendium on astronomy written in 1410/1411 for a certain Sultan Iskandar, probably a nephew of Sha¯h Rukh and a cousin of Ulugh Beg. It is preserved in two Persian manuscripts in London and Yazd. In 1413/1414 al-Ka¯shı¯ completed his Zı¯j-i Kha¯qa¯nı¯, which was either dedicated to Sha¯h Rukh, for al-Ka¯shı¯ was staying in Herat in this time, or to Ulugh Beg, for he says in the Zı¯j-i Kha¯qa¯nı¯ that he would not have been able to finish his work without the support of the prince. al-Ka¯shı¯’s Zı¯j, preserved in several Persian copies, is organized in six treatises and starts with an introduction in which al-Ka¯shı¯ pays respect to ▶ Naṣı¯r al-Dı¯n al-Tu¯sı¯ but expresses ˙ his dissatisfaction with much of al-Tu¯sı¯’s I¯lkha¯nı¯ ˙ Zı¯j that al-Ka¯shı¯ proposes to correct. The first treatise of al-Ka¯shı¯’s Zı¯j contains the chronological section with a description of the common

calendars in use, the second the mathematical section with a presentation of the standard trigonometric and astronomical functions, the third and fourth the spherical astronomy section with procedures and solutions of problems in spherical astronomy including tables, the fifth different solutions for the determination of the ascendant, and the sixth astrological material. Each treatise includes an introduction with a glossary of technical terms and two chapters with solutions, computations, and proofs. The tables computed by al-Ka¯shı¯ use pure sexagesimals; the sine tables give four sexagesimal places for each minute of arc. al-Ka¯shı¯ also mentions some observational instruments such as the mural quadrant and the revolving parallactic ruler, seemingly the “perfect instrument” of ▶ al-ҁUrd¯ı. ˙ In January 1416, presumably in Ka¯sha¯n, al-Ka¯shı¯ composed by order of Sultan Iskandar, possibly the Qara¯-Qoyunlu king, the Risa¯la dar sharh-i a¯la¯t-i raṣd, a commentary on ˙ observational instruments, preserved in two Persian manuscripts in Leiden and Tehran. Most of the instruments described by al-Ka¯shı¯ are mentioned by ▶ Ptolemy, and/or listed in al-ҁUrd¯ı, such as the parallactic ruler for the mea˙ surement of zenith distances, an armillary sphere as well as an equinoctial, and a solstitial armilla. Further, he describes the Fakhrı¯ sextant, used for the measurement of the altitude of stars. This instrument, invented by ▶ al-Khujandı¯ about 1000 in Rayy, was also described by ▶ alMarra¯kushı¯ and confirmed by ▶ al-Bı¯ru¯nı¯. al-Ka¯shı¯’s treatise demonstrates clearly that he had some knowledge of the observatory in Mara¯gha. His work represents a connecting link between these two great centers of medieval astronomical activity, centers whose influence reached at least as far as Istanbul to the west, and China and India to the east, if not to the earliest European observatories. In the Nuzhat al-hada¯ʾiq al-Ka¯shı¯ describes ˙ two instruments that he invented, the “plate of heavens” and the “plate of conjunctions.” The first version of this text that is preserved in an Arabic manuscript in London was finished in Ka¯sha¯n on 10 February 1416. The second version was revised in Samarqand in June 1426. It is only


known in a lithographic edition of some of al-Ka¯shı¯’s works, printed in Tehran 1888/1889. The “plate of heavens” is a planetary equatorium, a computing instrument to find the true position of a planet, an alternative to lengthy numerical computations by means of reducing an essentially three-dimensional problem to a succession of two-dimensional operations. al-Ka¯shı¯’s “plate of heavens” is the only example recovered from the lands of eastern Islam, and moreover, the most compact, which includes a method for the determination of planetary longitudes as well as latitudes. His “plate of conjunctions” is a simple device for performing linear interpolation, a mechanical application of elementary geometry, for ascertaining the time of day at which expected planetary conjunctions will occur. Besides these works, al-Ka¯shı¯ wrote numerous minor astronomical treatises. In his Taҁrı¯b al-zı¯j, preserved in Leiden and Tashkent, he translated the introduction of Ulugh Beg’s Zı¯j from Persian into Arabic, the translation being completed during al-Ka¯shı¯’s lifetime. Further, he wrote the Mifta¯h al-asba¯b fı¯ ҁilm al-zı¯j (the key of the ˙ causes in the science of astronomical tables), extant in an Arabic manuscript in Mosul; the Risa¯la dar sakht-i asṭurla¯b, on the construction of the astrolabe, extant in a Persian manuscript in Meshed; and the Risa¯la fı¯ maҁrifat samt al-qibla min da¯ʾira hindiyya maҁru¯fa, on the determination of the qibla by means of the “Indian circle,” extant in an Arabic manuscript in Meshed. The Zı¯j al-tashı¯la¯t that Ka¯shı¯ mentions in his Mifta¯h al-hisa¯b, seems not to be extant. The ˙ ˙ alleged al-Risa¯la al-iqlı¯la¯mina (mentioned in Kennedy, Planetary Equatorium, p. 7) is a misattribution based on a misreading. Though they are not astronomical treatises, two letters that al-Ka¯shı¯ sent from Samarqand to his father in Ka¯sha¯n are nonetheless very informative. The first of them, preserved in Tehran, was written about 1423. Because al-Ka¯shı¯ believed it was lost, sometime after the first letter, he composed a second, which contains descriptions similar to that in the first, but also includes some new information. It is preserved in three Persian manuscripts in Tehran. Both letters describe Ulugh Beg as a generous and learned

1163

K

man. al-Ka¯shı¯ praises his erudition and mathematical capacity and gives a picture of the prince as a scientist among those brought together and patronized by him. The observatory was founded as al-Ka¯shı¯ had suggested, quite similar to the earlier observatory in Mara¯gha. Its building was aligned in the meridian on the top of a rock, in which parts of the Fakhrı¯ sextant are carved, with a flat roof for the placing of further instruments. al-Ka¯shı¯ mentions several instruments constructed for the observatory, some of them listed in his commentary on observational instruments as well. Further, al-Ka¯shı¯ describes a sundial at an inclined wall, a device for the determination of the afternoon prayer, and a zarqa¯la, a universal astrolabe invented by ▶ al-Zarqa¯lı¯ in eleventh-century Andalusia. al-Ka¯shı¯ had a very positive image of himself and told his father that he knew how to solve problems others could not. On his father’s advise, he was completely engaged in working at the observatory, but this left him little time to do anything else. al-Ka¯shı¯ was unaffected by the newer planetary theories of the “School of Mara¯gha,” but his improvement and correction of the I¯lkha¯nı¯ Zı¯j of Naṣı¯r al-Dı¯n al-Tu¯sı¯ is of remarkable accuracy. In ˙ the letters to his father, al-Ka¯shı¯ gives a unique glimpse into the court of Ulugh Beg and the observatory at Samarqand, as well as into the work and life of a medieval astronomer.

Selected References Bagheri, Mohammad (1997). “A Newly Found Letter of Al-Ka¯shı¯ on Scientific Life in Samarkand.” Historia Mathematica 24: 241–256. Hamadanizadeh, Javad (1980). “The Trigonometric Tables of al-Ka¯shı¯ in His Zı¯j-i Kha¯qa¯nı¯.” Historia Mathematica 7: 38–45. Kennedy, E. S. (1956). “Parallax Theory in Islamic Astronomy.” Isis 47: 33–53. (Reprinted in Kennedy, Studies, pp. 164–184.) — (1960). “A Letter of Jamshı¯d al-Ka¯shı¯ to His Father: Scientific Research and Personalities at a Fifteenth Century Court.” Orientalia 29: 191–213. (Reprinted in Kennedy, Studies, pp. 722–744.) — (1960). The Planetary Equatorium of Jamshı¯d Ghiya¯th al-Dı¯n al-Ka¯shı¯. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

K

K

1164

— (1961). “Al-Ka¯shı¯’s Treatise on Astronomical Observational Instruments.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 20: 98–108. (Reprinted in Kennedy, Studies, pp. 394–404. A facsimile edition of Ka¯shı¯’s Risa¯la dar sharh-i a¯la¯t-i rasd with translation and commentary.) — (1962). “A Medieval Interpolation Scheme Using Second Order Differences.” In A Locust’s Leg: Studies in Honour of S. H. Taqizadeh, edited by W. B. Henning and E. Yarshater, pp. 117–120. London: Percy Lund, Humphries and Co. (Reprinted in Kennedy, Studies, pp. 522–525.) — (1964). “The Chinese-Uighur Calendar as Described in the Islamic Sources.” Isis 55: 435–443. (Reprinted in Kennedy, Studies, pp. 652–660.) — (1985). “Spherical Astronomy in Ka¯shı¯’s Kha¯qa¯nı¯ Zı¯j.” Zeitschrift f€ ur Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften 2: 1–46. — (1995/1996). “Treatise V of Ka¯shı¯’s Kha¯qa¯nı¯ Zı¯j: The Determination of the Ascendant.” Zeitschrift f€ ur Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften 10: 123–146. — (1998). On the Contents and Significance of the Kha¯qa¯nı¯ Zı¯j by Jamshı¯d Ghiya¯th al-Dı¯n al-Ka¯shı¯. Islamic Mathematics and Astronomy, Vol. 84. Frankfurt am Main: Institut f€ ur Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften. Kennedy, E. S., Colleagues, and Former Students (1983). Studies in the Islamic Exact Sciences, edited by David A. King and Mary Helen Kennedy. Beirut: American University of Beirut. Kennedy, E. S. and Debarnot, Marie-The´re`se (1979). “Al-Ka¯shı¯’s Impractical Method of Determining the Solar Altitude.” Journal for the History of Arabic Science 3: 219–227. (On the methods for the determination of the ascendant in the fifth treatise of Ka¯shı¯’s Zı¯j.) Tichenor, Mark J. (1967). “Late Medieval Two-Argument Tables for Planetary Longitudes.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 26: 126–128. (Reprinted in Kennedy, Studies, pp. 122–124.)

Kauffman, Nicolaus Ian T. Durham Saint Anselm College, Manchester, NH, USA

Alternate Name ▶ Mercator, Nicolaus Born possibly (Schleswig-Holstein, Germany), 1619 Died Paris, France, 14 January 1687

Kauffman, Nicolaus

Usually remembered for his work on navigation, Nicolaus Mercator, primarily a mathematician and astronomer, is not the Mercator for whom the map projection is named (▶ Gerardus Mercator). He was born Nicolaus Kauffman to Martin Kauffman, a schoolmaster at Oldenburg in Holstein. No information is available about Mercator’s mother or why he changed his name. Although his father worked in Holstein, there is no evidence confirming Mercator’s birth there; some evidence points to Denmark as his birthplace. Raised Lutheran, which speaks of his youth in Germany, Mercator spent much of his career in England and later died in France. It is most likely that Mercator began work at his father’s school. In 1632 he graduated from the University of Rostock and received an M.Phil. from the same institution in 1641. He also spent time studying at the University of Leiden. Mercator joined the philosophy faculty at Rostock in 1642. From 1648 to 1654 he worked at the University of Copenhagen, but was forced to leave when the university closed due to the plague. In 1660 he began work as a tutor in mathematics in London. It is possible (though not known for certain) that Oliver Cromwell invited Mercator to London as Cromwell knew of Mercator’s 1653 tract on calendars. The period of 1682–1687 found Mercator working in France where he had been commissioned to plan the waterworks at Versailles. Mercator was keenly interested in astrology as were many astronomers of his time. While at Copenhagen he published several textbooks in what was arguably his most prolific period. The year 1651 saw no fewer than three books published: Trigonometria sphaericorum logarithmica (dealt with spherical trigonometry), Cosmographia (dealt with geography and marked the beginning of his work in navigation), and Astronomica (his first contribution to astronomy). Two years later he published a book on mathematics, Rationes mathematicae. Two works dealing with astronomy, Hypothesis astronomia nova (1664) and Institutiones astronomicae (1676), appeared while he was living in England. The former combined ▶ Johannes Kepler’s ellipses with Mercator’s

Kayser, Heinrich

own work. The latter was a general exposition of contemporary astronomical theory. He corresponded with ▶ Isaac Newton regarding lunar theory and developed a new method to determine the line of apsides of a planetary orbit, challenging ▶ Jean Cassini’s work in this area. It was also during his time in England that one of Mercator’s most important works appeared. Logarithmotechnia (1668) contained constructions of logarithms from first principles. Combining this with a particular inequality he was able to establish a series expansion that now bears his name. He was the first to calculate, by means of an infinite series, the area connected with a hyperbola (something Newton also did, but published later). This, of course, was not just a watershed in the foundations of calculus, but also had a tremendous subsequent impact on celestial mechanics. In addition to his theoretical work Mercator made several practical contributions to science. His marine chronometer won him fellowship in the Royal Society in 1666. In 1669 he improved upon his previous clock designs and developed an efficient method for sailing into the wind.

Selected References Bell, E. T. (1937). Men of Mathematics. New York: Simon and Schuster. Muir, Hazel (ed.) (1994). “Mercator.” In Larousse Dictionary of Scientists, p. 354. New York: Larousse. Smith, David Eugene. (1923). History of Mathematics. Vol. 1. Boston: Ginn and Co. (Reprint: New York: Dover, 1958).

Kayser, Heinrich Klaus Hentschel University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany

Born Bingen, Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany, 16 March 1853 Died Bonn, Germany, 14 October 1940

1165

K

Spectroscopist Heinrich Kayser was responsible for a number of early attempts to fit simple (power law) formulas to the wavelengths of the lines from particular elements and ions, analogous to the Balmer formula for the visible lines of hydrogen. After attending primary school (P€ adagogikum) in Halle and the Sophien Gymnasium in Berlin, whence he graduated in 1872 with rather middling marks, Kayser continued his academic studies at the Universities of Strassburg, under August Kundt (1839–1894), Munich, and Berlin, under ▶ Hermann von Helmholtz and ▶ Gustav Kirchhoff. In 1879 he defended his Ph.D. thesis on the dependence of the velocity on the intensity of sound. He stayed in Berlin as assistant to von Helmholtz whom he revered, until he accepted an appointment to the Technische Hochschule in Hannover in 1885. There Kayser collaborated with the mathematician ▶ Carl Runge and his assistant Friedrich Paschen (1865–1947). Inspired by ▶ Johann Balmer’s series formula for hydrogen, published in 1885, l ¼ 1/(a + bm2), Runge and Kayser likewise found formulas for the wavelength l of series of spectra of other elements. Theirs differed in that (l) was parametrized in power series. They reparametrized Balmer’s series formula as 1/l ¼ (a bm2) and attempted to generalize this formula as a power expansion in m: first to 1/l ¼ (a + bm 1 + cm2) or 1/l ¼ (a 0 + b 0 m2 + c 0 m3), but with little success, and then to 1/l ¼ (a 0 + b 0 m– 2 + c 0 m–4), with surprisingly good success. It fit the known observations very well indeed. Their coefficients b0 for various series were always very similar, whereas a0 and c0 differed widely – they had no idea why, however. Kayser and Paschen calculated these wavelengths on a Thomas calculator optimized for input of the form a1b1 + a2b2 + a3b3. This explains their idiosyncratic parametrization with three terms: 1/l ¼ (a + bm– 2 + cm– 4), i.e., two exponents – thus, two multiplications, then two summations, and one inverse operation. This procedure was executed for roughly 4,000 iron lines, 2,000 carbon lines, and 1,400 lines of other elements, each line with wavelengths six to ˚ ). Altogether, seven digits long (e.g., 4,567.89 A

K

K

1166

this came to some 100,000 mechanical operations. (Their joint research, published in 1888–1893 and 1894, is discussed by Kayser 1936 and Richenhagen 1985.) By 1890, Kayser and Runge claimed that all known series of alkali metals, alkaline earths, iron, and a few other elements could be fitted to a single algebraic formula of the above form, with the fit not improved by including a first-order term dm1. The advantage of their approach was free adaptability to each set of data. The disadvantage was that they had to introduce new fitting parameters a, b, c for every series. Their approach was hence a purely phenomenological fitting with a power series expansion. Balmer and Johannes Rydberg chose a better form as a function of wave number: n ¼ 1/l. It proved to be far superior. 1/l ¼ A + B/(m + m)2 was generalized to 1/l–A ¼ B/(m + m)2 + C/(m + m)4 or to 1/l–A ¼ B/(m + a + b/m2)2, with m ¼ 1, 2, 3, . . . and m, a, and b being constants for each series. (See, e.g., Kayser and Runge 1890 for Rydberg’s parametrization and comparisons with the alternative by Kayser and Runge 1888–1892; Runge’s daughter Iris (1939, p. 107f.) later frankly admitted that Rydberg had an apparent knack for picking out the best parametrization among the many options available, thus being guided to a universal parametrization rather than to different fit functions for each series as Carl Runge and Heinrich Kayser were.) Rydberg also obtained B coefficients very similar to Kayser’s and Runge’s. They varied by no more than 20 % for all the elements he considered, and the coefficients C and b were small for all series spectra analyzed, which allowed Rydberg to omit these higher-order terms in the further analysis. Rydberg’s analysis and its later generalization by Walter Ritz (1878–1909) paved the way for Niels Bohr’s later reinterpretation of these series formulas as expressing quantum jumps of electrons between different energy levels in the atom. Contrasting approaches were the backdrop to these different series formula parametrizations. Runge and Kayser chose numerical algebra in

Kayser, Heinrich

their search, whereas Balmer and Rydberg preferred a visual graphic strategy (cf. Hentschel 2002, 2012). In 1894 Kayser was appointed successor to Heinrich Hertz (1857–1894) in the prestigious chair at Bonn. During his 30-year tenure, Kayser turned his institute into a global research center for spectroscopy. He was instrumental in the further development of the field partly through his eight-volume Handbuch. He figured prominently as an influential member of various international boards on metrology, spectroscopy, and astrophysics. The standardization efforts of the International Union for Co-operation in Solar Physics were largely shaped by Kayser’s research from 1904. From 30 July to 5 August 1913, the Solar Union held its fifth international meeting in Bonn as a tribute to Kayser’s unflagging support of spectroscopy (see, e.g., Plaskett (1913) for an account of this meeting and Kayser and Eversheim (1913) for a description of Kayser’s newly built physical institute in Bonn, at the time one of the best-equipped spectroscopic laboratories of the world). His election as a member of the scientific societies and academies at London, Saint Petersburg, Lund, and Haarlem duly acknowledged his accomplishments besides the conferral of honorary doctorates by the Universities of Bonn and Saint Andrews (cf. also Paschen 1940, p. 429). Between 1895 and 1926 Kayser advised around 170 graduate students, many future spectroscopists among them, such as his successor Heinrich Konen (1874–1948), Albert Bachem (1888–1957), and Leonhard Grebe (1883–1967), who around 1920 provided evidence in favor of gravitational redshift predicted by the general theory of relativity. Neither about general relativity nor the quantum theory could Kayser muster particular enthusiasm. The majority of his numerous graduate students used Rowland gratings to conduct routine measurements for his extensive wavelength tables. A number of foreign research fellows also stayed at Kayser’s institute to learn the subtleties of precision

Keckermann, Bartholomew

spectroscopy. Some continued to stay in contact with him for decades. They include ▶ Henry Crew and William F. Meggers (1888–1966). The latter filmed his elderly fellow physicist during a visit in 1927; the film is preserved at the archive of the American Institute of Physics in College Park, Maryland, USA. In 1936, Kayser wrote his autobiography (Lebenserinnerungen), which was distributed in typewritten form to a few close friends and family members, edited and published only much later (see Do¨rries and Hentschel (eds.) 1996). After a full life of acute observation, Kayser experienced failing eyesight. Consequently, he sold his large collection of more than 5,000 spectroscopic books and offprints to the library of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) (see MIT 1939) and a card index in MIT’s Special Collections Department.

Selected References AIP. Home movies of William F. Meggers, from of a meeting of 21 August 1927 with Heinrich Kayser at the Physics Institute in Bonn. American Institute of Physics, College Park, Maryland (also accessible online). Do¨rries, Matthias. “Heinrich Kayser as Philologist of Nature.” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 26 (1997): 1–33. Gerlach, Walther: “Kayser, Heinrich.” Neue Deutsche Biografie. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 11 (1977): 381–382. Hentschel, Klaus: Zum Zusammenspiel von Experiment, Instrument und Theoriebildung. Hamburg: Kovacˇ, 1998, esp. chaps. 5–6. — Mapping the Spectrum. Techniques of Visual Representation in Research and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002, esp. chap. 8. — “Walther Ritz’s Theoretical Work in Spectroscopy, Esp. on Series Formulae.” In Proceedings of the International Conference in Honor of Walther Ritz’ 100th Anniversary. Editor Jean-Claude Pont. Sion, Switzerland: Publications de l’Archives du Canton de Valleé, 2012, 129–156. Kayser, Heinrich: “Ueber den Einfluss der Intensit€at des Schalles auf seine Fortpflanzungsgeschwindigkeit.” Annalen der Physik 3rd ser., 4 (1879): 465–485.

1167

K

— Lehrbuch der Physik f€ ur Studierende. Stuttgart: Enke, 1894. (Digitized version available at the Universit€atsund Landesbibliothek D€ usseldorf.) — Handbuch der Spektroskopie. Leipzig: Barth, 1900–1934, 8 vols. — “Erinnerungen aus meinem Leben.” Annotierte wissenschaftshistorische Edition des Originaltyposkriptes aus dem Jahr 1936. Editors Matthias Do¨rries and Klaus Hentschel. Munich: Deutsches Museum, 1996. — & Eversheim, Paul: Das physikalische Institut der Universit€at Bonn, Physikalische Zeitschrift 143 (1913), 1001–1008. Kayser, H. and Carl Runge. “Ueber die Spectren der Elemente.” Abhandlungen der preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin 1888–1893. See esp. the summaries: “Ueber die Spectren der Alkalien” in Annalen der Physik, 4th ser., 41 (1890): 302–320; in Abandlungen der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (1890): 1–66 and plates I–II; and in “Beitr€age zur Kenntnis der Linienspektra.” Annalen der Physik, 3rd ser., 52 (1894): 114–118. MIT: The Kayser collection, Footnotes. The Bulletin of the Friends of the Library of MIT, no. 1 (1938), 1–2. Mulligan, Joseph F. “Doctoral Oral Examination of Heinrich Kayser, Berlin, 1879.” American Journal of Physics 60 (1992): 38–43. Paschen, Friedrich. “Heinrich Kayser”, Physikalische Zeitschrift 41 (1940), 429–433. Plaskett, J. S.: The Solar Union, Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada 7 (1913), 423–437 &pl. XVIII–XXI with photographs of the meeting in Bonn, July/Aug. 1913). Richenhagen, Gottfried: Carl Runge (1856–1927): Von der reinen Mathematik zur Numerik, Go¨ttingen: Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht, 1985. Studien zur Wissenschafts-, Sozial- und Bildungsgeschichte der Mathematik, no. 1. Runge, Iris: Die Geschichte der Spektroskopie von Balmer bis Bohr, Zeitschrift f€ ur physikalischen und chemischen Unterricht 523 (1939), 103–113.

Keckermann, Bartholomew Derek Jensen Brigham Young University, ID, USA

Born Danzig, (Gdan´sk, Poland), 1571 or 1573 Died Danzig, (Gdan´sk, Poland), 25 July 1609

K

K

1168

Keckermann, Bartholomew. Courtesy of History of Science Collections, University of Oklahoma Libraries

Bartholomew Keckermann developed a system of astronomy that was a basic outline of the Aristotelian universe, and which was widely used as a textbook. Born to Calvinists George and Gertrude Keckermann, Keckermann studied under Jacob Fabricius at the Academic Gymnasium of Danzig starting in 1586, before moving to Wittenberg, where he enrolled at the University of Wittenberg in 1590. In 1592, Keckermann enrolled at the University of Leipzig, but after one semester he and fellow Calvinist students became unwelcome due to the death of protector Prince Christian I. Keckermann then moved to Heidelberg, where he studied from 1592 until 27 February 1595, receiving a master of arts degree. Keckermann stayed in Heidelberg and eventually held a professorship in Hebrew there, but in 1602 after writing to the Danzig City

Keckermann, Bartholomew

Senate about his desire to return to his native city, he was offered a position to teach philosophy in the Danzig Gymnasium. There, Keckermann worked incessantly, paying little attention to sleep or health. This led to his early death. Known as a great pedagogue, Keckermann employed a systematic method of introducing students to subjects such as geometry, astronomy, optics, and geography. Keckermann presented his system of astronomy during lectures in 1605 and 1607. This system was first published posthumously in the Systema physicum, septem libris (1610), and later in different forms in the Systema astronomiae compendosium (1611), his Operum omnium quae extant (1614), and the Systema compendiosum totius mathematices (1617). Included in some of these works were discussions of phenomena related to astronomy such as comets and meteors, but they were placed under different systems such as physics. The commentaries of ▶ Georg Peurbach and ▶ Johann M€ uller (Regiomontanus) aided Keckermann in developing his system of astronomy. Keckermann began with general information about the motions of the heavenly spheres, which he held to be material despite arguments against this position resulting from observations of the comet of 1577 showing that it traversed planetary spheres. He then treated the motions of each of the planetary spheres separately. After working through the planetary spheres, Keckermann ended his system of astronomy by giving fundamental explanations concerning time reckoning and the reasons behind the recent change from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar. Keckermann’s syntheses of astronomical knowledge in his lectures and in the posthumous publications of his textbooks were widely used as school texts. At Harvard, Adrian Heereboord recommended Keckermann’s work as the best system of Aristotelian physics. At early seventeenth-century Cambridge, Keckermann’s works were used as standard manuals in undergraduate instruction. The English author ▶ John Milton was among the Cambridge students who

Keeler, James Edward

were probably influenced by Keckermann’s synthesis of natural philosophy. However, it is safe to say that Keckermann’s works were not used for their originality. He believed that tradition should prevail over unsubstantiated claims. By placing knowledge that was “rightly-ordered” before knowledge that may in fact be “true,” Keckermann stuck with the wisdom of the ancients over the moderns. For example, although he was favorable to those who denied the reality of solid celestial spheres, he could not accept their claims “because as yet no astronomical precepts have been established, through which an opinion and hypothesis of this sort can be taught in the schools.” He was waiting for the day when such precepts would be advanced through foundational textbooks such as his own. Because of his attitude, Keckermann had mixed reactions toward the work of recent astronomers like ▶ Nicolaus Copernicus and ▶ Tycho Brahe. In the margins of his personal copy of Copernicus’s De Revolutionibus he acknowledged and even praised Copernicus and other modern astronomers like ▶ Rheticus, ▶ Caspar Peucer, and Brahe. However, his system of astronomy in the Systema compendiosum followed the traditional Aristotelian model with only short references to the works of Copernicus and Brahe. Theologically, Keckermann believed that there was a harmonious relationship between God and nature. A knowledge of physics was necessary in order to understand the scriptural accounts of creation and of natural things in the Bible such as gems, metals, and foods. His view of comets also had a theological flavor. Although he took a standard astrological position when he said that comets portend events on the Earth such as changes in empires, his causal account of why this is the case became theological. Keckermann claimed that good angels or bad demons worked with the matter of a comet to produce effects on the Earth. The breadth of Keckermann’s work is amazing, considering how long he actually lived to create it. This probably resulted from his attitude

1169

K

not to be satisfied with leaving questions unanswered and at least attempting a “most probable” explanation to difficult questions.

Selected References Costello, William T. (1958). The Scholastic Curriculum at Seventeenth-Century Cambridge. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. (Concerns the use of Keckermann at Cambridge and his influence.) Donahue, William H. (1975). “The Solid Planetary Spheres in Post-Copernican Natural Philosophy.” In The Copernican Achievement, edited by Robert S. Westman, pp. 244–275. Berkeley: University of California Press. (For Keckermann’s concept of material celestial spheres.) — (1981). The Dissolution of the Celestial Spheres. New York: Arno Press. (For Keckermann’s concept of material celestial spheres.) Freedman, Joseph S. (1997). “The Career and Writings of Bartholomew Keckermann (d. 1609).” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 141: 305–364. (For extended biographical and bibliographical information.) — (1999). Philosophy and the Arts in Central Europe, 1500–1700: Teaching and Texts at Schools and Universities. Aldershot: Ashgate. Keckermann, Bartholomew (1606). Disputationes philosophiae. Hanover. (In addition to the primary texts cited above, there are also arguments concerning planetary spheres and comets herein.) Reif, Sister Mary R. (1962). “Natural Philosophy in Some Early Seventeenth Century Scholastic Textbooks.” Ph.D. diss., St. Louis University. (On Keckermann in his pedagogical context.) Thorndike, Lynn (1958). A History of Magic and Experimental Science. Vol. 7, pp. 375–379. New York: Columbia University Press. (Still useful is Thorndike’s summary of Keckermann’s Systema Physicum.)

Keeler, James Edward Glenn A. Walsh Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Born La Salle, Illinois, USA, 10 September 1857 Died San Francisco, California, USA, 12 August 1900

K

K

1170

Keeler, James Edward. Reproduced from Astrophysical Journal 12, no. 4 (Nov. 1900)

In an era dominated by large refracting telescopes, James Keeler demonstrated the promise and future prospects of reflecting telescopes for conducting astronomical research. His celestial photographs taken with the Crossley reflector demonstrated conclusively that the nebulae, many of them spiral nebulae, existed in much larger numbers than had been previously imagined. Keeler used the spectrograph to measure fundamental physical and chemical properties of celestial objects as a pioneer astrophysicist. Keeler was the son of William F. and Anna (neé Dutton) Keeler. His father, a senior partner in the La Salle Iron Works, had previously been a watchmaker and traveled around the world, after having no success in the California Gold Rush. Keeler grew up in La Salle, Illinois, where he witnessed the total solar eclipse that swept across the United States on 7 August 1869. That event seemingly left a strong


impression on Keeler. In November of that year, his family relocated to Mayport, Florida, a move that ended Keeler’s chances for a secondary education. Keeler developed his interest in astronomy from the practical side of surveying, a skill that he learned from his father. He ordered a 2-in. achromatic lens, and two smaller lenses for eyepieces, from a Philadelphia optical house. Within a week of their arrival Keeler assembled a telescope. In addition to viewing terrestrial objects he observed the Moon, Jupiter, Saturn, nebulae, and other celestial objects. Keeler’s sister, Lizzie, attended a private school in Tarrytown, New York. When she and her classmates observed Saturn through a telescope owned by a local amateur astronomer and philanthropist, Charles H. Rockwell (1826–1904), Lizzie mentioned that she had seen the planet through her brother’s homemade telescope in Florida. Intrigued, Rockwell took it upon himself to finance Keeler’s collegiate education. Keeler further impressed Rockwell by paying for his own passage northward, by assisting his schooner’s captain with celestial navigation. Rockwell enabled Keeler to gain admittance to the second freshman class at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, in December 1877. During his college years, he assisted a research team that viewed the total solar eclipse of 29 July 1878 from Central City, Colorado. Keeler sketched the solar corona with the aid of a 2-in. aperture telescope. This drawing, along with his first scientific paper, was published in the United States Naval Observatory’s report on the eclipse. After graduating in 1881, Keeler worked as an assistant to ▶ Samuel Langley, director of the Allegheny Observatory near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Langley was then perfecting the bolometer, an instrument used to measure total energy, including infrared energy from celestial objects. Keeler and Langley explored this hitherto unknown region of the solar spectrum. Keeler then spent a year of postgraduate study abroad, learning physics under Georg H. Quincke at the University of Heidelberg, and under ▶ Hermann von Helmholtz at the University


of Berlin. In 1886, he settled at Mount Hamilton, California, site of the new Lick Observatory (then under construction). Keeler spent the next 7 years as a Lick Observatory astronomer, assisting director ▶ Edward Holden. Keeler became one of the pioneers in utilizing spectroscopy to study the composition, temperature, and radial velocities of stars, nebulae, and other celestial objects. His peers considered him to be the leading astronomical spectroscopist of his generation. Along with Langley and several others, he was one of the founders of the new science of astrophysics. After the 36-in. refractor went into operation at the Lick Observatory in 1888, Keeler used the telescope to measure the wavelengths of emission lines seen in the spectra of nebulae. He went on to demonstrate conclusively that the lines, dubbed nebulium, were not emitted by any known chemical element examined under conditions duplicated in terrestrial laboratories. It took another 30 years before Mount Wilson Observatory astronomer ▶ Ira Bowen identified them as the so-called forbidden lines of ionized oxygen, produced under extremely low-density conditions. In 1891, Keeler married Cora Slocomb Matthews, a niece of the board president of the Lick Observatory trustees. That same year, he accepted an appointment as director of the Allegheny Observatory, after Langley was chosen secretary (director) of the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, District of Columbia. At Allegheny, Keeler demonstrated that the rings of Saturn are made of individual particles, each traveling with its own orbital velocity around the planet. Using a spectrograph of his own design, and exploiting the principle of the Doppler effect, Keeler measured the speeds of revolution of the ring particles as a function of their distance from the planet. He thus verified the result predicted mathematically by Scottish physicist ▶ James Maxwell in 1857. Keeler’s confirmation of Maxwell’s hypothesis was published in the first volume of the Astrophysical Journal (1895) and helped him to garner the Rumford Medal of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

1171

K

At the dedication ceremony of the Yerkes Observatory (21 October 1897), Keeler delivered the main invited address, entitled “The Importance of Astrophysics, and the Relation of Astrophysics to Other Physical Sciences.” This lecture highlighted Keeler’s standing within the American astronomical community and symbolized the growing importance of his subject matter to twentieth-century research practices. Keeler returned to direct the Lick Observatory in 1898 (succeeding Holden), and refurbished its 36-in. Crossley reflector. With that telescope, Keeler obtained the finest photographs to date of the spiral nebulae, which we know today as distant galaxies. Keeler’s study of the nebulae, which was continued after his death by Lick astronomer ▶ Heber Curtis and Mount Wilson astronomer ▶ Edwin Hubble, gradually led toward an acceptance of these objects as island universes of stars, lying far beyond the Milky Way. Along with ▶ George Hale, Keeler founded the Astrophysical Journal in 1895, to foster communications among the adherents of what Langley had termed the New Astronomy. He likewise inaugurated the first regular graduate program at the University of California, built around Lick Observatory fellowships, to produce theoretically trained but observationally oriented researchers in astrophysics. Keeler was awarded an honorary Sc.D. by the University of California in 1893, was a recipient of the Henry Draper Medal of the National Academy of Sciences (1899), and was elected to its membership in 1900. That same year, however, he suffered a fatal stroke.

Selected References Campbell, W. W. (1900). “James Edward Keeler.” Astrophysical Journal 12: 239–253. — (1900). “James Edward Keeler.” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 12: 139–146. Dieke, Sally H. (1973). “Keeler, James Edward.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 270–271. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Hale, George Ellery (1900). “James Edward Keeler.” Science, n.s. 12: 353–357.

K

K

1172

Hastings, Charles S. (1905). “Biographical Memoir of James Edward Keeler.” Biographical Memoirs, National Academy of Sciences 5: 231–246. Osterbrock, Donald E. (1984). James E. Keeler: Pioneer American Astrophysicist and the Early Development of American Astrophysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. — (1995). “Founded in 1895 by George E. Hale and James E. Keeler: The Astrophysical Journal Centennial.” Astrophysical Journal 438: 1–7. Perrine, C. D. (1900). “James Edward Keeler.” Popular Astronomy 8: 409–417. Scaife, W. Lucien (ed.) (1924). John A. Brashear: The Autobiography of A Man Who Loved the Stars. New York: American Society of Mechanical Engineers, esp. pp. 78–79, 135–138, 141–142. (Reprint, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1988.)

Keenan, Philip Childs Mary Woods Scott Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

Born Bellevue, Pennsylvania, USA, 31 March 1908 Died Columbus, Ohio, USA, 20 April 2000 American spectroscopist Philip Keenan was the first “K” of MKK spectral types (where M ¼ ▶ William Morgan and the second K ¼ Edith Kellman), one of the primary ways of classifying stars from 1943 down to the present. The elder son of Charles Gaskell Keenan and Evelyn Larrabee (neé Childs) Keenan, he was discovered by the Stanford University psychologist Lewis M. Terman, after the family moved to Ojai, in central California. Terman included him in a sample of about 1,000 children with high intelligence quotients (above 135) and other indications of exceptional brilliance, whom he followed for many decades, showing that Keenan was quite typical of the group in outstanding later achievements. Keenan received his BS from the University of Arizona in 1929, publishing his first paper (on the color of the Moon during total eclipse, important

Keenan, Philip Childs

for understanding transmission of light by the Earth’s atmosphere) the same year. He earned an MA in 1930 and headed east to the University of Chicago and Yerkes Observatory. After initial work with ▶ Edwin Frost, he completed a PhD in 1932, defending a dissertation titled “An Astrophysical Study of the Solar Chromosphere,” working with ▶ Otto Struve and ▶ Christian Elvey. Keenan was the 15th Chicago PhD in astronomy, following Morgan who had received his degree a year earlier. Apart from a year (1935/1936) as an instructor at Perkins Observatory, Keenan remained on the Yerkes and Chicago staff until 1942, observing extensively at the new McDonald Observatory as well as at Yerkes. Following war work (1942–1946) at the Bureau of Ordnance of the United States Department of the Navy, he was appointed to an assistant professorship at the Ohio State University, moving up to a full professorship and acting directorship of the Perkins Observatory (1955–1957). He retired as professor emeritus in 1976. His last paper was published in 1999, 70 years after his first, setting a record for duration of publications in major American journals. During the Yerkes years, Keenan was among the first to try to understand systematic errors in measurements of the surface brightnesses of galaxies (an essential sort of data if they are to be used as cosmological probes) and, with ▶ Louis Henyey, Keenan attempted to account for the radio emission from the plane of the Milky Way that had been detected by ▶ Karl Jansky and ▶ Grote Reber. They concluded in 1940 that it could not be ordinary thermal emission from ionized hydrogen but were unable to say what it was; a similar conclusion was drawn by ▶ Jesse Greenstein and ▶ Fred Whipple working at Harvard. Keenan also worked on interpretation of a number of solar phenomena, including prominences, granulation, limb darkening, and the chromosphere. About 1939, Morgan and Keenan began their collaboration to develop a two-dimensional system of stellar classification that would have signatures for both the surface temperatures

Keill, John

of stars (like the old OBAFGKM system of ▶ Annie Cannon) and their luminosities (like the “c-characteristic” of ▶ Antonia Maury). They succeeded in this so well that the resulting system, enshrined in the 1943 publication An Atlas of Stellar Spectra, with an Outline of Spectral Classification by Morgan, Keenan, and Kellman, remains standard today in an updated version published by Morgan and Keenan [MK] in 1973. On the whole, Morgan specialized in hot stars and Keenan in cool ones, and the system was pushed to more extreme types in both directions in later years. ▶ Jason Nassau was a frequent collaborator on luminosity indicators (such as the line of neutral calcium and some molecular bands) for cool stars. The original MKK Atlas actually included some stars (types R, N, and S) of unusual chemical composition, and Keenan later developed temperature indicators for these as well. Although both Morgan and Keenan were firm about the need to understand the physical processes underlying spectral types, Keenan particularly remained focused on the process: The proper way to classify stars was to start by obtaining spectra of a number of standard stars with the telescope, spectrograph, and detector you proposed to use and then go on to the program stars, classifying them by comparison with those locally prepared standards, before attempting to derive numbers for temperature, luminosity, or composition. Using this approach, one could accurately classify spectra even at very low dispersion, a whole star represented by only a few millimeters of exposed photographic emulsion. Keenan received an honorary doctorate from the University of Cordoba in 1971 and remained active in several professional societies long past retirement. Nevertheless, he resigned his membership in the American Astronomical Society in the 1970s over some issue now long forgotten. At a 1993 conference commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Atlas, the Vatican Observatory presented him with a medal honoring his pioneering work in spectral classification. Keenan was fluent in Spanish; fond of literature, music, and cooking; and an

1173

K

enthusiastic gardener, stamp collector, and player of bridge and tennis. He never married; his most important survivors were his students.

Selected References Boeshaar, Patricia C. (2000). “Philip C. Keenan (1908–2000).” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 112: 1519–1522. Copage, Eric (24 April 2000). “Philip C. Keenan, 92, Pioneer in the Classification of Stars.” New York Times., p. A18. Corbally, C. J., R. O. Gray, and R. F. Garrison (eds.) (1994). The MK Process at 50 Years: A Powerful Tool for Astrophysical Insight: A Workshop of the Vatican Observatory, Tucson, Arizona, U.S.A., September 1993. San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific. (Presentations to W. W. Morgan and P. C. Keenan, p. xxi.) Henyey, L. G. and Philip C. Keenan (1940). “Interstellar Radiation from Free Electrons and Hydrogen Atoms.’ Astrophysical Journal 91: 625–630. Keenan, Philip C. (1929). “The Photometry of the Total Lunar Eclipse of November 27, 1928.” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 41: 297–304. Keenan, Philip C. and Cecilia Barnbaum (1999). “Revision and Calibration of MK Luminosity Classes for Cool Giants by Hipparcos Parallaxes. ” Astrophysical Journal 518: 859–865. Morgan, W. W., Philip C. Keenan, and Edith Kellman (1943). An Atlas of Stellar Spectra, with an Outline of Spectral Classification. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Osmer, Patrick S. (2001). “Philip C. Keenan, 1908–2000.” Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society 33: 1574–1575.

Keill, John Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Born Edinburgh, Scotland, 1 December 1671 Died Oxford, England, 31 August 1721 From his seat as Savillian Professor of Astronomy at Oxford University, John Keill helped popularize ▶ William Whiston’s theory that the biblical Universal deluge resulted from a comet striking the Earth.

K

K

1174

Selected Reference Keill, John (2004). An Introduction to Natural Philosophy. Vol. 5 of Newtonianism in Eighteenth-Century Britain, by John Henry. Bristol: Thoemmes.

Keldysh, Mstislav Vsevolodovich Alexander A. Gurshtein Vavilov Institute for History of Science & Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Born Riga (Latvia), 28 January/ 10 February 1911 Died Moscow (Russia), 24 June 1978 A Soviet mathematician, an outstanding figure in mechanics, and a great organizer of Soviet scientific research, Mstislav Keldysh’s name is nearly synonymous with progress in applied computer mathematics in the USSR. For many years, he was the chairman of the main USSR interministerial Council for Space Research and in this capacity was responsible for the direction of lunar and planetary exploration, planning many of the Soviet experiments and missions. The creation within the USSR Academy of Sciences of the Institute for Space Research was also one of his important initiatives. In 1964–1978 Keldysh was the chairman of the State Committee on Lenin and State Awards. He was decorated with numerous foreign and domestic awards; for example, three times he was named as a Hero of Socialist Labor, the top Soviet decoration. Despite the pressure of governmental anti-Semitism, Keldysh was known for his tolerant position in this respect. Being classified as the scientific leader of Soviet space research, in the mass media he was puzzlingly publicized as the principal theoretician of Soviet Cosmonautics. The fifth of seven children, Mstislav Keldysh, along with his siblings, was largely educated at

Keldysh, Mstislav Vsevolodovich

home up to the university level. He graduated in 1931 from the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics of Moscow University and soon after began work at the Central Aerohydrodynamic Institute, created by Russian aviation pioneer N. E. Zhukovsky in 1918. He made contributions to computational mathematics, the design of nuclear arms, and the aviation industry, as well as celestial mechanics and planetology from space. Keldysh was elected as an academician in 1946. Keldysh was the founder and first director of the Institute of Applied Mathematics, Soviet Academy of Science, which now bears his name, after a term (1942–1953) as professor of the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics of Moscow University. He was president of the Soviet Academy (1961–1975), the first Academy president to be as member of the USSR Communist Party and its Central Committee. His death followed at least 6 years of heart disease, which included treatment by American surgeon Dr. Michael DeBakey. The memory of Keldysh is alive in many kinds of memorabilia (monuments, institutions, ships, squares, streets, documentaries, etc.). His name is given to a crater on the Moon.

Selected References Siddiqi, Asif A. (2000). Challenge to Apollo: The Soviet Union and the Space Race, 1945–1974. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Zabrodin, A. V., ed. (2001). M. V. Keldysh. Tvorcheskiy portret po vospominaniyam sovremennikov (M. V. Keldysh in memoirs of contemporaries). Moscow: Nauka (In Russian).

Kempf, Paul Friedrich Ferdinand Jordan D. Marche´ II University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

Born Berlin, (Germany), 3 June 1856 Died Potsdam, Germany, 16 February 1920

Kepler, Johannes

As a solar spectroscopist, Paul Kempf helped establish the reputation of the new Potsdam Astrophysical Observatory with his accurate measurements of spectral line wavelengths and the rotation rate of the Sun and by compiling a major photometric catalog. Kempf’s father, an actuary of the court, died when Paul was young, leaving him and an elder brother to be raised by his mother. Kempf graduated in 1874 from the Gymnasium of the Grauen Kloster in Berlin. Though a student for one semester at Heidelberg, he returned to his native city and pursued astronomy under the tutelage of Wilhelm Foerster and Friedrich Tietjen at the University of Berlin. At the age of 22, Kempf received his Ph.D. in 1878. His thesis, on the Ptolemaic theory of planetary motion, was awarded a prize by the philosophical faculty and subsequently published. Kempf was then appointed an assistant at the newly established Potsdam Astrophysical Observatory, where he conducted observations of sunspots under the supervision of ▶ Gustav Spo¨rer. Solar studies became one of Kempf’s principal lines of research; he determined the wavelengths of some 300 absorption lines in the solar spectrum (with ▶ Gustav M€ uller, 1886) and measured the Sun’s rotation from the motions of calcium flocculi (1916). Kempf and M€ uller likewise collaborated on the observations and reductions of the Potsdam Photometrische Durchmusterung des No¨rdlichen Himmels (photometric catalogue of the northern heavens, 1894–1906), which compiled the brightnesses and colors of some 14,000 stars down to visual magnitude 7.5. This enormous task was completed using the astrophotometer (and its artificial star) constructed by ▶ Johann Zo¨llner. Historian J. B. Hearnshaw has described the Potsdam Durchmusterung as one of “[t]hree great photometric catalogues of the late nineteenth century” and which consistently displayed the smallest probable error of mean magnitude. Kempf participated in (and later organized) several astronomical expeditions, including that

1175

K

to observe the transit of Venus from Punta Arenas in South America (1882). He traveled twice into the interior of Russia to observe total solar eclipses (in 1887 and 1914). In 1894, he journeyed with M€uller to the vicinity of Mount Etna and conducted observations to measure the extinction of starlight by the Earth’s atmosphere. Kempf’s contributions may be gauged by his 1915 appointment as secretary to the board of the Astronomische Gesellschaft (Astronomical Society). Simultaneously, he was chosen its treasurer, following Heinrich Bruns’s resignation. Kempf brought out a translation of ▶ Simon Newcomb’s Popular Astronomy (1914) and was preparing a revised edition at the time of his death.

Selected References

K Hearnshaw, J. B. (1996). The Measurement of Starlight: Two Centuries of Astronomical Photometry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, esp. pp. 84–87. Kempf, Paul (1878). Untersuchungen u€ber die Ptolem€ aische Theorie der Mondbewegung. Berlin: Schade. M€ uller, Gustav (1920). “Paul Kempf.” Astronomische Nachrichten 210: 391–392. M€ uller, Gustav, and Paul Kempf (1894–1906). Photometrische Durchmusterung des No¨rdlichen Himmels. Potsdam: Potsdam Publications. — (1907). Photometrische Durchmusterung des No¨rdlichen Himmels: Generalkatalog. Potsdam: W. Engelmann.

Kepler, Johannes Adam Jared Apt Cambridge, MA, USA

Born Weil der Stadt, (Baden-W€ urttemberg, Germany), 27 December 1571 Died Regensburg, (Bavaria, Germany), 15 November 1630

K

1176

Kepler, Johannes. Courtesy of History of Science Collections, University of Oklahoma Libraries, Small Portraits Collection

Johannes Kepler revolutionized astronomy and physics even more than ▶ Nicolaus Copernicus, in as much as he broke with the principle of uniform circular motion for celestial bodies, which Copernicus had tried to uphold. His reasoning was physical, but he created a rigorous mathematical model of planetary kinematics. Although best remembered today for his “three laws of planetary motion,” Kepler made contributions to science that were much broader than this simple mnemonic suggests, and his discoveries were hard won. His father, Heinrich Kepler, was a soldier who later abandoned the family; his mother, Katharina Guldenmann, was the daughter of the Burgermeister (mayor) of Eltingen, a village near Weil der Stadt. The family’s means were modest. As a scholarship student at the University of T€ ubingen (1589–1594), Kepler was educated in a rigorous curriculum that had been established by Protestant reformers during the previous half-century, and that helped to develop his understanding of the roles of astronomy and mathematics. Kepler’s own confession was Lutheran, with Calvinist leanings. At T€ubingen, he fell under the particular influence of the instructor ▶ Michael M€astlin, a convinced

Kepler, Johannes

follower of Copernicus who was to remain Kepler’s mentor in astronomy for many years. From this time at least, Kepler was a Copernican. He planned a career in divinity, but when a teaching position in mathematics became available at a seminary in Graz in 1594, Kepler’s instructors recommended him for the post as the strongest of their candidates. It was in Graz that he developed his first original ideas in astronomy, which he published in the Mysterium Cosmographicum in 1596. This work adumbrates the worldview that is the basis of much of his future theoretical work, in that it puts forth a structure of the planetary system based on geometrical regularity. The particular model of the heavens that it lays out determines both the number of the planets and their sequential distances from the Sun by nesting the five classical regular solids within the (notional) spheres encompassing the planetary orbits. Kepler, i.e., created a model with a cube inscribed within the sphere representing the orbit of Saturn, a sphere inscribed within this to represent the orbit of Jupiter, a tetrahedron inscribed within this and a sphere inscribed within the tetrahedron to represent the orbit of Mars, and so forth. By this structure, the proportional distances of the planets from the Sun (as then known from the Copernican model) were approximately represented. During his tenure in Graz, Kepler was engaged to a twice-married heiress, Barbara M€uller, whom he married in 1597. They had three children who survived childhood, but one died in 1611, and Barbara followed a few months later. Kepler married Susanna Reuttinger in Linz in 1613. Three of their six children survived. The Mysterium, which was Kepler’s first book, and his correspondence with ▶ Tycho Brahe (as well as his inadvertent involvement in Brahe’s priority dispute with ▶ Nicholaus B€ar [Raimarus Ursus] over the non-Copernican planetary theory according to which the planets orbit the Sun, which in turn orbits the Earth) led Brahe, the preeminent European astronomer, to invite Kepler to join him in Prague at the court of the Holy Roman Emperor Rudolph II in 1600, as one of several mathematical assistants. Kepler,

Kepler, Johannes

who had greater ambitions for modeling the Universe, was assigned the carefully circumscribed task of determining the parameters of the orbit of Mars from Brahe’s meticulous observations. A few days after Brahe’s death in 1601, Rudolph appointed Kepler Imperial Mathematician; he was to be Brahe’s successor. This position, at a comparatively early age, brought him European eminence. Several more major works followed during the reign of Rudolph, including the Astronomiae Pars Optica in 1604, and the Astronomia Nova, based on his work on the orbit of Mars, in 1609. Rudolph was deposed and replaced on the throne by his brother in 1612, and the remainder of Kepler’s life was unsettled. The Astronomia Nova, unique among astronomical works to this date in that it is not only a treatise, but also a personal history of scientific discovery subtly reworked to convince the reader of the inevitability of its conclusions, creates a wholly new and revolutionary model of planetary kinematics. The book presents the first two of what (since at least the time of ▶ Joseph de Lalande, in the late eighteenth century) have been known as Kepler’s “three laws of planetary motion.” These two are: (1) that planets move in elliptical orbits with the Sun at a focus and (2) that a line connecting a planet with the Sun will sweep over equal areas in equal periods of time. The first law, in particular, demolished the Western (including the Arabic) tradition of planetary models derived from combinations of circular motions. Kepler actually discovered the second law first, and used it as an aid to calculation. Because the ellipticity of Mars’ orbit is very small, Kepler’s discovery rested both upon Brahe’s extremely precise (nontelescopic) observations and Kepler’s own faith in their accuracy. Another noteworthy aspect of the book is that Kepler attempts to derive the kinematics of planetary motion from physical principles that are based in part on the discovery, by ▶ William Gilbert, that the Earth itself is a magnet. This line of reasoning required that the Sun be at one focus of the planetary orbits. In the Copernican system, though the Sun was at the center in a general sense, it was not actually at the mathematical center of the

1177

K

orbits; Kepler thereby forced classical astronomy to face the physical consequences of the Copernican revolution. One cannot, however, draw a direct line from Kepler’s theorizing to the planetary dynamics that were developed later in the seventeenth century, by ▶ Isaac Newton in particular. Kepler’s account of his model was persuasive for a number of technically proficient astronomers, but the practical difficulties of using it to calculate planetary positions were considerable. It was some time before his discoveries were widely applied in practice. In particular, the theory required the solution of what has become known as Kepler’s equation or Kepler’s problem, the best solution to which, if only as a mathematical problem rather than a practical one, has occupied a number of mathematicians over the centuries (and, in different contexts, at least as far back as the ninth century). For much of the seventeenth century, astronomers who chose to apply Kepler’s elliptical theory to the determination of planetary positions used an approximation method developed by ▶ Ismae¨l Boulliau. Kepler had a tremendous capacity for work (especially notable when one considers how much computation had to be done by hand), and several more books on astronomy followed, of which the most important were the Epitome Astronomiae Copernicanae (1618), a general textbook on astronomy that has not yet received much examination by historians, and the Harmonice Mundi (1619), buried within which is what we now call Kepler’s third law, that the square of a planet’s period is proportional to the cube of its mean distance from the Sun. The long-delayed Tabulae Rudolphinae, published in 1627, were a kind of culmination of Kepler’s astronomical work. They provided the basis for the calculation of ephemeredes of greatly increased accuracy. Kepler expended much energy between 1615 and 1621 in the ultimately successful defense of his mother, who had been accused of witchcraft. The last decade of his life was troubled by vicissitudes attendant upon the Thirty Years’ War, which broke out in 1618.

K

K

1178

Kepler’s last work, the Somnium, published posthumously in 1634, is an imaginative account of a visit to the Moon and a consideration of its inhabitants. Its speculations derive from his understanding of astronomy and physics, and it is now considered one of the earliest works of science fiction. Kepler worked on and made significant contributions to fields of knowledge other than astronomy, including optics, mathematics (in the geometry of solids, close packing, tiling, and logarithms), meteorology, and, though it has long ceased to be a scientific subject, astrology. His Dioptrice of 1611 laid out the theory of the refracting telescope, introducing a system of two convex lenses, later known as the Keplerian telescope. What became the Kepler conjecture on close packing, which was finally proven in 1998, is more closely related to work done by ▶ Thomas Harriot, and – contrary to some recent accounts – Kepler and Harriot did not discuss the subject. He attempted, without success, to discover the law of refraction, whose successful formulation is now often attributed to ▶ Willebrord Snel, who had studied Kepler’s writings on optics. Harriot, with whom he did, indeed, correspond on this topic, had earlier discovered the law but declined to reveal it to Kepler or anyone else. Among the discoveries set forth in the Astronomiae Pars Optica, which explores aspects of optics related to astronomical observation, is that the image projected on to the retina by the lens of the eye is inverted, leading to the realization that the process of vision is more complex than the simple receipt of the image. Kepler was not primarily an observational astronomer, but rather a theoretician. Nonetheless, throughout his work, from his earliest model onward, his theories are conceived in very concrete or geometric models, rather than in abstract algebraic constructs. Indeed, even in his work on the mathematics of regular solids, one can easily picture Kepler physically constructing models to ease his efforts at visualization. This may partly explain why, though a prominent streak of neo-Platonism runs through his thought, notably in his faith in a Universe founded on archetypes,

Kepler, Johannes

a case can be made that, in his philosophy, Kepler was what we now term a “realist.” Many historians and other writers have described, with varying degrees of subtlety, a Kepler who had a dual personality: a forward-looking modern rational scientist on the one hand and a mystic and obscurantist who looked backward to the Middle Ages on the other. This portrait, still sometimes presented to the public, has been superseded by the research of more recent historians, who see much of Kepler’s thought as having more unity and consistency, its important theoretical innovations arising from the same milieu as the less familiar or more easily disparaged ideas, such as his improvements (as Kepler thought them) to astrology. This greater appreciation of the depth and unity of his thought does not, however, completely place Kepler’s contributions within the broader history of astronomy, because even his contemporaries, and many of those who advanced the study of astronomy in the succeeding decades, were perplexed by his dynamic and harmonic theories and stymied by the complexity of the mathematical methods required to apply his astronomical discoveries in practice. Regardless of this puzzle, it is clear that although Kepler, like Copernicus, worked within long-standing traditions, his contributions to the kinematics of astronomy were radically new, and they gave to the revolution that Copernicus had started an impetus that helped drive both astronomy and physics forward to the creation of classical dynamical physics later in the seventeenth century.

Selected References Applebaum, Wilbur (1996). “Keplerian Astronomy after Kepler: Researches and Problems.” History of Science 34: 451–504. Caspar, Max (1968). Bibliographica Kepleriana. 2nd ed. Revised by Martha List. Munich: C. H. Beck. — (1993). Kepler, translated by C. Doris Hellman and edited by Owen Gingerich and Alain Segonds. New York: Dover. Colwell, Peter (1993). Solving Kepler’s Equation over Three Centuries. Richmond, Virginia: Willmann-Bell. Field, J. V. (1988). Kepler’s Geometrical Cosmology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kerr, Frank John Gingerich, Owen (1989). “Johannes Kepler.” In Planetary Astronomy from the Renaissance to the Rise of Astrophysics, Part A: Tycho Brahe to Newton, edited by Rene´ Taton and Curtis Wilson, pp. 54–78. Vol. 2A of The General History of Astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hamel, J€urgen (1998). Bibliographica Kepleriana. Munich: C. H. Beck. (Inventory of the printed papers by and about Kepler; complementary volume to the 2nd ed.) Jardine, N. (1984). The Birth of History and Philosophy of Science: Kepler’s A Defence of Tycho against Ursus with Essays on Its Provenance and Significance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Koestler, Arthur (1959). The Sleepwalkers: A History of Man’s Changing Vision of the Universe. New York: Macmillan. Martens, Rhonda (2000). Kepler’s Philosophy and the New Astronomy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Methuen, Charlotte (1998). Kepler’s T€ ubingen: Stimulus to a Theological Mathematics. Aldershot: Ashgate. Simon, Ge´rard (1979). Kepler, astronome astrologue. Paris: Gallimard. Stephenson, Bruce (1987). Kepler’s Physical Astronomy. New York: Springer-Verlag. — (1994). The Music of the Heavens: Kepler’s Harmonic Astronomy. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Voelkel, James R. (2001). The Composition of Kepler’s Astronomia Nova. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. Wilson, Curtis (1989). “Predictive Astronomy in the Century after Kepler.” In Planetary Astronomy from the Renaissance to the Rise of Astrophysics, Part A: Tycho Brahe to Newton, edited by Rene´ Taton and Curtis Wilson, pp. 161–221. Vol. 2A of The General History of Astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kerr, Frank John Woodruff T. Sullivan1 and Gillian Knapp2 1 University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA 2 Department of Astrophysical Sciences, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA

Born Saint Albans, Hertfordshire, England, 8 January 1918 Died Silver Spring, Maryland, USA, 15 September 2000 Australian-American radio astronomer Frank J. Kerr was the first to map out the gas disk of

1179

K

the half of the Galaxy visible from the Southern Hemisphere, demonstrating the existence of spiral arms, a warp in the gas disk, and some evidence for net expansion. Joined to a northern map made in the Netherlands by Gart Westerhout, this provided the definitive picture of the Milky Way as a rotating spiral for many years. Kerr studied physics at the University of Melbourne, receiving his BSc degree in 1938 and his MSc degree in 1940. He then became a staff member at the Radiophysics Laboratory in Sydney, Australia, continuing his affiliation until 1968; ▶ Joseph Pawsey was his key mentor during these years at the Radiophysics Laboratory. Kerr held research posts at Harvard University (where he also earned an MA in astronomy in 1951), Leiden University, and the University of Texas and in 1962 was awarded the DSc degree by Melbourne University. In 1966 he joined the faculty of the University of Maryland, where he remained for the rest of his career. Kerr’s early studies of radar and radio transmission and reception led in 1948 to his work on bouncing radar echoes off the Moon and studying the transmission and refraction of the upper ionosphere. In a classic 1952 paper, he analyzed the possibility of measuring distances, structure, and motions in the solar system using radar echoes. While visiting Harvard University, Kerr witnessed the first detection of the 21-cm line of interstellar neutral hydrogen by Harold Ewen and ▶ Edward Purcell and upon his return to Australia embarked on what was to become his life’s work, the use of this hydrogen line to study the structure of the Galaxy. He set up a Southern Hemisphere 21-cm line program, first using a 36-ft. telescope and in later years the Parkes 210-ft. radio telescope. In 1952/1953 he made the first detection and mapping observations of 21-cm hydrogen lines in galaxies other than our own, the Magellanic Clouds, showing that these relatively dust-free systems contain large amounts of cold hydrogen and demonstrating the existence of an interstellar medium of different global properties from those in the Galaxy. In 1954 Kerr, together with ▶ Gerard de Vaucouleurs, Brian Robinson, and James

K

K

Kesáva

1180

Hindman, mapped the hydrogen in the Large Magellanic Cloud, measured its extended hydrogen envelope and rotation curve, and made the first measurement of its mass. In 1954 Kerr began his studies of our Galaxy, using the 36-ft. telescope to map hydrogen emission from the southern galactic plane. He found that hydrogen in the outer Galaxy bends away from the galactic plane in the opposite direction to that in the northern galactic plane and invented the term “galactic warp” to describe this global distortion. Kerr hypothesized that the warp is due to tidal interaction between the galactic disk and the Magellanic Cloud. Together with Gart Westerhout and Maarten Schmidt at Leiden University, he used the northern and southern hydrogen surveys, and ▶ Jan Oort’srotation model, to make the first map of the entire Galaxy. Westerhout, Kerr, and Colin Gum also used these surveys to define the location of the galactic plane and the new galactic coordinate system adopted by the International Astronomical Union [IAU] in 1958. In 1966 Kerr moved to the University of Maryland, joining his colleague Westerhout and turning it into a major center for galactic structure studies for the next decades. Kerr’s work during this period included several improvements to the hydrogen map of the Galaxy, the use of OH masers to trace the evolved stellar population throughout the Galaxy, studies of the gas dynamics in the galactic center, and investigations of the enigmatic hydrogen high-velocity clouds. He carried out much of this work at the National Radio Astronomy Observatory in West Virginia but returned many times to Australia for extended observing periods. In the 1980s Kerr and the last of his 13 PhD students, Patricia Henning, pioneered blind searching for hydrogen emission from galaxies optically hidden by the dust in the galactic plane. Altogether, Kerr published nearly 200 scientific articles. Kerr’s service to the scientific community included the vice presidency of the American Astronomical Society (1980–1982), directorship of the Maryland astronomy program, a term (1978–1985) as provost of the Division of Mathematical and Physical Sciences and Engineering, and some years as program director

of the University Space Research Association (the organization charged with oversight of several of the national observatories) beginning in 1983. Within the International Astronomical Union, he was president of Commission (33) on structure of the Milky Way (1976–1979) and active in the commissions on interstellar matter and radio astronomy (organizing committee 1965–1968). Kerr cochaired, with Donald Lynden-Bell, the 1985 IAU committee that reevaluated the structure constants of the Milky Way, concluding that our distance from the center is closer to 8.5 than to 10 kPc, the number established 20 years earlier by Oort. Always a loyal Australian, Kerr diligently followed Australian politics, opera, and especially sports. He was predeceased by his wife, Maureen, and one of their three children.

Selected References Kerr, F. J. (1952). “On the Possibility of Obtaining Radar Echoes from the Sun and Planets.” Proceedings of the I.R.E. 40: 660–666. Kerr, F. J., J. V. Hindman, and B. J. Robinson (1954). “Observations of the 21 cm Line from the Magellanic Clouds.” Australian Journal of Physics 7: 297–314. Oort, J. H., F. J. Kerr, and G. Westerhout (1958). “The Galactic System as a Spiral Nebula.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 118: 379–389. Sullivan III, Woodruff T. (1988). “Frank Kerr and Radio Waves: From Wartime Radar to Interstellar Atoms.” In The Outer Galaxy, edited by L. Blitz and F. J. Lockman, pp. 268–287. Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Westerhout, Gart (2000). “Frank John Kerr, 1918–2000.” Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society 32: 1674–1676.

Kesáva Setsuro Ikeyama Kyotanabe, Kyoto, Japan

Flourished Nandod, (Gujaret, India), 1496–1507 Kesáva established a line of astronomers in Nandigra¯ma (Nandod). He was the son of

Khafrı¯: Shams al-Dı¯n Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Khafrı¯ al-Ka¯shı¯ ˙ ˙

1181

K

Kama¯lakara of the Kausíkagotra and the pupil of Vaijana¯tha. Kesáva’s three sons, Ananta, ▶ Ganesá, and Ra¯ma, were also noted astrono˙ mers. Ganesá listed more than ten works of his ˙ father but only six survive: the Grahakautuka, a treatise on astronomy composed in 1496; the Ja¯takapaddhati, a popular treatise on horoscopy usually accompanied by a commentary with tables; the Ja¯takapaddhativivrti, a commentary ˙ on the preceding; the Ta¯jikapaddhati, a work on annual predictions based on Islamic astrology; the Muhu¯rtatattva, a work on catarchic astrology; and the Sudhı¯ran˜jan¯ı. ˙

Born Emden, (Niedersachsen, Germany), circa 1540 Died Bantam (Banten, near Serang, Java, Indonesia), 13 September 1596

Selected References

Allen, Richard Hinckley (1963). Star Names: Their Lore and Meaning. New York: Dover.

Dikshit, S. B. (1896). Bha¯ratı¯ya Jyotisha. Poona. (English translation by R. V. Vaidya. 2 pts. New Delhi: Government of India Press, Controller of Publications, 1969, 1981.) Dvivedin, Sudha¯kara (1892). “Ganakataran.ginı¯.” Pandit, n.s. 14: 53-55. (Reprinted ˙ as Ganakataran˜ginı¯. ˙ Benares, 1933.) Pingree, David. Census of the Exact Sciences in Sanskrit. Series A. Vol. 2 (1971): 65b-74a; Vol. 3 (1976): 24a; Vol. 4 (1981): 64a-66a; Vol. 5 (1994): 56a-59b. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society. — (1973). “Kesáva.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 314-316. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. — (1981). Jyotihsá¯stra. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz. ˙

Pieter Keyser, a Dutch navigator, served on one of the first trade voyages to Asia. On the basis of Keyser’s and Fredrik de Houtman’s observations of the southern skies, western names were given to 12 constellations of the South Celestial Hemisphere.

Selected Reference

Khafrı¯: Shams al-Dı¯n Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Khafrı¯ al-Ka¯shı˙¯ ˙ Glen M. Cooper Department of History, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

Born probably Khafr near Shiraz, (Iran), circa 1470 Died probably (Iran), after 1525

Keyser, Petrus (Theodori) Dirckszoon Khafrı¯ was an Iranian theoretical astronomer who ▶ Keyser, Pieter (Theodori) Dirckszoon

Keyser, Pieter (Theodori) Dirckszoon Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Alternate Name ▶ Keyser, Petrus (Theodori) Dirckszoon

produced innovative planetary theories at a time well beyond the supposed period of the decline of Islamic science. Little is known about his life. Various Shı¯ҁ¯ı writers claim Khafrı¯ as one of their own religious scholars, and the sources assert that he was influential in the program of the Safavid Sha¯h Isma¯ҁ¯ıl (died: 1524) to make Shı¯ҁism the official Islamic sect of Iran. The fact that Khafrı¯ wrote works in the fields of both religion and astronomy seems to indicate that at his time and place Islamic religious scholars saw no insuperable conflict between science and religion. This appears contrary to the traditional view that science and religion were constantly at odds in Islamic society, and that, long before the

K

K

1182

Khafrı¯: Shams al-Dı¯n Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Khafrı¯ al-Ka¯shı¯ ˙ ˙

lifetime of Khafrı¯, religious scholars effectively squelched the scientific impulse in Islam. Other examples of Islamic scientists who also were religious scholars include ▶ Baha¯’ al-Dı¯n ¯ milı¯ and ▶ Niza¯m al-Dı¯n al-Nı¯sa¯bu¯rı¯. al-ҁA ˙ Khafrı¯’s fame as an astronomer rests mainly on his astronomical treatise al-Takmila fı¯ sharh ˙ “al-Tadhkira” (The completion of the commentary on the Tadhkira). This was a commentary on ▶ Naṣı¯r al-Dı¯n al-Ṭu¯sı¯’s important astronomical treatise, al-Tadhkira fı¯ҁ ilm al-hay’a (Memoir on astronomy). As was the custom of the time, in both the Arabic and Latin worlds, a scholar often presented his own theories within the context of a commentary on the work of an esteemed author. Consistent with the Islamic tradition in theoretical astronomy, in which astronomers had sought to reform Ptolemaic astronomy by revising ▶ Ptolemy’s planetary models into physically consistent forms, Khafrı¯ presented new models. Ptolemy had devised models of planetary motion involving spheres that were required to rotate with nonuniform velocity with respect to poles (the most notorious being the equant) other than their centers. In particular, Khafrı¯ presented new models for the motions of the Moon, the upper planets, and Mercury, some more successful than others in meeting the criticisms of earlier astronomers such as ▶ Ibn al-Haytham. Khafrı¯’s model for the lunar motion combined the best features of two previous theories, namely those of ▶ Mu’ayyad al-Dı¯n al-ҁUrd¯ı and ˙ ▶ Qutb al-Dı¯n al-Shı¯ra¯zı¯. He managed to ˙ employ only spheres that moved uniformly around their own centers, the basic criterion for physical consistency in Islamic astronomy. Khafrı¯ discussed various solutions to the irregular lunar motions, including those of Tu¯sı¯, Shı¯ra¯zı¯, ˙ and himself. However, there are some problems with his model. Because he attempted to make the predictions of his model coincide as closely as possible with the Ptolemaic lunar model, especially at the critical points including quadrature, his model replicated certain errors of Ptolemy’s model, including the absurd prediction that the Moon should appear twice its actual size.

▶ Ibn al-Sha¯tir had solved this problem, but ˙ Khafrı¯ seems to have been unaware of his work. The fact that Khafrı¯ adheres so closely to Ptolemy’s observations and reproduces one of the major predictive failings of Ptolemaic theory suggests that Khafrı¯ was more of a theorist than an observational astronomer. Khafrı¯ solved the equant problem for the upper planets, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn, by following ҁUrd¯ı’s model with a few adjustments, ˙ such as introducing a second deferent as well as an “epicyclet,” i.e., an epicycle on an epicycle. Again, this model essentially duplicates all of the Ptolemaic planetary positions while preserving a physically consistent model. Khafrı¯ described four such models for Mercury’s motion, one devised by ▶ ҁAlı¯ Qu¯shjı¯ and three by him. Khafrı¯ employed all of the techniques and theoretical mechanisms devised in the Islamic tradition of mathematical astronomy (the Tu¯sı¯ Couple, epicyclets, etc.) ˙ and, in each case, the result was a physically consistent model. The work of Khafrı¯ raises the important question of the status of theoretical models in science. In the Takmila, Khafrı¯ offered several possible models for the motion of Mercury, each of which was essentially equivalent in predictive power. This seems to imply that for Khafrı¯, the model apparently was simply a tool for predicting planetary positions. If so, then Khafrı¯ made a significant departure from his predecessors in the entire Graeco-Islamic tradition. Alternatively, Khafrı¯ may have been attempting to find all the possible solutions to a scientific problem, from which the scientist must employ observational criteria to choose the most correct configuration. In any case, it is not yet known what impact, if any, the work of Khafrı¯ had or whether it led to any broad reassessment of the aims of science in Islam. Two other works by Khafrı¯ are mentioned in several sources, but have yet to be studied: Muntaha¯ al-idra¯k fı¯ al-hay’a (The ultimate comprehension of astronomy), written as a refutation or a commentary on the Niha¯yat al-idra¯k fı¯ dira¯yat al-afla¯k (The ultimate

Khaikin, Semyon Emmanuilovich

understanding of the knowledge of the orbs) of Shı¯ra¯zı¯; and Hall ma¯ la¯ yanhall (Resolution of ˙ ˙ that not [yet] solved).

Selected References Al- Khafrı¯, Shams al-Dı¯n (1994). al-Takmila fı¯ sharh al-tadhkira. (This work has been neither edited nor published in Arabic or English translation. The following manuscripts were consulted by Saliba (1994): Za¯hiriyya Library, Damascus, MSS. 6727 and 6782; India Office Library, London, Arabic MS. 747; and Bibliothe`que Nationale, Paris MS. Arabe 6085.) Ragep, F. J. (1993). Nası¯r al-Dı¯n al-Tu¯sı¯’s Memoir on Astronomy (al-Tadhkira fı¯ ҁilm al-hay’a). 2 Vols. New York: Springer-Verlag. (Perhaps the most significant study to emerge thus far in the historiography of astronomy in Islam, in which al-Tu¯sı¯’s treatise was ˙ pivotal.) Rosenfeld, B. A. and Ekmeleddin Ihsanog˘lu (2003). Mathematicians, Astronomers, and Other Scholars of Islamic Civilization and Their Works (7th-19th c.). Istanbul: IRCICA, pp. 313–314. Saliba, George (1994). A History of Arabic Astronomy: Planetary Theories during the Golden Age of Islam. New York: New York University Press. (This is a collection of articles that are useful in that they probe deeply into several discrete figures and issues from the history of Islamic astronomy. Saliba provides helpful clarifications of a number of historical issues, including the nature of the apparent connection between the work of Islamic astronomers of the “Mara¯gha School” and the achievement of Nicolaus Copernicus.) — (1994). “A Sixteenth-century Arabic Critique of Ptolemaic Astronomy: The Work of Shams al-Dı¯n alKhafrı¯.” Journal for the History of Astronomy 25: 15–38. (Detailed survey of the al-Takmila fı¯ sharh al-tadhkira from which the remarks of the present article were derived.) — (1996). “Arabic Planetary Theories after the Eleventh Century AD.” In Encyclopedia of the History of Arabic Science, edited by Roshdi Rashed, pp. 58–127. London: Routledge. (Important survey of the later period of theoretical astronomy in Islam. Presents many helpful descriptions and diagrams of planetary models, and traces the often subtle theoretical modifications from one model to the next.) — (1997). “A Redeployment of Mathematics in a 16thCentury Arabic Critique of Ptolemaic Astronomy.” In Perspectives arabes et me´die´vales sur la tradition scientifique et philosophique grecque, edited by Ahmad Hasnawi, pp. 105–122. Paris: Peeters. (A speculative description of a possibly significant shift in understanding of the role of mathematical modeling in scientific theory which occurred late in the history of Islamic astronomy, in the work of Khafrı¯.)

1183

K

Khaikin, Semyon Emmanuilovich Alexander A. Gurshtein Vavilov Institute for History of Science & Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Born Minsk (Belarus), 21 August 1901 Died Leningrad (Saint Petersburg, Russia), 30 July 1968 Semyon Khaikin was a Soviet physicist and radio astronomer, a pioneer and visionary in observational radio astronomy who predetermined the strategy of its development in the USSR for decades to come. During the 1947 solar eclipse in Brazil, Khaikin became the first to observe the radio (1-m) emission of the Sun’s corona. A graduate (1928) of Moscow University, Khaikin also taught there from 1930 to 1946. In 1931–1933 he was deputy director of the Physical Institute within the Moscow University, in 1934–1937 the dean of the Physical Faculty, and in 1937–1946 the chair of the Department of General Physics. Concurrently, in 1945–1953, he conducted research at the Lebedev Physical Institute of the Soviet Academy of Science [PhIAN]. After World War II, Khaikin headed the creation of the first Soviet radio astronomical station in Crimea. During Stalin’s anti-Semitic (so-called anticosmopolitan) campaign, Khaikin was forced to leave Moscow University and soon moved to Pulkovo Observatory near Leningrad, where he founded and ran the Department of Radio Astronomy (1953). He was the principal designer of a special type of new radio telescope with an antenna of changing profile for a higher angular resolution; RATAN-600, the largest telescope in the world of such a type, was erected later on the Northern Caucasus side by side with the great 6-m optical telescope [BTA]. One of Khaikin’s postgraduate students, T.A. Shmaonov, in 1955–1956 factually

K

K

1184

Khalı¯faza¯de Isma¯ҁ¯ıl: Khalı¯faza¯de Çınarı¯ Isma¯ҁ¯ıl Efendi ibn Mustafa¯ ˙˙

discovered the thermal relict radiation of the universe, although the physical meaning of this discovery as a trace of the Big Bang was not then recognized. Shmaonov’s measurements under Khaikin’s guidance took place about 10 years earlier similar measurements of Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson who, for their results, shared the Nobel Prize in physics for 1978.

Selected References Alpert, Ya. L. (2000). Making Waves: Stories from My Life. New Haven: Yale University Press. Andronov, A. A., A. A. Vitt, and S. E. Khaikin. (1987). The Theory of Oscillators. New York: Dover. Kaidanovsky, N. L. (1986). “At the Sources of Radioastronomy” (in Russian). Istorico-astronomicheskie issledovaniya (Research in the History of Astronomy) 18: 17–40. Kaidanovsky, N. L. and Yu. N. Pariisky (1987). “From the History of the Relict Radiation Discovery” (in Russian). Istorico-astronomicheskie issledovaniya (Research in the History of Astronomy) 19: 59–68. Khaikin, S. E. (1962). The Physical Foundations of Mechanics (in Russian). (2nd ed. Moscow: Nauka. 1971.) Salomonovich, A. E. (ed.) (1988). The Development of Radio Astronomy in the USSR. Moscow: Nauka. Salomonovich, A. E. and Smol’kov, G. Ya. (eds.) (1990). Soviet Radio Telescopes and Radio Astronomy of the Sun. Moscow: Nauka.

Khalı¯faza¯de Isma¯ҁ¯ıl: Khalı¯faza¯de Çınarı¯ Isma¯ҁ¯ıl Efendi ibn Mustafa¯ ˙˙ Meltem Kocaman Department of History of Science, University of Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey

Died (Turkey), probably 1790 Khalı¯faza¯de Isma¯ҁ¯ıl was an Ottoman astronomer, astrologer, timekeeper (muwaqqit), and astronomical instrument maker. He lived and worked in Istanbul, but we have no information about the date and place of his birth. The title Çınarı¯ in some of his manuscripts implies that he lived in the C ¸ ınar district, also known as Sancaktar

Hayrettin. The name Khalı¯faza¯de was derived from the profession of his father Muṣtafa¯ Efendi, ˙ who was a khalı¯fa (experienced apprentice) of muka¯bele-i piya¯de and worked in the barracks at Sumnu (in Bulgaria). Muka¯bele-i piya¯de was an office under the Treasury that enlisted infantry and handled the paper work for their salaries. This was also Khalı¯faza¯de Isma¯ҁ¯ıl’s first position, and it required mathematical skills; he worked in the same office as a s¸a¯kird (apprentice) in 1755 and then was promoted bas¸halife. Probably the earliest work of Khalı¯faza¯de is a sundial that he most likely completed as an apprentice. This vertical sundial still exists and is located at the southwest wall of the Hekimog˘lu Ali Pasha Mosque in the neighborhood of Çınar where Khalı¯faza¯de lived. The inscription on the sundial notes that it was engraved in 1761 by Khalı¯faza¯de Isma¯ҁ¯ıl. In 1767, Khalı¯faza¯de was appointed as muwaqqit to the Laleli Mosque (also called the Sultan Muṣtafa III Mosque) and remained ˙ there until 1789. During this period he compiled or translated a number of works on astronomy, astrology, and mathematics. In 1767, Khalı¯faza¯de constructed a horizontal sundial engraved on marble that is no longer extant but which partially existed until the end of the nineteenth century. However, located at the base of the west minaret of the Laleli Mosque are two other vertical sundials made by him. The larger of the two was completed in 1779. Although the lines of the sundials are not sharp, the inscription is still legible and states that it was “engraved by muwaqqit Isma¯ҁ¯ıl.” The Ottoman Sultan Muṣtafa¯ III (reigned: ˙ 1757–1774), who was particularly fond of astrology, asked Khalı¯faza¯de to translate two studies on astronomy from French to Turkish; this indicates that he had some knowledge of French, but we have no information on how he acquired this knowledge. The first translation, Rasad-i qamar or Terceme-i Zı¯c-i Clairaut, was related to the movements of the Moon and was probably based on ▶ Alexis Clairaut’s (1713–1765) astronomical work entitled Theórie de la lune. Two copies exist: The first is Istanbul, Kandilli Observatory Library MS 190 (which is the author’s copy),

Khalı¯lı¯: Shams al-Dı¯n Abu¯ ҁAbdalla¯h Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Khalı¯lı¯ ˙ ˙

completed in 1768 and dedicated to Muṣtafa¯ III; ˙ a second copy is Kandilli Observatory Library MS 244. Khalı¯faza¯de’s second translation, also at the request of Muṣtafa¯ III, was of ▶ Jacques ˙ Cassini’s (1677–1756) Tables astronomiques du soleil, de la lune, des plane`tes, des e´toiles fixes et des satellites de Jupiter et de Saturne (Paris, 1740). Completed in 1772–73, it was named Tuhfe-i Behı¯c-i Rası¯nı¯ Terceme-i Zı¯c-i Cassinı¯. (Kandilli Observatory Library MS 200.) This work, known as Cassini’s Zı¯j, was significant for two main reasons. First, it introduced logarithms to the Ottomans; furthermore, Khalı¯faza¯de added tables to the translation giving the logarithms for sines and tangents of arcs from 0 to 45 to the level of minutes, and he also provided logarithmic tables for integers from 1 to 10,000. Second, this zı¯j influenced Ottoman timekeeping. ▶ Ulugh Beg’s zı¯j was abandoned during Sultan Selim III’s reign (1789–1807) due to its errors (as much as 1 h) and replaced with calendars and astronomical calculations based on Cassini’s zı¯j beginning in 1800. This zı¯j was then used for almost 30 years. Khalı¯faza¯de Isma¯ҁ¯ıl Efendi wrote other works in the fields of astronomy, astrology, and mathematics that can be found listed in Osmanli Astronomi Literat€ ur€ u Tarihi and Osmanli Matematik Literat€ ur€ u Tarihi.

Selected References Çam, Nusret (1990). Osmanlı’da G€ unes Saatleri. Ankara. I˙hsanog˘lu, Ekmeleddin (1992). “Introduction of Western Science to the Ottoman World: A Case Study of Modern Astronomy (1660–1860).” In Transfer of Modern Science and Technology to the Muslim World, edited by Ekmeleddin ˙Ihsanog˘lu, pp. 67–120, esp. 96–97. Istanbul: IRCICA. I˙hsanog˘lu, Ekmeleddin et al. (1997). Osmanlı Astronomi Literat€ ur€ u Tarihi (OALT) (History of astronomy literature during the Ottoman period). Vol. 2, pp. 530–536. Istanbul: IRCICA — (1999). Osmanlı Matematik Literat€ ur€ u Tarihi (OMLT) (History of mathematical literature during the Ottoman period). Vol. 1, pp. 250–251. Istanbul: IRCICA. ˙Izgi, Cevat (1997). Osmanlı Medreselerinde İlim. Vol. 1, p. 252. Istanbul.

1185

K

K€ ut€ ukog˘lu, M€ ubahat (1999). “Osmanlı Maliyesi.” In Osmanlı Devleti Tarihi, edited by Ekmeleddin I˙hsanog˘lu. Vol. 2, p. 516. Istanbul. Meyer, Wolfgang (1985). İstanbul’daki G€ unes Saatleri. Istanbul, pp. 50–51, 56–57. ¨ zdemir, Kemal (1993). Osmanlıdan G€ O un€ um€ uze Saatler. Istanbul, pp. 54–55. Salih Zeki Kamus-i Riyaziyat. Vol. 1, pp. 315–318. Istanbul 1315 (1897). Takvim-i Vakayi, no. 46, 6 Receb 1248 (29 November 1832), p. 3. (Newspaper published in Istanbul.) Uzunçarsılı, ˙Ismail Hakkı (1983). Osmanlı Tarihi. Vol. 4, p. 2, p. 537. Ankara. Kut, G€ unay et. al. (2007). Kandilli Rasathanesi El Yazmaları 1: T€ urkçe Yazmalar. I˙stanbul: Bog˘aziçi € Universitesi Yayınevi, pp. 378–387.

Khalı¯lı¯: Shams al-Dı¯n Abu¯ ҁAbdalla¯h Muhammad ibn Muhammad ˙ ¯lı¯ ˙ al-Khalı David A. King Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universit€at, Frankfurt am Main, Germany

Flourished Damascus, (Syria), circa 1365 Khalı¯lı¯ was an astronomer associated with the Umayyad Mosque in the center of Damascus. A colleague of the astronomer ▶ Ibn al-Sha¯tir, ˙ he was also a muwaqqit – i.e., an astronomer ҁ concerned with ilm al-mı¯qa¯t, the science of timekeeping by the Sun and stars and regulating the astronomically defined times of Muslim prayer. Khalı¯lı¯’s major work, which represents the culmination of the medieval Islamic achievement in the mathematical solution of the problems of spherical astronomy, was a set of tables for astronomical timekeeping. Some of these tables were used in Damascus until the nineteenth century, and they were also used in Cairo and Istanbul for several centuries. The main sets of tables survive in numerous manuscripts, but they were not investigated until the 1970s. Khalı¯lı¯’s tables can be categorized as follows: 1. Tables for reckoning time by the Sun, for the latitude of Damascus;

K

K

1186

Khalı¯lı¯: Shams al-Dı¯n Abu¯ ҁAbdalla¯h Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Khalı¯lı¯ ˙ ˙

2. Tables for regulating the times of Muslim prayer, for the latitude of Damascus; 3. Tables of auxiliary mathematical functions for timekeeping by the Sun for all latitudes; 4. Tables of auxiliary functions for finding the solar azimuth from the solar altitude for any latitude; 5. Tables of auxiliary functions for solving the problems of spherical astronomy for all latitudes; 6. A table displaying the qibla, i.e., the direction of Mecca, as a function of terrestrial latitude and longitude for each degree of both arguments; and 7. Tables for converting lunar ecliptic coordinates to equatorial coordinates. (Paris, Bibliothe`que Nationale MS ar. 2558, copied in 1408, contains all of the tables in Khalı¯lı¯’s major set [1, 2, 5 and 6]. Dublin, Chester Beatty MS 4091 and Bursa, Haraççiog˘lu MS 1177, four are unique copies of the minor auxiliary tables [3] and [4], respectively.) The first two sets of tables correspond to those in the large corpus of spherical astronomical tables computed for Cairo that are generally attributed to the tenth-century Egyptian astronomer ▶ Ibn Yu¯nus. Khalı¯lı¯’s fifth set of tables was designed to solve all the standard problems of spherical astronomy, and they are particularly useful for those problems that, in modern terms, involve the use of the cosine rule for spherical triangles. Khalı¯lı¯ tabulated three functions and gave detailed instructions for their application. The functions are the following: f f ¼ sin y= cos f and gf ¼ sin y tan f K ðx; yÞ ¼ arc cos fx= cos yg,

tðh; d; fÞ ¼ K

Computed for appropriate domains. The entries in these tables, which number over 13,000, were computed to two sexagesimal digits and are invariably accurate. An example of the use of these functions is the rule outlined by Khalı¯lı¯ for finding the hour angle t for given solar or stellar altitude h, declination d, and terrestrial latitude j. This may be represented as:

i o f f ðhÞ gf ðdÞ ; d

(2)

And it is not difficult to show the equivalence of Khalı¯lı¯’s rule to the modern formula t ¼ arc cos

f sin h sin d sin fg cos d cos f

(3)

These auxiliary tables were used for several centuries in Damascus, Cairo, and Istanbul, the three main centers of astronomical timekeeping in the Muslim world. They were first described in 1973. In 1991 Glen Van Brummelen, in his statistical investigation of the errors in the entries, determined that the tables of (7) had been computed first and the tables of (6) were computed from these. In 2000, the fourth set of Khalı¯lı¯’s tables was discovered in a manuscript in Bursa. These were compiled before the fifth set and also contain a set of tables of (7); when compiling his main set (5), Khalı¯lı¯ simply took over the tables of (7) from this earlier set (4). So Van Brummelen’s hypothesis was confirmed. Khalı¯lı¯’s computational ability is best revealed by his qibla table. The determination of the qibla for a given locality is one of the most complicated problems of medieval Islamic trigonometry. If (L, ’) and (LM, ’M) represent the longitude and latitude of a given locality and of Mecca, respectively, and DL ¼ jLL Mj, then the modern formula for q(L, ’), the direction of Mecca for the locality, measured from the south, is q ¼ arc cot

(1)

nh

f sin f cos DL cos f tan fM g (4) sin DL

Khalı¯lı¯ computed q (L, j) to two sexagesimal digits for the domains j ¼ 10 , 11 , . . . , 56 and DL ¼ 1 , 2 ,. . ., 60 ; the vast majority of the 2,880 entries are either accurately computed or in error by 10 or 20 . Several other qibla tables based on approximate formulas are known from the medieval period. Khalı¯lı¯’s splendid qibla table does not appear to have been widely used by later Muslim astronomers.

Kharadze, Evgeni

Selected References King, David A. (1973). “Al-Khalı¯lı¯’s Auxiliary Tables for Solving Problems of Spherical Astronomy.” Journal for the History of Astronomy 4: 99–110. (Reprinted in King, Islamic Mathematical Astronomy, XI. London: Variorum Reprints, 1986; 2nd rev. ed., Aldershot: Variorum, 1993.) — (1975). “Al-Khalı¯lı¯’s Qibla Table.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 34: 81–122. (Reprinted in King, Islamic Mathematical Astronomy, XIII. London: Variorum Reprints, 1986; 2nd rev. ed., Aldershot: Variorum, 1993.) — (1978). “Al-Khalı¯lı¯.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 15, pp. 259–261. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. — (1983). “The Astronomy of the Mamluks.” Isis 74: 531–555. (Reprinted in King, Islamic Mathematical Astronomy, III. London: Variorum Reprints, 1986; 2nd rev. ed., Aldershot: Variorum, 1993.) — (1993). “L’astronomie en Syrie a` l’e´poque islamique.” In Syrie, me´moire et civilization, [exhibition catalogue] edited by Sophie Cluzan, Eric Delpont and Jeanne Moulie´rac, pp. 392–394, 440. Paris: Institut du monde arabe and Flammarion. — (2004). In Synchrony with the Heavens: Studies in Astronomical Timekeeping and Instrumentation in Medieval Islamic Civilization. Vol. 1, The Call of the Muezzin (Studies I-IX). Leiden: Brill, II-10. Van Brummelen, Glen (1991). “The Numerical Structure of al-Khalı¯lı¯’s Auxiliary Tables.” Physis, n.s., 28: 667–697.

Khaljı¯: Mahmu¯d Sha¯h Khaljı¯ ˙ ▶ Cholgi: Mahmu¯d Sha¯h Cholgi ˙

Kharadze, Evgeni Alexander A. Gurshtein Vavilov Institute for History of Science & Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Born Tiflis (Tbilisi, Georgia), 18/31 October 1907 Died Tbilisi (Georgia), 10 October 2001

1187

K

Georgian-Soviet astrophysicist and science administrator Evgeni Kharadze seems to have been the first to recognize that when the spectrum of an astronomical object displays both emission and absorption features of the same lines, it is necessary to correct for the emission in order to measure the radial velocity of the absorption. Although his first, 1935, paper was a discussion of the correlation of the profile of hydrogen lines in the solar spectrum with solar activity (during the 1929 maximum), he was best known for a cluster of papers (mostly in English in Observatory and Zeitschrift f€ ur Astrophysik) concerning the spectrum of P Cygni and concluding that, after suitable corrections, the absorption velocities were correlated with ionization potential of the lower levels from which lines arose, as had earlier been suggested by ▶ Otto Struve. Kharadze was educated at Tbilisi State University (bachelor’s degree 1930), Leningrad State University (Candidate of Science, 1936), and Moscow State University (Doctor of Science 1948) and held a number of administrative positions at Tbilisi. He became director of the Abastumani Astrophysical Observatory on Mount Kanobili (in Georgia) in 1932 and served in the capacity for 60 years. He was elected one of the vice-presidents of the International Astronomical Union for the term 1976–1982 and became a full member of the USSR Academy of Science in 1984. During Kharadze’s directorship, Abastumani produced a catalogue of dark nebulae (1960, author D. Sch. Khavtassi) and a new way of attempting to determine the distribution of stars in the Milky Way (1937, author M.A. Vashakidze). The first volumes of the Bulletin of the Abastumani Astrophysical Observatory appeared in 1937, and the volumes continued more or less regularly through World War II. The 70 cm meniscus telescope, with an objective prism, was used to provide low-resolution spectra, for instance, of stars in and around M13, for use by colleagues elsewhere. There is an asteroid (2147) Kharadze.

K

K

1188

Kharaqı¯: Shams al-Dı¯n Abu¯ Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Kharaqı¯ [al-Khiraqı¯] ˙ ˙

Selected References Anon. (1986). “Kharadze, Evgeni Kirillovich.” In Astronomy: Biograficheskii spravochnik (Astronomers: A Biographical Handbook), edited by I.G. Kolchinskii, A.A. Korsun’ and M.G. Rodriges, p. 341–342, 2nd ed. Kiev: Naukova dumka (In Russian). Dictionary of Georgian National Biography www. georgianbiography.com. Kharadse E. К., An investigation of displacements of absorption lines in the spectrum of P Cygni in connection with their intensities and ionization potentials, “Zeitschrift f€ur Astrophysik”, 1936; Bd 11, H. 4.

minds to this task. Yet, Kharaqı¯ proclaims, people still do not know how the stars carry out their motions. It is like knowing that a person went from one city to another, but not knowing whether he went by foot or on horseback. His own work aims to rectify the matter. Although no specific advances can yet be credited to alKharaqı¯, his writings were an influence upon ▶ Naṣı¯r al-Dı¯n al- Tu¯sı¯. ˙

Selected References

Kharaqı¯: Shams al-Dı¯n Abu¯ Bakr Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Kharaqı¯ ˙ ˙ [al-Khiraqı ¯] Y. Tzvi Langermann Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel

Flourished Marw (Merv near Mary, Turkmenistan) Died 1138/1139 Kharaqı¯ is the author of two works on hay’a, a genre of the Arabic astronomical literature that placed its main emphasis on explaining the physical structure of the Universe. The shorter of these, al-Tabṣira f ¯ıҁ ilm al-hay’a (Conspectus of the science of astronomy), achieved considerable popularity. Altogether, about a dozen manuscripts survive (including several copied into Hebrew letters). Two commentaries were written, one by the Yemeni Jew Alu’el ben Yeshaҁ, the other anonymous; and a Hebrew translation has been identified. Only a few manuscript copies of the longer work, Muntaha¯ al-idra¯k fı¯ taqa¯sı¯m al-afla¯k (The utmost attainment in the configuration of the orbs) survive. Neither work has been published or even been the subject of a close study. Kharaqı¯’s work constitutes an important stage in the physical investigations of Islamic astronomers. He acknowledges the work of predecessors such as ▶ Ibn al-Haytham who had put their

Ragep, F. J. (1993). Nası¯r al-Dı¯n al-Tu¯sı¯’s Memoir on Astronomy (al-Tadhkira fı¯ҁ ilm al-hay’a). 2 Vols. New York: Springer-Verlag. (See his index for occasional references and citations from the writings of Kharaqı¯.) Wiedemann, E. and K. Kohl (1926/1927). “Einleitung zu Werken von al-Charaqı¯.” Sitzungsberichte der Physikalisch-Medizinischen Soziet€ at in Erlangen 58-59: 203-218. (Reprinted in Wiedemann, Aufs€ atze zur arabischen Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Vol. 2, pp. 628-643. Hildesheim: G. Olms, 1970. German translations of introductions to Kharaqı¯’s two books.) Wiedemann, E. and J. Samso´ (1978). “Al-Kharakı¯.” In Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Vol. 4, p. 1059. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

Khatib: (Imam) Fakhr ibn al-Khatib ▶ Fakhr al-Din al-Razi: Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Umar ibn al-Husayn al-Taymi al-Bakri al-Tabaristani Fakhr al-Din al-Razi

Khayya¯m: Ghiya¯th al-Dı¯n Abu¯ alFath ҁUmar ibn Ibra¯hı¯m al-Khayya¯mı¯ ˙¯sha¯pu¯rı¯ al-Nı Behnaz Hashemipour Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran

Alternate Name ▶ Omar Khayya¯m; ▶ ҁUmar Khayya¯m

Khayya¯m: Ghiya¯th al-Dı¯n Abu¯ al-Fath ҁUmar ibn Ibra¯hı¯m al-Khayya¯mı¯ al-Nı¯sha¯pu¯rı¯ ˙

Born Nı¯sha¯pu¯r, Khura¯sa¯n, (Iran), 18 May 1048 Died Nı¯sha¯pu¯r Khura¯sa¯n, (Iran), circa 1123 Better known in the West as ҁUmar Khayya¯m, Khayya¯m was one of the most prominent scholars of medieval times, with remarkable contributions in the fields of mathematics and astronomy. His worldwide fame today mainly comes from a number of quatrains attributed to him that have tended to overshadow his brilliant scientific achievements. Besides his ingenious achievements in mathematics, Khayya¯m is said to have supervised or actively taken part in the formulation and compilation of a solar calendar that potentially surpasses all calendar systems ever composed in precision and exactness – a legacy alive today in his native Iran. Khayya¯m’s contributions to astronomy should be viewed within the context of his efforts to compile this calendar. Nı¯sha¯bu¯r was known for its great learning centers and its prominent scholars. Khayya¯m studied the sciences of the day in his native town and is said to have mastered all branches of knowledge in early youth. Khayya¯m soon rose to prominence in Khura¯sa¯n, the political center of the powerful Salju¯q dynasty that ruled over a vast empire extending from the borders of China to the Mediterranean. As the leading scientist, philosopher, and astronomer of his day, he enjoyed the support and patronage of the Salju¯q court. With the ascent of Jala¯l al-Dı¯n Malik Sha¯h to the throne, in 1072, Isfaha¯n was chosen as the new capital of the Salju¯q dynasty. Consequently, a group of prominent scientists and scholars from Khura¯sa¯n, among them Khayya¯m and ▶ al-Muzaffar al-Isfiza¯rı¯, were ˙ summoned to the court in the new capital to embark on two grand projects: the construction of an observatory and the compilation of a new calendar to replace the existing calendars. In addition to other deficiencies, these calendars had proved inefficient in monetary and administrative matters related to time-reckoning. No details have survived regarding the observatory and its site, except for brief notes saying that huge sums of money were spent on it and that it was very well equipped. However, one finds references made by ▶ Naṣı¯r al-Dı¯n al-Ṭu¯sı¯,

1189

K

▶ Qutb al-Dı¯n al-Shı¯ra¯zı¯, and others to a Zı¯j-i ˙ Khayya¯m or Zı¯j-i Maliksha¯hı¯ (Astronomical handbooks of Khayya¯m or Maliksha¯h) that could possibly be one major outcome of the observatory. By 1079, a solar calendar was developed that was named the “Jala¯lı¯” or “Malikı¯” calendar, thus carrying the name of the monarch who was the project’s patron. The most remarkable feature of the new calendar was the correspondence of the beginning of the year (Nowru¯z or new day) and the beginning of Aries, i.e., where the Sun passing from the Southern Celestial Hemisphere to the northern appears to cross the Celestial Equator, marking the beginning of spring or the vernal equinox. The Jala¯lı¯ year was a true solar year that followed the astronomical seasons. The length of this year was the mean interval between two vernal equinoxes. Recent studies have underscored the advantage of the Jala¯lı¯ calendar by demonstrating the superiority of the vernal equinox as a calendar regulator, arguing that the vernal equinox year length is much more consistent than other natural regulating points. The second important feature of this calendar was the introduction for the first time of leap years using the rule of quinquennia (5-year periods for leap years). After a normal period of 7 quadrennia (4-year periods for leap years - in exceptional cases 6 or 8), there comes a quinquennia in which the extra day is added to the 5th and not the 4th year as usual. This produces patterns of 33-, 29- and 37-year cycles for 7, 6, and 8 quadrennia, respectively. As modern calculations have shown, this introduction of 5-year leap-days into the calendar has the potential, provided that a correct pattern is employed, of rendering the calendar quite accurate over relatively long time spans - indeed, more accurate than the modern Gregorian calendar. There is, however, a wide variety of opinions on the pattern (the number of times 29 or 37 cycles are combined with 33-year cycles) of leap years originally built into the Jala¯lı¯ calendar, thus leaving its actual accuracy an open question to be investigated. Khayya¯m’s major role in the court of MalikSha¯h, as well as the historical testimony of prominent astronomers such as Tu¯sı¯, Shı¯ra¯zı¯, and ˙

K

K

1190

Khayya¯m: Ghiya¯th al-Dı¯n Abu¯ al-Fath ҁUmar ibn Ibra¯hı¯m al-Khayya¯mı¯ al-Nı¯sha¯pu¯rı¯ ˙

▶ Nı¯sa¯bu¯rı¯, all associating the name of ҁUmar Khayya¯m with the Jala¯lı¯ calendar, leaves little doubt of his leading role in the compilation of the Jala¯lı¯ calendar. His prominence as a major astronomer of his time is also borne out by his critical notes on ▶ Ibn al-Haytham’s Maqa¯la fı¯ harakat al-iltifa¯f (Treatise on the winding ˙ motion). This work, which is discussed by Shı¯ra¯zı¯, demonstrates the fact that Khayya¯m had been engaged in quite complicated and difficult aspects of theoretical astronomy that involved the development of new models to replace the unwieldy latitude models of ▶ Ptolemy. Khayya¯m’s work in astronomy has been overshadowed by his outstanding achievements in mathematics, in which his genius and originality are best manifested. His contributions to the subject may well be considered some of the greatest during the entire Middle Ages. In particular, his treatise entitled Risa¯la fı¯ al-bara¯hı¯n ҁala¯ masa¯’il al-jabr wa-’l-muqa¯bala (Treatise on the proofs of the problems of al-jabr and al-muqa¯bala) is one of the most important algebraic treatises of the Middle Ages. He also dealt with the socalled parallel postulate and arrived at new propositions that were important steps in the development of non-Euclidean geometries. His work in the theory of numbers was also significant, eventually leading to the modern notion of real positive numbers that included irrational numbers. Khayya¯m also wrote short treatises in other fields such as mechanics, hydrostatics, the theory of music, and meteorology. Through his work in ornamental geometry, he contributed to the construction of the north dome of the Great Mosque of Isfaha¯n. He may have also served as a court physician. Though little remains of his work in philosophy, Khayya¯m was a follower of ▶ Ibn Sı¯na¯ and much respected by his contemporaries for his work in this field. In a later work, he concludes that ultimate truth can be grasped only through mystical intuition. This perhaps gives some inkling of how to read his famous poetry, not all of which has been accepted as authentic by modern scholarship. Khayya¯m seems to have spent the most fruitful scientific years of his life in Isfaha¯n.

But with the assassination of Maliksha¯h in 1092, he returned to Khura¯sa¯n, spending the rest of his life in Marw and Nı¯sha¯pu¯r. His death brought to an end a brilliant chapter in Iranian intellectual history.

Selected References Abdollahy, Reza (1990). “Calendar: Islamic Period.” In Encyclopaedia Iranica, edited by Ehsan Yarshater. Vol. 4, pp. 668–674. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Al-Bayhaqı¯, ҁAlı¯ ibn Zaid (1935). Tatimmat ṣiwa¯n al-hikma, edited by M. Shafı¯ҁ. Lahore: University of Panjab. Angoura¯ni, Fa¯teme and Zahra¯. Angoura¯ni (eds.) (2002). Bibliography of ҁOmar Khayya¯m (in Persian). Tehran: Society for the Appreciation of Cultural Works and Dignitaries. Borkowski, Kazimierz M. (1996). “The Persian Calendar for 3000 Years.” Earth, Moon, and Planets 74: 223–230. Djebbar, Ahmed (Spring 2000). “ҁOmar Khayya¯m et les activite´s mathe´matiques en pays d’Islam aux XI-XII sie`cles.” Farhang 12, no. 29–32: 1–31. (Commemoration of Khayya¯m.) Hashemipour, Behnaz (Winter 2002). “Gufta¯rı¯ dar ba¯r-i-yi kullı¯ya¯t-i wuju¯d (Khayya¯m’s Treatise on The Universals of Existence [Edited with an Analytical Introduction]).” Farhang 14, no. 39–40: 29–87. (Farsi section.) Meeus, Jean (2002). “The Gregorian Calendar and the Tropical Year.” More Mathematical Astronomy Morsels. Richmond, Virginia: Willmann-Bell Inc., pp. 357–366. Nasr, Seyyed Hossein (Winter 2002). “The Poet-Scientist Khayya¯m as Philosopher.” Farhang 14, no. 39–40: 25–47. Netz, Reviel (Winter 2002). “ҁOmar Khayya¯m and Archimedes.” Farhang 14, no. 39–40: 221–259. Niza¯mı¯-i ҁAru¯d¯ı-i Samarqandı¯ (1957). Cha¯ha¯r Maqa¯la ˙(Four Discourses). ˙ Tehran: Zawwa¯r Pub. Originally edited with introduction, notes and index by Mohammad Qazvı¯nı¯. Revised with a new introduction, additional notes and complete index by Mohammad ˙ Moҁ¯ın. Rashed, Roshdi and Bijan Vahabzabeh (2000). Omar Khayya¯m the Mathematician. Persian Heritage Series, no. 40. New York: Bibliotheca Persica Press. Rosenfeld, Boris A. (2000). “ҁUmar Khayya¯m.” In Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Vol. 10, pp. 827–834. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Steel, Duncan (April 2002). “The Proper Length of the Calendar Year.” Astronomy and Geophysics 43, no. 2: 9. Struik, D. J. (1958). “Omar Khayyam, Mathematician.” Mathematics Teacher 51: 280–285. Vitrac, Bernard (Spring 2000). “ҁOmar Khayya¯m et Eutocius: Les anteće´dents grecs du troisie`me chapitre

Kha¯zin: Abu¯ Jaҁfar Muhammad ibn al-Husayn al-Kha¯zin al-Khura¯sa¯nı¯ ˙ ˙ du commentaire sur certaines pre´misses proble´matiques du Livre d’Euclide.” Farhang 12, no. 29–32: 51–105. — (Winter 2002). “ҁOmar Khayya¯m et l’anthype´re`se: E´tudes du deuxie`me livre de son commentaire.” Farhang 14, no. 39–40: 137–192. Youschkevitch, A. and B. A. Rosenfeld (1973). “Al-Khayya¯mı¯.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 323–334. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

Kha¯zin: Abu¯ Jaҁfar Muhammad ibn ˙ ¯ sa¯nı¯ al-Husayn al-Kha¯zin al-Khura ˙ Emilia Calvo Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain

Born probably Khura¯sa¯n, (Iran) Died circa 971 Abu¯ Jaҁfar al-Kha¯zin was an astronomer and mathematician whose main work was the Zı¯j al-ṣafa¯’ih (zı¯j of the plates). A zı¯j is an astro˙ nomical handbook; “plates” here refer to the plates of an astronomical instrument, like an astrolabe or an equatorium. This work was considered by later scholars as the best work in this field. Abu¯ Jaҁfar al-Kha¯zin was a Sabian of Persian origin. (The Sabians were a Hellenized, pagan sect that was tolerated in early Islam.) He was called al-Khura¯sa¯nı¯, meaning from Khura¯sa¯n, a province in eastern Iran. Kha¯zin was attached to the court of the Bu¯yid ruler Rukn al-Dawla (932–976), Prince of Rayy (a town near Tehran destroyed in the twelfth century). There he benefited from the patronage of Abu¯ al-Fadl ibn ˙ al-ҁAmı¯d, the vizier of Rukn al-Dawla, and his fame reached Baghdad. In 953/954 Kha¯zin played the role of negotiator in the war in which the army of Nu¯h ibn Naṣr of Khura¯sa¯n opposed ˙ Rukn al-Dawla. As an astronomer, Kha¯zin knew and commented upon the works of earlier astronomers. For instance, he wrote a commentary on ▶ Ptolemy’s Almagest in which he provided

1191

K

information regarding the astronomical activities of early Islamic astronomers. Later authors mention the astronomical observations carried out by Kha¯zin. He measured the obliquity of the ecliptic at Rayy in 960. This measurement was ordered by the aforementioned Vizier Ibn al-ҁAmı¯d, who also ordered the construction of a mural quadrant in Rayy. Kha¯zin, together with another astronomer called al-Khira¯wı¯, measured the obliquity of the ecliptic with this instrument. We are also told of the determination of the latitude made by Kha¯zin and a number of collaborators using a ring of 4 m. Another source mentions observations made in Ka¯sha¯n on 6 October 960, also ordered by Ibn al-ҁAmı¯d, in order to obtain the latitude of this city. In 970 he also measured the obliquity of the ecliptic in Edessa. Kha¯zin was not only a good observer but also a theoretician. He believed in the solid character of the heavenly spheres, supported the theory of the progressive diminution of the obliquity of the ecliptic, and, probably, the theory of the trepidation of the equinoxes along an arc of 8 on the ecliptic. Among his writings there is a maqa¯la in which Kha¯zin developed a solar model without eccentrics and epicycles. This maqa¯la is not preserved, but there are some references to it preserved in some of the works of ▶ Bı¯ru¯nı¯. It was a homocentric model in which the Sun has a circular motion with the Earth as the circle’s center, but in such a way that its motion is uniform with respect to a point that does not coincide with the center of the Universe. In this model the Sun moves on a circle, which is concentric and coplanar with the ecliptic, at a variable speed. The uniform movement of the Sun takes place on a different circle. The distance between the centers of these two circles has the same value as the Ptolemaic eccentricity. But there is neither an apogee nor a perigee, contrary to the Ptolemaic model, although the line joining the two centers intersects the circle of the Sun’s path where it reaches its minimum and maximum speeds. This system reappeared in a more complete version in the fourteenth century, in the work of the

K

K

1192

astronomer ▶ Henry of Langenstein entitled De reprobatione ecentricorum et epiciclorum (1364). Kha¯zin was also the author of a book (now lost) entitled Kita¯b al-abҁ a¯d wa-’l-ajra¯m, in which he gave the diameters of stars from the first to the sixth magnitude but without saying how he obtained these values. The Zı¯j al-Safa¯’ih, written for Ibn al-ҁAmı¯d, ˙ ˙ dealt with a variant of the astrolabe. This work was considered lost for a long time, but in the late 1990s a manuscript with a copy of an incomplete text of this treatise was found in the Research Library of the Government of Srinagar in India (number 314). Pages 17–87 and pages 95–102, as well as in all likelihood some of the last part of the manuscript (215b-?), are missing in the copy. The lost pages contain the details of the construction of the instrument and the use of the planetary plate of the instrument. In the first page of the treatise there is an index of the contents from which we can confirm that the treatise is divided into two books (or maqa¯la¯t) as reported by later authors. The first book of the treatise deals with the computation of the longitude and latitude of the planets. This analysis is preceded by an introduction that is mostly theoretical. The second book is divided into seven chapters. It deals with the astronomy of the primum mobile, calculations of spherical astronomy, and the elements of trigonometry that are necessary to carry them out. The instrument described contains a whole set of orthogonal lines that provide graphical solutions for the standard astronomical problems usually solved by a zı¯j or by an astrolabe; Kha¯zin, however, uses a safı¯hat ˙ al-juyu¯b, a plate of sines, instead of a conventional astrolabe with its plates. One such instrument was made by Hibat Alla¯h ibn al-Husayn al-Asturla¯bı¯, an astrolabist of early ˙ ˙ twelfth-century Baghdad. He constructed the instrument in the year 513 of the Hijra (1120). The instrument was still extant at the beginning of the twelfth century in Germany, but it subsequently disappeared. Photographs of this instrument were published and analyzed by David King. In the late 1990s the instrument was rediscovered in Berlin. It has more

Kha¯zinı¯

plates than the ones depicted in the preserved photographs and awaits a deeper study. In mathematics Kha¯zin was the first to show that a cubic equation of the form x3 + c ¼ ax2 could be solved geometrically by means of conic sections. He stated that the equation x3 + y3 ¼ z3 did not have a solution in positive integers, but he was unable to give a correct proof. Kha¯zin also worked on the isoperimetric problem and wrote a commentary to Book X of Euclid’s Elements.

Selected References Anbouba, Adel (1978). “L’Alge`bre arabe; note annexe: Identite´ d’Abu¯ Jaҁfar a1-Kha¯zin.” Journal for the History of Arabic Science 2: 98–100. Calvo, Emilia (2004). “The Treatise on the Zı¯j al-safa¯’ih by Abu¯ Jaҁfar al- fa¯zin: A Preliminary Study.” In Sciences, techniques et instruments dans le monde iranien (Xe - XIXe sie`cle.), e´tudes reúnies et pre´senteés par N. Pourjavady et Zˇ. Vesel, pp. 67–78. Actes du colloque tenu a` l’Universite´ de Te´he´ran (7–9 juin 1998). Tehran. King, David A. (1980). “New Light on the Zı¯j al-safa¯’ih of Abu¯ Jaҁfar al-Kha¯zin.” Centaurus 23: 105–117. (Reprinted in King, Islamic Astronomical Instruments, XI. London: Variorum Reprints, 1987.) Lorch, Richard P. (1986). “Abu¯ Jaҁfar al-Kha¯zin on Isoperimetry and the Archimedean Tradition.” Zeitschrift f€ ur Geschichte der Arabisch-Islamischen Wissenschaften 3: 150–229. Samso´, Julio (1977). “A Homocentric Solar Model by Abu¯ Jaҁfar al-Kha¯zin.” Journal for History of Arabic Science 1: 268–275. Sayılı, Aydın (1960). The Observatory in Islam. Ankara: Turkish Historical Society, pp. 103–104, 123, 126. Sezgin, Fuat. Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums. Vol. 5, Mathematik (1974): 298–299; Vol. 7, Astronomie (1978): 189–190. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

Kha¯zinı¯: Abu¯ al-FathҁAbd al-Rahma¯n ˙ u¯rҁAbd ˙ al-Kha¯zinı¯ (Abu¯ Mans ҁ ˙ ma¯n Mansu¯r) al-Rahma¯n, Abd al-Rah ˙ ˙ ˙ Mohammed Abattouy Fez University, Fez, Marocco

Flourished Marw, (Merv near Mary, Turkmenistan), first half of the 12th century

Kha¯zinı¯

Kha¯zinı¯ was known for scientific activity in the fields of astronomy, mechanics, and scientific instruments. A slave of Greek origin in his youth, he later converted to Islam and received a distinguished scientific education. He had a reputation for asceticism, devotion, and piety. Kha¯zinı¯ worked in the court of the Salju¯q ruler Sanjar ibn Malik-Sha¯h (reigned: 1118–1157), and dedicated two of his most important writings to him: al-Zı¯j al-Sanjarı¯, an astronomical handbook with tables for Sanjar, and his encyclopedic Kita¯b mı¯za¯n al-hikma, a major work on mechan˙ ical knowledge, specific gravity, and the like. His other known works include a treatise on astronomical instruments (Risa¯la fı¯ al-a¯la¯t) and a text on a self-rotating sphere (Maqa¯la fı¯ ittikha¯dh kura tadu¯ru bi-dha¯tiha¯). Kha¯zinı¯’s main astronomical work is the Zı¯j al-mu ҁ tabar al-sanjarı¯ al-sulṭa¯nı¯, a lengthy astronomical handbook with tables, dedicated to Sultan Sanjar and compiled after 1118, in the aftermath of the work done reforming the solar calendar (the “Jala¯lı¯ calendar”). It is preserved in two incomplete manuscript copies (British Library MS Or 6669 and Vatican Library MS Ar 761), and in a revised abridgment called Wajı¯z al-zı¯j al-mu ҁ tabar al- sulṭa¯nı¯, made by Kha¯zinı¯ himself in 1130/1131. This version was translated into Greek in the late 1290s by ▶ Gregory Chioniades, an Orthodox bishop, upon his return to Constantinople from Tabrı¯z and then utilized by Byzantine scholars such as George Chrysococces (in Trebizond, circa 1335–1346) and Theodore Meliteniotes (in Constantinople, circa 1360–1388). It became a basis for the revival of astronomy then taking place in the Byzantine Empire. Since the two extant manuscripts of Kha¯zinı¯’s Zı¯j lack several parts, the existence of the Wajı¯z is very helpful for the recovery of some of the missing material, although the canons and the tables contained within it have both been drastically revised; for example, the original Zı¯j contains 145 tables, whereas the Wajı¯z has only 45. Among other things, al-Zı¯j al-sanjarı¯ includes numerous tables related to chronology and calendars as well as various tables for calculating holidays and fasting, material related to the

1193

K

theory of Indian cycles, important developments in the theory of planetary visibility, and an elaborate set of eclipse tables. The section on visibility tabulates the arcs of visibility for the five planets as well as those for the Moon, and it also presents differences according to climes. Kha¯zinı¯ undoubtedly made a certain number of astronomical observations, though they seem to be limited in number. ▶ Qutb al-Dı¯n al˙ Shira¯zı¯ implied that Kha¯zinı¯ must have had technical competence and access to good instruments since his determination of the obliquity was carefully made. In the introduction to his Zı¯j, Kha¯zinı¯ describes several astronomical instruments and observational techniques, and he asserts in the canons that he bases his astronomy on observations and sound theory. Further, he states at the beginning of the Wajı¯z that he compared, observed, and calculated positions for all the planets as well as for the Sun and Moon, at conjunctions and eclipses. Kha¯zinı¯ was familiar with the astronomy of his predecessors, especially ▶ Bı¯ru¯nı¯, ▶ Tha¯bit ibn Qurra, and ▶ Batta¯nı¯. His Zı¯j seems to be influenced by their work in addition to his own observations. Throughout his Zı¯j, he reports the methods and conclusions of Tha¯bit and Batta¯nı¯. For instance, for predicting the crescent visibility, Kha¯zinı¯ proposes a sophisticated mathematical method that can be traced back to Tha¯bit’s Fı¯ Hisa¯b ru’yat al-ahilla. ˙ Another astronomical work by Kha¯zinı¯ is his treatise on astronomical instruments. The text, a short work in 17 folios, is composed of seven parts, each devoted to a different instrument: a triquetrum, or parallactic ruler, a diopter for measuring apparent diameters, an instrument in the shape of a triangle, a quadrant (but called a suds or sextant), an instrument involving reflection, an astrolabe, and devices for aiding the naked eye. All the instruments in this text are treated in a general way, and there is no reference to any special observatory. Kha¯zinı¯’s text on The Self-Rotating Sphere demonstrates his interest in connecting astronomy and applied mechanics. This text, probably the earliest of his extant works, describes a celestial globe that works with weights.

K

K

1194

An instrument, in the shape of a solid sphere and marked with the stars and the standard celestial circles, is suspended halfway within a box. The sphere is mounted so as to rotate once a day propelled by a weight falling from a leaking reservoir of sand. This automated celestial instrument may be used to find arcs of importance in spherical astronomy.

Selected References Al-Bayhaqı¯,ҁAlı¯ ibn Zayd (1988). Ta¯rı¯kh hukama¯’ al-isla¯m. Damascus. (Biographical account). Hall, Robert E. (1973). “Al-Kha¯zinı¯.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 335–351. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Kennedy, E. S. (1956). “A Survey of Islamic Astronomical Tables.” Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, n.s., 46, pt. 2: 121–177. (Reprint, Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1989.) King, David A. (1999). World-Maps for Finding the Direction and Distance to Mecca. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Lorch, Richard (1980). “Al-Kha¯zinı¯’s Sphere That Rotates by Itself.” Journal for the History of Arabic Science 4: 287–329. Pingree, David (1999). “A Preliminary Assessment of the Problems of Editing the Zı¯j al-Sanjarı¯ of al-Kha¯zinı¯.” In Editing Islamic Manuscripts on Science, edited by Yusuf Ibish, pp. 105–113. London: Al-Furqa¯n Islamic Heritage Foundation. Sayılı, A. (1956). “Al-Kha¯zinı¯’s Treatise on Astronomical € Instruments.” Ankara Universitesi Dil ve Tarih-Cog˘rafya Fak€ ultesi Dergisi 14: 15–19.

Khujandı¯: Abu¯ Mahmu¯d Ha¯mid ibn ˙¯ ˙ al-Khidr al-Khujandı ˙ Glen Van Brummelen Quest University, Squamish, BC, Canada

Born Khujand, (Tajikstan), circa 945 Died 1000 Khujandı¯ was an astronomer of some repute who constructed a variety of instruments and

Khujandı¯: Abu¯ Mahmu¯d Ha¯mid ibn al-Khidr al-Khujandı¯ ˙ ˙ ˙

contributed to the mathematics supporting astronomical work. He is best known for the first very large mural quadrant that was intended to make solar observations of unprecedented accuracy. Only a few details are known of his life; he was likely one of the khans of Khujanda in Transoxania and was supported by the Bu¯yid ruler Fakhr al-Dawla. Khujandı¯’s towering achievement, the giant mural sextant near Rayy, was perhaps the most ambitious instrument of its time. Named al-suds al-Fakhrı¯ (after its sponsor Fakhr al-Dawla), it consisted of 60 of a meridian arc about 43 m in diameter, built at and below ground level. A small aperture in the roof of the building that housed the instrument allowed a cone of the Sun’s rays to shine through. A circle with crosshatch lines was placed on the rays that fell onto the scale in order to determine their center. The scale was marked to 1000 , making it the first instrument capable of measuring with a precision better than minutes. In 994 Khujandı¯ used the suds al-Fakhrı¯ to measure meridian transits near solstices; from this he obtained the value e ¼ 23;32,19 for the obliquity of the ecliptic, and a value of 35;34,38.45 for the latitude of Rayy (accurate to within one0 ). On the basis of earlier determinations of e, Khujandı¯ decided that e is a variable quantity, a conclusion with which ▶ Bı¯ru¯nı¯ disagreed. In his Tahdı¯d al-ama¯kin, Bı¯ru¯nı¯ ˙ discusses Khujandı¯’s work in detail. He argues that the measurements failed to produce the expected accuracy because the building settled between the summer and winter solstices, causing the height of the aperture in the roof to drop. After the failure of the suds al-Fakhrı¯, the observational program probably continued with armillary spheres and other instruments, and Khujandı¯ eventually produced the Zı¯j al-Fakhrı¯ (an astronomical handbook) on the basis of his results. (A partially extant Persian zı¯j written 200 years later may also derive from Khujandı¯’s observations.) Although the large instrument was an immediate failure, it was a model for similar instruments at the observatories in Mara¯gha and Samarqand in the thirteenth and fifteenth

Khwa¯rizmı¯: Muhammad ibn Mu¯sa¯ al-Khwa¯rizmı¯ ˙

centuries, respectively. These avoided the problem of settling by using different construction materials. Astronomical instruments are a recurring interest in Khujandı¯’s other works. A treatise entitled The Comprehensive Instrument describes an invention called a sha¯mila designed to replace the astrolabe or a quadrant. It was not universal in the sense that it was restricted for use in a particular range of terrestrial latitudes. Two geometric methods of drawing azimuth circles on an astrolabe are credited to Khujandı¯ by other medieval authors. He constructed an astrolabe in 984/985, which is one of the earliest still extant. It is considered to be one of the most important surviving astronomical instruments. Khujandı¯ composed several mathematical works, among them a text on geometry and a flawed proof of Fermat’s last theorem for n ¼ 3. He is also one of several competing claimants to the rule of four quantities, a theorem in spherical trigonometry that was simpler than Menelaus’ theorem and, for many Muslim astronomers, replaced it as the basic tool of spherical astronomy.

Selected References Al-Bı¯ru¯nı¯, Abu¯ Rayha¯n (1985). Kita¯b Maqa¯lı¯d ҁ ilm ˙ al-hay’a: La trigonome ´trie sphe´rique chez les arabes de l’est a` la fin du Xe sie`cle, edited and translated by Marie-The´re`se Debarnot. Damascus: Institut français de Damas. Ali, Jamil (trans.) (1967). The Determination of the Coordinates of Cities: Al-Bı¯ru¯nı¯’s Tahdı¯d al-Ama¯kin. Beirut: American University of Beirut. Berggren, J. L. (1991). “Medieval Islamic Methods for Drawing Azimuth Circles on the Astrolabe.” Centaurus 34: 309–344. Cheikho, Louis (1908). “Risa¯lat al-Khujandı¯ fı¯ al-mayl waҁard al-balad.” Al-Machriq 11: 60–69. € Frank, Josef (1921). “Uber zwei astronomische arabische Instrumente.” Zeitschrift f€ ur Instrumentenkunde 41: 193–200. Kennedy, E. S. (1973). A Commentary Upon Bı¯ru¯nı¯’s Kita¯b Tahdı¯d al-Ama¯kin. Beirut: American University of Beirut. Samso´, Julio (1969). Estudios sobre Abu¯ Nasr Mansu¯r b.ҁ Alı¯ b.ҁ Ira¯q. Barcelona: Asociacioń para la Historia de la Ciencia Espanõla. — (1986). “Al-Khudjandı¯.” In Encyclopaedia of Islam. 2nd ed. Vol. 5, pp. 46–47. Leiden: E. J. Brill.

1195

K

Sayılı, Aydin (1960). The Observatory in Islam. Ankara: Turkish Historical Society. Schirmer, Oskar (1926/1927). “Studien zur Astronomie der Araber.” Sitzungsberichte der PhysikalischMedizinische Soziet€ at in Erlangen 58–59: 33–88. Tekeli, Sevim (1973). “Al-Khujandı¯.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 352–354. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. € Wiedemann, E. (1919). “Uber den Sextant des al-Chogendi.” Archiv f€ ur die Geschichte der Naturwissenschaften und der Technik 2: 148–151.

Khwa¯rizmı¯: Muhammad ibn Mu¯sa¯ al-Khwa¯rizmı¯ ˙ Sonja Brentjes Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, Germany

K Born circa 780 Died circa 850 Khwa¯rizmı¯ was a well-known astrologer who spent most, if not all, of his scholarly life in Baghdad, in close connection with the ҁAbba¯sid court, particularly during the caliphate of ▶ Ma’mu¯n (reigned: 813–833). There is some confusion about his origins. The tenth-century bibliographer Ibn al-Nadı¯m claimed that Muham˙ mad ibn Mu¯sa¯ was from Khwa¯rizm in Central Asia, whereas the historian Tabarı¯ reported that ˙ Khwa¯rizmı¯ was also known as al-Qutrabbulı¯, ˙ a name associating the scholar with a town not far from Baghdad rather than with the Central Asian region of Khwa¯rizm (Toomer, p. 358). Tabarı¯ added that he was also called al-Maju¯sı¯, ˙ a designation that indicates that Khwa¯rizmı¯ was a Zoroastrian rather than a Muslim. Ibn al-Nadı¯m also stated that he was attached to the Bayt al-hikma, the caliphal library. What this means ˙ exactly is unclear since there is considerable modern controversy about this institution. Some translations are attributed it, but mostly it seems to have served for storing documents of various kinds.

K

1196

Ibn al-Nadı¯m lists four astronomical works: the Zı¯j al-Sindhind (an astronomical handbook according to the Sindhind), a treatise on the sundial, and two works on the astrolabe. Of these, the first is no longer extant in Arabic but is available in Latin translation; the second seems to be extant as are fragments of a work on the astrolabe. Rosenfeld and Ihsanog˘lu list 20 astronomical works in all. Among Khwa¯rizmı¯’s other works at least two are mathematical: a book on Indian arithmetic and one devoted to algebra. (A book on “addition and subtraction” is also attributed to him.) He also has a Book on Geography, which is extant, and a Book on History, which is not but was quoted by later authors. The Algebra and the Zı¯j were dedicated to Caliph Ma’mu¯n. The treatise on Indian arithmetic in its extant Latin translation mentions the Algebra and hence was produced later. Khwa¯rizmı¯ also wrote a description of the Jewish calendar, which was written not before 823/824 because one of its examples is carried out for that year. The other texts offer no clue for dating them. Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Zı¯j al-Sindhind confirmed the place of pre-Islamic Indian astronomical models, functions, and parameters in the scholarly community of Baghdad, which had been multicultural since the second half of the 8th century. Before him, several “Zı¯ja¯t al-Sindhind” are said to have been compiled based on Arabic translations of Indian astronomical handbooks (Pingree 1970, ¯ damı¯ p. 105). Indeed, the astronomer ▶ Ibn al-A described Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Zı¯j as an abridgment, prepared for al-Ma’mu¯n, of ▶ Faza¯rı¯’s (second half of the 8th century) handbook al-Sindhind (Pingree 1970, p. 106). Khwa¯rizmı¯’s tables were known to astronomers not only in Baghdad, but also in Central Asia in the east and in Andalusia on the Iberian Peninsula in the west. A number of authors who compiled their own handbooks relied on it. Two examples are the ¯ damı¯ in Baghdad, already-mentioned Ibn al-A in his nonextant astronomical handbook Nazm al-ҁiqd, and ▶ Ibn Muҁa¯dh in Andalusia, ˙ whose handbook is extant in its Latin translation Tabulae Jahen. Others commented on Khwa¯rizmı¯’s tables, often criticizing the methods


used, such as ▶ Ahmad ibn Kathı¯r al-Fargha¯nı¯ ˙ (ninth century) in Baghdad, Ibn al-Muthanna¯ (tenth century?) in Andalusia, ҁAbdalla¯h ibn Masru¯r al-Ha¯sib al-Naṣra¯nı¯ in Baghdad ˙ (ninth/tenth centuries), and ▶ Abu¯ l-Ra¯yha¯n al˙ Bı¯ru¯nı¯ in Ghazna. Bı¯ru¯nı¯ devoted three treatises to Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Zı¯j. In one of them he defended Khwa¯rizmı¯ against attacks of Ahmad ibn al˙ Husayn al-Ahwa¯zı¯ (tenth century) (Muhammad ˙ ˙ ibn Mu¯sa¯ 1983, p. 21). It is believed that as late as the nineteenth century, tables connected to Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Zı¯j were copied in Egypt (Goldstein and Pingree 1978; Pingree 1983). No copy of Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Zı¯j has survived, but Hebrew and Latin versions of various later texts connected with Khwa¯rizmı¯’s tables are extant. Ibn al-Muthanna¯ in Andalusia set out to compose a commentary in order to rectify the obscurities of a critique of Khwa¯rizmı¯’s tables written by Fargha¯nı¯. Both commentaries are lost. But Hebrew and Latin versions of Ibn al-Muthanna¯’s commentary are extant (Goldstein 1967, pp. 5–6; Pedersen, p. 32). The Latin translation of Ibn al-Muthanna’s commentary was made by Hugo of Santalla (twelfth century) (Milla´s Vendrell 1963). One Hebrew translation was produced by ▶ Abraham ibn Ezra (Goldstein 1967, p. 3). In the same century as Ibn al-Muthanna¯ and also in Andalusia, ▶ Maslama ibn Ahmad al-Majrı¯ṭı¯ ˙ edited Khwa¯rizmı¯’s tables. Majrı¯t¯ı’s student ˙ ▶ Ibn al-Saffa¯r is believed to have continued ˙ the editorial work of his teacher (Toomer, p. 358). This edition was translated in the twelfth century into Latin presumably by ▶ Adelard of Bath. Other Latin manuscripts contain texts that seem to combine extracts from Ibn alMuthanna¯’s commentary, Majrı¯t¯ı’s edition, and ˙ one or more Arabic compilations of material, translated and revised into Latin, from the tables of Khwa¯rizmı¯, ▶ Yahya¯ ibn Abı¯ Manṣu¯r, ˙ Muhammad ibn Ja¯bir al-Batta¯nı¯, Ibn al˙ Muthanna¯, and Majrı¯t¯ı (Pedersen, pp. 31–46). ˙ The Toledan Tables, compiled around 1060 in Andalusia, contain several tables from Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Zı¯j, some of which are not found in Majrı¯t¯ı’s revision. They are lost in Arabic, but ˙ extant in several Latin versions (van Dalen, p. 200).


The extant texts and tables follow in their presentation of the material; in their methods, rules, and models; and in several of their parameter values astronomical knowledge and practice as taught in several treatises written by Hindu scholars between the fifth and seventh centuries. They also use elements from Sasanian astronomical tables, incorporate borrowings from Greek astronomical writings (in particular ▶ Ptolemy’s Almagest and Handy Tables), and include values determined by observations carried out during al-Ma’mu¯n’s reign. A survey of the character of the tables in the Latin translation of Majrı¯t¯ı’s revision of Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Zı¯j ˙ has recently been given by van Dalen (pp. 200–211). Khwa¯rizmı¯’s original Zı¯j has been described as a similar mixture of elements ¯ damı¯, who, according to Ibn al-Qift¯ı by Ibn al-A ˙ (1173–1248), had reported that Khwa¯rizmı¯ had relied in his work on the mean motions of the Indian tradition, but differed from it in the equa¯ damı¯ also tions and the declination. Ibn al-A asserted that Khwa¯rizmı¯ followed Sasanian sources with regard to the equations and Ptolemy when he dealt with the declination of the Sun (Pingree 1970, p. 106). According to McCarthy and Byrne, Khwa¯rizmı¯’s original handbook juxtaposed tables, which addressed the same kind of tasks, but came from different cultural origins. Examples illustrating the diverse components in the extant texts and tables and their modifications are the replacement of the Yazdagird calendar by the Hijra era, the addition of calendars alien to the traditions in India such as the ancient Egyptian, Seleucid, Roman, and Christian eras, the use of theorems (such as the Menelaus theorem) that were unknown to Hindu astronomers, the use of the value for the obliquity of the ecliptic as found in Ptolemy’s Handy Tables, the use of the Ptolemaic value of 66 ⅔ miles for a terrestrial degree, and the replacement of the latitude of Baghdad by the latitude of Cordova (Neugebauer, p. 19; Kennedy and Janjanian, pp. 73, 77; Goldstein 1967, pp. 7–8; van Dalen 1996, pp. 196, 240). Khwa¯rizmı¯’s treatise on the Jewish calendar gives rules for determining the mean longitude of the Sun and the Moon based on this calendar and for determining on what day of the Muslim week

1197

K

the first day of the New Year shall fall. It also discusses the 19-year intercalation cycle and the temporal distance between the beginning of the Jewish era, i.e., the creation of Adam and the beginning of the Seleucid era (Kennedy 1964, pp. 55–59; Toomer p. 360). The treatise on how to work with an astrolabe is only fragmentarily preserved, and opinions vary as to whether these fragments in their present form represent the genuine version of what Khwa¯rizmı¯ actually wrote. The treatise on how to construct an astrolabe seems to be lost. Khwa¯rizmı¯’s book on geography Kita¯b Su¯rat al-ard combines ˙ ˙ substantial parts of Ptolemy’s Geography with many non-Ptolemaic coordinates and place names. His two writings on arithmetic, one in the tradition of oral reckoning and the other according to the Indian tradition of written reckoning using the decimal place-value system, are lost in Arabic. The latter is extant in various Latin manuscripts. Khwa¯rizmı¯’s book on algebra is the first known in Arabic. It treats quadratic equations, the measurement of areas and volumes, commercial problems by means of four proportional quantities, and several types of problem classes dealt with in Muslim inheritance mathematics. This text too was translated into Latin by at least two translators. Its influence upon elementary algebra in Arabic, Persian, Ottoman Turkish, Latin, and European vernacular languages was substantial. Finally, it is worth mentioning that Khwarizmi may have participated in two scientific expeditions, one to measure the size of the Earth, the other to explore the regions north of the Caspian Sea (Matvievskaya and Rozenfeld 1983, Vol. 2, p. 41). The first, though, has been recently questioned (King 2000).

Selected References Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯, Muhammad ibn Mu¯sa¯ (1983). Astronomicheskiye traktaty. Vstupitel’naya stat’ya, perevod i kommentarii A. Ahmedova. Tashkent: Izdatel’stvo “FAN” Uzbekskoj SSR. — (1997). Texts and Studies II. Collected and reprinted by Fuat Sezgin, in collaboration with Mazen Amawi, Carl Ehrig-Eggert, and Eckhard Neubauer. Islamic

K

K

1198

Mathematics and Astronomy, Vol. 4. Frankfurt am Main: Institute for the History of Arabic-Islamic Science at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University. Dalen, Benno van (1996). “Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Astronomical Tables Revisited: Analysis of the Equation of Time.” In From Baghdad to Barcelona: Studies in the Islamic Exact Sciences in Honour of Prof. Juan Vernet, edited by Josep Casulleras and Julio Samso´. Vol. 1, pp. 195–252. Barcelona: Instituto "Milla´s Vallicrosa" ´ rabe. de Historia de la Ciencia A Goldstein, Bernard R. (1967). Ibn al-Muthanna¯’s Commentary on the Astronomical Tables of al-Khwa¯rizmı¯. Two Hebrew versions, edited and translated, with an astronomical commentary by Bernard R. Goldstein. New Haven: Yale University Press. Goldstein, Bernard R. and David Pingree. (1978). “The Astronomical Tables of al-Khwa¯rizmı¯ in a Nineteenth Century Egyptian Text.” Journal of the American Oriental Society 98: 96–99. Gutas, Dimitri (1998). Greek Thought, Arabic Culture: The Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Early ҁAbba¯sid Society (2nd-4th/8th10th centuries). London: Routledge. Hogendijk, Jan P. (1991). “Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Table of the ‘Sine of Hours’ and the Underlying Sine Table.” Historia scientiarum 42: 1–12. Ibn al-Nadı¯m (1970). The Fihrist of al-Nadı¯m: A TenthCentury Survey of Muslim Culture, edited and translated by Bayard Dodge. 2 Vols. New York: Columbia University Press. Kennedy, E. S. (1964). “Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯ on the Jewish Calendar.” Scripta mathematica 27: 55–59. (Reprinted in Kennedy, Studies, pp. 661–665.) Kennedy, E. S, et al. (1983). Studies in the Islamic Exact Sciences, edited by David A. King and Mary Helen Kennedy. Beirut: American University of Beirut. Kennedy, E. S. and Mardiros Janjanian (1965). “The Crescent Visibility Table in Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Zı¯j.” Centaurus 11: 73–78. (Reprinted in Kennedy, Studies, pp. 151–156). Kennedy, E. S. and Walid Ukashah (1969). “Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Planetary Latitude Tables.” Centaurus 14: 86–96. (Reprinted in Kennedy, Studies, pp. 125–135). King, David A. (1983). “Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯ and New Trends in Mathematical Astronomy in the Ninth Century.” Occasional Papers on the Near East 2. New York: New York University, Hagop Kevorkian Center for Near Eastern Studies. — (1987). “Some Early Islamic Tables for Determining Lunar Crescent Visibility.” In From Deferent to Equant: A Volume of Studies in the History of Science in the Ancient and Medieval Near East in Honor of E. S. Kennedy, edited by David A. King and George Saliba, pp. 185–225. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 500. New York: New York Academy of Sciences. (Reprinted in King, Astronomy in the Service of Islam, II. Aldershot: Variorum, 1993.)

Khwa¯rizmı¯: Muhammad ibn Mu¯sa¯ al-Khwa¯rizmı¯ ˙ — (2000). “Too Many Cooks . . . A New Account of the Earliest Muslim Geodetic Measurements.” Suhayl 1: 207–241. Kunitzsch, Paul (1987). “Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯ as a Source for the Sententie astrolabii.” In From Deferent to Equant: A Volume of Studies in the History of Science in the Ancient and Medieval Near East in Honor of E. S. Kennedy, edited by David A. King and George Saliba, pp. 227–236. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, Vol. 500. New York: New York Academy of Sciences. (Reprinted in Kunitzsch, The Arabs and the Stars, IX. Northampton: Variorum Reprints, 1989.) Matvievskaya, G. P. and B. A. Rozenfel’d (1983). Matematiki i astronomi musulmanskogo srednevekovya i ikh trudy (VIII-XVII vv.) (Mathematicians and astronomers of the Muslim middle ages and their works [8th-17th centuries]). 3 Vols. Moscow: Nauka. McCarthy, Daniel P. and John G. Byrne (2003). “Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯’s Sine Tables and a Western Table with the Hindu Norm of R = 150.” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 57: 243–266. Milla´s Vallicrosa, Jose´ Marıá (1963). “La autenticidad del comentario a las Tablas astrono´micas de al-Jwa¯rizmı¯ por Ahmad ibn al-Muṭa¯nna¯.” Isis 54: 114–119. ˙ Milla´s Vendrell, Eduardo (1963). El comentario de Ibn al-Mutanna` a las Tablas astrono´micas de alJwa¯rizmı¯. Madrid. Neugebauer, Otto (1962). The Astronomical Tables of al-Khwa¯rizmı¯. Translation with commentaries of the Latin version edited by H. Suter, supplemented by Corpus Christi College MS 283. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard. Pedersen, Fritz S. (1992). “Alkhwarizmi’s Astronomical Rules: Yet Another Latin Version?” Cahiers de l’Institut du moyen aˆge grec et latin 62: 31–75. Pingree, David (1968). “The Fragments of the Works of Yaҁqu¯b ibn Ta¯riq.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 27: 97–125. — (1970). “The Fragments of the Works of al-Faza¯rı¯.” Journal of Near Eastern Studies 29: 103–123. — (1983). “Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯ in Samaria.” Archives internationales d’histoire des sciences 33: 15–21. Rosenfeld, B. A. and Ekmeleddin Ihsanog˘lu (2003). Mathematicians, Astronomers, and Other Scholars of Islamic Civilization and Their Works (7th-19th c.). Istanbul: IRCICA, pp. 21–26. Rozenfel’d, Boris A. and N. D. Sergeeva (1977). “Ob astronomicheskikh traktatakh al-Khorezmi.” Istoriko-Astronomicheskie Issledovaniya 13: 201–218. Sezgin, Fuat. Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums. Vol. 5, Mathematik (1974): 228–241; Vol. 6, Astronomie (1978): 140–143; Vol. 7, Astrologie, Meteorologie und Verwandtes (1979): 128–129. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Suter, Heinrich (1914). Die astronomischen Tafeln des Muhammed ibn Mu¯sa¯ al-Khwa¯rizmı¯ in der Bearbeitung des Maslama ibn Ahmed al-Madjrı¯tı¯ und

Kienle, Hans Georg € der lateinischen Ubersetzung des Adelhard von Bath. Copenhagen: Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab. (Reprinted in Suter, Beitr€ age zur Geschichte der Mathematik und Astronomie im Islam. Vol. 1, pp. 473–751. Frankfurt am Main, 1986.) Toomer, Gerald J. (1973). “Al-Khwa¯rizmı¯.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 358–365. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

1199

K

of the equinoxes prior to ▶ Hipparchus, along with System B for calculating the Moon’s position in 314 BCE. Criticism by F.X. Kugler prompted Schnabel to revise the date to 379 BCE, but ▶ Otto Neugebauer decisively disproved Schnabel’s thesis in 1950.

Selected References

Kidenas ▶ Kidinnu

Hunger, Hermann, and David Pingree (1999). Astral Sciences in Mesopotamia. Leiden: Brill. (For a summary of the controversy linking Kidinnu to precession.) Neugebauer, Otto (1975). A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy. 3 pts. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Kidin ▶ Kidinnu

Kienle, Hans Georg

Kidinnu

Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Nicholas Campion University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Ceredigion, GB

Alternate Names ▶ Kidenas; ▶ Kidin

Flourished (Iraq), fourth century BCE Kidinnu was a Babylonian astronomer known as Kidenas by the Greeks. He was clearly an astronomer of repute in the ancient world, for he was mentioned in ▶ Pliny’s Natural History in the first century and his computation of lunar eclipses was used by the second-century Greek astrologer Vettius Valens in his astrological compendium, the Anthology. Kidinnu became the focus of a modern controversy in 1923 when he was credited by the cuneiform scholar P. Schnabel with the discovery of the precession

Born Kulmbach, Bavaria, Germany, 22 October 1895 Died Heidelberg, Baden-W€ urttemberg, (Germany), 15 February 1975 Stellar spectroscopist Hans Kienle had the distinction of running four major German observatories: He succeeded director ▶ Johannes Hartmann at Go¨ttingen and then went on to directorships at Potsdam, of the Astrophysical Observatory of the German Academy of Science, and at Heidelberg. With ▶ Ludwig Biermann, he also superintended the Copenhagen Observatory during the Nazi occupation. Kienle was ▶ Martin Schwarzschild ’s thesis advisor.

Selected Reference Wempe, J. (1976). “Hans Kienle.” Astronomische Nachrichten 297: 99–105.

K

K

1200

Kiepenheuer, Karl Otto J. McKim Malville Department of Astrophysical and Planetary Sciences, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, USA

Born Weimar (Thuringia), Germany, 10 November 1910 Died Ensenada, Mexico, 23 May 1975 German solar physicist and observer who developed the idea of frozen-in magnetic fields in the corona, attempted to use observations of the Sun to optimize radio communication with warplanes, planned to send up on a V2 rocket to obtain what would have been the first solar ultraviolet spectrograph above the Earth’s atmosphere, and proposed that radio emission from galaxies and supernova remnants was due to synchrotron. Kiepenheuer was the son of Gustav and Irma Kiepenheuer, successful leftist publishers in the Weimar Republic. He may have acquired some of his distaste for Nazi politics from his parents, whose books were banned when the Nazi party came to power in January 1933 and were burned in the bonfires organized by Joseph Goebbels in May 1933. Karl Kiepenheuer died of a heart attack in Mexico just 6 days after overseeing a successful balloon flight of the spectrostratoscope to obtain high-resolution measurements of solar granulation. He was in Mexico to provide advice on a possible solar telescope at the San Pedro Martir Observatory. During the Second World War, Kiepenheuer built the foundations of an impressive career in basic research and solar physics, established five solar observatories, and protected astronomers and observatories in occupied countries. Kiepenheuer studied physics and astronomy at the University of Berlin from 1930 to 1935 and at the Sorbonne in Paris in 1933. He prepared his thesis On the Theory of the Solar Corona at the Potsdam Observatory and was awarded his PhD in 1935. In this thesis Kiepenheuer investigated

Kiepenheuer, Karl Otto

the role of the magnetic field in the dynamics and structure of the coronal plasma, in particular in the formation of coronal streamers, which he identified with the streams of particles moving along magnetic fields. His thesis was a remarkably modern view of the solar corona and broke new ground in magnetohydrodynamics in which he developed the concept of frozen-in magnetic fields. After finishing his thesis, Kiepenheuer faced a dilemma. He disliked the Nazi regime – opportunities for academic positions in solar physics were practically nonexistent in Germany – but, with a wife and new child, emigration was not a good option for him. During 1936–1939, Kiepenheuer attempted unsuccessfully to measure ultraviolet radiation from the Sun at the Jungfraujoch, Switzerland. In 1939 he collaborated with Erich Regener, using balloon flights to carry crystal detectors that would be discolored by UV radiation, but the detectors could not be calibrated. He earned some money translating Hale’s Realm of the Nebula. Kiepenheuer was drafted into the army in August 1939 and served as a recruit in Go¨ttingen. In December he was released from the military due to the efforts of Hans Plendl, without whose sponsorship his career would have floundered during the war years. Joining Plendl’s team at the Rechlin airbase, he worked briefly on aerial cameras for the Luftwaffe. Most significantly, Plendl and Kiepenheuer initiated a program of solar research, under the code name Sonnengott, establishing a chain of solar observatories and ionospheric monitors. Five solar observatories were established at Wendelstein, Zugspitze, Kanzelhohe, and Schauinsland and in Sicily, which, among them, contained seven of the coronagraphs of the world. By 1942, Kiepenheuer and Plendl had established a extensive network of observatories for monitoring the Sun and the ionosphere stretching from Crimea in the east; Paris in the west; Tromso¨, Norway, in the north; and Sicily in the south. They hoped that the study of the corona and sunspots would produce useful predictions for determining the best frequency bands for long-distance military radio communications


and the guiding of planes of the Luftwaffe to their targets. During these years, solar research grew (Seiler 2007) “from a provincial backwater to the forefront of this science.” The total funding provided for solar research was more than 2.5 million Reichsmark, which today would amount to approximately 30 million euros (Seiler 2007). By the end of 1944 Nazi authorities made a cost-benefit analysis of research in solar physics and realized that the money spent for establishing solar observatories was totally out of proportion to the actual contribution to the war effort and support waned. Plendl and Kiepenheuer assisted scientists during the war by securing then positions away from the front lines. Kiepenheuer was particularly successful in protecting astronomers and astronomical facilities. He managed to prevent the closure of the Hamburg Observatory, operated under ▶ Otto Heckmann. He probably saved Meudon Observatory from destruction by preventing the establishment of an antiaircraft battery on its grounds. Kiepenheuer continued support of Pic du Midi, where Bernard Lyot operated a coronagraph, even though he knew the French Resistance was using the observatory as an operating base. He intervened when the astrophysicist ▶ Henri Mineur, who was active in the resistance, was arrested by the Gestapo and arranged to have him reinstated as a professor. He arranged for the Pic du Midi astronomer Marcel Gentili to flee France to Spain. After Yugoslavia was invaded in 1941, the Luftwaffe intended to use the Belgrade Observatory as an officers’ mess. The observatory contained a spectroheliograph, which Kiepenheuer had hoped would be operated by Professor Vojislav Miskovic. Kiepenheuer intervened when Miskovic was arrested by the Gestapo and arranged for his release from the Banjica prison. After the mirrors of the coelostat were stolen by partisans, Kiepenheuer moved the spectroheliograph in 1942 to Syracuse, Sicily. In their 1943 retreat from Russia, German troops dismantled the Crimean Observatory, and Kiepenheuer saved the library by transferring it and the librarian to his institute in Freiberg. There was concern that reoccupying troops would use the books for

1201

K

fuel in the winter. In a letter (October 1948) to ▶ Gerard Kuiper, ▶ Donald Menzel commented: “. . . I have heard of one or two instances where he [Kiepenheuer] went out of his way to warn this or that person of impending capture by the SS, and even provided them with identification papers that enabled them to escape” (quoted in Seiler 2007). An unintended consequence of the Sonnengott project was financial support for the coronagraph station established by Harvard at Climax, Colorado. Menzel had difficulty finding financial support for the observatory (Bogdan 2002). ▶ Walter Roberts (personal communication to the author) credits Kiepenheuer for having inadvertently helped provide funding. In January 1942 Menzel received a message from Joseph Boyce, a technical aid to the National Research Committee, that the Norwegian astronomer ▶ Svein Rosseland had reported that the Germans were interested in ionospheric phenomena (Bogdan 2002; Seiler 2005). Rosseland was one of the leading figures in astrophysics in Europe at that time. With a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation he had constructed the world’s most powerful differential analyzer, an instrument arguably of great use to the German rocket development program at Peenemunde. As a result of Rosseland’s message, Menzel and Boyce convinced John Dellinger of the National Bureau of Standards to designate the Climax Observatory as a national defense project. By July 1942 a stable stream of government funding was assured. It is not entirely clear how Rosseland learned of Sonnengott and the huge investment by the Luftwaffe in solar and ionospheric research. There are reports that he was visited by three prominent German astronomers in the 13 months between the invasion of Norway on 9 April 1940 and his escape with his family on 10 May 1941. These were ▶ Carl von Weizs€acker (Oddbjorn Engvold, personal communication), Grotrian (Seiler 2005), and Kiepenheuer (Rolf Brahde, personal communication to the author). Of the three, Kiepenheuer is the person most likely to have shared information on Sonnengott as well as having warned Rosseland that his computer might be removed to Peenemunde. Rosseland

K

K

1202

removed the key parts of the machine, carefully wrapped them, and buried them in the garden of the Institute, before he and his family fled to the United States through Russia. Throughout the war the United States effort of monitoring the Sun, especially the solar corona, remained poverty stricken compared to that of Germany. While the Climax Observatory was operated during most of the year by only one person, Roberts, Kiepenheuer had a staff of 60 working for him. He also established the Fraunhofer Institute for solar research in Freiberg and became its director. Kiepenheuer continued his efforts to measure the ultraviolet spectrum of the Sun, further evidence of his interest in basic research rather than support of the war effort. In 1943 he collaborated with Regener in an experiment to send a spectrograph to above 60 km by a V2 rocket, but they did not get the rocket. In November 1944 the Institute in Freiburg was bombed, and a month later Kiepenheuer was denounced by the finance officer of the Institute. He had been openly critical of the war and the Nazis within the walls of the institute. He was interrogated by the SS in Berlin and removed as director. In June 1945 Kiepenheuer was interviewed by Kuiper, who was a member of the ALSOS mission, the Allied intelligence effort to evaluate the quality of German science. Kuiper concluded that Kiepenheuer was the only German astronomer who had not joined the Nazi party and was unstinting in his praise: I might add that Kiepenheuer is one of the most outstanding solar physicists today, elsewhere in fact in recent years his contributions to the interpretation of solar-terrestrial relationships have probably been more outstanding than any similar work. I believe it would be a distinct gain to the United States, if he could be brought to this country; he is about 35 years old and may be expected to have a brilliant career ahead of him once he gets away from the stifling conditions under which he is now working. (Seiler 2007)

Kuiper was interested in building a program of solar system astronomy at Yerkes Observatory and hoped that he could bring Kiepenheuer to Yerkes.


Kiepenheuer went with his family in the fall of 1949 for a year and a half to the United States. His time at Yerkes Observatory was particularly productive, where he could collaborate with Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar. Here he developed his idea (independently of ▶ Hans Alfven) that nonthermal radio emission from galaxies and supernova remnants is produced by synchrotron emission by relativistic electrons in magnetic fields. Returning to Freiberg, in 1951, Kiepenheuer expanded the activities of the Institute in all aspects of solar phenomena. He constructed a dynamic radiospectrograph for detecting radio bursts, the first in existence in Europe. He built a new observatory with good seeing conditions on the island of Capri. In 1965 he installed a domeless coude refractor, which minimized the effects of local seeing, at the Anacapri Observatory. Kiepenheuer should be remembered for the observatories he established and for the passion and commitment with which he pursued research in solar physics: “Looking at the career of KarlOtto Kiepenheuer in the Third Reich there is, at a superficial glance, a certain astonishment that the son of a publisher still ostracized by the regime could be so successful” (Seiler 2007). It can be argued that he made his own Faustian bargain with the Nazi regime, which he detested, and accepted certain moral compromises in order to advance research in solar physics. But, judging from reports from the ALSOS teams, he did no harm and saved a number of lives. He built a highly successful career, making significant contributions in practically all areas of solar physics.

Selected References Bogdan, Thomas J. 2002. Donald Menzel and the Beginnings of the High Altitude Observatory. Journal for the History of Astronomy, xxxiii, 157–192. Kiepenheuer, K.O. 1934. Der Bildwandler. Naturwissenschaften 22, 297. Michael P. Seiler 2005. Solar Research in the Third Reich, in Wittmann, A.D., Wolfschmidt, G., Duerbeck, H.W., eds., Development of Solar Research, p. 199–228, H. Deutsch, Frankfurt 2007. Roberts, Walter Orr. 1983. Interview with Dr. Walter Roberts by David DeVorkin, July 26, 1983. Niels

Kiess, Carl Clarence Bohr Library & Archives, American Institute of Physics, College Park, MD USA, http://www.aip.org/history/ohilist/28418_1.html. Wittmann, A. & Mehltretter, J. P. 1977. Computerprocessed granulation pictures of project ‘Spectrostratoscope’, Astronomische Gesellschaft and Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Wissenschaftliche Tagung, Goettingen, West Germany, Mar. 1–4, 1977. Astronomische Gesellschaft, Mitteilungen, no. 42, 1977, p. 114–117. € — 1941. Uber die Ausstrahlung der Sonne im fernen Ultraviolett. I. Theorie der chromosph€arischen Eruptionen. Zeitschrift f€ ur Astrophysik 20, 332. — 1944. Deviations from thermal equilibrium in the outer layers of the sun. February 25,1944. Report of the Fraunhofer Institute No. 4. — 1944. The absolute intensity and other properties of the solar UV radiation (l600–900 A) that Produces the Ionosphere. August 1, 1944. Report of the Fraunhofer Institute No. 5. — 1945. Rećherches de Physique Solaire I. Annales d’Astrophysique 8, 210. — 1946a. Rećherches de Physique Solaire II., III. Annales d’Astrophysique 9, 42. — 1946b. On the relations between ionosphere, sunspots and solar corona. Monthly Notices Roy.Astr. Soc. 106, 515. — 1947. A Slow Corpuscular Radiation from the Sun. Astrophys.J. 105, 408. — 1950a. Cosmic Rays as the Source of Galactic Radio Emission. Phys.Rev. 79, 738. — 1950b. Zur Beeinflussung des menschlichen Blutserums durch die Sonne. Naturwissenschaften 37, 234. — 1950s. On the Origin of the Cosmic Radiation from the Sun, Phys. Rev. 78, 809. — 1951. The Nature of Solar Prominences, Publ. Astron. Soc. Pacific 63, 161. — 1952. Emission of Corpuscles from the Sun’, J. Geophys. Res. 57, 113. — 1953. Solar Activity’, in G. Kuiper (ed.), The Sun, p. 322, Chicago 1953. — 1953. Photoelectric Measurements of Solar Magnetic Fields’, Astrophys. J. 117, 447. — 1955. On the Mechanism of Solar Outbursts’, IAU Symp. 4 (Radio Astronomy, Jodrell Bank, pp. 345. — 1959. The Sun, Ann Arbor 1959. — 1958. On the Origin of the Solar Component of the Cosmic Radiation’, Nuovo Cimento 8, 218. — 1959. The Observability of Hydromagnetic Phenomena on the Sun’, Nuovo Cimento 13, 305. — 1960. Der Freiburger Radiospektrograph (48–165 MHz) (with H. H. Rabben)’, Z. Astrophys. 49, 61. — 1961. Der Magnetograph des Fraunhofer Instituts (with F. L. Deubner and R. Liedler)’, Z. Astrophys. 52, 119. — 1966a. The Fine Structure of the Solar Atmosphere. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Forschungsbericht 12. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.

1203

K

— 1966b. Sonnenforschung. Ko¨ln: Westdeutscher Verlag — 1961 Solar Site Testing’, 1AU Symp. 19; Bull. Astron. 24 (1962), 277. — 1965. About the Flare Problem’, in C. de Jager fed.), The Solar System, p. 240, Dordrecht 1965. — 1964. An Assembly of Flare Observations as Related to Theory’, in W. N. Hess (ed.), AAS- NASA Symposium on the Physics of Solar Flares, NASA SP 50, p. 323, Washington. — 1966. The Domeless Solar Refractor of Capri Observatory’, Sky Teles. 31 (5), (1966). — 1966. Fine Structure of the Solar Chromosphere’, DFG Forsch. Ber. 12 (ed.), Wiesbaden 1966. — 1967. Morphology of an Active Region on the Sun’, in Xanthakis (ed.), Solar Physics, p. 383, London. — 1966. Fraunhofer Institut, Freiburg’, Solar Phys. 1, 162. — 1968. ‘Observational Aspects of Flare and Surge Theories’, in Y. Ohman (ed.), Nobel Syrup. 9, 231, Stockholm. — 1968. Structure and Development of ‘Structure and Development of Solar Active Regions’, IAU Symp. 35 (ed.), Dordrecht 1968. — 1970. The JOSO Project (Joint Organization for Solar Observation)’, in C. de Jager (ed.), Transactions,1 AU, 1970. — 1971. The Role and Necessity of Optical Space Observations in Solar Physics’, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London A 270 (1971), 109. — 1971. High Angular Resolution Solar Observations from Balloon Borne Instruments’, in Proc. COSPAR Symp., Seattle 1971. — 1973. Joint Organization for Solar Observations (JOSO)’, in Xanthakis (ed.), Proc. First European Astron.Meeting 1 (1973), 165. — 1974. Recent Developments in Improving Daytime Angular Resolution from the Ground’, in G. Athay (ed.), IAU Symp. 56 (1974), 27. — 2007. Kommandosache Sonnengott. Geschichte der Sonnenforschung im Dritten Reich und unter alliierter Besatzung. H. Deutsch, Frankfurt 2007.

Kiess, Carl Clarence Marvin Bolt Adler Planetarium, Chicago, IL, USA

Born Fort Wayne, Indiana, USA, 18 October 1887 Died probably Washington, DC, USA, 16 October 1967

K

K

1204

Carl Kiess conducted spectroscopic measurements in the laboratory to enhance investigations of solar and stellar spectra. He was born to John F. and Florence Fordney Kiess, and was married on 21 June 1919 to Harriet Knudsen, with whom he had a daughter, Margaret, the following year. In 1906, Kiess began his studies at Indiana University in Bloomington, where he received his BA in astronomy with high distinction in 1910. He earned a Ph.D. in 1913 from the University of California at Berkeley, where he was a fellow at the Lick Observatory and a student of ▶ William Campbell. Kiess taught at the University of Missouri, Pomona College, and the University of Michigan before taking a position in 1917 as a physicist at the United States National Bureau of Standards [NBS] in Washington, DC. There, he worked alongside William F. Meggers, section chief of the Spectroscopy Section, to produce numerous books and papers on spectroscopic measurements. Kiess taught in the NBS postgraduate school, and gave courses at Georgetown University and George Washington University as well. He wrote about a 100 scientific papers in his fields of research prior to retiring from the NBS on 31 October 1957. In addition to his extensive laboratory work, Kiess participated as a government scientist on expeditions to observe eclipses in Brazil. He spent several weeks at an observation post near the summit of Mauana Loa, Hawaii, accompanied by C. H. Corliss, another NBS spectroscopist. Their analysis of sunlight reflected from Mars showed no evidence of water vapor or oxygen in its atmosphere. His collaboration with C. J. Humphreys during World War II determined the electronic configuration of atomic uranium, thereby establishing for the first time the existence of a second series of rare-earth elements. Kiess’s work on silicon atoms enabled him to identify conspicuous solar spectral lines that had long resisted identification. As a result of his laboratory studies on the phosphorus atom, this element was first detected in the Sun’s atmosphere. Kiess also collaborated with the Allegheny Observatory on measurements of solar spectral lines.

Kimura, Hisashi

Kiess held memberships in the American Astronomical Society, American Physical Society, Astronomical Society of the Pacific, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington Academy of Science, Optical Society of America, and National Geographic Society. Kiess was awarded the Donohoe Comet Medal of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific in 1911 for his discovery of a comet (C/1911 N1). In 1946, he received the Department of Commerce Meritorious Service Award. 9 years later, Kiess was awarded the department’s Exceptional Service Award for his outstanding achievements in spectroscopy, including the discovery of atomic energy levels in highly complex atoms, his precise measurements of spectral wavelengths, and for basic contributions to astrophysics. On 7 October 1967, he received the Vicennial Medal for his 20 years of service on the faculty of Georgetown University. Kiess is honored with an honorary degree from Indiana University (D.Sc., 1963), an asteroid ((1788) Kiess), and a lunar crater (named in his honor in 1973).

Selected Reference Poggendorff, J. C. (1937). “Kiess.” In Biographischliterarisches Handwo¨rterbuch. Vol. 6, p. 1314. Berlin.

Kimura, Hisashi Naoshi Fukushima University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

Born Kanazawa, Ishikawa Prefecture, Japan, 10 September 1870 Died probably Kanazawa, Ishikawa Prefecture, Japan, 26 September 1943 Hisashi Kimura observed terrestrial latitudinal variations and developed an equation to account for it. He was adopted into the family Kimura.

Naoshi Fukushima: deceased.

Kindı¯: Abu¯ Yu¯suf Yaҁqu¯b Ibn Isha¯q al-Kindı¯ ˙

In 1892, he graduated from the Department of Astronomy in the College of Science, Imperial University of Tokyo. Kimura then worked in the Tokyo Astronomical Observatory and in 1899 became the first director of Mizusawa Latitude Observatory, established when the International Latitude Service [ILS] started. The ILS comprised six stations (including Mizusawa) on a circle of constant latitude around the world; its purpose was to study the fluctuating motion of the position of the Earth’s pole. This fluctuation should be expressible by using two terms if the Earth is a rigid body. However, the actual latitude variation observed at all ILS stations showed unexpectedly complicated time variations. Kimura reported in 1902 that the observed latitude variations are better expressed by means of an equation with three terms. The introduced third term (now often called the Kimura term) was shown to be common to all stations and independent of the pole’s motion. The term shows a seasonal variation with an amplitude range less than 0.500 , with a maximum in winter and a minimum in summer. Kimura’s original 1902 note was published in both the Astronomical Journal and the Astronomische Nachrichten. Although it is now thought that the Kimura term is due to the presence of a liquid core in the Earth’s interior, we have still much to study to understand its real origin. Kimura received various prizes, such as the Gold Medal from the Royal Society, the First Prize from the Japanese Academy, and many others. A crater on the far side of the Moon was named Kimura to honor his scientific contribution.

Selected References Kimura, H. (1902). “A New Annual Term in the Variation of Latitude, Independent of the Components of Pole’s Motion.” Astronomical Journal 22: 107–108. — (1902). “On the Existence of a New Annual Term in the Variation of Latitude, Independent of the Components of Pole’s Motion.” Astronomische Nachrichten 158: 233–240. Wako, Y. (1970). “Interpretation of Kimura’s Annual Z-Term.” Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan 22: 525–544.

1205

K

Kindı¯: Abu¯ Yu¯suf Yaҁqu¯b Ibn Isha¯q ˙ al-Kindı¯ Glen M. Cooper Department of History, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

Born probably Ku¯fa, (Iraq), circa 800 Died probably Baghdad, (Iraq), after 870

Kindı¯ was a pivotal figure in the transmission of Greek science into the Islamic world. A polymath, he left approximately 260 treatises on various scientific and philosophical subjects, including optics, astronomy, arithmetic, geometry, medicine, music, and metaphysics. Only a few of these have survived. Little is known about his life. Kindı¯ arrived in Baghdad, the capital of the Islamic realm, during the reign of the ҁAbba¯sid Caliph ▶ Ma’mu¯n (reigned: 813–833), when the Graeco-Arabic translation movement was in its early stages. Kindı¯ enjoyed the favor of several caliphs, serving as tutor to the son of Caliph Muҁtaṣim (reigned: 833–842), under whom Kindı¯ especially flourished, but he fell into disgrace under Caliph Mutawakkil (reigned: 847–861). His library was confiscated, and he was publicly beaten, possibly due to court intrigue. According to some accounts, Kindı¯’s library was eventually restored. Although he is remembered primarily as “the philosopher of the Arabs,” Kindı¯ was active in many areas of scientific research. His work is significant in the history of astronomy for a number of reasons. First, he founded the philosophical program of study, centering on the works of ▶ Aristotle, without which the pursuit of Greek-inspired astronomy, and the many contributions made by Islamic theoretical astronomers, would have been impossible. He taught that philosophical knowledge can be acquired only through years of sustained study. The sciences of the quadrivium (arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy) must be

K

K

1206

mastered before the student can understand Aristotle’s writings on logic, physics, ethics, and metaphysics, or other sciences such as astrology and medicine. Kindı¯’s approach toward the ancient sciences was to complete them, and his strategy of presentation was to combine observation with the Euclidean “axiomatic method” of rational demonstration, a perspective he presented in a treatise entitled That Philosophy Can Be Acquired Only by Mathematical Discipline. Kindı¯ did not slavishly follow Aristotle or other Greek philosophers. For example, he produced an ingenious argument against the infinite magnitude of the Universe; by employing a skillful reductio ad absurdum argument, Kindı¯ showed how the notion of actual infinity leads to paradoxes. Second, Kindı¯ began the systematic formulation of a scientific Arabic terminology based on Greek concepts. This idiom formed the groundwork for the later philosophical and scientific contributions of ▶ Fa¯ra¯bı¯, ▶ Ibn Sı¯na¯, Ghaza¯lı¯, ▶ Ibn Rushd, and others. And through Latin translations of the twelfth century, Kindı¯’s influence also extended into Europe. Third, Kindı¯ also created an Islamic idiom, showing how Greek ideas could be adapted into the Islamic metaphysical framework, without detriment to either. Despite these efforts, however, Kindı¯ clashed with contemporary Islamic theologians, who often viewed the Greek sciences with suspicion. In terms of actual work in astronomy and cosmology, Sezgin lists some 30 works, only 13 or so being extant. Of those that are extant, five are general or cosmological works (one being a paraphrase of the Almagest), three concern instruments, and the rest are on particular topics. None of these seem particularly original but indicate an interest in making the Greek scientific heritage better known to a wider audience. Kindı¯ also wrote extensively on astrological topics and was responsible for introducing Abu¯ Ma ҁ shar to astrology; he was to become the most influential astrological authority in both the Arabic and the Latin Middle Ages. Finally, it is worth

Kindı¯: Abu¯ Yu¯suf Yaҁqu¯b Ibn Isha¯q al-Kindı¯ ˙

mentioning that Kindı¯ was also interested in optics, a subject important to astronomy, and developed a new analytical approach, punctiform analysis, whereby each point of the visible object is perceived by an individual ray coming from the eye.

Selected References D’Alverny, M. T. and F. Hurdy. “Al-Kindi, De Radiis.” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et litte´raire du moyenaˆge 41:139–260. Endress, Gerhard (1997). “The Circle of Al-Kindı¯.” In The Ancient Tradition in Christian and Islamic Hellenism: Studies on the Transmission of Greek Philosophy and Sciences, edited by Gerhard Endress and Remke Kruk, pp. 43–76. Leiden: Research School CNWS. (Contains a detailed discussion of the figures associated with Kindı¯’s circle, the philosophers, scientists, and translations, and describes the scope of their work.) Gutas, Dimitri (1998). Greek Thought, Arabic Culture: The Graeco-Arabic Translation Movement in Baghdad and Earlyҁ Abba¯sid Society (2nd-4th/8th10th centuries). London: Routledge. Ivry, Alfred L. (1974). Al-Kindı¯’s Metaphysics. Albany: State University of New York Press. (A work fundamental to understanding Kindı¯’s philosophy.) Lindberg, David C. (1976). “Al-Kindi’s Critique of Euclid’s Theory of Vision.” Chap. 2 in Theories of Vision from al-Kindi to Kepler,. pp. 18–32. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Rescher, Nicholas (1964). Al-Kindı¯: An Annotated Bibliography. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. (Somewhat dated, but still very useful.) Rescher, Nicholas and Haig Khatchadourian (1965). “Al-Kindı¯’s Epistle on the Finitude of the Universe.” Isis 56: 426–433. Rosenthal, F. (1956). “Al-Kindı¯ and Ptolemy.” In Studi orientalistici in onore di Giorgio Levi Della Vida. Vol. 2, pp. 436–456. Rome: Instituto per l’Oriente. (Contains a discussion of Kindı¯’s paraphrase of the Almagest, placing it within the context of Kindı¯’s other writings and of the understanding of Ptolemaic astronomy of Kindı¯’s time.) Sezgin, Fuat. Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums. Vol. 5, Mathematik (1974): 255–259; Vol. 6, Astronomie (1978): 151–155; Vol. 7, AstrologieMeteorologie und Verwandtes (1979): 130–134. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Walzer, R. (1957). “New Studies on al-Kindi.” Oriens 10: 203–232. (Excellent summary of the then available treatises by Kindı¯.)

King, Arthur Scott

King, Arthur Scott Richard P. Wilds American Astronomical Society, Lawrence, KS, USA

Born Jerseyville, Illinois, USA, 18 January 1876 Died Pasadena, California, USA, 25 April 1957 American spectroscopist Arthur Scott King built the first electrical furnace to ionize and excite elements in the laboratory and produce spectra that could, among other uses, be compared with astronomical spectra to determine stellar compositions. He was born the son of Robert Andrew and Miriam Munson King; he received his training in California and Europe, and he spent most of his working life in California, on the leading edge of astrophysical spectroscopy. The family moved from Illinois to California in the hope (fulfilled) of improving Arthur’s health. He entered the University of California at Berkeley and received his bachelor’s degree in physics in 1899 and the first Ph.D. degree in physics given by the University of California in 1903. King was awarded a Whiting Fellowship to study in Europe. He spent 2 years doing research in spectroscopy at the Universities of Berlin and Bonn – the latter with Professor ▶ Heinrich Kayser who produced the Handbuch der Spectroscopie. King spent his time in Kayser’s laboratory designing and building the first electric furnace for the excitation of the spectra of metals. In addition King was able to spend some time traveling Europe before returning to California. He began publishing in 1901, while still a student. King returned to Berkeley to teach physics and to continue to publish works on his progress with improving his electric furnace with the goal of getting better laboratory spectra to compare with astrophysical ones. While involved in these groundbreaking efforts, King married Louise

1207

K

Burnett; they had two sons, Robert (1908) and Ralph (1911). In 1907 King also encountered ▶ George Hale who offered him a staff position with the Mount Wilson Observatory in the mountains outside Pasadena, California. King shared Hale’s enthusiasm for the progress of astrophysics and immediately published an article in the 1908 Astrophysical Journal describing what became known as the “King Furnace.” This furnace would be used for over four decades to shed light on how to interpret stellar spectra. In King’s efforts to understand the elements that could be identified in observed spectra, he focused particularly on rare earth elements. He spent significant time in his early years investigating the Zeeman Effect (the broadening and displacement of spectral lines by ambient magnetic fields) and was also involved in the discovery of the isotope carbon 13. With Hale close by, King could not have avoided extended work in solar studies, including sunspots and the photosphere. He also found time to obtain spectra of meteors. King’s work would be published in almost 150 scientific papers, in a number of journals worldwide. The World Wars did not disrupt King’s work as much as they did most scientists of this period. However, he did spend some time through the war periods studying sonar issues and naval ordnance. King was elected to the US National Academy of Sciences and was a Member of the American Physical Society, American Astronomical Society, Optical Society of America, and Commission 14 (Atomic and Molecular Data) of the International Astronomical Union. He was elected President of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific in 1941 and of the Meteoritical Society for the term 1945–1950. King’s good California health finally failed him when he overextended himself on a family trip. He never fully recovered and died in his sleep. His son Robert became a Professor of physics at the California Institute of Technology, and son Ralph became a practicing medical doctor in La Mesa, California.

K

K

1208

Selected References Babcock, H. D., “Arthur Scott King, 1876–1957.” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, (1957), Vol. 69, No. 409, pp. 333–335. Kayser, Heinrich Gustav Johannes, Handbuch der Spectroscopie. S. Hirzel, Leipzig, 1905. King, Arthur S., “Uber Emissionsspektra von Metallen im Electrichen Ofen,” Annalen der Physik, 16:360. Leipzig, 1905. Published in English as “An Electric Furnace for Spectroscopic Investigations.” King, Arthur S., “Ten Years’ Work on a Mountain Observatory.” Carnegie Institute, Washington Pub. No. 235, 1915, pp. 34–37. King, Robert B., “Biographical Memoirs: Arthur S. King, January 18, 1876 – April 17, 1957.” The National Academies, 1957.

King, Edward Skinner John Hearnshaw University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

Born Liverpool near Syracuse, New York, USA, 31 May 1861 Died Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 10 September 1931 Edward Skinner King was an American astronomer who spent his entire professional career at the Harvard College Observatory in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where he made important contributions to the techniques of photographic photometry of the brighter stars. He was one of the pioneers of the method of extrafocal photometry, in which the density of an out-of-focus stellar image on a photographic plate was used to determine the star’s apparent magnitude. King was born in upstate New York in 1861 and educated at Hamilton College, some 50 miles east of Syracuse, where he graduated in 1887 with a BA degree, majoring in mathematics. In that same year, King obtained a position at the Harvard College Observatory, working under

King, Edward Skinner

▶ Edward Pickering, where he spent his entire career of 44 years’ duration. Pickering introduced King to the relatively new technique of astronomical photography as a tool for stellar astronomy. Apart from a 2-year period when he was in charge of Harvard’s station on Mount Wilson in California (1888–1890), King worked in Cambridge and was given responsibility as superintendent of all the photographic work undertaken at Harvard College Observatory. Pickering at that time was initiating very large programs both for photographic stellar photometry and for objective prism spectroscopy of the stars in both hemispheres, and the need for a dedicated photographic expert to coordinate the techniques of the new photographic science led to King’s appointment. One of the projects that King initiated in his early years at Harvard was that of systematically testing the photographic plates used. From 1896, he devised a scheme whereby one plate from each batch was exposed to a standard light source (a gas burner) with different apertures. Plates were exposed at monthly intervals and the effects of both plate age and delayed development (up to 4 months after exposure) were explored. He thus established an invaluable store of expertise in photographic astronomy using the latest emulsion-on-glass dry bromide plates. By 1912, he concluded that “photography has disadvantages peculiar to itself and the reduction of the plates used in this investigation has shown many sources of error causing discordant results. Temperature, humidity, and other influences affect the sensitive film either temporarily or permanently, and make the quantitative use of photography a problem of great difficulty.” Nevertheless, King used his wide experience and knowledge of photographic methods to write a book, A Manual of Celestial Photography, which he published at the end of his life in 1931. In spite of (or in part because of) these problems that he encountered, King persevered with photographic photometry, and he devised an extrafocal method of photographing stellar images for the determination of the magnitudes

King, Edward Skinner

of the bright stars. It is this work, undertaken during his most active period at Harvard around 1912, for which King is best known. His technique involved comparing the photographic density in out-of-focus images of bright stars with that produced by the adopted standard star, Polaris. For this work, he used the Draper 11-in. refracting telescope. Seven extrafocal plate positions were chosen, and the relative surface intensities of the light from a given star were determined by comparison with a calibrated photographic wedge. The aim was to record extrafocal images such that equal photographic blackening was recorded in equal 60-s exposures but with different plate positions. Knowing the law between plate position and surface intensity, which was close to an inverse square law, allowed a difference in focal positions to be converted to a magnitude difference. King initially applied this technique to find photographic magnitudes of 33 bright stars north of 30 . His zero point was based on the adopted photographic magnitude of Polaris being mpg ¼ 2.62 mag. The program was then extended to include 76 stars mainly brighter than mpg ¼ 4.0 and then to 153 stars brighter than mpg ¼ 5.5. Finally, 79 bright and mainly southern stars were included in the program between 1911 and 1914, when King obtained plates taken on the 13-in. Boyden telescope at Harvard’s Boyden Station at Arequipa in Peru. While King was one of the pioneers of precise extrafocal photographic photometry, his program was smaller than those undertaken by either ▶ John Parkhurst at Yerkes Observatory – his Yerkes Actinometry was published in 1912 – or by Karl Schwarzschild at the Go¨ttingen Observatory from 1901. (The Go¨ttinger Aktinometrie was published in 1910 and 1912.) King also concentrated on brighter stars than his contemporaries. Like them, he formed a color index by taking the difference between his photographic (blue) magnitudes and those determined visually from Harvard’s meridian photometer. He was able to demonstrate a tight correlation between color index (mpg mvis) and the Harvard spectral

1209

K

type, with a typical scatter of the points being 0.12 mag. Both Parkhurst and Schwarzschild had earlier shown the same type of relationship between color and spectrum. One interesting conclusion of King’s investigation was the announcement of the presence of an absorbing medium in space, based on his finding of a positive correlation between the color index and the distance of a star based on its trigonometric parallax. ▶ Jacobus Kapteyn had earlier considered the same question by exploring the dependence of stellar colors on apparent and absolute magnitudes as well as distance. For the distance effect, Kapteyn had concluded by 1909 that for stars near the Milky Way, the color increased at the rate of 0.31 magnitudes per kiloparsec. King’s value for the same parameter was, however, much higher, 1.9 magnitudes per kpc. King ascribed this to the presence of an absorbing medium in interstellar space, which progressively reddened the more distant stars. Unfortunately, such early attempts to demonstrate the presence of an interstellar medium using stellar colors were flawed. In practice the whole question was complicated by the then poorly understood relation between intrinsic stellar color and luminosity, the more luminous stars of a given late spectral type being both intrinsically redder and more distant. What is more, King was unaware that the reddening effect only applied to stars near the Milky Way and can only be reliably explored using distant early-type stars in the galactic plane. Even Kapteyn by 1915 was convinced that interstellar matter had a negligible influence on stellar colors, and Harlow Shapley came to the same conclusion. With two such formidable opponents, King’s ideas (published in 1913 and 1916) on a selectively absorbing interstellar medium were soon suppressed. Yet the concept of interstellar absorption in space was never fully laid to rest in the time before ▶ Robert Trumpler at Lick Observatory triumphantly revived it in 1930. King’s legacy to astronomy was certainly his lifelong mastery of the photographic “art” to obtain relatively precise photographic

K

K

1210

King, William Frederick

magnitudes. He was one of a few observers who recognized the intrinsic merit of the extrafocal technique over the less reliable focal images, which concentrated the light of a star into a very small and saturated image on a plate. His shy and reserved manner meant that he was happy to work on one project over more than four decades at one institution. King served as observer at Harvard from 1887 to 1913, as assistant professor from 1913 to 1926, and finally as full professor from 1926. He retired on 1 September 1931 at the age of 70 and died just 10 days later. His contributions to astronomy were recognized by his election as a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and by an honorary doctorate from his alma mater, Hamilton College.

Selected References Hearnshaw, John B. (1996). The Measurement of Starlight: Two Centuries of Astronomical Photometry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, esp. pp. 156–160. King, Edward Skinner (1912). “Standard tests of photographic plates.” Annals of Harvard College Observatory 59: 1–32. — (1912). “Photographic magnitudes of bright stars.” Annals of Harvard College Observatory 59: 95–126. — (1913). “Absorption of light in space.” Popular Astronomy 21: 28–31. — (1916). “Absorbing medium in space.” Annals of Harvard College Observatory 76, no. 1: 1–10. — (1931). A Manual of Celestial Photography. Boston: Eastern Science Supply Company. Payne, Cecilia H. (1932). “Edward Skinner King (1861–1931).” Popular Astronomy 40: 64–68.

King, William Frederick Richard A. Jarrell York University, Toronto, ON, Canada

Born Stowmarket, Suffolk, England, 19 February 1854 Died Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 23 April 1916

King, William Frederick. Reproduced from Popular Astronomy 24, no. 6 (June-July 1916)

As Canada’s first chief astronomer, William King founded the Dominion Observatory and oversaw the creation of the Dominion Astrophysical Observatory. The son of William King and Ellen Archer, he married Augusta Florence Snow in 1881. The couple had four sons and two daughters. King arrived in Canada at the age of eight, studying at the Port Hope Grammar School and later at the University of Toronto, which he entered in 1869. King left the university in September 1872 without a degree to take a position as subassistant astronomer to the British team of the International Boundary Survey in western Canada. On completion of the work, he returned to Toronto in 1874 to finish his degree, with a gold medal in mathematics. Two years later, after passing the examinations for the designation of Dominion Land Surveyor and Dominion Topographical Surveyor, King joined the Department of the Interior’s surveying team in the interior plains.

Kirch, Christfried

Some of his astronomical work employed the telegraph. King rose quickly through the ranks; by 1886, he was chief inspector of surveys and moved to Ottawa to work directly with the surveyor-general. In 1890, King became chief astronomer. With ▶ Otto Klotz, he built a small observatory in the capital, and the two worked to persuade the government to create a national observatory. By 1899, the way was clear politically, and the Dominion Observatory opened in 1905. King became its director as well as its chief astronomer. From 1892, King was the International Boundary Commissioner for Canada. In 1909, when the Geodetic Survey of Canada was created, he became its director as well. King strongly supported his junior associate, ▶ John Plaskett, in lobbying for what became the Dominion Astrophysical Observatory. King was active in the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada and the American Astronomical Society. The latter’s first meeting outside the United States was held in Ottawa in 1911 at King’s invitation. He was elected a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada and served as its president in 1911. King was awarded an honorary doctorate from the University of Toronto. He was also elected a Companion of the Order of Saint Michael and Saint George [CMG], a step below knighthood. King’s scientific work was limited to astronomical surveying. His importance to Canadian astronomy was his ability to create two national observatories in a small, scientifically backward nation within 15 years.

Selected References Jarrell, Richard A. (1988). The Cold Light of Dawn: A History of Canadian Astronomy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. — (1988). “King, William Frederick.” In Dictionary of Canadian Biography. Vol. 14, pp. 558–559. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

1211

K

Kirch, Christfried Roland Wielen Zentrum f€ur Astronomie Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

Born Guben, (Brandenburg, Germany), 24 December 1694 Died Berlin, (Germany), 9 March 1740 From 1716 to 1740 Christfried Kirch worked as an astronomer and calendar maker at the observatory of the Academy of Sciences in Berlin. The son of the astronomer ▶ Gottfried Kirch and his second wife, ▶ Maria Kirch, Christfried Kirch received a careful education in Berlin. Until 1712, he was a student at the Joachimsthalsche Gymnasium. He continued his studies for 2 years at Nuremberg, and later at Leipzig and Ko¨nigsberg. In 1715, Christfried Kirch joined his mother in her move to Danzig, where he worked for 18 months at the observatory of the late ▶ Johannes Hevel. From childhood on he was trained by his parents in astronomical matters. By the age of 20, Christfried Kirch started to publish annual planetary ephemerides. Having shown sunspots and other celestial phenomena to Tsar Peter the Great of Russia at the Danzig Observatory, Christfried Kirch and his mother received an offer to work as astronomers at Moscow. This offer was declined, mainly because a career for Christfried Kirch at Berlin was already very probable and preferred by both of them. Also later, Christfried Kirch received some offers to work at the Academy of Sciences in Saint Petersburg, which he never accepted. After the death of the Berlin astronomer Johann Heinrich Hoffmann in April 1716, Christfried Kirch accepted the offer of a permanent position in astronomy at the Academy of Sciences in Berlin. He became a member of the Academy of Sciences in October 1716, and got one of the two positions of an

K

K

1212

observator (observer) at the observatory of the academy in January 1717. In 1728, Christfried Kirch was promoted from the position of an “observer” to that of the regular “astronomer” of the Academy of Sciences. As was usual for the Berlin astronomers of that time, the main task of Christfried Kirch was the preparation of the annual calendar issued by the academy. In this task, he was supported unofficially by his mother and by his sister, ▶ Christine Kirch. In addition to Christfried Kirch’s calendar work he published planetary ephemerides and carried out astronomical observations at the observatory. His observations concerned nearly all astronomical phenomena. In particular, Christfried Kirch observed the transit of Mercury in 1720 and the solar eclipse in 1733. From eclipses of Jupiter’s satellites, he derived the differences in longitude between Berlin, Paris, and Saint Petersburg. In general, with regard to work, Christfried Kirch followed closely in the lines of his father. He was elected as a foreign member of the French Academy of Sciences (Paris) in 1723 and of the Royal Academy (London) in 1742 (after his death). Christfried Kirch was very careful in all his work and had an intense correspondence with most of the eminent astronomers of his time. He lived together with his sisters, and was never married. Christfried Kirch died of a heart attack.

Selected References Aufgebauer, P. (1971). “Die Astronomenfamilie Kirch.” Die Sterne 47: 241–247. Bode, Johann Elert (1813). “Chronologisches Verzeichnis der ber€uhmtesten Astronomen, seit dem dreizehnten Jahrhundert, ihrer Verdienste, Schriften und Entdeckungen.” In Astronomisches Jahrbuch f€ ur das Jahr 1816, pp. 92–124. Berlin: J. E. Hitzig. (For Christfried Kirch, see p. 114.) Brather, Hans-Stephan (1993). Leibniz und seine Akademie: Ausgew€ ahlte Quellen zur Geschichte der Berliner Soziet€ at der Wissenschaften 1697–1716. (For Kirch, see pp. 306–311.) Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. Des Vignoles, Alphonse (1742). “Eloge de Monsieur Kirch le fils astronome de Berlin.” Journal litte´raire d’Allemagne, de Suisse et du Nord 1, pt. 2: 300–351.

Kirch, Christine G€ unther (1882). “Kirch: Christfried.” In Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. Vol. 15, p. 788. Leipzig: Duncker and Humblot. Harnack, Adolf (1900). Geschichte der Ko¨niglich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. 3 Vols. Berlin: Reichsdruckerei. Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2000). “Neue Erkenntnisse zur Biographie von Gottfried Kirch.” In 300 Jahre Astronomie in Berlin und Potsdam, edited by Wolfgang R. Dick and Klaus Fritze, pp. 71–85. Acta Historica Astronomiae, Vol. 8. Thun: Harri Deutsch. Lalande, Joseph Jeˆrome le Français de (1792). Astronomie. 3rd ed. 3 Vols. Paris. (For Christfried Kirch, see Vol. 1, p. 180, no. 532.) Ludendorff, Hans (1942). “Zur Fr€ uhgeschichte der Astronomie in Berlin” Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vortr€ age und Schriften, no. 9: 1–23. M€adler, Johann Heinrich (1873). Geschichte der Himmelskunde. 2 Vols. Braunschweig: G. Westermann. (For the Kirch family, see Vol. 1, pp. 404–406.) Multhauf, Letti S. (1973). “Kirch.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 373–374. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Poggendorff, J. C. (1863). “Kirch.” In Biographischliterarisches Handwo¨rterbuch. Vol. 1, col. 1258. Leipzig. Schro¨der, Hans (1851). “Lexikon der hamburgischen Schriftsteller bis zur Gegenwart.” Hamburg: PerthesBesser und Mauke. (For the relation of J. E. Bode to the Kirch family, see “Bode, J. E.”, Vol. 1, p. 284.) Wattenberg, Diedrich “Zur Geschichte der Astronomie in Berlin im 16. bis 18. Jahrhundert.” Die Sterne 48 (1972): 161–172; 49 (1973): 104–116. (Reprinted as Mitteilungen der Archenholdsternwarte BerlinTreptow No. 107.) — (1977). “Kirch: Christfried.” In Neue deutsche Biographie. Vol. 11, p. 634. Berlin: Duncker and Humblot. Wolf, Rudolf (1877). Geschichte der Astronomie. M€ unchen: Verlag R. Oldenbourg. (For the Kirch family, see pp. 457–459.)

Kirch, Christine Roland Wielen Zentrum f€ur Astronomie Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

Born Guben, (Germany), circa 1696 Died Berlin, (Germany), 6 May 1782

Kirch, Christine

Christine Kirch worked mainly in the background and supported her father, her mother, her brother, and later other astronomers at Berlin in calculating calendars and in carrying out astronomical observations. The daughter of the astronomer ▶ Gottfried Kirch and his second wife, ▶ Maria Kirch, and the sister of the astronomer ▶ Christfried Kirch, Christine Kirch was educated in astronomy by her parents. She assisted them in their astronomical observations during her childhood. It is reported that Christine Kirch, as a child, was mainly responsible for taking the time (or measuring time intervals by using a pendulum). When she was older, she was introduced to calendar making. Christine Kirch assisted first her mother and later her brother in calculating various calendars. Until 1740, she did not receive a regular salary for her contributions, but only occasionally small donations from the Berlin Academy of Sciences. After the death of Christfried, the academy had to rely more strongly on Christine Kirch’s help in calculating calendars. She became especially responsible for preparing the calendar for Silesia, the province conquered for Prussia in 1740–1742 by Friedrich the Great. The new, populous province significantly increased the income of the Berlin Academy from the academy monopoly on calendars in Prussia. In 1776, Christine Kirch received the very respectable salary of 400 Thaler from the Academy. Christine Kirch continued her esteemed calendar work up to her old age. When she was 77 years old, the academy put her into a status that we would nowadays describe as “emeritus”: she continued to receive her salary but no longer had an obligation to work. Instead, she was to introduce the new Berlin astronomer ▶ Johann Bode to calendar making. Her contacts with Bode were quite friendly, and were probably strongly enhanced by the fact that in 1774 Bode married a grandniece of Christine Kirch. After the death of his first wife in 1782, Bode even married in 1783 another grandniece of Christine Kirch (the older sister of his first wife).

1213

K

In a letter to Christine Kirch, the academy expressed explicitly its official thanks for her work on calendars. She died as a very respected person. The youngest sister of Christine Kirch, Margaretha Kirch, was also active in astronomy, but we know only very few details about her life. She was seven when her father died. Later, she observed comets, especially the comet 1743 C1, which was discovered by Augustin Grischow in Berlin on 10 February 1743.

Selected References Aufgebauer, P. (1971). “Die Astronomenfamilie Kirch.” Die Sterne 47: 241–247. Bode, Johann Elert (1813). “Chronologisches Verzeichnis der ber€ uhmtesten Astronomen, seit dem dreizehnten Jahrhundert, ihrer Verdienste, Schriften und Entdeckungen.” In Astronomisches Jahrbuch f€ ur das Jahr 1816, pp. 92–124. J.E. Hitzig. Berlin. (For Christine Kirch, see p. 113 under entry for Maria Margaretha Kirch.) Brather, Hans-Stephan (1993). Leibniz und seine Akademie: Ausgew€ ahlte Quellen zur Geschichte der Berliner Soziet€ at der Wissenschaften 1697–1716. (For Kirch, see pp. 306–311.). Berlin: AkademieVerlag. G€ unther (1882). “Kirch: Christine.” In Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. Vol. 15, p. 788. Leipzig: Duncker and Humblot. Harnack, Adolf (1900). Geschichte der Ko¨niglich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin3 Vols. Berlin: Reichsdruckerei. Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2000). “Neue Erkenntnisse zur Biographie von Gottfried Kirch.” In 300 Jahre Astronomie in Berlin und Potsdam, edited by Wolfgang R. Dick and Klaus Fritze, pp. 71–85. Acta Historica Astronomiae, Vol. 8. Thun: Harri Deutsch. Ludendorff, Hans (1942). “Zur Fr€ uhgeschichte der Astronomie in Berlin.” Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vortr€ age und Schriften, no. 9: 1–23. M€adler, Johann Heinrich (1873). Geschichte der Himmelskunde. 2 Vols. Braunschweig: G. Westermann. (For the Kirch family, see Vol. 1, pp. 404–406.) Multhauf, Letti S. (1973). “Kirch.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 373–374. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Poggendorff, J. C. (1863). “Kirch.” In Biographischliterarisches Handwo¨rterbuch. Vol. 1, col. 1258. Leipzig.

K

K

1214

Schro¨der, Hans (1851). “Lexikon der hamburgischen Schriftsteller bis zur Gegenwart.” Hamburg: PerthesBesser und Mauke. (For the relation of J. E. Bode to the Kirch family see “Bode, J. E.”, Vol. 1, p. 284.) Wattenberg, Diedrich. “Zur Geschichte der Astronomie in Berlin im 16. bis 18. Jahrhundert.” Die Sterne 48 (1972): 161–172; 49 (1973): 104–116. (Reprinted as Mitteilungen der Archenholdsternwarte BerlinTreptow No. 107.) Wolf, Rudolf (1877). Geschichte der Astronomie. M€unchen: Verlag R. Oldenbourg. (For the Kirch family, see pp. 457–459.)

Kirch, Gottfried Roland Wielen Zentrum f€ ur Astronomie Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

Born Guben, (Bradenburg, Germany), 18 December 1639 Died Berlin, (Germany), 25 July 1710 Gottfried Kirch, probably the most prominent German astronomer around 1700, is best known for having published long series of calendars and ephemerides. Also an active observer, Kirch was famous for his discovery of the bright comet of 1680. In 1686 Kirch detected the variable star w Cygni, the third known variable star after Mira itself (detected 1639) and Algol (1669). His career culminated in his appointment as the first permanently engaged astronomo ordinario at Berlin on 18 May 1700. Kirch was born during the 30 Years’ War. His father, Michael Kirch, a tailor, had to flee with his family from Guben, and the childhood of Gottfried was therefore rather restless. He probably never received a university degree. However, Kirch had good contacts with ▶ Erhard Weigel, who taught mathematics, astronomy, geography, and physics at the University of Jena from 1653 to 1699. Weigel recommended Kirch to the prominent astronomer ▶ Johann Hevel, who had a well-equipped private observatory at Danzig. In 1674, Kirch worked there for some months.

Kirch, Gottfried

Before 1700 Kirch’s living conditions were rather unstable and his income not safe. While he probably earned most of his money as a calendar maker, he also worked as a teacher. Kirch lived in Guben, in Langgr€un, Thuringia, until 1676, in Leipzig Saxony 1676–1680, in Coburg 1680–1681, again in Leipzig 1681–1692 and in Guben 1692–1700, and finally in Berlin 1700–1710. At Langgr€un, Kirch married Maria Lang in 1667; they had seven sons and one daughter. Maria Kirch died in 1690. In 1692 he married his second wife, Maria Margaretha Winkelmann, and they had five daughters and two sons. His second wife supported him strongly in calculating calendars and in carrying out astronomical and meteorological observations. ▶ Maria Kirch became widely known as the “Kirchin,” i.e., the “feminine version” of the name Kirch. Also, many of their children supported and followed them in their astronomical tasks, especially ▶ Christfried Kirch and ▶ Christine Kirch. From 1663 until his death, Gottfried Kirch carried out astronomical observations quite regularly, usually using small instruments. His observations concerned nearly all types of celestial objects or phenomena, from sunspots to comets to variable stars. In 1678, he published a paper on Mira, based partially on his own observations of this variable star. Kirch became most famous as the discoverer of the extremely bright comet of 1680, now designated C/1680 V1. This was the first telescopic comet discovery in history. In 1681, Kirch described the galactic open star cluster that is now designated as Messier 11. In 1686, he found w Cygni to be a variable star and determined its period as 404.5 days. The main astronomical activity of Kirch was, however, the computation and editing of calendars for the general public and the publishing of astronomical ephemerides. His first calendars appeared in 1667 in Jena and Helmstedt, later in Nuremberg and Ko¨nigsberg, e.g., the “Christen-, J€uden- und T€urcken-Kalender oder alt und neu Jahr-Buch,” and the “Alter und neuer Schreib-Kalender in Cantzeleyen, Aemptern,

Kirch, Gottfried

Raths-und Richter-Stuben . . . n€utzlich zu gebrauchen.” Kirch’s ephemerides (e.g., Ephemeridum Motuum Coelestium), first published in 1681, are mainly based on ▶ Johannes Kepler’s Rudolphine Tables, but Kirch added some corrections. In 1700, Kirch accepted the call to the permanent position as the astronomo ordinario at Berlin. This position was created by Friedrich III, Elector of Brandenburg, in his edict of 10 May 1700, the so called Kalenderpatent. This edict followed the decision of the German Protestant states in 1699 to introduce from 1700 onward a new “improved” calendar, which was essentially identical to the Catholic Gregorian Calendar (except for the computation of the date of Easter) and which should be calculated by qualified astronomers. The edict introduced a monopoly for this calendar in the Electorate of Brandenburg (later in Prussia) and imposed a “calendar tax.” The corresponding income was used for paying the astronomer and other members of the Berlin Academy of Sciences, which was founded on 11 July 1700. Friedrich III promised also to erect an observatory at Berlin, but this observatory was not actually inaugurated until 19 January 1711. Kirch started his expected calendar work immediately and in 1700 was able to prepare the first calendar of this series, the “Chur-Brandenburgischer Verbesserter Calender Auff das Jahr Christi 1701.” In his calendar work Kirch was strongly supported by his wife Maria Margaretha Kirch and by an assistant astronomer, Johann Heinrich Hoffmann (1669–1716), who followed Kirch as astronomo ordinario after Kirch’s death in 1710. The Berlin calendars were quite popular and certainly gained much from Kirch’s long experience in calculating and editing calendars. His calendar experience was also the strongest motivation for calling him to the position of the astronomer at Berlin, in spite of his advanced age of 60 years. The observing conditions at Berlin were not the best. Kirch had to use small transportable instruments, located either in his own house or (after 1708) in the tower of the unfinished Berlin Observatory. After 1705, he was sometimes

1215

K

allowed to use the better-equipped private observatory of Baron Bernhard Friedrich von Krosigk (1656–1714). Nevertheless, Kirch also collected and published many astronomical observations at Berlin. For example, he discovered in 1702 the globular cluster that is now designated as Messier 5, and his wife and he were among the independent discoverers of comet C/1702 H1. After his death, his calendar work was continued (somewhat unofficially) by Maria Margaretha, officially by Hoffmann from 1710 to 1716, and then by his son, Christfried, from 1716 onward, and then again unofficially by his daughter Christine. We should remark here that the prominent Berlin astronomer ▶ Johann Bode had strong personal links to the Kirch family: Bode’s first two wives were grandnieces of Christine, and hence great granddaughters of Kirch. Thus, Kirch established what is probably the longest family tradition in calendar and ephemerides making. Two astronomical objects are named for Kirch: A lunar crater Kirch and the minor planet (6841) Gottfriedkirch.

Selected References Aufgebauer, P. (1971). “Die Astronomenfamilie Kirch.” Die Sterne 47: 241–247. Bode, Johann Elert (1813). “Chronologisches Verzeichnis der ber€ uhmtesten Astronomen, seit dem dreizehnten Jahrhundert, ihrer Verdienste, Schriften und Entdeckungen.” In Astronomisches Jahrbuch f€ ur das Jahr 1816, pp. 92–124. Berlin: J. E. Hitzig. (For Gottfried Kirch, see p. 111.) Brather, Hans-Stephan (1993). Leibniz und seine Akademie: Ausgew€ ahlte Quellen zur Geschichte der Berliner Soziet€ at der Wissenschaften 1697–1716. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. (For Gottfried Kirch, see pp. 306–311.) Do¨ring, Detlef (1997). “Der Briefwechsel zwischen Gottfried Kirch und Adam A. Kochanski 1680–1694.” Abhandlungen der S€ achsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Philologisch-historische Klasse 74, no. 5: 1–94. G€ unther (1882). “Kirch: Gottfried.” In Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. Vol. 15, pp. 787–788. Leipzig: Duncker and Humblot. Harnack, Adolf (1900). Geschichte der Ko¨niglich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin.3 Vols. Berlin: Reichsdruckerei.

K

K

1216

Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (1999). Astronomie um 1700: Kommentierte Edition des Briefes von Gottfried Kirch an Olaus Ro¨mer vom 25. Oktober 1703. Acta Historica Astronomiae, Vol. 4. Frankfurt am Main: Harri Deutsch. — (1999). “Die Beziehungen zwischen Erhard Weigel und Gottfried Kirch.” In Erhard Weigel-1625 bis 1699: Barocker Erzvater der deutschen Fr€ uhaufkl€ arung, edited by Reinhard E. Schielicke, Klaus-Dieter Herbst, and Stefan Kratochwil, pp. 105–122. Acta Historica Astronomiae, Vol. 7. Thun: Harri Deutsch. — (2000). “Neue Erkenntnisse zur Biographie von Gottfried Kirch.” In 300 Jahre Astronomie in Berlin und Potsdam, edited by Wolfgang R. Dick and Klaus Fritze, pp. 71–85. Acta Historica Astronomiae, Vol. 8. Thun: Harri Deutsch. Lalande, Joseph Jeˆrome le Français de (1792). Astronomie. 3rd ed. 3 Vols. Paris. (For Gottfried Kirch, see Vol. 1, p. 176, No. 514.) Ludendorff, Hans (1942). “Zur Fr€ uhgeschichte der Astronomie in Berlin.” Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vortr€ age und Schriften, no. 9: 1–23. M€adler, Johann Heinrich (1873). Geschichte der Himmelskunde. 2 Vols. Braunschweig: G. Westermann. (For the Kirch family, see Vol. 1, pp. 404–406.) Multhauf, Letti S. (1973). “Kirch.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 373–374. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Poggendorff, J. C. “Kirch.” In Biographisch-literarisches, Handwo¨rterbuch. Vol. 1 (1863): 1257–1258 and Vol. 7a, suppl. (1971): 324–325. Leipzig and Berlin. Schiebinger, Londa (1987). “Maria Winkelmann at the Berlin Academy: A Turning Point for Women in Science.” Isis 78: 174–200. — (1989). The Mind Has No Sex? Women in the Origins of Modern Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Schro¨der, Hans (1851). “Lexikon der hamburgischen Schriftsteller bis zur Gegenwart.” Hamburg: PerthesBesser und Mauke, 1851. (For the relation of J. E. Bode to the Kirch family, see “Bode, J. E.”, Vol. 1, p. 284. Wattenberg, Diedrich. “Zur, Geschichte der Astronomie in Berlin im 16. bis 18. Jahrhundert.” Die Sterne 48 (1972): 161–172; 49 (1973): 104–116. (Reprinted as Mitteilungen der Archenholdsternwarte BerlinTreptow No. 107.) — (1977). “Kirch: Gottfried.” In Neue deutsche Biographie. Vol. 11, pp. 634–635. Berlin: Duncker and Humblot. Wolf, Rudolf (1877). Geschichte der Astronomie. M€unchen: Verlag R. Oldenbourg. (For the Kirch family, see pp. 457–459.) Zedler, Johann Heinrich (1732–1754). Großes vollst€ andiges Universal-Lexikon aller Wissenschaften und K€ unste. Halle: Zedler, 1732–1754. (For Gottfried Kirch, see Vol. 15 (1737): 702–704.)

Kirch, Maria Margaretha Winkelman

Kirch, Maria Margaretha Winkelman Roland Wielen Zentrum f€ur Astronomie Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

Born Panitzsch near Leipzig, (Germany), 25 February 1670 Died Berlin, (Germany), 29 December 1720 Maria Margaretha Kirch was one of the few women active in astronomy around 1700. She was the second wife of the astronomer ▶ Gottfried Kirch, and the mother of the astronomers ▶ Christfried Kirch and ▶ Christine Kirch. While mainly engaged in calculating calendars, together with her husband and later her son, Maria Margaretha Kirch also carried out astronomical and meteorological observations. She became well known as one of the discoverers of a comet in 1702. Maria Margaretha Winkelmann was the daughter of a Lutheran minister. At the age of 13, she had already lost both her father and her mother. Maria Margaretha received her general education privately, first from her father and then from her brother-in-law, Justinus Toellner. Knowledge of astronomy was mainly provided to her by a farmer and well-known astronomer, Christoph Arnold, who lived nearby at Sommerfeld. Probably due to his contacts with Arnold and Toellner, the astronomer Gottfried Kirch met Maria Margaretha. She married him on 8 May 1692. Gottfried found in her not only the new housewife for him and his children, but someone also able and very willing to help him in his astronomical observations and in calculating calendars. For her, it was a welcome chance to follow her astronomical interests. Gottfried and Maria Kirch had six children, two of whom (Christfried and Christine) also became astronomers. After living at Leipzig and Guben, Saxony, for some years, the Kirch family moved in 1700 to Berlin, where Gottfried accepted the newly

Kirch, Maria Margaretha Winkelman

established position of the astronomo ordinario. His main task in Berlin was to compute and edit the new calendar, and Maria Margaretha supported him very strongly in this task. She also carried out astronomical observations, using usually small transportable instruments. Her most significant success was the independent discovery of comet C/1702 H1. Maria Margaretha Kirch’s husband confirmed her discovery; hence he is often also considered as one of the independent discoverers of this comet. Maria Margaretha Kirch published three tracts between 1709 and 1711, but these publications were essentially of an astrological nature. Her other works, especially her calendar calculations and her observations, were usually contained in publications of her husband or her son. After Gottfried’s death, it was clear to Maria Margaretha that she had no chance to replace her husband in the official position of the astronomo ordinario at the Berlin Academy of Sciences. She asked, however, in August 1710 and in subsequent letters to the academy, for a minor position in order to continue her work for the calendar. In 1712, all Maria Margaretha Kirch’s requests were finally rejected, although the president of the academy, ▶ Gottfried Leibniz, expressed explicitly his admiration for her astronomical skills. In 1711, Johann Heinrich Hoffmann (1669–1716) was officially appointed as the successor to her husband as astronomer of the academy. In October 1712 Maria Margaretha moved with her children to the private observatory of Baron Bernhard Friedrich von Krosigk (1656–1714) at Berlin. There she carried out astronomical observations and continued her calendar work, which was published in Breslau and Nuremberg. After the death of Krosigk, Maria Margaretha moved to Danzig and reorganized and used the observatory of the deceased astronomer ▶ Johannes Hevel. In 1716, she declined an offer from Tsar Peter the Great of Russia for her and Christfried to become astronomers in Moscow.

1217

K

Maria Margaretha returned to Berlin when Christfried was appointed (together with J. H. Wagner) as an astronomer of the Berlin academy in October 1716, after the death of Hoffmann. Back at Berlin, she supported her son in calculating the official calendar, as she had done earlier for her husband. In addition, Maria Margaretha earned money by providing the astronomical data for other calendars, including those issued at Dresden and in Hungary. Initially, she also used the Berlin Observatory for astronomical observations. However, the academy complained about the “visibility” of Maria Margaretha Kirch at the observatory and about her meddling with matters of the academy. In 1717, the Academy forced her to leave her home and the observatory. Maria Margaretha Kirch died of fever. The minor planet (9815) Mariakirch has been named for Maria Margaretha Kirch.

K Selected References Aufgebauer, P. (1971). “Die Astronomenfamilie Kirch.” Die Sterne 47: 241–247. Bode, Johann Elert (1813). “Chronologisches Verzeichnis der ber€ uhmtesten Astronomen, seit dem dreizehnten Jahrhundert, ihrer Verdienste, Schriften und Entdeckungen.” Astronomisches Jahrbuch f€ ur das Jahr 1816, pp. 92–124. Berlin: J.E. Hitzig. (For Maria Margaretha Kirch, see p. 113.) Brather, Hans-Stephan (1993). Leibniz und seine Akademie: Ausgew€ ahlte Quellen zur Geschichte der Berliner Soziet€ at der Wissenschaften 1697–1716. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag. (For Maria Margaretha Kirch, see pp. 316–320.) Des Vignoles, Alphonse (1721). “Eloge de Madame Kirch a` l’occasion de laquelle on parle des quelques autres Femmes et d’un Paisan Astronome.” Bibliothe`que germanique ou histoire litte´raire de l’Allemagne et des pays du nord 3: 155–183. Do¨ring, Detlef (1997). “Der Briefwechsel zwischen Gottfried Kirch und Adam A. Kochanski 1680–1694.” Abhandlungen der S€ achsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Philologisch-historische Klasse 74, no. 5: 1–94. G€ unther (1882). “Kirch: Maria Margaretha.” In Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie. Vol. 15, p. 788. Leipzig: Duncker and Humblot. Harnack, Adolf (1900). Geschichte der Ko¨niglich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. 3 Vols. Berlin: Reichsdruckerei.

K

1218

Herbst, Klaus-Dieter (2000). “Neue Erkenntnisse zur Biographie von Gottfried Kirch.” In 300 Jahre Astronomie in Berlin und Potsdam, edited by Wolfgang R. Dick and Klaus Fritze, pp. 71–85. Acta Historica Astronomiae, Vol. 8. Thun: Harri Deutsch. Lalande, Joseph Jeˆrome le Français de (1792). Astronomie. 3rd ed. 3 Vols. Paris. (For Maria Margaretha Kirch, see Vol. 1, p. 179, No. 524.) Ludendorff, Hans (1942). “Zur Fr€ uhgeschichte der Astronomie in Berlin.” Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Vortr€ age und Schriften, No. 9: 1–23. M€adler, Johann Heinrich (1873). Geschichte der Himmelskunde. 2 Vols. Braunschweig: G. Westermann. (For the Kirch family, see Vol. 1, pp. 404–406.) Multhauf, Letti S. (1973). “Kirch.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 373–374. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Poggendorff, J.C. (1863). “Kirch.” In Biographischliterarisches Handwo¨rterbuch. Vol. 1, p. 1258. Leipzig. Schiebinger, Londa (1987). “Maria Winkelmann at the Berlin Academy: A Turning Point for Women in Science.” Isis 78: 174–200. — (1989). The Mind Has No Sex? Women in the Origins of Modern Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Schro¨der, Hans (1851). “Lexikon der hamburgischen Schriftsteller bis zur Gegenwart.” Hamburg: PerthesBesser und Mauke. (For the relation of J.E. Bode to the Kirch family, see “Bode, J. E.”, Vol. 1, p. 284.) Wattenberg, Diedrich. “Zur Geschichte der Astronomie in Berlin im 16. bis 18. Jahrhundert.” Die Sterne 48 (1972): 161–172; 49 (1973): 104–116. (Reprinted as Mitteilungen der Archenholdsternwarte BerlinTreptow No. 107.) — (1977). “Kirch.” In Neue deutsche Biographie. Vol. 11, pp. 634–635. Berlin: Duncker and Humblot. Wolf, Rudolf (1877). Geschichte der Astronomie. M€unchen: Verlag R. Oldenbourg. (For the Kirch family, see pp. 457–459.)

Kircher, Athanasius Joseph F. MacDonnell Holycross University, Worchester, MA, USA

Born Geisa, (Hessen, Germany), 2 May 1598 Died Rome, (Italy), 27 November 1680

Joseph F. MacDonnell died in 2005.

Kircher, Athanasius

Kircher, Athanasius. Courtesy of History of Science Collections, University of Oklahoma Libraries, Small Portraits Collection

Athanasius Kircher’s greatest contribution was to sum up, through his 41 massive books, what had been achieved in a given subject by past scientists and what scientific methods seemed most appropriate for future study. The son of Johannes Kircher and Anna Gansek, he received his early schooling at the Jesuit school in Fulda, after which he entered the Jesuit Order in 1616. Kircher studied rhetoric, philosophy, and mathematics at the University of Paderborn and later at the University of Cologne. He then studied theology in Mainz. It was there that Kircher first used a telescope to study sunspots. He became a professor of mathematics, philosophy, and oriental languages at the University of W€urzburg, and then was appointed professor of mathematics at the Roman College. In 1656 Kircher published Iter Celeste, a treatise on astronomy emphasizing fixed and movable stars as well as the composition and structure of these bodies. He gradually became skilled in constructing telescopes; his chief interest was in comets and in eclipses (both solar and lunar). He was the first to give a clear depiction of Jupiter and Saturn. Kircher’s greatest contribution to astronomy, however, was providing a clearinghouse of astronomical data and discoveries; he provided a good number of astronomers

Kircher, Athanasius

with valuable information, having been a correspondent with most important astronomers of the time. Kircher also studied optics and horology, which included not only sundials but also clocks powered by the regularity of certain plants, such as the sunflower. Kircher’s contributions to mathematics, astronomy, harmonics, acoustics, chemistry, microscopy, and medicine played a significant part in early scientific revolution. In his works, he displayed an understanding of the sciences of the past, but he was always open to the developments and possibilities of the future. His Museum Kircherianum was considered one of the best science museums in the world. So broad and so well known were his interests that Kircher was the recipient of many scientific curiosities from other scientists. For three centuries it has survived in Rome. Recently, the scientific items of this museum have been divided up and spread throughout three other Roman museums. Among Kircher’s inventions are found the megaphone, the pantometrum for solving geometrical problems, and a counting machine. His discoveries include sea phosphorescence as well as microscopically small organisms, the nature of which remains disputed. Kircher’s works were quoted by many scholars of the day. It was by facilitating a wide diffusion of knowledge, by stimulating thought and discussion about his vast collections of scientific information, that Kircher earned a place among the fathers of modern science and the title of universal genius. Kircher wrote about the Coptic language and showed that it was a vestige of early Egyptian. He was the first to have discovered the phonetic value of a hieroglyph. His interest in interpreting the obelisks led him to such a thorough study of the subject that princes, popes, and cardinals appointed Kircher to decipher various obelisks. He has been called the real founder of Egyptology. Kircher developed a great interest in the underworld and assumed the existence of huge underground reservoirs. During the violent eruption of Mount Etna in 1630, he had himself lowered into the cone for closer observation. His two-volume work, Mundus subterraneus

1219

K

(Amsterdam, 1665), was probably the first printed work on geophysics and vulcanology. In it, he held that much of the phenomena on Earth, including the formation of minerals, were due to the fact that there was fire under the Earth’s surface, an unusual teaching for those days. Some of his works were really encyclopedic in their scope. One such is Phonurgia nova (Kempten, 1673), which contains all the thenknown mathematics and physics concerning sound as well as his own use of the megaphone. Another is the popular Musurgia universalis (Rome, 1646), one of Kircher’s longest works, which marks a crucial juncture in the development of music. Kircher’s treatise on light, Ars magna lucis et umbrae (Rome, 1646), also discussed the planetary system. He showed no inclination to follow the heliocentric system, but favored ▶ Tycho Brahe’s model in which the planets circle the Sun. In Iter Exstaticum (1656) he recounted an imaginary voyage, guided by angels through Brahe’s heavens. Despite his censors, Kircher believed in the existence of other worlds inhabited by creatures similar to humans, posing this as an example of God’s omnipotence. Some other inventions found in this book include the magic lantern, the predecessor to the movies.

Selected References De Morgan, A. (1862). Contents of the Correspondence of the 17th and 18th century. London: Oxford. Findlen, Paula (ed.) (2004). Athanasius Kircher: The Last Man Who Knew Everything. New York: Routledge. Institutum Historicum (1958). Archivum Historicum Societatis Iesu. Vol. 27, pp. 339–362. Rome: Institutum Historicum. Kangro, Hans (1973). “Kircher, Athanasius.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 374–378. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Reilly, P. Conor, S. J. (1974). Athanasius Kircher S.J.: Master of a Hundred Arts. Wiesbaden: Edizioni del Mondo. Riguad, Stephen Jordan (ed.) Correspondence of Scientific Men of the Seventeenth Century. 2 Vols. 1841. (Reprint, Hildesheim, Germany: Georg Olms, 1965.) Sommervogel, Carlos (1890–1960). Bibliothe`que de la Compagnie de Je´sus. 12 Vols. Brussels: Socie´te´ Belge de Libraire.

K

K

1220

Kirchhoff, Gustav Robert Paul Charbonneau University of Montreál, Montreál, QC, Canada

Born Ko¨nigsberg (Kaliningrad, Russia), 12 March 1824 Died Berlin, Germany, 17 October 1887

Kirchhoff, Gustav Robert. Courtesy of History of Science Collections, University of Oklahoma Libraries

Gustav Kirchhoff founded spectral analysis (with ▶ Robert Bunsen) and discovered fundamental properties of the absorption and emission of electromagnetic radiation. His father, a government law councillor, was devoted to the Prussian state and encouraged his sons to similarly serve the state to the best of their abilities. Kirchhoff enrolled at the University of Ko¨nigsberg, where he studied mathematical physics under Carl Gustav Jacob Jacobi (1804–1851) and Franz Ernst Neumann (1798–1895). After graduation in 1847 and a short scientific visit to Paris, he held an unsalaried lectureship in Berlin. In 1850, Kirchhoff was appointed extraordinary professor of physics at Breslau, where the arrival of Bunsen the following year inaugurated an immensely

Kirchhoff, Gustav Robert

fruitful collaboration that would revolutionize astronomy. Kirchhoff moved to Heidelberg as professor of physics in 1854, following Bunsen who had gone there 2 years before. In 1857, Kirchhoff married Clara Richelot, daughter of one of his former mathematics professors at Ko¨nigsberg. This first marriage, which gave the couple four children, came to a premature end in 1869 with Clara’s untimely death. These were difficult times for Kirchhoff, as he had just the year before suffered a debilitating injury to a foot, which left him having to use crutches or a wheelchair for extended periods of time thereafter. In 1872, he married Luise Bro¨mmel, a childless union that remained happy to the end of his life. Increasingly unable to pursue experimental work in view of his failing health, Kirchhoff moved to Berlin as professor of mathematical physics in 1875, the same year he was elected fellow of the Royal Society. Ill health finally forced him into retirement in 1886. Kirchhoff was a mathematical physicist by training. He made his first important scientific contributions in 1845–1846, while still a student, by using topological concepts to generalize Ohm’s law to complex networks of electrical conductors. In 1857, Kirchoff went on to demonstrate theoretically that an oscillating current would propagate in a conductor of zero resistance at the speed of light, an important step toward the electromagnetic theory of light, though he did not make that connection. Kirchhoff’s most important contribution to astronomy was his development of spectroscopic analysis with Bunsen and their subsequent determination of the chemical composition of the Sun. Half a century before quantum mechanics would provide for it a firm physical basis, Kirchhoff and Bunsen established spectroscopy as an empirical science. Between 1859 and 1861, they demonstrated that: 1. incandescent solids or liquids emit continuous spectra; 2. the spectra of heated gases consist of a number of bright lines, characterized by different wavelength patterns for different gases; and

Kirkwood, Daniel

3. when the light from an incandescent gas or liquid traverses a heated gas, the gas absorbs light at the same wavelength is as it emits when heated to the same temperature. This last principle in particular provided a natural explanation for the ubiquitous dark lines in the solar spectrum, first noted in 1802 by ▶ William Wollaston and studied in much greater detail in 1817 by ▶ Joseph von Fraunhofer. Kirchhoff’s next step was the production of a detailed map of the solar spectrum, in the course of which he ruined his eyesight to the extent that an assistant eventually had to complete the map. In a parallel effort involving the comparison of this growing map with laboratory spectra of gases, Kirchhoff began to determine the chemical composition of the Sun’s atmosphere. He first identified the elements sodium, calcium, barium, strontium, magnesium, iron, nickel, copper, cobalt, and zinc, with the list steadily growing ever longer in the following years. Kirchhoff’s spectroscopic findings also led him to put forth a theory of the Sun’s physical constitution, whereby a hot gaseous atmosphere is assumed to overlie a hotter, incandescent liquid core. This stood in marked contrast to the still prevalent view promoted by ▶ William Herschel and ▶ John Herschel of a dark, cold solar nucleus; Kirchhoff’s efforts contributed much to the latter concept’s demise in the second half of the nineteenth century. True to his training and inclination, Kirchhoff did not neglect theoretical aspects related to his work in spectroscopy. In 1859, as a consequence of his chemical spectral analysis, he had formulated a general principle stating that the ratio of emission to absorption of all material bodies is the same at a given temperature and wavelength. Kirchhoff’s law in turn led to his formulation in 1862 of the concept of the perfect blackbody, of vital importance in the later development of quantum theory. Although in this he had been partly anticipated by others, perhaps most notably by the British physicist ▶ Balfour Stewart, the generality and mathematical rigor of Kirchhoff’s work is such that he is now credited with the formulation of the blackbody concept.

1221

K

Select References Boltzmann, L. (1905). “Gustav Robert Kirchhoff.” Popul€ are Schriften 51–75. (Includes interesting personal reminiscences on Kirchhoff.) Hentschel, Klaus (2002). Mapping the Spectrum: Techniques of Visual Respresentation in Research and Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kirchhoff, Gustav Robert (1876–1894). Vorlesungen u€ber mathematische Physik. 4 Vols. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner. — (1882). Gesammelte Abhandlungen. Leipzig: J. A. Barth. (The editing of Kirchhoff’s papers and essays was completed by Ludwig Boltzmann, with editions published between 1882 and 1891.) McGucken, W. (1969). Nineteenth-Century Spectroscopy. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, Chap. 1. (For a good, in-context discussion of Kirchhoff’s work in spectral analysis.) Meadows, A. J. (1970). Early Solar Physics. Oxford: Pergamon Press, Chap. 2. (Includes English translations of two important papers by Kirchhoff on spectrum analysis and the theory of heat.) Rosenfeld, L. (1973). “Kirchhoff, Gustav Robert.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 379–383. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Schuster, A. (1932). Biographical Fragments. London: MacMillan and Co., pp. 216–220. Siegel, Daniel M. (1976). “Balfour Stewart and Gustav Kirchhoff: Two Independent Approaches to ‘Kirchhoff’s Radiation Law.’” Isis 67: 565–600.

Kirkwood, Daniel Frank K. Edmondson Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, USA

Born Harford County, Maryland, USA, 27 September 1814 Died Riverside, California, USA, 11 June 1895 Daniel Kirkwood’s most important contribution to astronomy was his discovery, published in 1866, of gaps in the distribution of orbits of the asteroids. His interest in the origin and evolution of the solar system was clearly evident in his books and papers on asteroids, comets, and meteors that were important contributions on these topics. Born in Bladensburg, Maryland, to

Frank K. Edmondson: deceased.

K

K

1222

John Kirkwood, a farmer, and his wife Agnes (neé Hope) Kirkwood, Daniel was the 12th of 13 children. His early education was limited to a nearby country school. Kirkwood began his career as a teacher at the age of 19 when he took a teaching position at a country school in Hopewell, Pennsylvania. He enrolled at the York County Academy, York, Pennsylvania, in 1834, majoring in mathematics. Following his graduation in 1838, Kirkwood was appointed first assistant and instructor in mathematics at the York County Academy. In 1843 he became principal of the Lancaster, Pennsylvania, High School, and in 1845 he married Sarah A. McNair. Kirkwood became interested in the rotations of the planets in 1839, during his first year as instructor in mathematics at York County Academy. In August 1843 he derived a mathematical analogy relating the rotation and revolution periods of the planets based on the nebular hypothesis of ▶ Pierre de Laplace. A year later, he described his work to the eminent astronomer ▶ Sears Walker. At the second meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS], at Cambridge, Massachusetts, in August 1849, Walker presented Kirkwood’s letter, dated 4 July 1849, to the meeting as a formal paper. ▶ Benjamin Gould asserted that Kirkwood’s analogy supported the Laplace nebular hypothesis, while Walker proclaimed it “the most important harmony in the Solar System discovered since the time of Kepler.” Thus, Kirkwood’s letter brought instant international fame to the 35-year-old principal of the Pottsville Academy. David Brewster called it “a work of genius” in his 1850 presidential address to the British Association for the Advancement of Science. The Kirkwood analogy became irrelevant when the Laplace nebular hypothesis was temporarily abandoned in favor of ▶ Chamberlin-Moulton hypothesis, but it is noteworthy that Kirkwood in his later years became one of the leading critics of Laplace’s nebular hypothesis. During his 5 years in Lancaster, Kirkwood published seven scholarly papers on astronomical

Kirkwood, Daniel

topics including one in which he analyzed reports of a very bright meteor that had been seen in Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware, and Virginia on 13 July 1846. Kirkwood collected and compared “as many newspaper descriptions of the appearance as possible” and also “corresponded with scientific gentlemen residing in various parts of the country.” Using this information he calculated a height of 62 miles, a track length of more than 200 miles, and a velocity of 13 miles/second. Kirkwood’s efforts were reminiscent of a similar effort by ▶ Nathaniel Bowditch for the Weston, Connecticut, meteorite observed widely all over New England in 1807. Both cases were valuable because too few such well-documented path observations and calculations had accumulated since the first coordinated attempts to determine meteor altitudes were made by ▶ Johann Benzenberg and ▶ Heinrich Brandes in Germany in 1798. In 1849, Kirkwood accepted an appointment as the principal of the Pottsville Academy. Near the end of his second year in this position, Kirkwood gave some of the first public demonstrations of the Foucault pendulum in the United States. Kirkwood left the Pottsville Academy in 1851 to become professor of mathematics at Delaware College. He was elected by the faculty to be its president in 1854. After 2 years as president, he resigned to accept an appointment as professor of mathematics at Indiana University. Kirkwood’s interest in asteroids can be traced to the announcement of the discovery of minor planet (5) Astraea by ▶ Karl Hencke in Marienwerder, Germany, in 1845. There had been no such discoveries after the first four asteroids were discovered between 1801 and 1807. Thus, the announcement of Hencke’s discovery was a significant event, as was the announcement, 2 years later, of Hencke’s second asteroid discovery (6) Hebe. At the time of the announcement of Hencke’s first discovery, Kirkwood was principal of the Lancaster High School. Announcements of additional asteroid discoveries came in fairly

Kirkwood, Daniel

rapid order, stimulating Kirkwood to study the orbits of this emerging new class of solar system object. By 1857, a year after Kirkwood arrived on the Indiana campus, 55 asteroids with computed orbits were known to exist, and it was at about that time that Kirkwood first realized the existence of the gaps with which his name has since been associated. Kirkwood found an absence of asteroids with orbital periods that were one-half, one-third, two-fifth, etc. of the orbital period of Jupiter. Kirkwood formalized this most important of his contributions to solar system astronomy at the AAAS meeting in 1866, in a paper that also dealt with a theory of meteors and with the gaps in Saturn’s rings. Kirkwood generalized the problem to some degree by noting that both the Cassini and Encke divisions in Saturn’s rings would be populated with bodies with periods that would be in resonance with the periods of various Saturnian satellites. Kirkwood’s continued study of the asteroids led to several other important discoveries based on resonances of their orbital periods with that of Jupiter. This led to his prediction of the existence of what is now known as the Hilda group of asteroids at the two-thirds resonance. In 1892, Kirkwood identified some 32 other possible groups based on this concept. Another aspect of solar system dynamics that attracted Kirkwood’s attention was the relationship between these various minor solar system objects and other phenomena. He was the first to recognize and convincingly demonstrate that the orbits of certain periodic comets and those of certain meteor showers coincide and were likely related, a fact borne out in later studies. His speculations regarding a possible relationship between comets, asteroids, showers of meteors and stony meteorites, and the origin of fireballs in asteroids were controversial but also productive. ▶ Richard Proctor, a British astronomer and leading writer of popular books on astronomy, frequently called Kirkwood “the Kepler of our day” in his books. Proctor spoke in Indianapolis

1223

K

in 1873 while on a lecture tour of the United States. After the lecture he was approached by a delegation from Greencastle, Indiana, who requested that he lecture at DePauw University the next evening. Proctor replied, “No I cannot do so. I came from England to America to see Daniel Kirkwood. Tomorrow is my opportunity and I am going to Bloomington to see him.” Indiana University had a faculty of six in 1856, and this had increased to 23 in 1886, the year Kirkwood retired. He served under five presidents, including zoologist David Starr Jordan. In 1889 Kirkwood and his wife moved to Riverside, California, where Mrs. Kirkwood died the next year. Their only child, Agnes, had died in 1874 after many years as an invalid. Shortly after their arrival in California, Kirkwood joined the Astronomical Society of the Pacific – unusual for the society at the time, given that he had performed the majority of his work outside California. He promptly published three papers in the Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific, Volume II, followed by another in Volume III, and two more in Volume IV. David Starr Jordan became the founding president of Stanford University in 1891. He showed his high regard for Kirkwood by appointing him to the original Stanford Faculty as nonresident professor and lecturer in astronomy. Kirkwood was then 77 years old. Kirkwood was a prolific scholar, publishing a total of 133 papers and 3 books during his extended career. His last paper, about the Perseid meteors, was published in the Sidereal Messenger in April 1893, 2 years before his death. His body was returned to Bloomington a week after he died and was buried at Rose Hill Cemetery on 17 June 1895, next to the graves of his wife and daughter. Kirkwood’s funeral was an imposing event. Every business in town was closed for that period. The text of the funeral sermon read: “The heavens declare the Glory of God and the firmament showeth his handiwork.” The minister said: “Dr. Kirkwood knew far more of the heavens than the writer of the eighth psalm.”

K

K

1224

Kirwitzer, Wenceslaus Pantaleon

Selected References

Selected Reference

Anon. (1897). “Kirkwood, Daniel.” In National Cyclopaedia of American Biography. Vol. 4, pp. 349–350. New York: James T. White and Co. Fernie, J. Donald. (1999). “The American Kepler.” America Scientist 87: 398–401. Holden, E. S. (June 1895). Obituary. Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 7, no. 42. Kirkwood, Daniel (1867). “On the Theory of Meteors.” In Proceedings of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Joseph Lovering. (Fifteenth meeting, held at Buffalo, New York.) Marsden, Brian G. (1973). “Kirkwood, Daniel.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 384–387. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Numbers, Ronald L. (1973). “The American Kepler: Daniel Kirkwood and His Analogy.” Journal for the History of Astronomy 4: 13–21. — (1977). “Daniel Kirkwood’s Analogy.” In Creation by Natural Law: Laplace’s Nebular Hypothesis in American Thought, pp. 41–54. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Mason, S. (2002). Galileo’s Scientific Discoveries, Cosmological Confrontations, and the Aftermath. History of Science 40: 1.

Kirwitzer, Wenceslaus Pantaleon Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Born Kada˘n, (Czech Republic), 1588 Died Macao, (China), 1626 For many years after the introduction of the Copernican theory, and for a short while yet following the telescopic discoveries of Galileo Galilei, Catholic faculty were free to debate the value of these ideas. Wenceslaus Kirwitzer, a Jesuit since 1606 and then a professor at Graz, was an avid supporter of the heliocentric system in 1615. However, the Edict of 1616 prohibited his further advocacy of these views. Kirwitzer was sent as a missionary to China in 1618.

Klein, Hermann Joseph Thomas A. Dobbins Fort Meyers, FL, USA

Born Cologne, (Germany), 14 September 1844 Died Cologne, Germany, 1 July 1914 The director of the Cologne Observatory during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, Hermann Klein was an energetic man of many talents renowned for an excellent star atlas, a map of the Milky Way, and several widely employed texts on astronomy and meteorology. But, above all else he was an ardent observer of the Moon, and his popular writings did much to advance the cause of lunar studies in Germany. As a young man, Klein had been personally acquainted with both ▶ Johann von M€adler and ▶ Johann Schmidt. He translated ▶ James Nasmyth and John Carpenter’s influential 1874 book The Moon, Considered as a Planet, a World, and a Satellite into German and fostered widespread interest in selenographical work in the periodicals he edited: Sirius, Gaea, Wochenschrift f€ ur Astronomie, and the annual Jahrbuch f€ ur Astronomie und Geophysik. Klein was undoubtedly the most active student of the Moon in Germany during the latter part of the nineteenth century.

Selected References Both, Ernst E. (1961). A History of Lunar Studies. Buffalo, New York: Buffalo Museum of Science. Sheehan, William P. and Thomas A. Dobbins (2001). Epic Moon: A History of Lunar Exploration in the Age of the Telescope. Richmond, Virginia: Willmann-Bell.

Klinkerfues, Ernst Friedrich Wilhelm

Klein, Oskar Benjamin Virginia Trimble University of California, Irvine School of Physical Sciences, Irvine, CA, USA

Born Morby, Sweden, 15 September 1894 Died Stockholm, Sweden, 5 February 1977

Swedish theoretical physicist Oskar Klein developed a useful extension of Theodore Kaluza’s five-dimensional version of general relativity; Klein’s work anticipates the existence of dark matter in the universe. The son of Austrian immigrants Gottlieb Klein (the chief rabbi of Stockholm) and Toni Levy, Klein worked in the laboratory of ▶ Svante Arrhenius while still a teenager and earned a Ph.D. at Stockholm in 1921 with a study of suspensions and solutions. Klein worked briefly with ▶ Niels Bohr in Copenhagen and then with Svein Rosseland, using the initial ideas of quantum mechanics and the Bohr model of the atom to elucidate the process of collisional de-excitation (which is what prevents coronal lines from being observed in laboratory studies). While at the University of Michigan from 1923 to 1935, Klein attempted to formulate a five-dimensional extension of general relativity that would incorporate electromagnetism as well as gravity. Theodore Kaluza attempted a similar unification at about the same time. The fivedimensional Kaluza-Klein space-time has applications in modern theoretical cosmology in that it implies a lowest-mass particle that preserves Kaluza-Klein symmetry and could be a dark matter candidate. After returning to Europe, Klein was at Lund from 1925 to 1930 and professor at Stockholm from 1930 to his retirement in 1962. He contributed to a great many topics in quantum mechanics, but the next topic of importance for

1225

K

astronomy was his work with Yoshio Nishina of Japan, using the Dirac equation to study the scattering of light by electrons. The Klein-Nishina cross section replaces the Thompson cross section at high energies and is smaller. Toward the end of his life, Klein, together with ▶ Hannes Alfveń, proposed a cosmology that would be completely symmetric in matter and antimatter. He continued to take an active interest in cosmological issues well into the 1970s, corresponding with younger workers in the field like ▶ John Wheeler. Klein was awarded honorary degrees by the universities of Oslo and Copenhagen.

Selected References Kaku, Michio (1994). Hyperspace: A Scientific Odyssey through Parallel Universes, Time Warps, and the 10th Dimension. New York: Doubleday. Kaluza, Theodore (1921). Sitzungsberichte Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften 96: 69. Von Meyenn, Karl and Mariano Baig (1990). “Klein, Oskar Benjamin.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 17 (Suppl. 2), pp. 480–484. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Whittaker, Sir Edmund (1953). A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity. Vol. 2, The Modern Theories. New York: Harper.

Klinkerfues, Ernst Friedrich Wilhelm Christof A. Plicht Arbeitsgemeinschaft Hildesheimer Amateurastronomen, Hildesheim, Germany

Born Hofgeismar, (Hessen, Germany), 29 March 1827 Died Go¨ttingen, Germany, 28 January 1884 Textbook author Ernst F. W. Klinkerfues discovered eight comets and contributed to meteor

K

K

1226

theory. The son of Johann Reinhard and Sabine (neé Dedolph) Klinkerfues, Ernst Klinkerfues was supported by relatives during a difficult youth. After school (gymnasium and polytechnic school) he worked as a surveyor with a railroad company. From 1847 to 1851 Klinkerfues studied astronomy and mathematics in Marburg. In 1851, ▶ Carl Gauss accepted him as assistant at the Go¨ttingen Observatory. After Gauss’ death in 1855 the physicist Wilhelm Weber (1894–1891) was director of the observatory. Klinkerfues wrote his doctoral thesis on “A New Method to Calculate the Orbits of Binary Stars” and received his doctoral honors in 1855. Klinkerfues discovered or codiscovered eight comets in the years 1853–1863. His work was not only on astronomy, but also on meteorological themes. In addition to other instruments, Klinkerfues constructed a hygrometer. Klinkerfues published several texts. His main work, Theoretische Astronomie, was first printed in 1871; in it, he introduced the term meteor-shower radiant. Klinkerfues was a fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society (1882). From 1861 on Klinkerfues was responsible for the observatory; from 1868 he was head of the department for practical astronomy, while the mathematician E. Schering led the theoretical department. Thus, Klinkerfues never reached his aim to be fully in charge of the astronomical work at Go¨ttingen. Financial difficulties, health problems, and the struggle for the leading position in astronomy at Go¨ttingen Observatory took its toll: Klinkerfues committed suicide.

Selected References R. C. (1885). “Ernst Friedrich Wilhelm Klinkerfues.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 45: 203–208. Volk, Otto (1980). “Klinkerfues, Wilhelm.” In Neue deutsche Biographie. Vol. 12, p. 100. Berlin: Dunker and Humblot.

Klotz, Otto Julius

Klotz, Otto Julius Richard A. Jarrell York University, Toronto, ON, Canada

Born Preston, (Cambridge, Ontario, Canada), 31 March 1852 Died Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, 28 December 1923 Otto Klotz pioneered the development of geophysics in Canada. The son of German immigrants Otto and Elise´ (neé Wilhelm) Klotz, Otto studied at the local grammar school and entered the University of Toronto in 1869 but transferred to the University of Michigan the following year. There he studied with James Craig Watson at the Detroit Observatory. After graduating as a civil engineer in 1872, Klotz returned to Preston to establish a private surveying practice. After obtaining the highest qualifications in surveying, he became a contract surveyor for the Department of the Interior (1879), working on the prairie surveys. In 1885, the department gave him the more difficult task of surveying the Canadian Pacific Railway line through the mountains of British Columbia. In 1892, Klotz moved to Ottawa to become a permanent staff member. With the Chief Astronomer, ▶ William King, Klotz helped to press for, and then design, the future Dominion Observatory, which opened in Ottawa in 1905. Klotz was effectively the assistant director and headed the geophysical work at the observatory. On King’s death in 1916, Klotz’s appointment as director was held up due to antiGerman sentiment. He became chief astronomer and director in 1917, serving till his death. Klotz was active in the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, a fellow of the Royal Society of Canada, and recipient of honorary degrees from the universities of Toronto, Michigan, and Pittsburgh. He was Canada’s organizing head for entering both the International Union for

Klumpke Roberts, Dorothea

Geodesy and Geophysics and the International Astronomical Union in 1919–1922. He was also president of the Seismological Society of America. Klotz and his wife Marie Widenmann (married 1873) had four children. Klotz can be considered Canada’s pioneer geophysicist. His division at the Dominion Observatory produced important results for decades after his death. He worked on gravity measurements and magnetic field surveys, but was most interested in the new field of seismology, working on microseisms. At the time of his death, the Dominion Observatory was one of the most important seismological stations in the world.

Selected References Jarrell, Richard A. (1988). The Cold Light of Dawn: A History of Canadian Astronomy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. — “Klotz, Otto Julius.” In Dictionary of Canadian Biography. Toronto: University of Toronto Press (in press).

€ ber, Harald von Klu ▶ von Kl€ uber, Harald

Klumpke Roberts, Dorothea Katherine Bracher Whitman College, Walla Walla, WA, USA

Born San Francisco, California, USA, 9 August 1861 Died San Francisco, California, USA, 5 October 1942 Dorothea Klumpke Roberts headed the Paris Observatory’s Bureau of Measurements for the

1227

K

Carte du Ciel project, and also published the photographic Isaac Roberts Atlas of 52 Regions. Dorothea Klumpke and her four sisters (all of whom became distinguished in their own fields) were educated in California and then in Paris. She received a BS in mathematics and mathematical astronomy from the University of Paris in 1886, and in 1893 became the first woman to receive the degree Doctor of Science there. Her dissertation was a mathematical study of the rings of Saturn. In 1887, Klumpke began work at the Paris Observatory, measuring star positions on photographic plates. When the Paris Observatory was assigned a large section of the sky to be photographed for the Carte du Ciel project, she was appointed to head the Bureau of Measurements, and from 1891 to 1901 she carried out this task so well that she was awarded the first Prix des Dames of the Socie´te´ Astronomique de France (1889) and Officier of the Paris Academy of Sciences in 1893. In 1901 Klumpke married ▶ Isaac Roberts, an amateur astronomer and pioneer in astronomical photography. They settled in England, and she assisted him in his work. After Roberts’ death in 1904, she returned to France and lived with her mother and sister, continuing Roberts’ work and publishing results from time to time. In 1929 she published the Isaac Roberts Atlas of 52 Regions, a Guide to William Herschel’s Fields of Nebulosity, followed by a 1932 supplement; these contained fine enlargements of 50 photographs from Roberts’ collection. This earned her the He´le`ne-Paul Helbronner Prize from the French Academy of Sciences in 1932. In 1934 she was elected Chevalier of the Legion of Honor in recognition of 48 years of service to French astronomy. About this time, Klumpke Roberts retired from active work, and returned to San Francisco, where she continued her interest in astronomy and young astronomers. She endowed several prizes through the Paris Observatory and the University of California, and gave money to the Astronomical Society of the Pacific for the Klumpke-Roberts Lecture Fund, named in

K

K

1228

honor of her parents and her husband. This has subsequently become the Klumpke-Roberts Award for those who have excelled in the popularization of astronomy.

Kneller, Andreas

Knobel, Edward Ball Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Selected References Aitken, Robert G. (1942). “Dorothea Klumpke Roberts – An Appreciation.” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 54: 217–222. Bracher, Katherine (1981). “Dorothea Klumpke Roberts: A Forgotten Astronomer.” Mercury 10, no. 5: 139–140.

Kneller, Andreas Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Alternate Name

Born London, England, 21 October 1841 Died probably London, England, 25 July 1930 After ▶ Christian H. Peters’ death, his editing and republication of ▶ Ptolemy’s Almagest was taken up by English amateur astronomer Edward Knobel. Knobel made significant observations of Mars and Jupiter, and was a cataloger of double stars. Knobel was instrumental in resolving a major crisis in the Royal Astronomical Society [RAS]. His report on the Sadler-Smyth controversy – see ▶ William Smyth – was responsible for clearing Smyth’s name and for Herbert Sadler’s resignation from the RAS Council in disgrace.

▶ Cellarius Flourished (the Netherlands), circa 1660

Other than the fact that he lived in the Netherlands, little is known about Andreas Cellarius. His Harmonica Macrocosmica, one of the most beautiful celestial atlases of all time, is a snapshot of seventeenth-century cosmology: All three major systems (Ptolemaic, Tychonic, and Copernican) are lavishly illustrated by Cellarius.

Selected Reference F. W. D. (1931). “Edward Ball Knobel.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 91: 318–321.

Knorre, Viktor Carl Christof A. Plicht Arbeitsgemeinschaft Hildesheimer Amateurastronomen, Hildesheim, Germany

Selected Reference Friedman, Anna Felicity (1997). Awestruck by the Majesty of the Heavens. Chicago: Adler Planetarium and Astronomy Museum.

Born Nikolajew, (Ukraine), 4 October 1840 Died Lichterfelde, (Sachsen-Anhalt), Germany, 25 August 1919

Knorre, Viktor Carl

Knorre, Viktor Carl. Courtesy of Mrs. Inga von Knorre

Viktor Knorre discovered four asteroids and contributed to telescope accessory and mounting improvements. A third-generation astronomer, Knorre was one of the 15 children of Karl Friedrich Knorre (1801–1883), director of the astronomical observatory in Crimea until 1871 and his wife Dorothea, nee´ v. Dieterichs. Because of the difficult educational situation in Russia, Karl Knorre sent Viktor to school in Fellin, Estonia. Knorre returned home after he had finished school and helped his father at the observatory for 2 years. In 1862 he left for Berlin, to study astronomy with Wilhelm Fo¨rster (1832–1921). After presenting his doctoral thesis Knorre went to Pulkovo Observatory in 1867 as an astronomical calculator. During his time there he traveled with Heinrich Wild (1833–1902) to inspect some meteorological stations and made observations to get the exact location of these stations. He also made magnetic observations.

1229

K

In 1869 Knorre returned to Nikolajew where he first taught his younger brothers and sisters and then got a post as teacher at the local school. It seems that he earned a lot of praise but received little or no money at all for his work; he left for Berlin again to meet his father who had gone there after retiring from his post in Nikolajew. Knorre soon joined the Berlin Observatory as an observer, where he used the refractor made by ▶ Joseph von Fraunhofer. His main work involved minor planets, comets, and binary stars. On 4 January 1876 he discovered the minor planet (158) Koronis, followed by (215) Oenone, (238) Hypatia, and (271) Penthesilea in later years. For the observations of minor planets Knorre constructed a micrometer that he described in its various stages of development within the pages of the Astronomische Nachrichten. Knorre also worked on the improvement of other instruments and equatorial telescope mountings. He did not take a post in teaching students at the University in Berlin but was always helpful in introducing new users to the telescopes. In 1892 Knorre was appointed professor. In 1906 he retired and moved to Lichterfelde, close to Berlin, where he owned a house. Knorre found recreation, away from his ongoing scientific work, while working in the garden or playing chess. In 1909 and 1911 he published works on a new equatorial telescope mounting. A prototype was made by Heele at Knorre’s expense. Knorre died after a short illness.

Selected References Ebell, M. (1919). “Todesanzeige: Viktor Knorre.” Astronomische Nachrichten 209: 367–368. Poggendorff, J. C. “Knorre.” In Biographischliterarisches Handwo¨rterbuch. Vol. 3 (1898): 731; Vol. 5 (1926): 646. Leipzig.

K

K

1230

Knox-Shaw, Harold Richard P. Wilds American Astronomical Society, Lawrence, KS, USA

Born Saint Leonards-on-Sea, Sussex, England, 12 October 1885 Died Cape Town, South Africa, 11 April 1970 Harold Knox-Shaw had a long life as a productive astronomical observer who specialized in cataloging nebulae, assisting in massive programs for obtaining proper motion of stars, and the building of a new observatory to increase the astronomical work in the Southern Hemisphere. He was born on the south coast of England and went to school at Wellington College, graduating with a degree in mathematics from Trinity College, Cambridge. Knox-Shaw’s first professional position was at Khedivial Observatory at Helwan, Egypt, in 1908 using the 3000 reflector that had been financed by ▶ John Reynolds. Knox-Shaw regularly photographed various nebulae from Khedivial, sometimes with Reynolds, discovering new objects and clarifying established catalogs such as the New General Catalogue. His statement in 1916 concerning Bernes 157, a magnificent dark nebula in the constellation Corona Australis, was “the chief point of interest in the region in which the nebula lay was an extraordinary dark object which crossed the field, and was no doubt due to the presence of some absorbing material – some gas of a cooler nature between us and the stars.” (The nebula being discussed was the Variable Nebula NGC 6729 or R Corona Australis in Bernes 157.) This was 3 years before the dark nebulae specialist, ▶ Edward Barnard, published his 1919 Catalogue of Dark Nebulae. Knox-Shaw would take his next position in 1924 at Radcliffe Observatory, Oxford, England. He found the observing conditions in England to be less than ideal. However, his purpose was to finish the work started by Dr. A. A. Rambaut.

Knox-Shaw, Harold

This was an immense project to measure the proper motions of all stars found in the 115 northern selected areas in cooperation with the Dutch astronomer ▶ Jacobus Kapteyn. The result was published in 1934. Knox-Shaw was President of the Royal Astronomical Society from 1931 to 1934 but quickly began a new project to relocate the observatory at Oxford to the more astronomically useful climate of South Africa, where he would also continue his interests in the Southern Hemisphere. The establishment of the new observatory began a most trying period in which Knox-Shaw was assisted by some of the leading astronomers of his day but was strongly fought by many at Oxford itself as they felt they were being left behind. The process involved obtaining funds for the construction of a new 7400 reflecting telescope, a lengthy legal battle in the courts with Oxford, several failures in the pouring of the primary mirror, and then having the project delayed by the onset of the Second World War. (From 1939 to 1947, KnoxShaw’s chief, indeed only, assistant was ▶ Roderick Redman.) The mirror finally arrived in 1948, and the observatory could begin its new observing projects to explore the Southern Celestial Hemisphere. It was one of six 70–74-in. reflecting telescopes in the world and, over the years, by far the most productive until nearly the present, probably because the users matched their programs to its capabilities. It was generally called the Radcliffe Telescope. Knox-Shaw reached retirement in 1950 and so was forced to leave his work in the capable hands of ▶ David Evans. In gratitude for his efforts in South Africa, Harold Knox-Shaw was the first recipient of the Gill Medal in 1956.

Selected References Bernes, C, “A Catalogue of Bright Nebulosities in Opaque Dust Clouds,” Astronomy and Astrophysics Supplement Series, 29, 65, 1977. Erdmann, Jr., Robert E., NCC/IC Project at http://www. ngcicproject.org/ Copyright # 1990 through 2010. Phillips, The Rev. T.E.R., “Meeting of the British Astronomical Association”. The Observatory, A Monthly Review of Astronomy. Vol. 39, No. 503, August 1916. Pp. 327–331.

Kohlsch€ utter, Arnold Thackeray, A.D., “The Work of the Radcliffe Observatory”. Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada. Vol. 58, No. 2, 1964. Pp. 55–67. Thackeray, A.D., “Dr. Harold Knox-Shaw, Obituary”. Monthly Notes of the Astronomical Society of South Africa, Vol. 29, Pp.54–55.

Kobold, Hermann Albert Thomas Hockey1 and Hector MacPherson2 1 Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA 2 Edinburgh, UK

Born Hanover, (Germany), 5 August 1858 Died probably Kiel, Germany, 11 June 1942 Hermann Kobol’s more than 200 papers on comets, planets, asteroids, solar motion, eclipses, and the rotation of stellar systems appeared in several journals, including the Astronomische Nachrichten, which he edited between 1907 and 1938. Kobold earned his Ph.D. from Go¨ttingen in 1880; he was a pupil of ▶ Ernst Klinkerfues. Kobold was first employed as an assistant to ▶ Miklo´s Konkoly Thege at O’Gyalla Observatory in Hungary, and then at the University of Strasbourg. He was part of the German team for the nineteenth-century transits of Venus. In 1902, Kobold got a transfer to Kiel, where he became an “observator” and professor of astronomy at the university. Kobold also wrote a 1906 textbook on stellar astronomy. He retired in 1925.

1231

K

Ko¨hler, Johann Gottfried Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Born Gauernitz near Meissen, (Sachsen, Germany), 15 December 1745 Died Dresden, (Germany), 19 September 1801

From 1776, Johann Ko¨hler served as Inspektor (curator), and from about 1785 until his death as Oberinspektor (director), of both the Kunstkammer and the MathematischPhysikalischer Salon in Dresden. He published a list of “nebulae” in 1780. The list included several independent discoveries of deep-sky objects that eventually received numbers in ▶ Charles Messier’s catalog. Ko¨hler’s instruments also were apparently used by ▶ Alexander von Humboldt on his first voyage to South America.

Selected Reference Brosche, Peter (2002). “Ko¨hler’s Sternphotometer von 1786.” In Vol. 5 of Beitr€ age zur Astronomiegeschichte, edited by Wolfgang R. Dick, pp. 152–158. Acta Historica Astronomiae, Vol. 15. Frankfurt am Main: Deutsch.

Selected References

€ tter, Arnold Kohlschu

Hansen, Julie M. Vinter (1943). “Hermann Albert Kobold.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 103: 76. Poggendorff, J. C. (1926). “Kobold.” In Biographischliterarisches Handwo¨rterbuch. Vol. 5, pp. 647–648. Leipzig: J. A. Barth.

Thomas Hockey1 and Virginia Trimble2 1 Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA 2 University of California, Irvine School of Physical Sciences, Irvine, CA, USA

Hector MacPherson: deceased.

Born Halle, Germany, 6 July 1883 Died Bonn, (Germany), 28 May 1969

K

K

1232

Arnold Kohlsch€ utter and ▶ Walter Adams found subtle criteria that could distinguish ordinary giants from dwarf stars. Kohlsch€ utter was educated at Go¨ttingen University, a student of ▶ Karl Schwarzschild. He spent 3 years at Mount Wilson Observatory, California, from 1911 to 1914. There he cooperated with Adams in the work that led to a new method for determining the distances to stars. Kohlsch€ utter and Adams examined the spectra of stars with both large and small parallaxes, but similar apparent magnitudes. The stars with smaller parallaxes were necessarily more luminous. The two Mount Wilson spectroscopists found differences in the absorption-line strength ratios between the two sets of stars – even within the same spectral class. Once calibrated using stars of known distance, these differences could be observed in stars without measured parallax in order to determine their distances. The method refined the technique known as spectroscopic parallax. When coupled with the apparent magnitudes of the stars involved, this method allowed the determination of stellar distances greater than the limit measurable by trigonometric parallax, surpassing the quality of traditional parallax measurements at 25 pc. In 1897, ▶ Antonia Maury had identified a few peculiar spectrograms characterized by some of the absorption lines being unusually sharp and others unusually strong for the stellar colors. ▶ Ejnar Hertzprung recognized in 1905 that these stars were supergiants, the brightest sort known. Kohlsch€utter and Adams found that differences in line properties arise from the lower gas densities in giant atmospheres, which sharpen those lines whose width is due mostly to Stark effect broadening and strengthen lines produced by ionized atoms, because recombination proceeds more slowly at low density. In a second Mount Wilson collaboration, Kohlsch€ utter and ▶ Harlow Shapley concluded that even strong absorption lines typically have a residual flux at their centers that is 20–30 % of the continuum, meaning that the region of a stellar atmosphere responsible for the absorption features must be located near an optical depth of 0.2.

Kohn, Tobias

In 1918 Kohlsch€utter was appointed to the staff of Potsdam Observatory, and in 1925 became professor of astronomy at Bonn and director of the observatory there. He undertook the Bonn portion of the Zweiter Katalog der Astronomischen Gesellschaft, completed in 1958. Kohlsch€utter was coauthor of the Handbuch der Astrophysik (1928; with Gustav Eberhard and ▶ Hans Ludendorff) and of a revised version of ▶ Simon Newcomb’s Popular Astronomy (1926).

Selected Reference Schmidt, H. (1970). “Arnold Kohlsch€ utter.” Astronomische Nachrichten. 192: 142.

Kohn, Tobias ▶ Cohn, Tobias

Kolho¨rster, Werner Heinrich Julius Gustav Jordan D. Marche´ II University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

Born Schwiebus (S´wiebodzin, Poland), 28 December 1887 Died Munich, Germany, 5 August 1946 Werner Kolho¨rster helped bring modern, quantitative methods to the study of cosmic rays. Kolho¨rster earned his PhD in physics under the direction of Friedrich Ernst Dorn at the University of Halle in 1911. He then became interested in the discovery of cosmic rays in the Earth’s upper atmosphere by Austrian physicist ▶ Victor Hess, achieved by means of balloon ascensions (up to 5-km altitude) with an electrometer. Kolho¨rster extended the balloonborne measurements up to 10-km altitude and

Kolmogorov, Andrei Nikolaevich

fully demonstrated the validity of Hess’s conclusions. He remained an assistant at the Physical Institute in Halle until the outbreak of World War I. He spent the war years in Turkey measuring atmospheric electricity. After the war, Kolho¨rster was forced into secondary teaching to support himself, at the Friedrich Werdersche Oberrealschule (circa 1920–1924) and the Sophien Realgymnasium, Berlin (circa 1924–1928). Nonetheless, Kolho¨rster became a guest investigator at the Physikalische-Technische Reichsanstalt in Berlin, where he significantly improved the instrumentation used to measure various types of radiation. He frequently tested his equipment in the Alps. In collaboration with ¨ physicist Walther Bothe, Kolhorster developed the so-called coincidence method of scintillation counting, for which he was awarded the Leibniz Medal of the Prussian Academy of Sciences. Their joint papers in 1928 and 1929 were important in establishing that cosmic rays are very high energy particles and not very short wavelength photons. In 1928, Kolho¨rster was hired as an observer at the Magnetic-Meteorological Observatory at Potsdam. Two years later, he was appointed a Privatdozent (lecturer) in geophysics at the University of Berlin and concurrently designed the Dahlemer University Institute for High-altitude Radiation Research, the first such facility ever to be established. In 1935, Kolho¨rster became the laboratory’s director and professor of radiation physics. He shared in the discovery of air showers associated with the production of secondary cosmic rays. With Leo Tuwim, Kolho¨rster wrote a leading text, Physakalische Probleme der Ho¨henstrahlung (Physical problems of high-altitude radiation).

1233

K

Kolho¨rster, Werner, and Leo Tuwim (1934). Physakalische Probleme der Ho¨henstrahlung. Leipzig: Academic Verlagsgesellschaft. Poggendorff, J. C. “Kolho¨rster.” In Biographischliterarisches Handwo¨rtenbuch. Vol. 5 (1926): 664–665; Vol. 6 (1937): 1365–1366; Vol. 7a (1958): 859–860. Leipzig and Berlin.

Kolmogorov, Andrei Nikolaevich Victor K. Abalakin Central Astronomical Observatory at Pulkovo, St Petersburg, Russia

Born Tambov, Russia, 25 April 1903 Died Moscow, (Russia), 20 October 1987

K

Selected References

Kolmogorov, Andrei Nikolaevich. Reproduced by permission of the Archives of the Russian Academy of Sciences

Anon. (1946). “Werner Kolho¨rster.” Physikalische Bl€ atter 2: 110. Fl€ugge, Siegfried (1948). “Werner Kolho¨rster.” Zeitschrift f€ ur Naturforschung 3A: 690–691.

The works of leading Soviet mathematician Andrei Kolmogorov found diverse applications in the treatment of dynamical systems and the

K

1234

study of turbulence or chaos theory as those fields applied to astronomy. The so called Kolmogorov spectrum describes, for instance, the structure of turbulence in the intersteller medium reasonably well. Kolmogorov’s father was Nicholas Matveyevich Katayev; his mother, Maria Yakovlevna Katayeva (neé Kolmogorova), died from complications surrounding his birth. He was then adopted by his aunt, Vera Yakovlevna Kolmogorova, and received her family name. He married Anna Dmitriyevna Kolmogorova (neé Egorova). Before the October 1917 Bolshevik Revolution, Kolmogorov studied in Moscow at the private E. A. Repmann Gymnasium; after the revolution, he attended a high school of the second level. In 1920, he was admitted to Moscow University as a student of the Faculty of Mathematics. There, Kolmogorov began his scientific activities under the guidance of professors P. S. Urysohn, A. K. Vlasov, V. V. Stepanov, and especially N. N. Luzin. In 1922, he acquired experience as a secondary school mathematics teacher, an occupation to which he voluntarily returned after the age of 60. Kolmogorov graduated from Moscow University in 1925 and then enlisted as a postgraduate student. After finishing postgraduate studies, Kolmogorov obtained a position as chair of mathematics at the Moscow Karl-Liebknecht Pedagogical Institute. He also began scientific research at the Mathematical Institute of Moscow University. Kolmogorov’s early research explored the theory of functions of a real variable. He investigated the convergence of trigonometric series, the theory of measure, the theory of functional approximations, set theory, and the theory of integrals. In 1925, working with A. J. Khintchine, he applied methods of the theory of functions to the theory of probabilities. In 1933, Kolmogorov constructed the axiomatic foundations of the theory of probabilities and established the theory of Markovian random processes in continuous time. During the period from 1939 to 1941, he solved extrapolation and interpolation problems concerning stationary processes. He clarified the link between the theories of random processes and that of Hilbert spaces and formulated many problems in terms of

Kolmogorov, Andrei Nikolaevich

functional analysis. Kolmogorov investigated ergodic theorems and formulated the necessary and sufficient conditions of applicability for the law of large numbers. He made significant contributions to constructive logic and topology, having introduced in 1935 the so called upper limit operator (or Nabla-operator) and the topologic invariant of the cohomology ring. Kolmogorov formulated the idea of a topological vector space, and was deeply engaged in the theory of differential equations and in functional analysis. In his works concerning fluid mechanics, Kolmogorov created and developed the concept of local isotropy of turbulence in a viscous, incompressible fluid (at large Reynolds numbers), having established with Alexander M. Obukhov the spectrum of local turbulence (the KolmogorovObukhov law of 2/3). In celestial mechanics, Kolmogorov’s results are especially applicable to the theory of dynamical systems as related to perturbed motions in Hamiltonian systems. These relationships describe, for example, the motion of an asteroid in an elliptical orbit under the perturbing influence of Jupiter. The same equations are pertinent to a wide range of problems addressing the stability of magnetic surfaces in fields with Tokamak geometries (e.g., inside toroidal chambers known as “magnetic traps” and used in thermonuclear fusions experiments) and the stability of rapid rotation of a massive asymmetric rigid body. This work has been continued and expanded by his pupil, Vladimir I. Arnold, who examined the stability of quasi-periodicity in the three-body problem. Generalized methods to construct inverse functions by successive approximations, which overcame difficulties caused by small divisors, were developed by Kolmogorov, Arnold, and J€urgen Moser. The corresponding theory, known as KAM theory, draws its name from the initials of these three men. It plays an important role in investigations of the stability of the Solar System over very long (cosmogonical) timescales. Kolmogorov was elected a member (academician) of the USSR Academy of Sciences (1939), the academician-secretary of the Department of Mathematics of the USSR Academy of

Konkoly Thege, Miklo´s

Sciences (1939), a member of the USSR Academy of Pedagogical Sciences (1968), and president of the Moscow Mathematical Society (1964–1966). He received honorary doctoral degrees from the Paris Sorbonne University (1955), Stockholm University (1960), and the Institute of Statistics in India (1962). Kolmogorov was awarded the Stalin Prize (1940), the Eugenio Balzan Prize (1963), and the Lenin Prize (1965). He was declared a “Hero of the Socialist Labor” (1963) and was decorated with many orders and medals from the USSR, Hungary, and the German Democratic Republic.

Selected References Anon. (1963). “Kolmogorov, Andrei Nikolaevich.” In Soviet Men of Science: Academicians and Corresponding Members of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, edited by John Turkevich, pp. 171–172. Princeton, New Jersey: Van Nostrand. Anon. (1988). “Andrej Nikolayevich Kolmogorov” (in Russian). Messenger of the U.S.S.R. Academy of Sciences 1: 103–104. Arnold, V. I. (1989). “A. N. Kolmogorov.” Physics Today 42, no. 10: 148–150. Frisch, Uriel (1995). Turbulence: The Legacy of A. N. Kolmogorov. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rozov, N. Kh. and V. M. Tikhomirov (1999). IAvlenie chrezvychainoe: Kniga o Kolmogorove (The extraordinary phenomena: Life of Kolmogorov). Moscow: FAZIS/MIROS.

Konkoly Thege, Miklo´s La´szlo´ Szabados Konkoly Observatory, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary

Alternate Name ▶ Konkoly Thege, Nikolaus

Born Pest (Budapest, Hungary), 20 January 1842 Died Budapest (Hungary), 16 February 1916

1235

K

Well respected as an early participant in the evolution of astrophysics, Miklo´s Konkoly Thege founded an institute for the study of astronomy and astrophysics in Hungary using his own resources. He is rightly thought of as the founder of astronomy in Hungary, although such noteworthy astronomers as ▶ Jańos von Zach and ▶ Maximilian Hell were Hungarian natives practicing astronomy abroad. The Konkoly Thege family was Hungarian nobility with a considerable landed estate. His parents were Elek and Kla´ra (neé Fo¨ldva´ri) Konkoly Thege. Miklo´s studied at the universities of Pest (1857–1860) and Berlin (1860–1862), earning a doctor of law degree. While in Berlin, he studied astronomy with ▶ Johann Encke, J. H. Dove, and H. G. Magnus. Upon request of his parents, he became the subprefect of a Hungarian county for a short time, but Konkoly Thege was much more interested in physics and astronomy. Skillful with his hands, he made his own instruments when becoming an astronomer. In his youth, Konkoly Thege traveled extensively, studied the European observatories, visited the leading optical and precision-mechanical workshops, and made acquaintance with distinguished astronomers of the period. In 1871, Konkoly Thege built a private ´ gyalla (now observatory on his own estate in O Hurbanovo, Slovakia). He equipped the observatory with both purchased equipment and instruments he made in his own shops. The largest telescope was a 10.25-in. Browning silver-onglass Newtonian reflector purchased in England (1874). The most important self-made instruments include a 10-in. refractor (still in use in the Debrecen Heliophysical Observatory), a 6.25-in. astrograph, a 5.25-in. telescope for solar photography, numerous spectrographs, and spectroscopes for observing prominences, meteors, comets, and other celestial objects. Konkoly Thege’s astronomical activity included extensive observational work on various celestial bodies, instrument development, and publication of handbooks on observational astronomy. During his study of sunspots, Konkoly Thege drew the projected solar disk

K

K

1236

and determined the position and shape of the spots. From 1908 on, the sunspots were followed photographically. Sunspot results were reported regularly to Z€ urich. Konkoly Thege was one of the first astronomers who carried out spectroscopic observations of meteors, attempting to determine their chemical composition. He studied the spectra of about 30 comets, a pursuit that earned him wide recognition. At the request of ▶ Hermann Vogel, Konkoly Thege compiled a catalog describing the ´ gyalla. spectra of 2,022 stars observed from O Unfortunately, the stellar spectra in this catalog were classified according to the Potsdam Observatory system. Within a few years, after ´ gyalla catalog, the the publication of the O Harvard system of spectral classification was adopted internationally; in consequence the ´ gyalla catalog is less well remembered today. O Konkoly Thege also made drawings of the surface features of the planets Mars and Jupiter. Konkoly Thege’s published astronomical and astrophysical work is extensively cited in the contemporary literature, for example, in A Treatise on Astronomical Spectroscopy, ▶ Edwin Frost’s translation, and revision of ▶ Julius Scheiner’s earlier work. Konkoly Thege’s involvement in the invention and development of instrumentation for astronomy was significant and productive. Two of his inventions that deserve special mention in this regard were several types of a simple, direct vision solar flare telescope, and the blink comparator. One model of the solar flare spectroscope was marketed by Zeiss, though without acknowledging Konkoly Thege’s role as the inventor. His blink comparator was eventually manufactured and marketed by G. Heide of Dresden. One of Konkoly Thege’s more lasting contributions to the development of astrophysics was in his publications of detailed instructions on technique. His several books on astrophysics were richly detailed and extensively illustrated with woodcut drawings of equipment. As a result, Konkoly Thege was asked to write the chapter on astrophotography for the influential four-volume compendium, Handwo¨rterbuch der

Konkoly Thege, Miklo´s

Astronomie, edited by Karl Wilhelm Friedrich Johannes Valentiner (1845–1913). As a mentor to other individuals interested in astronomy and astrophysics, Konkoly Thege performed the invaluable role of encouraging the development of other private observatories in Hungary. In addition to the well-equipped and productive observatory of ▶ Jeno¨ von Gothard at Hereńy and Bishop Haynald’s observatory in Kalocsa, Konkoly Thege was also instrumental in the founding of the Kiskartal Observatory of Baron Ge´za Podmaniczky. The Kiskartal Observatory employed several rising young professional astronomers and was the site at which the Baroness Berta De´genfeld-Schomburg made her independent discovery of the extragalactic supernova S Andromedae (SN 1885A). In addition to the scientific contributions of these private observatories, they enriched Hungarian astronomy with extensive collections of instruments and valuable libraries that form the basis for modern institutes in Hungary. In 1890, Konkoly Thege was appointed director of the National Institute of Meteorology and Geomagnetism. During his directorship the forecast service was created, and the first meteorological maps appeared. The tasks of organization took up his days, leaving little time for astrophysics. Konkoly Thege suggested several times that he wished to transfer ownership of the ´ gyalla Observatory to the state, but the problem O was complicated by both the political instability and the financial weakness of the Habsburg Austro-Hungarian Empire. Konkoly Thege’s highly creative solution to this problem was to invite the Astronomische Gesellschaft [AG] to hold its 17th assembly in Budapest in 1898. He was extremely well known and well liked by European colleagues like ▶ William Huggins, many of whom had visited his observatory. As a result the AG ignored a parallel invitation from the Heidelberg Observatory and elected to meet in Budapest. The pressure on Emperor Franz Josef and his cabinet from the resulting international gathering succeeded where other attempts had failed. The emperor himself made the announcement that the state would acquire ´ gyalla Observatory in his address to the the O

Kopal, Zdeneˇk

assembled astronomers. Therefore in 1899, ´ gyalla Observatory Konkoly Thege donated the O to the Hungarian state. The observatory’s successor is now the Konkoly Observatory of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, with its headquarters in Budapest. Konkoly Thege was elected corresponding member (1876), then honorary member (1885) of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, and a member of the Astronomische Gesellschaft and the Royal Astronomical Society. The minor planet (1445) Konkolya is named for him. Konkoly Thege retired from his position at the Meteorological Institute in 1911. He was also a talented pianist and qualified maritime engineer and ship captain. In his later years he was again involved in politics as a member of the Hungarian parliament (from 1896 to 1906). Konkoly Thege married Erzse´bet Madarassy; their two children died in early childhood.

Selected References Konkoly Thege, Miklo´s (1883). Practical Guide to Making Astronomical Observations, with Special Considerations for Astrophysics; Secondarily a Review of Modern Instruments (in German). Braunschweig, Germany. — (1887). Practical Introduction for Sky Photography and Draft Description of Modern Photography and Spectroscopy in the Laboratory (in German). Halle, Germany. — (1890). Handbook for Spectroscopists in the Laboratory and at the Telescope: Practical Warnings for Beginners in Practicing Spectralanalysis (in German). Halle, Germany. Vargha, Magda (1986). “Hungarian Astronomy of the Era.” In A Kalocsai Haynald Obszervato´rium To¨rteńete, edited by Imre Mojzes, pp. 31–36. Budapest. Vargha, Magda, La´szlo´ Patko´s, and Imre To´th (eds.) (1992). The Role of Miklo´s Konkoly Thege in the History of Astronomy in Hungary. Budapest: Konkoly Observatory. (Chapters in this monograph by the editors, Katalin Barlai, and many others form a valuable resource.)

Konkoly Thege, Nikolaus ▶ Konkoly Thege, Miklo´s

1237

K

Kopal, Zdeneˇk Jirˇ´ı Grygar Institute of Physics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, The Czech Republic

Born Litomysl (Czech Republic), 4 April 1914 Died Manchester, England, 23 June 1993 Czech-American-English astronomer Zdeneˇk Kopal is most often associated with studies of close binaries and their implications for the interior physics of stars and kinds of systems observed. A youthful enthusiastic amateur astronomer Kopal joined the Czech Astronomical Society in 1929 and became chair of its section on variable stars in 1931. He received a PhD summa cum laude in physics and mathematics at the Charles University of Prague (by then part of Czechoslovakia) in 1937; studied under ▶ Arthur Eddington in Cambridge, England, in 1938; and took an appointment at ▶ Harlow Shapley’s Harvard College Observatory at the end of that year. Kopal quickly became an American citizen and worked on ballistics for the United States Navy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology during World War II, as well as contributing to the mathematics needed for the first generation of computers. In 1951 he became professor and founding chair of the Astronomy Department at the University of Manchester, retiring in 1981 but remaining an active professor emeritus for the rest of his life. His daughter Zdenka married a British astronomer. Kopal’s PhD dissertation already focused on the development of numerical methods for study of close pairs of stars, for instance, decomposition of the light curve into Fourier components, and he continued this work in Cambridge, England, and Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. An early result was that the density distribution of stars must be far more centrally condensed than modelers had supposed for the rotation of the line of apsides of binary orbits to be as slow as it is. ▶ Thomas Cowling was able to show with ▶ Ludwig Biermann that Kopal had made

K

K

1238

a serious error in neglecting the tidal distortion of the shapes of stars, which puts them very nearly into equilibrium, so that they drag on each other very little. With this correction, apsidal motion and other probes of stellar interiors gave concordant results. At Manchester, Kopal produced his classic text, Close Binary Systems (1959), in which he summarized the state of the subject just before a three-pronged assault on binary evolution with transfer of material between the stars began in Europe. It is no coincidence that one of the three groups, under Miroslav Plavec, was working at the Astronomical Institute of the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, and Kopal maintained close contact with the Czech astronomical community thereafter. The concept of mass transfer in binaries can be traced back to ▶ Gerard Kuiper in 1935, and Kopal 20 years later drew the critical distinction among detached systems (both stars smaller than their Roche lobes), semidetached systems (one star filling its lobe and transferring material to the other), and contact systems, where both stars fill their lobes and material can move back and forth. With the advent of the space age, Kopal became fascinated by the idea of landing people on the Moon. Realizing that very good Moon maps would be needed, he obtained sponsorship from the United States Air Force to obtain a large number of very high-resolution images from the high-altitude observatory at Pic du Midi in the French Pyrenees. The funding was lavish by British standards of the time and enabled Kopal to bring students to Manchester from all over the Middle East. Many of them returned to their home countries to begin astronomy programs there, and the legacy can still be discerned in the relatively large number of papers from these countries published in one of the journals Kopal founded. By 1962, Kopal recognized that the assortment of journals then being published did not really provide an adequate home for the rapidly increasing literature on solar system physics and astronomy. He therefore became the founding editor of Icarus, published by Academic Press, but turned the editorship over to

Kopff, August

others (initially Carl Sagan) in 1969. His second foray into publishing came with the recognition that there was also no journal focusing on results obtained from space by scientists in all the countries that hoped to pursue space programs. Thus came into being Astrophysics and Space Science, a Reidel journal for which Kopal remained an editor until his death, when it was taken over by his younger colleague at Manchester, John Dyson. Kopal usually maintained a friendly relationship with his authors, sometimes handwriting letters of acceptance. He remained active in space-based research throughout the remainder of his career, writing shortly before his death, for instance, on the shape of the nucleus of comet 1P/Halley as revealed in photographs by the Giotto mission. Kopal served as an officer of the Royal Astronomical Society and in commissions of the International Astronomical Union. He was elected an honorary member of the Czech Astronomical Society in 1967, and minor planet (2628) is named Kopal. Kopal was the author of several popular books as well as many technical publications.

Selected References Dyson, John (1994). “Zdenek Kopal.” Physics Today 47, no. 3: 80. — (1994). “Zdenek Kopal 1914–1993.” Astrophysics and Space Science 213: 171–173. Kopal, Z. (1986). Of Men and Stars: Reminiscences of an Astronomer. Bristol: A. Hilger. Meaburn, John (1994). “Zdenek Kopal (1914–1993).” Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 35: 229–230.

Kopff, August Horst Kant Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Berlin, Germany

Born Heidelberg, Germany, 5 February 1882 Died Heidelberg, (Germany), 25 April 1960

Kordylewski, Kazimierz

Comet and Trojan asteroid discoverer August Kopff was the son of a master plumber in Heidelberg. From 1900 to 1905 he studied mathematics, physics, and astronomy at the University of Heidelberg, where he got his Ph.D. in 1906 with € a paper on “Uber die Nebel der Nova Persei.” Among his academic teachers were astronomer ▶ Maximilian Wolf, who founded the Ko¨nigstuhl Observatory at the University of Heidelberg, mathematician Leo Ko¨nigsberger (1837–1921), and physicist Georg Quincke (1834–1924). By 1901, Kopff began work with Wolf at the observatory. In 1907 Kopff became Privatdozent (lecturer), and in 1912 a professor at the University of Heidelberg. After military service during World War I, Kopff returned to teaching and observing at the University of Heidelberg. In 1924, Kopff became professor of theoretical astronomy at the University of Berlin and simultaneously – as a successor of Fritz Cohn (1866–1921) – director of the Institute for Astronomical Calculation (Astronomisches Recheninstitut in Berlin-Dahlem, Germany). (During World War II this institute was evacuated to Saxony, and found a new accommodation in 1945 in Heidelberg.) From 1947 up to his retirement in 1950 Kopff was professor of astronomy at the University of Heidelberg, and besides his directorship of the institute (until 1954) also director of the observatory. In his time at Ko¨nigstuhl, Kopff took part in all observation programs of the observatory and published studies on the theory of comets, stellar astronomy, and the theory of relativity. During his time in Berlin he and his co-workers published several catalogs of stars. One of the main projects was the third fundamental catalog of the FK-series (1935), which was adopted as the standard list of fundamental stars by the International Astronomical Union [IAU]. Kopff had memberships to the Academy of Sciences at Berlin (1935), the Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (1936), and the American Astronomical Society (honorary, 1949), and was associate of the Royal Astronomical Society (London). He was also actively engaged in the organization of the Astronomische Gesellschaft, to whose council he belonged since 1930. A lunar crater is named for him.

1239

K

Selected References Fricke, L. W. (1960). “August Kopff.” Astronomische Nachrichten 285: 284–286. Gondolatsch, F. (1967). “August Kopff.” Mitteilungen der Astronomischen Gesellschaft, no. 15: 5–16. Kopff, August. Grundz€ uge der Einsteinschen Relativit€ atstheorie. Leipzig: S. Hirzel, 1921. 2nd ed. 1923. (Also in English and Italian translation.) — (1923). “Das Milchstraßensystem.” Ergebnisse der exakten Naturwissenschaften 2: 50–81. — (1929). “Probleme der fundamentalen Positionsastronomie.” Ergebnisse der exakten Naturwissenschaften 8: 1–24. — (1936). “Star Catalogues, Especially Those of Fundamental Character.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 96: 714–730. (George Darwin Lecture, 10 June 1936). — (1937–1938). Dritter Fundamentalkatalog des Berliner astronomischen Jahrbuchs. Pt. 1, Die Auwers-Sterne f€ ur die Epochen 1925 und 1950; pt. 2, Die Zusatzsterne f€ ur die Epoche 1950. Berlin: F. D€ ummlers Verlag.

K Koppernigk, Nicolaus [Nicholas] ▶ Copernicus, Nicolaus

Kordylewski, Kazimierz Thomas A. Dobbins Fort Meyers, FL, USA

Born Poznan, Poland, 11 October 1903 Died Cracow, Poland, 11 March 1981 A versatile and prolific observer, Kazimierz Kordylewski discovered the “dust clouds” accompanying Lagrangian points L4 and L5 along the Earth’s orbit. Son of Wladyslaw and Franciszka (neé Woroch) Kordylewski, he first attended Poznan University (1922–1924), after which he became an assistant at the Cracow Observatory (1924–1934) and later an adjunct instructor. Kordylewski received his Ph.D. at Jagiellonian University in Cracow (1932). He married Jadwiga Pojak in 1929; the couple had four children.

K

1240

An accomplished mathematician, Kordylewski calculated the orbits of many comets and minor planets, although his principal work involved the photoelectric photometry of variable stars and the cinematography of solar eclipses. He discovered the nova T Corvi in 1926. Between 1939 and 1951, Kordylewski directed the scientific instruments section of the National Astronomical Copernicus Institute, at Cracow, as well as the institute itself. After 1958, he was chief of the observing station for artificial satellites, and edited the Eclipsing Binaries Circulars (1960–). Kordylewski was president of the Cracow branch of the Polish Astronomical Society (1956–). In 1951, Kordylewski began to hunt for small “Trojan” satellites of the Earth at the L4 and L5 libration points, located 60 ahead of and behind the Moon in its orbit. His initial visual search with a 30-cm refractor proved unsuccessful. Then in 1956, professor Josef Witkowski suggested that Kordylewski stop looking for solid bodies and search instead for faint luminous patches of dust. Following this advice, when observing from the Skalnate´ Pleso Observatory in Czechoslovakia’s Tatras Mountains in 1956, Kordylewski managed to glimpse with his naked eye an exceedingly faint, diffuse patch of light subtending an apparent angle of 2 at one of the Lagrangian points. He estimated its brightness as only half that of the notoriously difficult Gegenschein. In March and April of 1961, Kordylewski succeeded in capturing images of these transient clouds on film and subjected them to isodensitometry measurements. Although they were observed as early as January 1964 by the American amateur astronomer John Wesley Simpson (1914–1977) and his colleagues in the Santa Cruz Mountains of California, the reality of the Kordylewski clouds was debated until 1975, when J. R. Roach announced their detection using data acquired over a 15-month period by the Orbiting Solar Observatory 6 [OSO-6] spacecraft. The clouds were subsequently photographed on many occasions by Maciej Winiarski, using batteries of wide-angle cameras at a dark site in Poland’s Bieszczady Mountains. Thus, Kordylewski is

Korff, Serge Alexander

remembered as the discoverer of these ephemeral natural satellites of the Earth, the culmination of a century-long hunt for a “second Moon.”

Selected References Anon. (1978). “Kordylewski, Kazimierz.” In Who’s Who in the Socialist Countries, edited by Borys Lewytzkyj and Juliusz Stroynowski, p. 305. New York: K. G. Saur. Kordylewski, K. (1961). “Photographische Untersuchungen des Librationspunktes L5 im System Erde-Mond.” Acta Astronomica 11: 165–169. Mietelski, J. (1981). “Kronika Ptma Kasimierz Kordylewski.” Urania 8: 245–248. Simpson, J. Wesley (May-June 1968). “The Libration Clouds: A Status Report.” Review of Popular Astronomy 62, no. 551: 10–13.

Korff, Serge Alexander Virginia Trimble University of California, Irvine School of Physical Sciences, Irvine, CA, USA

Born Helsinki, (Finland), 1906 Died New York, New York, USA, 1 December 1989

Russian-American nuclear and cosmic-ray experimental physicist Serge Korff is known primarily for inventing the class of particle detector called the wire proportional counter and applying it to a range of problems in physics and astronomy. This included the demonstration that cosmic-ray particles carry positive charge, and so must be mostly protons. Of Russian-American parentage, Korff came to the United States after the October (1917) Revolution deprived his father of his job as lieutenant governor of Finland. Korff received degrees from Princeton (BA: 1928, MA: 1929, Ph.D.: 1931) and held fellowships at Mount Wilson Observatory, the California Institute of Technology, and the Bartol Research Foundation

Kovalsky, Marian Albertovich

before joining the physics department of New York University in 1941. He retired as professor emeritus in 1973. Korff participated in expeditions to highaltitude sites to study cosmic rays from 1934 (Mexico) to 1957 (Alaska). The 1934/1935 Peruvian expedition demonstrated beyond doubt the bending of cosmic-ray paths by the Earth’s magnetic field and, therefore, the positive charge carried by the particles. His later work on cosmic rays was relevant to radiocarbon dating (via the variable production rate of carbon-14 by cosmicray secondary neutrons in the upper atmosphere), radiation hazards of high-altitude flight, and our understanding of the effects of the solar wind on galactic cosmic rays reaching the Earth. Most of the later work was done from balloons and rockets rather than mountain sites, but Korff served for many years on committees devoted to high-altitude research as well as to USA-Latin American scientific cooperation. Korff received honors from France, Cyprus, Greece, and the United Kingdom, as well as the United States, and was president of the American Geographical Society (1966–1971), the Explorers’ Club (1955–1958 and 1961–1963), and the New York Academy of Sciences (1971–1972). His younger colleagues proudly referred to themselves as Korff’s balloonatics.

1241

K

Sergei Konstantinovich Kostinskii was a specialist in photographic astrometry and the application of those methods to the study of close binary stars. He also contributed to the understanding of polar motion. Kostinskii began working at the Pulkovo Observatory in 1902. He is regarded as one of the founders of photographic astrometry, wherein he developed a new method of measuring the positions of stars taken upon photographic plates. He also derived formulae for the reduction of those measurements. Kostinskii investigated the effects upon image formation of two nearly coincident objects, e.g., in close binary stars. He also collected and analyzed data for determining the proper motions of stars. Kostinskii was elected a corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences.

Selected Reference

K Anon. (1976). “Kostinskii, Sergei Konstantinovich.” In Great Soviet Encyclopedia, vol. 13, editor-in-chief A. M. Prokhorov, 438. New York: Macmillan.

Kovalsky, Marian Albertovich Mihkel Joeveer Tartumaa, Estonia

Selected References Alternate Name Mendell, Rosalind B. (1991). “Serge Alexander Korff.” Physics Today 44, no. 11: 112–113. Soberman, Robert K. (1991). “Serge Alexander Korff, 1906–1989.” Bulletin of the American Astronomical Society 23.

Kostinskii, Sergei Konstantinovich Jordan D. Marche´ II University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

Born Moscow, Russia, 12 August 1867 Died Pulkovo (Russia), 22 August 1936

▶ Voytekhovich, Marian Albertovich Born Dobrzin, Poland, 15/27 August 1821 Died Kazan, Russia, 28 May/9 June 1884 Marian Kovalsky developed new methods in celestial mechanics, composed a zone catalog of northern stars, and studied the motions of stars in the Milky Way. Born into the Polish family of Albert Kovalsky, he matriculated at Saint Petersburg University in 1841 and studied

Mihkel Joeveer: deceased.

K

1242

astronomy under ▶ Friedrich Struve and Aleksei Nikolaevich Savich. Graduating in 1845, Kovalsky spent a year at the Pulkovo Observatory before earning his master’s degree (1847) on the motions of comets. Over the next 2 years, he participated in geodetic expeditions conducted by the Russian Geographical Society. In 1849, Kovalsky was made an assistant, and in 1850, a lecturer on astronomy at Kazan University. His doctoral dissertation was awarded in 1852 for his theory of the orbit of Neptune. In that year, Kovalsky was appointed a full professor and in 1855 became director of the university’s observatory. He married Henriette Serafimovna Gatsisskaya in 1856; the couple had one son. Kovalsky’s subsequent research elaborated upon the mathematical theory of solar eclipses; he also proposed a simplified method to calculate occultations of stars by the Moon. At the Kazan Observatory, he measured the positions and prepared the zone catalog (published in 1887 for the Astronomische Gesellschaft) of more than 4,200 stars whose declinations lay between 75 and 80 . Kovalsky’s most important work, however, concerned his analysis (1860) of the proper motions of stars. Independently of Astronomer ▶ Royal George Airy, Kovalsky employed data from the star catalog of ▶ James Bradley to derive improved estimates of the Sun’s own motion through space and identified a significant deviation in stellar motions that was not explained for several decades. His work refuted one theory of a “central sun” proposed in 1846 by astronomer ▶ Johann von M€adler and instead supported contemporary notions of our Galaxy’s solid-body rotation. Kovalsky was appointed a corresponding member of the Saint Petersburg Academy of Sciences (1863), a member of the Royal Astronomical Society (1863), and a founding member of the Astronomische Gesellschaft (1864).

Selected References Anon. (1951). “Marian Albertovich Kovalsky.” In Vydaiushchiesia russkie astronomy (Outstanding Russian astronomers), edited by Iu. G. Perel, pp. 108–122.

Kozyrev, Nikolai Alexandrovich Moscow: Gos. izd-vo techniko-teoreticheskoi literatury. Kulikovsky, P. G. (1973). “Kovalsky, Marian Albertovich.” In Dictionary of Scientific Biography, edited by Charles Coulston Gillispie. Vol. 7, pp. 480–482. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons. Struve, Otto (1962). “M. A. Kovalsky and His Work on Stellar Motions.” Sky & Telescope 23, no. 5: 250–252.

Kozyrev, Nikolai Alexandrovich William Sheehan1 and Thomas A. Dobbins2 1 Lowell Observatory, Flagstaff, AZ, USA 2 Fort Meyers, FL, USA

Born Saint Petersburg, Russia, 2 September 1908 Died near Leningrad (Saint Petersburg, Russia), 27 February 1983 Russian astrophysicist Nikolai Kozyrev is best remembered for his claim that he recorded photographically the spectra of emission from gas on the Moon no fewer than four times. This has been widely accepted as evidence that the Moon is not (quite) geologically dead. Kozyrev graduated from the University of Leningrad in 1928 and, in 1931, was appointed to the staff at Pulkov Astronomical Observatory. He also worked at various times at the observatories in Kharkov, Ukraine, and in the Crimea. Kozyrev was part of the large group of Pulkovo Observatory astronomers (most famously ▶ Boris Gerasimovich) who were arrested in 1936 and imprisoned or executed. Kozyrev appears briefly in the memoir The Gulag Archipelago by Alexander Solzhenitsyn, because the author was deeply impressed by his efforts to continue to carry out work in astrophysics under extraordinarily hostile circumstances. Released in January 1947, Kozyrev set to work to rebuild his shattered career. Despite the unconventionality of his post-World War II work, Kozyrev maintained a formal affiliation with the main astronomical observatory (Pulkovo) of the Soviet Academy of Sciences until the official retirement age.

Kozyrev, Nikolai Alexandrovich

During the autumn of 1958 Kozyrev began to examine the crater Alphonosus with the Crimean Astrophysical Observatory’s 1.3-m Zeiss reflector, which was equipped with a prism spectrograph. On the night of 3 November 1958, when the phase of the Moon was 1 day before last quarter, Kozyrev placed the slit of the spectrograph across the central peak of Alphonsus and opened the shutter of the camera to begin a 30-min exposure. Keeping his eye glued to the eyepiece of a 6-in. auxiliary guidescope, he made frequent manual corrections to keep the slit of the spectrograph centered over the crater’s central peak. While guiding the exposure, Kozyrev noticed that the central peak “appeared brighter and whiter than usual,” until “suddenly, in a period of less than a minute, the brightness of the peak dropped to normal.” (It was late afternoon in Alphonsus at the time, so these impressions are hardly startling.) He stopped the exposure and inserted a second plate to record the spectrum of the peak, now “in its normal state.” This second exposure lasted 10 min. On the first plate, Kozyrev claimed that he could make out a set of faint emission bands centered at 474 nm and 440 nm, but these features were absent on the comparison plate. He attributed them to ionized molecules of diatomic carbon in a rapidly expanding, rarefied cloud of gas released from the central peak and excited to fluorescence by solar ultraviolet radiation. Curiously, the chemical composition of the gas was not similar to terrestrial volcanic emissions, but seemed to resemble the materials found in the nuclei of comets. Kozyrev’s account appeared in the February 1959 issue of Sky & Telescope, complete with reproductions of his spectrograms. Expert spectroscopists who examined Kozyrev’s images suspected that his “emission bands” were simply artifacts of faulty guiding. Guiding errors would be far less pronounced in the second comparison spectrum, which was exposed with the benefit of the half hour of practice spent guiding the first spectrum and for only one-third the length of time, convincingly accounting for its dearth of supposed emission bands. At least initially, the report was widely believed and regarded as very significant.

1243

K

Kozyrev received a variety of kinds of recognition, including the statement from Dinsmore Alter that the spectrum was “the most important single lunar observation ever made.” One might expect that witnessing even the rather quiescent emission of gas from a lunar volcano would be a once-in-a-lifetime chance occurrence, so eyebrows were raised in 1960 when Kozyrev announced that he had managed to record a second event in Alphonsus, and this time nothing less than a bona fide volcanic eruption. This time there were no “peculiarities in the appearance of the crater,” so no comparison spectrum was taken. Kozyrev detected a very slight “uniform increase in contrast” between 530 nm and 660 nm, attributing it to the thermal blackbody radiation emitted by a flow of lava. This time reaction to Kozyrev’s announcement was considerably less ethusiastic. Doubts were further compounded in 1963 when Kozyrev reported that he had repeatedly recorded the emission lines of excited molecular hydrogen in spectra of the crater Aristarchus. In 1969, he announced that new spectra of Aristarchus featured the lines of ionized molecular nitrogen and hydrogen cyanide, but by this time pronouncements elicited few comments. With the Cold War at its height at this time, direct exchanges between western scientists and their Soviet counterparts were limited. During a visit to the United States, one of Kozyrev’s colleagues, the astronomer V. I. Krassovsky, confided to his hosts that not only were Kozyrev’s spectra “defective,” but that Kozyrev himself was “personally unstable.” Few could have imagined the ordeal that may have prompted this appraisal. Doubts about Kozyrev’s lunar spectra are certainly valid when they are considered in the context of some of his other spectrographic “discoveries.” In 1954 Kozyrev announced that he had obtained spectrograms of a glow emanating from the night side of Venus. While the reality of the socalled ashen light continues to be debated to this day, even its proponents reacted with incredulity to Kozyrev’s claim that the emission he recorded was 50 times brighter than terrestrial “airglow.”

K

K

1244

The following year Kozyrev published a bizarre claim that the characteristic ruddy color of Mars is an illusion caused by the optical properties of the planet’s tenuous atmosphere, which he mistakenly alleged was all but opaque to wavelengths shorter than 500 nm. In 1966 Kozyrev announced the presence of absorption bands in spectra of Saturn’s rings that suggested a tenuous atmosphere of ammonia; data from the Voyager space probes have ruled out such a possibility. During a transit of Mercury in 1973, Kozyrev reported that he was able to detect the emission lines of hydrogen in an atmosphere about 1/100 as dense as the Earth’s. The ultraviolet spectrograph aboard the Mariner 10 space probe did detect a hydrogen halo during its flyby of Mercury the following year, but it proved to be 10 trillion times more rarefied than the one postulated by Kozyrev, far beyond the threshold of his instrument. Even more serious questions are raised by Kozyrev’s forays into experimental physics. In 1951 he embarked on a prolonged series of experiments with gyroscopes, torsion balances, and pendulums in the laboratory of the Pulkovo Observatory, inspired by ruminations on the nature of time during his dreary years in captivity. Fifteen years later he published a number of utterly incredible claims: That he had observed quantum effects on a macroscopic scale, that time possesses a variable spatial density and can be shielded against by interposing chiral organic compounds, and that information can be propagated instantaneously through space – seemingly in violation of special relativity. His gyroscope experiments led Kozyrev to infer that the distance from the Equator to the north pole of a rapidly rotating planet should be less than the distance from Equator to its south pole, and he claimed to have confirmed this nonexistent asymmetry by measuring photographs of Jupiter and Saturn. His theory of “causal mechanics” held that the energy source of stars is not thermonuclear but derives from “the flow of time.” Kozyrev’s lunar spectra continue to be cited as evidence that the Moon is not quite geologically dead, a tale that is often told in a distorted form and seldom with even a passing reference to the peculiarities of his other work. Yet some of

Krafft, Johann

Kozyrev’s work is quite praiseworthy, notably his 1974 observations of the azimuthal brightness asymmetry in the rings of Saturn.

Selected References Deutsch, A. N. (1984). Obituary. Zemlya i Vselennaya 1: 50–51. Doel, Ronald E. (1996). “The Lunar Volcanism Controversy.” Sky & Telescope 92, no. 4: 26–30. Kozyrev, N. A. (1955). Isvestia Krymskoy Astrophysicheskoy Observatorii 15: 169–181. — (1962). “Physical Observations of the Lunar Surface.” In Physics and Astronomy of the Moon, edited by Zdeneˇk Kopal, pp. 361–383. New York: Academic Press, see pp. 366–367. — (1968). Possibility of Experimental Study of Time. Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce Joint Publication Research Service. — (1974). “East-West Asymmetry of Saturn’s Ring.” Astrophysics and Space Science 27: 111–116. Moore, Patrick (1992). “Astronomers and Josef Stalin.” In Fireside Astronomy. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Sheehan, William P. and Thomas A. Dobbins (2001). Epic Moon: A History of Lunar Exploration in the Age of the Telescope. Richmond, VA: Willmann-Bell. Solzhenitsyn, Alexander (1973). The Gulag Archipelago. New York: Harper and Row, pp. 480–484.

Krafft, Johann ▶ John of Gmunden

Krebs, Nicholas Daniel Kolak Department of Philosophy, William Paterson University, NJ, USA

Alternate Names ▶ Nicholas Cusanus; ▶ Nicholas of Cusa; ▶ Nikolaus von Cusa Born Cusa (Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany), 1401 Died (Germany), 1464

Krebs, Nicholas

Nicholas Krebs is generally regarded as a key transitional figure between the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. He gave the study of the universe a legitimacy that would be exploited by the cosmologists of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Krebs’s father was a boatman on the Moselle River. In 1413 he joined the Brothers of the Common Life at Deventer in the Lowlands, a group of mystics devoted to experiencing unity with God as inspired by a widely influential book of the time, Imitatio Christi (Imitation of Christ). Krebs went on to study philosophy, law, mathematics, the sciences, theology, and the arts at the universities of Heidelberg, Rome, Cologne, and Padua, where he received his doctorate in law. After he was ordained in 1433, he pursued a series of ecclesiastical appointments, culminating in his becoming cardinal in 1448 and bishop of Brixen in 1450. Krebs’s most important philosophical innovation – the concept of the identity of opposites (coincidentia oppositorum), developed in his major philosophical work, De Docta Ignorantia (Of learned ignorance, 1440) – is the idea that the distinctions and oppositions among finite beings resolve into unity at the absolute level. His arguments are remarkable for their analytical sophistication. Draw, for instance, a series of bigger and bigger circles, all of which touch a straight line at a point. As the circles get bigger, the more the curve “flattens out” and approaches the straightness of the line so that if you could thus draw an infinitely large circle and place it against the line, there would no longer be any difference between the “curved” line of the circle and the straight line. In this precise way Krebs argues that in the infinite all the opposites become one, thus his oft-misunderstood “mystical” thesis that “everything is everything.” Inspired both by Neoplatonic philosophy and thirteenth-century mysticism, Krebs’s thought developed in marked opposition to scholastic Aristotelianism. Striving for a synthesis of, on the one hand, mathematical and experimental knowledge and, on the other, mysticism and knowledge, Krebs made brilliant and original use of analogies from mathematics. He built

1245

K

a system of epistemology and metaphysics in which the categories of reason, with their opposites and contradictions, give us at best only a limited and inadequate representation of reality that in itself is beyond our direct access and understanding. Krebs’s work thereby anticipated the great system of ▶ Immanuel Kant. Reason is by its very nature discursive, and because our thinking is discursive, any conclusions drawn upon it are attained through a series of inferences and not by direct insight. Although it is possible for the intellect to transcend these limitations through intuitive cognitions apprehended all at once, our language cannot adequately express these intuitions because it relies necessarily on categories, oppositions, and contradictions that exist only at the finite, relative level of immediate experience. The unity of opposites in ultimate reality can therefore never be directly or fully attained by us; however, once the mind sees that this cannot be attained, it is then capable of transcending the very linguistic and conceptual limitations once it understands their necessity. Another fascinating upshot of Krebs’s line of thinking is that in studying the universe we are studying God. This is an idea that reverberated throughout the Renaissance, especially as brought to fruition by scientists like ▶ Galileo Galilei, who sought to study nature directly rather than through official scriptures to learn about God and the origin of the universe. The universe according to Krebs is a theophany, an “appearance of God.” In anticipation of the cosmology of ▶ Giordano Bruno and Baruch Spinoza, Krebs viewed the universe as endless unfoldings of God; the present “expansion” of existence is, according to his theory, the result of a divine “contraction” from which the unity of God unfolds into multiplicity, an anticipation of twentieth-century cyclical cosmological theory. The universe is therefore itself infinite, which led Krebs to reject the idea of fixed points in space and time in a way that further anticipated twentieth-century developments in the relativity of space and time as pioneered by ▶ Albert Einstein. No place in the universe – neither on the Earth nor on the Sun – is a privileged position. All judgments about location must therefore be

K

K

1246

relative. Krebs then even went on to conclude that the geocentric view of the solar system expressed by the Old Testament is false. According to Krebs, each individual entity in the universe is a manifestation of the whole, forming a harmonious system in which each is both unique and part of the whole. His revival of the key phrase from ▶ Anaxagoras, “everything is in everything,” states that everything mirrors the entire universe, just as conceived in ▶ Gottfried Leibniz’s subsequent theory of monads. The whole of being is in everything, and everything is in the whole. And anticipating both Spinoza and Leibniz still further, he concluded: “all things are what they are, because they could not be otherwise nor better.” The ultimate goal of all inquiry, described in Krebs’s final work, De Visione Dei (Vision of God, 1453), is the transcendence of the limitations of sensory knowledge to attain through intellectual intuition a vision that goes beyond reason, logic, and language, thereby returning the finite to the infinite and allowing us to achieve a mystical union with the universe. We are then free to live out the rest of our lives in mystical contemplation of the oneness of all things, a transcendental bridge between the relative, finite world and the absolute, infinite universe.

Kreiken, Egbert Adriaan

Kreiken, Egbert Adriaan Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Born Barneveld, the Netherlands, 1 November 1896 Died probably The Hague, The Netherlands, 16 August 1964 Dutch astronomer Egbert Kreiken received his Ph.D. from the University of Groningen in 1923. He started his career as a professor at the University of Amsterdam and retired at the University of Ankara. Studying early-type stars, Kreiken found that the components of binary systems rotate less rapidly than similar-type single stars.

Selected Reference Tassoul, J. L. (2000). Stellar Rotation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kremer, Gerhard Selected References Cassirer, Ernst (1994). Individuum und Kosmos in der Philosophie der Renaissance. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft. Hopkins, Jasper (trans.) (1985). Nicholas of Cusa on Learned Ignorance: A Translation and an Appraisal of. De Docta Ignorantia 2nd ed. Minneapolis: A. J. Banning Press. Nicholas of Cusa (1979). Nicholas of Cusa on God as Not-other: A Translation and an Appraisal of De Li Non Aliud, translated by Jasper Hopkins. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. — (1986). De Ludo Globi: The Game of Spheres, translated by Pauline Moffitt Watts. New York: Abaris Books. — (2001). Complete Philosophical and Theological Treatises of Nicholas of Cusa, translated by Jasper Hopkins. 2 Vols. Minneapolis: A. J. Banning Press. Yamaki, Kazuhiko (ed.) (2002). Nicholas of Cusa: A Medieval Thinker for the Modern Age. Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press.

Fathi Habashi Department of Mining, Metallurgical, and Materials Engineering, Laval University, QC, Canada

Alternate Name ▶ Gerardus Mercator Born Rupelmonde, Flanders (Belgium), 1512 Died Duisburg, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany, 1594 Cartographer Gerardus Mercator’s map projection is still in use today and has also proved useful for uranography.

Kreutz, Heinrich Carl Friedrich

Mercator was born in a German family. He studied geography, cartography, and mathematics at the University of Louvain in what is now Belgium, graduating in 1532. He published his first map (of Palestine) in 1537 at the age of 25. From 1537 to 1540 he surveyed and mapped Flanders, and in 1538 he made and published his first world map, based on the ▶ Ptolemy map. In 1554 Mercator produced a map of Europe. He did cartographical work for Emperor Charles V and was cosmographer to the Duke of J€ulich and Cleves. In 1544, he was arrested and prosecuted for heresy, and in 1552 he moved to Duisburg to evade religious persecution because he was a Protestant. Mercator solved the problem of depicting a spherical surface on a flat piece of paper in 1568, by using the “cylindrical projection.” He used a new way of displaying a map with parallel lines for the latitudes and meridians at 90 to each other. The Mercator projection, using straight lines to indicate latitude and longitude, was a great progress for navigation at sea. Its disadvantage is the disproportion of size: Greenland, for instance, is shown 16 times larger than it is in reality. Mercator’s main work, a three-volume world atlas, was published in several editions from 1585 on, and after his death, by his son. He was the first to use the word “atlas.”

Selected Reference Debus, Allen G. (ed.) (1968). “Mercator, Gerhardus.” In World Who’s Who in Science, p. 1162. Chicago: Marquis Who’s Who.

Kreutz, Heinrich Carl Friedrich Hartmut Frommert Munich, Bavaria, Germany

Born Siegen (Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany), 28 September 1854 Died Kiel, Germany, 13 July 1907

1247

K

Heinrich Kreutz is chiefly remembered for his work on sun-grazing comets and his editorship of the Astronomische Nachrichten (1896–1907). He was the son of a superintendent of Siegen. After obtaining his secondary education in Siegen, Kreutz studied astronomy at the University of Bonn under the tutorship of ▶ Eduard Scho¨nfeld and Carl Kr€uger. He was awarded his Ph.D. in 1880 for a study of the orbit of the great comet C/1861 J1. Afterward, Kreutz spent several months in Vienna with ▶ Edmund Weiss and ▶ Theodor von Oppolzer. For roughly a year, he served as a computer at the Recheninstitut in Berlin. In 1883, Kreutz’s former professor, Kr€uger, was appointed director of the Kiel Observatory. Along with this responsibility, Kr€uger assumed the editorship of the Astronomische Nachrichten, then the world’s leading astronomical journal. Kreutz followed Kr€uger to Kiel, where he accepted a position as computer. From the beginning, however, Kreutz was involved in the editorial work of the Astronomische Nachrichten. In 1888, he was also appointed as lecturer at the University of Kiel; by 1891, he was named an associate professor. About that time, Kreutz married Kr€uger’s daughter. Upon Kr€uger’s death in 1896, Kreutz succeeded him as editor of the Astronomische Nachrichten, a position he held for the rest of his life. In that capacity, he produced its volumes 140–175. Kreutz performed these duties with great care and maintained the journal’s high standards for publication. When faced with an increasing number of longer papers, he founded the Astronomische Abhandlungen (1901), to provide a forum of more comprehensive accounts. Thirteen issues of the Abhandlungen were published before his death. Kreutz also directed the headquarters for astronomical telegrams. Kreutz’s most important astronomical research work was his investigation of the orbits of the great sun-grazing comets C/1843 D1, C/1880 C1, and C/1882 R1. Through extensive computational work, he provided evidence that these bodies were all members of a similar group of comets, now called the “Kreutz group,” which had their origins in the breakup of a once-larger celestial body.

K

K

1248

Selected References Anon. (1907). “Heinrich Kreutz.” Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 19: 249. Seeliger, Hugo von (1907). “Todes-Anzeige: Heinrich Kreutz.” Astronomische Nachrichten 175: 241–244.

Krieger, Johann Nepomuk Thomas A. Dobbins Fort Meyers, FL, USA

Born Unterwiesenbach, (Bavaria, Germany), 1865 Died Munich, Germany, February 1902

Krieger, Johann Nepomuk. Reproduced from Popular Astronomy 22, no. 1 (Jan. 1914)

Johann Krieger completed less than one-third of a planned lunar atlas that showed great promise before he died, his health ruined by his obsessive commitment to the mapping project. The son of a brewer, Krieger was little more than a boy when he started to observe the Moon with a small refractor from the sleepy mountain hamlet of Unterwiesenbach, where his scanty education ended at the age of 15. Six years later he traveled

Krieger, Johann Nepomuk

to Cologne to visit ▶ Hermann Klein, the foremost German selenographer and popularizer of astronomy of the era. Klein not only warmly encouraged Krieger to make selenography his life’s work, but assumed the role of his mentor, directing the young man to study mathematics, physics, photography, and the graphic arts. Krieger’s ensuing academic career faltered because he lacked the mathematical aptitude required for the rigorous curriculum at the University of Munich. Undeterred, he spent his inheritance to establish a private observatory in the Munich suburb of Gern-Nymphenburg. Krieger equipped his observatory with a fine 270-mm refractor and announced his intention to produce an exhaustive lunar atlas. In the quest for a better astronomical climate, he would move his observatory to Trieste on the Adriatic coast several years later. Klein provided Krieger with photographic prints made from the best lunar negatives taken at the Lick and Paris observatories. The photographs were enlarged to a scale of almost 12 ft to the Moon’s diameter. These grainy, low-contrast prints served as the substrates for Krieger’s drawings, ensuring an exceptional level of positional accuracy and proper proportion. At the eyepiece Krieger used different colored pencils on successive nights to sketch the finest details glimpsed in fleeting moments of steady seeing that were far beyond the capability of photography to record. These sketches served as the basis for magnificent shaded drawings executed with India ink, graphite pencil, charcoal, and paper stumps that were almost universally recognized as startlingly superior in their meticulous accuracy, aesthetic appeal, and legibility. The frantic, monomaniacal pace at which Krieger labored would quickly take its toll, and in only a few short years his health would utterly collapse. He died early, a martyr to selenography. He had completed less than a third of the plates for his atlas, and these would only be published, in rough and fragmentary form, 10 years after his death. Krieger’s work was collected and edited by his friend Rudolf Ko¨nig (1865–1927), an Austrian businessman who was a mathematician

Kr€ uger, Karl Nicolaus Adalbert

and amateur astronomer of rare ability. Ko¨nig published the two lavish volumes of Johann Nepomuk Kriegers Mond-Atlas, but only 18 of the 58 plates had been completed by Krieger, the remainder being little more than rough outlines.

Selected References Ashbrook, Joseph (1984). “J. N. Krieger: The Moon Halfwon.” In The Astronomical Scrapbook, edited by Leif J. Robinson, pp. 258–265. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Sky Publishing Corp. Both, Ernst E. (1961). A History of Lunar Studies. Buffalo, New York: Buffalo Museum of Science. Ko¨nig, Rudolf (ed.) (1912). Johann Nepomuk € Kriegers Mond-Atlas. Vienna: Carl Uberreutersche Buchdruckerei. Sheehan, William P. and Thomas A. Dobbins (2001). Epic Moon: A History of Lunar Exploration in the Age of the Telescope. Richmond, Virginia: Willmann-Bell. Whitaker, Ewen A. (1999). Mapping and Naming the Moon: A History of Lunar Cartography and Nomenclature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kron, Gerald Edward Steven J. Dick NASA/Library of Congress, Washington, DC, USA

Born Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA, 6 April 1913 Died 9 April 2012 American photometrist Gerald E. Kron developed a system for measuring colors of stars and other astronomical objects; his system is now called Kron-Cousins (sometimes Kron-CousinsJohnson) colors. Kron received his BS (1933) and MS (1934) degrees from the University of Wisconsin, and a Ph.D. (1938) from the University of California (Berkeley) for a thesis on the design, construction, and use of a photoelectric photometer for the 36-in. refractor at the Lick Observatory. He joined the staff of the Lick Observatory as a junior astronomer in 1938 and remained there, apart from research associateships at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and

1249

K

California Institute of Technology, and war work at the United States Naval Ordnance Test Station in California, rising through the ranks until 1965. With ▶ Joel Stebbins, a pioneer of photoelectric photometry, Kron applied a new six-color system to variable stars and eclipsing binaries. Other early collaborators were ▶ Joseph Moore and ▶ Arthur Wyse. In 1965, Kron was appointed director of the United States Naval Observatory [USNO] Station in Flagstaff, Arizona, where he developed an electronic camera for its astrometric reflector. He continued to work on photometry of variable stars and globular clusters, reconciling the properties of galaxies as reported in the Zwicky and Shapley-Ames catalogs, and clarifying the nature of the emission from the jets of active galaxies like M87 and the quasar 3C273. He also made major contributions to our understanding of the distribution of interstellar reddening. Kron has been headquartered at the private Pinecrest Observatory most of the time since his 1973 retirement from USNO. His wife, Katherine C. Gordon (whom he married in 1946) and their son Richard G. Kron are also astronomers.

Selected Reference Kron, Gerald (1973). A Catalog of Colorimetric Measures of Stars on the Six-Color System of Stebbins and Whitford. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

€ ger, Karl Nicolaus Adalbert Kru Thomas R. Williams Rice University, Houston, TX, USA

Born Marienberg, (Sachsen, Germany), 3 December 1832 Died Kiel, Germany, 21 April 1896 Stellar astronomer Karl Kr€uger participated in the development of two great nineteenth-century stellar catalogs. Kr€uger was educated at Berlin, and became assistant to ▶ Friedrich Argelander at

K

K

1250

Bonn in 1853. Kr€ uger was immediately involved, together with Argelander and Argelander’s other assistant, ▶ Eduard Scho¨nfeld, in the observations that eventually led to the publication of the great Bonnner Durchmusterung atlas and catalog for epoch 1855.0. In 1854 Kr€uger was granted a Ph.D. in astronomy at Bonn. When work on the Durchmusterung was completed in 1862, Kr€uger accepted an assignment at the university observatory in Helsingfors, Russia (now Finland), and in 1876 moved to the Herzogliche Observatory in Gotha, Thuringia, Germany. In 1880, he relocated again, this time to the Kiel Observatory, where he served as professor and observatory director for the remainder of his career. Kr€uger observed comets and determined a number of stellar parallaxes. His principal work after leaving Bonn, however, appears to have been the zonal observations from Helsingfors and Gotha of all stars in the band +54 550 to + 65 100 for the Astronomischen Gesellschaft; a catalog of 14,680 stars in that band was published in 1890. In 1893 Kr€uger published a catalog of 2,153 red stars.

Selected References Auwers, Arthur (1896). “Todes-Anzeige: Nicolaus Adalbert Krueger.” Astronomische Nachrichten 140: 193–196. Macpherson, Hector Copeland (1940). Biographical Dictionary of Astronomers. Edinburgh. (Typescript copies at the Harvard University Archives and the United States Naval Observatory Library.) Poggendorff, J. C. (1904). “Krueger.” In Biographischliterarisches Handwo¨rterbuch. Vol. 4, p. 808. Leipzig.

Krylov, Alexei Nikolaevich Alexander A. Gurshtein Vavilov Institute for History of Science & Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Born Visjaga near Alatyr (Chuvash Republic, Russian Federation), 3/15 August 1863 Died Leningrad (Saint Petersburg, Russia), 26 October 1945

Krylov, Alexei Nikolaevich

Krylov was an outstanding Russian mathematician, an authority in theoretical mechanics, and a legendary shipbuilder. His parents were certainly not prosperous but he was lucky to get an excellent free education as the son of a soldier. In 1884, he graduated with distinction from a Maritime High School where he performed his first scientific research on deviation of the magnetic compasses. In 1890, the first in his class, Krylov graduated ahead of schedule from the Saint Petersburg Naval Academy and started his long career as mathematics and ship-theory lecturer in his alma mater, being in 1919–1921 its Head with the rank of a general. In 1898, Krylov received a gold medal from the Royal Institution of Naval Architects for his exceptional contributions to the theory of oscillating motions of a ship. In 1927–1934, Academician Krylov was the director of the Physical-Mathematical Institute, Soviet Academy of Sciences. The accomplishments of his life are primarily in the modern theory of shipbuilding, the theory of approximate computing and other issues of applied mathematics, and the theory of gyroscopes and solving of differential equations. In astronomy, Krylov improved the theory of orbital determination from observations, developed a method of planetary orbit variation, and solved some other problems in celestial mechanics. He reconstructed Newton’s theory of refraction. Krylov is well known in Russia as a historian of science and a great translator of many important classical works. He translated ▶ Carl Gauss on theoretical astronomy and the Theory of lunar motion by Leonhard Euler. In 1915, Krylov also published the first Russian translation of Isaac Newton’s Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica. During his lifetime, Krylov was awarded with multiple highest distinctions of Russia and the USSR. He left breathtaking memoirs. His daughter Anna married celebrated Russian physicist P. L. Kapitsa, discoverer of superfluidity and the Nobel Prize winner in physics of 1978. A crater on the Moon is named after Krylov. In 1951–1956, the complete collection of his works was published in 12 volumes.

Ku¯hı¯: Abu¯ Sahl Wı¯jan ibn Rustam [Wustam] al-Ku¯hı¯ [al-Qu¯hı¯]

Selected References Grigorian, A. T. “Krylov”. In Dictionary of Scientific Biography. – New York 1970–1990. Khanovich, I. G. (1967). Academician Alexei Nikolaevich Krylov. – Moscow: Nauka (Series of Scientific Biographies). 251 p. (In Russian). Krylov, A. N. (1963). Moi vospominanija (My recollections). – Moscow: USSR Academy of Sciences (In Russian).

Ku¯hı¯: Abu¯ Sahl Wı¯jan ibn Rustam [Wustam] al-Ku¯hı¯ [al-Qu¯hı¯] J. L. Berggren Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada

Flourished second half of the tenth century

Ku¯hı¯ attained distinction as an astronomer who was skilled in observational instruments, and his work was well known among the astronomers and mathematicians of his age working in the Bu¯yid domains of ҁIra¯q and western Iran. Born in Tabaristan, he was supported by three kings of the Bu¯yid Dynasty: ҁAdud al-Dawla, Samṣa¯m al˙ ˙ Dawla, and Sharaf al-Dawla, whose combined reigns cover the period 962–989. Thus, Ku¯hı¯ probably did most of his work in the second half of the tenth century. ▶ Ibn al-Haytham and ▶ Bı¯ru¯nı¯ knew of several of Ku¯hı¯’s works, and later ▶ ҁUmar alKhayya¯m cites him as one of the “distinguished mathematicians of ҁIra¯q” (Sesiano, p. 281). In 969/970 Ku¯hı¯ assisted in ▶ Su¯fı¯’s observations ˙ in Shı¯ra¯z to determine the obliquity of the ecliptic, as well as in other observations of the Sun’s movement, done on the order of ҁAdud al-Dawla. ˙ And in 988/989 he was director of the observaҁ tory that Adud’s son, Sharaf al-Dawla, built in ˙ Baghdad, which was intended to observe the Sun, Moon, and the five known planets. According to Bı¯ru¯nı¯, Ku¯hı¯ constructed for solar observations a house whose lowest part was in the form of a segment of a sphere of

1251

K

diameter 25 cubits (approximately 13 m) and whose center was in the ceiling of the house. Sunlight was let in through an opening at that center point of the sphere, which was located in the roof. Three of Ku¯hı¯’s works deal directly with problems that might be called astronomical. They are: (1) On What Is Seen of Sky and Sea (published in Rashed), (2) On Rising Times (published in Berggren and Van Brummelen), and (3) On the Distance from the Center of the Earth to the Shooting Stars (published in Van Brummelen and Berggren). The first treats the visible horizon and shows how, knowing the height of a lighthouse on an island, one can calculate how far away its light can be seen (and related problems). In the second he shows how one can calculate the rising times and ortive amplitudes of the zodiacal signs by Menelaus’s theorem. In the third he uses parallax to show how to calculate the distance to meteors. (Ku¯hı¯’s technique was rediscovered in 1798 by ▶ Johann Benzenberg and ▶ Heinrich Brandes in Germany, who settled the ancient question of whether or not meteors were atmospheric phenomena.) In none of them, however, is any observational data cited, nor are any numerical examples worked. A fourth work, dealing with the astrolabe (published in Berggren), discusses the geometry of that instrument. In particular, it solves problems demanding the construction of certain lines or points of a planispheric astrolabe given other lines and points. A fifth work, applying a method for computing the direction of Mecca, which became common in astronomical works known as zı¯j es, has been ascribed to Ku¯hı¯. But the detailed computations carried out are entirely out of character with his other works and so the attribution must, for the present, be regarded as spurious. Although Ku¯hı¯’s work was studied by Islamic scholars as late as the eighteenth century (notably Muhammad ibn Sirta¯q in the first half ˙ ˙ of the fourteenth century and Muṣtafa¯ Sidqı¯ in ˙ ˙ the eighteenth century), it – like that of many of his distinguished contemporaries and successors in the eastern regions – was unknown in the west.

K

K

1252

Selected References Al-Qift¯ı, Jama¯l al-Dı¯n (1903). Ta’rı¯kh al-hukama¯,’ ˙ edited by J. Lippert. Leipzig: Theodor ˙Weicher, pp. 351–354. Berggren, J. L. (1994). “Abu¯ Sahl al-Ku¯hı¯’s Treatise on the Construction of the Astrolabe with Proof: Text, Translation and Commentary.” Physis 31: 141–252. Berggren, J. L. and Glen Van Brummelen (2001). “Abu¯ Sahl al-Ku¯hı¯ on Rising Times.” SCIAMVS 2: 31–46. Ibn al-Nadı¯m (1970). The Fihrist of al-Nadı¯m: A TenthCentury Survey of Muslim Culture, edited and translated by Bayard Dodge. 2 Vols. New York: Columbia University Press. Rashed, Roshdi (2001). “Al-Qu¯hı¯: From Meteorology to Astronomy.” Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 11: 157–204. Sayılı, Aydın (1960). The Observatory in Islam. Ankara: Turkish Historical Society, esp. pp. 106, 112–117. Sesiano, J. (1979). “Note sur trois theóre`mes de mećanique d’al-Qu¯hı¯ et leur conse´quence.” Centaurus 22: 281–297. Sezgin, Fuat (1974). Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums. Vol. 5, Mathematik, pp. 314–321. Leiden: E. J. Brill. Van Brummelen, Glen and J. L. Berggren (2001). “Abu¯ Sahl al-Ku¯hı¯ on the Distance to the Shooting Stars.” Journal for the History of Astronomy 32: 137–151.

Kuiper, Gerard Peter Virginia Trimble University of California, Irvine School of Physical Sciences, Irvine, CA, USA

Born Harenkarspel, the Netherlands, 7 December 1905 Died Mexico City, Mexico, 24 December 1973 Dutch-American astronomer and planetary scientist Gerard P. Kuiper discovered that the atmosphere of Mars consists largely of carbon dioxide and advocated the importance of Solar System astronomy in the third quarter of the twentieth century when it was generally unpopular. Kuiper also participated in the identification of some of the best mountain-top observatory sites, including Mauna Kea (Hawaii) and Cerro Tololo (Chile).

Kuiper, Gerard Peter

As a teenager, Kuiper was interested in astronomy and had good-enough eyesight to produce a sketch of the Pleiades including stars that are a factor of four fainter than most people can see without a telescope. He earned a B.Sc. in 1927 and a Ph.D. in 1933 from Leiden University, with a thesis on binary stars carried out under ▶ Ejnar Hertzprung. Among the best known of his own students in turn were Thomas Gehrels, Tobias Owen, and Carl Sagan, all of whom made important contributions to planetary astronomy, especially with the use of infrared observations, another of Kuiper’s early interests. Following his Ph.D., Kuiper became a fellow at Lick Observatory (1933–1935), moved on to Harvard (1935–1936), and was appointed to an assistant professorship at the University of Chicago and Yerkes Observatory in 1936. Kuiper married Sarah Parker Fuller (by whom he had two children) in 1936 and became a US citizen in 1937. He became full professor in 1943 and headed west to the University of Arizona in 1960 as the founder of the Lunar and Planetary Lab [LPL] there, from the directorship of which he resigned a year before his death. His war work was initially as an operations analyst at Eighth Air Force Headquarters in 1944, and he was part of the Alsos debriefing mission to formerly Nazi Europe in 1945. Kuiper’s early work focused on binary stars; he was the first to attempt a statistical description of the distribution of binary orbit periods and mass ratios. He suspected (correctly) an almost uniform distribution over the entire period range, from stars that touch each other (for which he coined the name “contact binaries”) to ones almost a parsec apart, and a mass ratio distribution that was a direct reflection of the fact that little stars are much commoner than big ones. Kuiper also did one of the first quantitative estimates of the dependence of star brightness on mass and calculated the relationship (called bolometric correction) between the total brightness of a star and the amount of luminosity in the wavelength band we can see. He and, separately, ▶ Willem Luyten were responsible for the discovery of most of the white dwarfs found until ▶ Jesse Greenstein took up the problem

Kuiper, Gerard Peter

in the 1960s; Kuiper was instrumental in recognizing that the white dwarfs, like normal stars, could be classified by the elements whose absorption features appear in their spectra. During his time at Chicago, Kuiper interacted with ▶ Otto Struve, ▶ Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, ▶ Gerhard Herzberg, and ▶ Harold Urey, and so gradually turned his attention from binary stars to their formation and on to the interdisciplinary topic of the formation of the Solar System. He concluded (probably wrongly) that planet formation is the low-mass extreme of the same process that makes double stars. Kuiper was involved in building the 82-in. reflector at the new McDonald Observatory in west Texas and, with it, discovered methane in the atmosphere of Titan (Saturn’s largest satellite) in 1944 and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere of Mars in 1947. He also discovered one satellite, each of Neptune (Nereid) and Uranus (Miranda). Many of these accomplishments, and his later survey of minor planets, were undertaken using a Cashman lead sulfide cell (developed during World War II) as an infrared detector. Kuiper assumed, along with most of his contemporaries, that there would be very few planets or minor planets beyond the orbit of Neptune, while, in contrast, Frederick Leonard, Kenneth Edgeworth, ▶ Fred Whipple, and A. G. W. Cameron thought that there might be a great many residual planetesimals 30–50 AU from the Sun. Nevertheless, the name Kuiper belt (less often, Kuiper-Edgeworth belt) is invariably attached to these objects and their location. The LPL, with Whipple’s group at Harvard University, became one of the two major planetary science groups in the United States. Increasing friction with his Chicago colleagues over how credit for various discoveries about the Moon and planets should be apportioned was part of the reason Kuiper left the University of Chicago and Yerkes Observatory. Kuiper and his colleagues investigated planetary atmospheres, prepared an atlas of the Moon (which contributed to the choice of Apollo program landing sites), and pioneered infrared planetary studies from high-altitude aircraft. The American longlived follow-on mission to these initial studies was

1253

K

called the Kuiper Airborne Observatory. Another of his legacies to later generations of astronomers was the commissioning and overall editing, first, of a four-volume series called The Solar System and, later, of a nine-volume (only eight of which were ever completed, shortly after Kuiper’s death) compendium covering all of astronomy, from telescopes to cosmology. He was a member of the United States National Academy of Sciences and of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences as well as a foreign associate of the Royal Astronomical Society. Kuiper died of a heart attack while attending an astronomical meeting.

Selected References Anon. (1974). “G. P. Kuiper.” Nature 248: 539. Cruikshank, Dale P. (1974). “20th-Century Astronomer.” Sky & Telescope 47, no. 3: 159–164. Doel, Ronald E. (1996). Solar System Astronomy in America: Communities, Patronage, and Interdisciplinary Science, 1920–1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Green, D. W. E. (1999). “Book Review – Solar System Astronomy in America: Communities, Patronage, and Interdisciplinary Research.” International Comet Quarterly 21: 44–46. (Includes an extensive historical commentary on Kuiper’s poorly understood approach to small objects beyond Pluto.) Kuiper, Gerard P. (1937). “On the Hydrogen Content of Clusters.” Astrophysical Journal 86: 176–197. (Kuiper included an early version of a color-magnitude diagram for galactic clusters.) — (1938). “The Empirical Mass-Luminosity Relation.” Astrophysical Journal 88: 472–507. (Kuiper here clearly defined the mass-luminosity relation for main-sequence stars, with white dwarfs departing from this group.) — (1941). “On the Interpretation of b Lyrae and Other Close Binaries.” Astrophysical Journal 93: 133–177. (Here Kuiper introduced the term “contact binary” for a case where one star accretes matter from its neighbor.) — (1944). “Titan: A Satellite with an Atmosphere.” Astrophysical Journal 100: 378–383. (Account of his discovery of methane in Titan’s atmosphere.) — (1949). “The Fifth Satellite of Uranus” and “The Second Satellite of Neptune.” Proceedings of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific 61: 129, 175–176. (Kuiper’s accounts of his discoveries of Uranus V [Miranda] and Neptune II [Nereid].) — (1949). “Survey of Planetary Atmospheres.” In The Atmospheres of the Earth and Planets, edited by G. Kuiper, pp. 304–345. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Second of Kuiper’s two papers in a symposium proceedings edited by himself, deemed influential for the following generation of Solar

K

K

1254

System planetary scientists; a revised edition was printed in 1952.) — (1956).“The Formation of the Planets.” Parts 1–3. Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada 50: 57–68, 105–121, 158–176. (Extensive three-part paper detailing Kuiper’s thinking on the origin of the Solar System, including citations to all his earlier key work on the topic.) — (1964). “The Lunar and Planetary Laboratory.” Parts 1 and 2. Sky & Telescope 27: 4–8, 88–92. (Kuiper’s two-part article on the early history and results of the LPL.) Kuiper, Gerard P., W. Wilson, and R. J. Cashman. (1947). “An Infrared Stellar Spectrometer.” Astrophysical Journal 106: 243–254. (An account of an infrared spectrometer, from wartime technology involving new PbS cells, designed for attachment to a large telescope, and early results.) Kuiper, Gerard P. et al. (1958). “Survey of Asteroids.” Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 3, no. 32: 289–428. (With six other coauthors, Kuiper presented the results of a large astrometric and photometric survey of minor planets, from photographic plates taken at McDonald Observatory in 1950–1952.) Sagan, Carl (1974). “Obituary: Gerard Peter Kuiper (1905–1973).” Icarus 22: 117–118. Whitaker, Ewen A. (1974). “Gerard P. Kuiper.” Physics Today 27, no. 3: 85–87.

Kulik, Leonid Alexyevich Ursula B. Marvin Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA

Born Tartu, (Estonia), 19 August 1883 Died Spas-Demensk near Smolensk, (Russia), 14 April 1942 Leonid Kulik was a leading Soviet meteoriticist who is best known for his investigations of the 1908 Tunguska, Siberia, impact site. His father was a physician. Kulik’s secondary education was completed in 1903 at the Gymnasium in the town of Troitsk, Orenburg Province, in the Ural Mountains, where he won a gold medal. He then pursued an education at the Institute of Forestry in Saint Petersburg until he was inducted into military service in 1904 and sent to Kazan on the Volga River. On his own initiative, he

Kulik, Leonid Alexyevich

attended lectures at the Faculty of Physics and Mathematics at Kazan University. In 1910, Kulik was arrested for revolutionary activities but, after serving a short time in prison, was sent to the Ilmen region of the Urals. During the next 2 years (1911–1912), he was paroled to work in the Forestry Department on the condition of making frequent reports to the police chief in the town of Zlatoust. In 1912, Kulik married Lidiya Ivanovna; both later served on the scientific staff of the Mineralogical Museum of the Academy of Sciences in Saint Petersburg. In the course of his fieldwork, Kulik had the good fortune to meet and work with a leading scientist, Vladimir Ivanovich Vernadsky, who became known as the father of geochemistry in the USSR. With the outbreak of war, Kulik joined the army and served on the western front. After the October 1917 Revolution, Kulik’s record of arrest under the Czarist regime redounded to his advantage. Early in 1918, he went to the Soviet Academy of Sciences in Petrograd and started working on meteorites. Later that same year, Kulik led an expedition, organized by the academy, to investigate the fall of a stony meteorite on 27 February 1918, near the town of Kashin, in the province of Tver, a short distance north of Moscow. He returned with a 122-kg specimen of the Glasatovo chondrite, named for the village where it fell. In 1921, the Mineralogical Museum of the Academy of Sciences in Petrograd established a meteorite section with Vernadsky as director. Vernadsky assigned Kulik to lead a 2-year expedition to gather information on the fall of a giant meteorite witnessed in Siberia in June 1908. Reports in provincial newspapers had described a brilliant fireball, visible over a vast area, moving from approximately the south to the north, accompanied by deafening explosions and a great trembling of the ground when it struck the Earth. Using a railroad car designated for the purpose, Kulik visited many places in Siberia and gathered eyewitness accounts. One story implied that the meteorite had landed at Tomsk in western Siberia. Kulik found no meteorite at Tomsk, but learned that the fireball had passed over the Yenesei Province and landed somewhere near

Kulik, Leonid Alexyevich

the mouth of the Podkamennaya Tunguska River, a site so remote that he could not visit it on that trip. Throughout his travels, Kulik collected reports of numerous meteorite falls, and sometimes obtained specimens. He made special efforts to educate the people he met about meteorites, and enlisted many volunteers to serve as corresponding observers who would send reports back to the institute on a regular basis. During the 1920s, Kulik issued updated instructions to this network, which grew in membership and in the volume of reports and specimens that were returned to Petrograd each year. In 1927, Kulik led the first of several expeditions to the Tunguska area to investigate the 1908 fall. From the remote fur-trading station of Vanovara in eastern Siberia, he traveled by horse and reindeer into the deep forest. Kulik was led by local guides, some of whom had witnessed the event at fairly close range. Even after 19 years, the destruction he encountered was awesome beyond all expectations. Kulik found that a vast area of the forest had been uprooted and flattened, with treetops fanning outward. Only on later expeditions did he determine that the fallen trees pointed radially away from the center of an explosion. The tree roots faced a swampy area of low mounds and peat bogs pocked with rounded holes, up to a few dozen meters across, that Kulik believed were the craters made by a swarm of impacting meteorites. In 1928 and again in 1929/1930, Kulik led two more arduous expeditions to Tunguska in an effort to excavate the water-filled holes and recover the meteorites. He directed the draining and trenching of one large depression, and the boring with hand augers into others. Kulik also conducted geodetic and magnetic surveys of the entire area. But all to no avail; he found no meteorites in the ground or on the surface. However, photographs of the flattened forest, taken on his expeditions, caused a sensation at home and abroad. Back in Petrograd, Kulik argued for an aerial survey of the Tunguska region. The first attempt, made in 1930, was postponed twice for logistical problems. Faced with delays, Kulik conducted

1255

K

other inquiries. In 1933, he investigated a shower of stony meteorites that occurred on 26 December at Pervomaiskii Poselok in the Vladimir Province of Russia. It was seen over such a wide area that Kulik determined the approximate site of the fall from the reports sent to the Meteorite Institute. He visited the area immediately and obtained about 16 kg of specimens from local citizens. Kulik did not find the strewn field right away, but used a theodolite to calculate the trajectory of the fireball. After the snow melted, he went directly to the strewn field, aided by a group of schoolboys, and collected 97 stones weighing a total of 50 kg. This was the first known instance in which an instrumental calculation revealed the site of a meteorite fall. In 1937, during an attempted aerial survey of Tunguska, the plane crash-landed but with no harm done to Kulik or the other passengers. Finally, in 1938, the aerial survey successfully revealed that the uprooted trees lay in an elliptical area with a center of devastation some 12–15 km across in the northwestern portion of the ellipse. The total affected area was 250 km2. Kulik returned to the site in the following year to correlate the aerial photographs with geodetic stations he had set up in the region. Further studies, however, were prevented by the onset of World War II. When Kulik investigated the Tunguska site, only a few scientists favored a meteorite impact as the origin of craters found on the Earth or Moon. However, Kulik’s summary of eyewitness accounts of the fireball, together with his photographs of the devastation at the site, provided clear evidence that a large extraterrestrial body had wreaked destruction on the Earth in historic times. This finding prompted many scientists to take a new look at the possibilities of meteorite impacts as geological processes. Kulik found no crater and no meteorites at Tunguska because, like most scientists of the time, he did not understand the explosive potential of meteorites moving through the Earth’s atmosphere at cosmic velocities. Today, astronomers and meteoriticists agree that the incoming body exploded in the atmosphere over Tunguska without reaching the ground and without

K

K

1256

depositing any meteorite fragments. The remaining point of contention is whether that body was a fragment of a comet or a friable asteroid. By the start of World War II, Kulik held the position of curator of meteorites at the Soviet Academy of Sciences, a well-earned appointment that recognized his leading role in promoting the growth and documentation of the Soviet Union’s collection of meteorites. He was the first person to serve as the scientific secretary of the Academy’s Committee on Meteorites, which was chaired by Vernadsky. Kulik retained his civilian status because of weak eyesight. Nonetheless, he voluntarily joined the so called minutemen and was captured by the German army and put into a camp. He wrote a series of letters describing his daily life in the camp, where he did some paramedical work. Kulik contracted typhus and died.

Selected References Krinov, E. L. (1948). “L. A. Kulik as an Organizer of Meteoritics in the USSR” (in Russian). Meteoritika 4: 14–30. — (1960). Principles of Meteoritics, translated from the 1957 Russian edition by Irene Vidziunas; English version edited by Harrison Brown. New York: Pergamon Press. — (1966). Giant Meteorites, translated from the 1952 Russian edition by J. S. Romankeiwicz; English version edited by M. M. Beynon. New York: Pergamon Press. Kulik, L. (1935). “On the Fall of the Podkamennaya Tunguska Meteorite in 1908,” translated by Lincoln La Paz and Gerhardt Wiens. Popular Astronomy 43: 596–599. — (1936). “Preliminary Results of the Meteorite Expeditions Made in the Decade 1921–31,” translated by Lincoln La Paz and Gerhard Wiens. Popular Astronomy 44: 215–220. Marvin, Ursula B. (1986). “Meteorites, the Moon, and the History of Geology.” Journal of Geological Education 34: 140–165.

Kulikovskij, Petr Grigor’evich ▶ Kulikovsky, Piotr Grigor’evich

Kulikovskij, Petr Grigor’evich

Kulikovsky, Piotr Grigor’evich Alexander A. Gurshtein Vavilov Institute for History of Science & Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia

Alternate Name ▶ Kulikovskij, Petr Grigor’evich Born Kiev (Ukraine), 13 June 1910 Died Moscow, Russia, 4 November 2003 Piotr Kulikovsky was an expert in stellar astronomy and an internationally acclaimed Russian historian of astronomy, a composer, and a musician. His father was a Polish nobleman, and his mother was a French woman (a nurse at the time of World War I). His first education was a musical one. After graduating as an astronomer from Moscow University in 1938, Kulikovsky began to work in the Sternberg State Astronomical Institute (GAISh), and, later on, teaching at GAISh remained his profession throughout his entire life until his retirement in 1986. His scholarly interests included statistics and classifications of supernovae, investigations of Cepheids and other types of variable stars including their distribution in stellar complexes, and many other issues in stellar astronomy and astrophysics. During Kulikovsky’s long life in science, he wrote several books, including a textbook on stellar astronomy (1978), a very popular Handbook for the Amateur Astronomer (many editions), and some biographical pamphlets. For a number of years, he was a member of the Organizing Committee for International Astronomical Union (IAU) Commission 26 (Variable Stars). After World War II in the early 1950s, when significant numbers of astronomers began to take an interest in the history of their subject, Kulikovsky became a national leader in the history of astronomy. He initiated and headed

K€ ustner, Karl Friedrich

the national Commission on History of Astronomy and stimulated the development of historical-astronomical research throughout many of what were then Soviet republics. He was the founder, and for many years editor-in-chief, of the Russian annual for history of astronomy, Istoriko-Astronomicheskie Issledovaniya, which he started in 1955 and which flourishes to this day under the aegis of the Vavilov Institute for History of Science and Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences. A highlight of Kulikovsky’s organizational achievements was his involvement in the groundwork for the 1958 IAU General Assembly in Moscow. In particular, due to his efforts, three postage stamps were issued. The IAU General Assembly (GA) was a major international scientific happening in Moscow after Stalin’s death, and it took place just after the launch of the first Sputnik in 1957. Being admirably arranged, it triggered a genuine breakthrough in relationships between astronomers of two, then antagonistic, social systems. For the USSR, it was the onset of the replacement of an era of confrontation with an era of cooperation known as Khrushchev’s Thaw. Adriaan Blaauw characterized the event as astronomers’ hospitality versus political hostility, and Kulikovsky was part and parcel of this extremely important process. At the Moscow GA, Kulikovsky succeeded the prominent ▶ Otto Neugebauer (USA) and Herbert Dingle (UK) as the third President of IAU Commission 41 (History of Astronomy), which had been established in 1948 at the first postwar GA, in Zurich. He held this position for two terms (1958–1964). He was also part of a small committee (chaired by ▶ Jan Oort) that, in 1954, provided revised by-laws defining membership in the IAU and participated in IAU Symposium Number 1. Kulikovsky was among the originators of the international project The General History of Astronomy and served on the Editorial Board of this IAU/International Union of History and Philosophy of Science initiative. For many years he was among the Advisory Editors of the Journal for the History of Astronomy. An exemplary envoy of the old-fashioned traditional Russian intelligentsia, Kulikovsky

1257

K

aroused affection in his numerous students. Not getting a lot of decorations, he was a fair and benevolent mentor for several generations of scholars and teachers in Moscow and throughout the former USSR. During many deplorable occurrences under Stalinist totalitarianism, he did no evil, but lived a modest and honest life. The main-belt asteroid (2497) was named after him.

Selected References Gurshtein, A. A. (2004). “Piotr Grigor’evich Kulikovsky (1910–2003),” Journal for the History of Astronomy, 35, Part 1, No. 118: 120–121. Petr Grigor’evich Kulikovsky, In http://Infm1.sai.msu.ru/ GAL/teacher/kul.htm (In Russian).

Kuo Shou-ching ▶ Guo Shoujing

€ stner, Karl Friedrich Ku Brian Luzum United States Naval Observatory, Washington, DC, USA

Born Go¨rlitz, (Sachsen, Germany), 22 August 1856 Died Mehlem, (Nordrhein-Westfalen), Germany, 15 October 1936 As a meridian observer, Friedrich K€ustner achieved an outstanding reputation for the precision and accuracy of his own observations as well as for his careful reconsideration of historical observations. He was the first astronomer to measure the solar parallax using the radial velocities of stars measured at different times of the year. The son of a master bricklayer, K€ustner first became familiar with practical astronomy when he was a student at Strassburg

K

K

1258

University, where he received his Doctor of Philosophy in 1879. While there, he was influenced strongly by ▶ Friedrich Winnecke. Shortly after finishing school, K€ustner began work at the office of the Berliner Jahrbuch. There, he mostly worked on computing orbits of minor planets and on the redetermination of the constant of aberration. In 1882, K€ustner was selected by ▶ Arthur Auwers to act as his first assistant on the transit of Venus expedition to Puntas Arenas, Argentina. In 1884, K€ ustner was appointed Observator of the Berlin Observatory. During his tenure there, he returned to the problem of determining the constant of aberration. The anomalous data obtained from his observations convinced him that the latitude of the telescope had changed. With further observations over the course of a year, K€ ustner proved conclusively that the variation of latitude occurred on a different frequency than that predicted by ▶ Leonhard Euler. K€ ustner’s work allowed ▶ Seth Chandler to reexamine the entire problem using his own observations, K€ ustner’s, and other zenith observation data sets to determine the correct frequency, later confirmed theoretically by ▶ Simon Newcomb. In 1891, K€ ustner became a Professor of Astronomy and the Director of the Bonn Observatory, succeeding ▶ Eduard Scho¨nfeld. A couple of years after this, he began work on his catalog of 10,663 stars. This catalog included stars between the celestial equator and declination +51 , using his own observations made with a 6-in. Repsold meridian circle. It was considered the most accurate catalog of its kind at the time of its completion, in part because of his work reducing errors in positions due to stellar magnitude by making all observations reduced to a standard magnitude of 8.5. Using a 12-in. photographic refractor along with a three-prism spectrograph, K€ ustner also made observations of the radial velocities of stars. This information, combined with his earlier work on fundamental positions of stars and the known velocity of light, length of the year, and radius of the Earth, allowed him to

K€ ustner, Karl Friedrich

determine the speed of the Earth in its orbit, the aberration constant and the solar parallax. K€ustner received the Gold Medal from the Royal Astronomical Society for his star catalog, his work in the determination of the aberration constant from line-of-sight motions of stars, and for his detection of the variation of latitude. He also received the Bradley Medal of the Prussian Academy of Sciences. At the 1928 International Astronomical Union Meeting in Leiden, the Netherlands, K€ustner was conferred an honorary degree. He was a member of the Royal Astronomical Society and the United States National Academy of Science. In 1887, K€ustner married the daughter of a Hamburg sculptor named Bo¨rner. They had two children. Their son was a U-boat commander in World War I who was listed as missing. After his retirement, K€ustner was cared for by his daughter.

Selected References Brosche, P. (2000). “K€ ustner’s Observations of 1884–5: The Turning Point in the Empirical Establishment of Polar Motion.” In Polar Motion: Historical and Scientific Problems, edited by Steven Dick, Dennis McCarthy, and Brian Luzum, pp. 101–107. San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific. Gill, Sir David (1910). “Address Delivered by the President, Sir David Gill, K.C.B., in presenting the Gold Medal of the Society to Professor Friedrich K€ ustner.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 70: 395–413. Hopmann, J. (1937). Obituary. Vierteljahresschrift der Astronomische Gesellschaft 72: 24–34. J. J. (1937). “Friedrich K€ ustner.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 97: 285–289. K€ ustner, Friedrich (1888). Neue Methode zur Bestimmung der Aberrations-Constante nebst Untersuchung u€ber die Ver€ anderlichkeit der Polho¨he. Berlin. — (1905). “Eine spektrographische Bestimmung der Sonnenparallaxe.” Astronomische Nachrichten 169: 241–264. — (1908). Katalog von 10663 Sternen zwischen 0 [Grad] und 51 [Grad] no¨rdlicher Deklination f€ ur das A¨quinoktium 1900: Nach den Beobachtungen am Repsoldschen Meridiankreise der Ko¨niglichen Sternwarte zu Bonn in den Jahren 1894 bis 1903. Bonn.

Kuzmin, Grigori

Kuzmin, Grigori Peeter Tenjes Institute of Physics, University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia

Alternate Name ▶ Kuzmin, Grigory Grigorievich Born Vyborg (Finland), 8 April 1917 Died Tartu (Estonia), 22 April 1988 Grigori Kuzmin is known for his fundamental works in stellar dynamics, especially studies of the third integral of motion and models of triaxial ellipsoidal galaxies. He was among those who showed that there is very little local dark matter in the plane of the Milky Way. Grigori Kuzmin was born in a family of a student and secretary. His wife and children did not work in the field of astronomy. Kuzmin moved to Tallinn in 1924 and later to Tartu (Estonia). In 1940 he graduated from Tartu University cum laude (mathematics). Already during his studies he began to work as an astronomer under the supervision of ▶ Ernst ¨ pik. Kuzmin defended his Ph.D. thesis in O 1952 (Tartu University) and his Dr. Sci. (Habil.) degree in 1970. During 1939–1952 he worked at Tartu University. From 1947 Kuzmin began to work also at the Institute of Astronomy and Atmospheric Physics, where during 1960–1982 he was the head of the Department of Stellar Astronomy. In 1961 he was elected a member of the Academy of Sciences of Estonia. In 1971 Kuzmin received the title of Professor and from 1982 Professor Emeritus. In 1976–1982 he was Vice-President and President of the Commission 33 (Structure and Dynamics of the Galactic System) of the International Astronomical Union. Kuzmin was awarded the Bredikhin Prize in 1971 for his fundamental work in stellar dynamics.

1259

K

While at Tartu University Kuzmin lectured in stellar dynamics, stellar statistics, general astronomy, and practical astronomy. He was a supervisor of seven Ph.D. theses. The main areas of research for Kuzmin were stellar dynamics, modeling of stellar systems (Milky Way, the Andromeda galaxy, spherical systems, systems with triaxial symmetry), and stellar orbits. Classical are Kuzmin’s disk model (1953, 1956, also Kuzmin-Toomre disk) and Kuzmin’s third integral of motion (1952, 1953). Kuzmin showed that only single-valued (isolating) integrals of motion can be used as arguments of the distribution function for a stellar system and that in the case of the Galaxy, the number of integrals is three. He showed that St€ackel-type potentials can be used to describe the structure of the galaxy. Later Kuzmin generalized the St€ackel-type model for stellar systems with triaxial ellipsoidal symmetry. Kuzmin also studied time evolution of stellar velocity dispersions caused by the variation of the regular gravitational field of the Galaxy and by irregular gravitational forces. He found that in the case of disk galaxies, a quasi-stationary relation between velocity dispersion components is established. Together with S. Kutuzov, Kuzmin found a two-integral distribution function for an axisymmetric mass distribution model (KuzminKutuzov model). Together with U-I. Veltmann, Kuzmin developed a theory of spherical stellar systems suitable to describe the mass distribution of globular clusters.

Selected References De Zeeuw, P. T., van de Ven, G. “Grigori Kuzmin and Stellar Dynamics.” Baltic Astronomy 20 (2011) 211–220. Einasto, J. “Grigori Kuzmin and Astronomy in Estonia.” In Dynamics of Galaxies, Proc. Conf. 6–10 Aug. 2007, Pulkovo Observatory, St. Petersburg, Russia, p. 5, 2007. Kuzmin, G. G. “Model of the steady galaxy allowing of the triaxial distribution of velocities.” Astronomicheskii Zhurnal 33 (1956), 27. (In Russian).

K

K

1260

Kuzmin, G. G. “Quadratic integrals of motion and stellar orbits in the absence of axial symmetry of the potential.” In Structure and dynamics of elliptical galaxies, Proc. 127th Symp. of IAU, Princeton, NY. Ed. P. T. de Zeeuw and S. D. Tremaine. D. Reidel Publ. Co., pp. 553–556, 1987. (English translation; original in Russian was published in 1973). Kuzmin, G. G. “The third integral of stellar motion and the dynamics of the stationary Galaxy.” Publ. Tartu Astron. Obs. 32 (1953), 332–368. (In Russian). Kuzmin, G. G., Kutuzov, S. A. “Models of stationary self-gravitating stellar systems with axial symmetry.” Bull. Abastumani Astrphys. Obs. 27 (1962), 82–86. (In Russian). Kuzmin, G. G., Veltmann, U-I. K. “Generalized isochrone models of spherical stellar systems.” In Galactic bulges, Proc. 153rd Sump. of IAU, Ghent, Belgium, August 17–22, 1992. Ed. H. DeJonghe, H. J. Habing. Kluwer Acad. Publ. Dordrecht, pp. 363–366, 1993. (English translation; original in Russian was published in 1973).

Kuzmin, Grigory Grigorievich

Kwal-luk Thomas Hockey Department of Earth Science, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA, USA

Flourished Japan, circa 602 A Paekche priest named Kwal-luk sailed from Korea to Japan in 602 at the invitation of the Japanese. A scholar well versed in astronomy, Kwal-luk brought along books on the subject and was, in turn, assigned Japanese students. Thus began the modern study of astronomy in Japan.

Selected Reference

Kuzmin, Grigory Grigorievich ▶ Kuzmin, Grigori

Grayson, J. H. (1997). Early Buddhism and Christianity in Korea: A Study in the Emplantation (Studies in the History of Religions, 47). Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill.