ABSTRACT

We are interested in the case of Friedrich Christoph Mayer, who in the 1720s, while at the Imperial Academy of Sciences in St. Petersburg (in Latin Academiae scientiarum imperialis Petropolitanae), developed a system of the aurora borealis, as well as a mathematical method for calculating the height of the aurora from the geometrical characteristics of the auroral arc. Mayer, encountering a major contradiction in his system which placed the aurora at the height of the clouds, whereas his mathematical method led to an altitude a hundred times higher, never applied his method to concrete cases to deduce the height of the aurora, and quickly lost interest in their detailed description, a task that was nevertheless assigned to him at the St. Petersburg Observatory. Jean-Jacques Dortous de Mairan suggests that Mayer’s abandonment was due to his lack of confidence in observations. We set Mayer’s case against that of Leonhard Euler who, working with Mayer and being aware of the great height of the aurora, later developed a system of the aurora borealis that was compatible with the observational fact. We put forward possible hypotheses to explain Mayer’s disinterest in observing the aurora and in the mathematical method he himself had developed.

摘要

我们对弗里德里希·克里斯托夫·梅耶 (Friedrich Christoph Mayer) 的案例很感兴趣，他在 1720 年代在圣彼得堡帝国科学院（拉丁语 Academiae scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae）开发了一套北极光系统以及一种数学方法用于根据极光弧的几何特征计算极光的高度。Mayer 遇到了一个主要矛盾，他的系统将极光置于云层的高度，而他的数学方法却导致高度高出一百倍，从未将他的方法应用于具体案例来推导出极光的高度，并迅速对他们的详细描述失去了兴趣，但圣彼得堡天文台分配给他的任务。Jean-Jacques Dortous de Mairan 认为 Mayer 的放弃是由于他对观察缺乏信心。我们将 Mayer 的案例与 Leonhard Euler 的案例进行对比，Leonhard Euler 与 Mayer 合作并意识到极光的高度，后来开发了一个与观测事实相符的北极光系统。我们提出了可能的假设来解释 Mayer 对观测极光和他自己开发的数学方法不感兴趣。