Almagest Book IX: Exploring Mercury’s Double Perigee

As a general rule, I try to stay away from using too much modern math as I work through the Almagest. The goal of this project is to try to understand how astronomers worked in a historical context – not simply examining their work through a modern lens.

However, Ptolemy’s discussion around Mercury has been greatly frustrating me. There’s several reasons for this. A large one is certainly that the language Ptolemy used is clunky which is challenging for a model that is so complex.

Therefore, I want to dig deeper into what’s happening with the double perigee and make sure I fully understand it. In particular, I previously showed a diagram from Pedersen which looked at the path the center of the epicycle would trace out for various eccentricities. This graphically showed the distance from earth over time, but I wanted something more quantitative, so in this post, we’ll derive an equation to determine the distance between the center of Mercury’s epicycle and earth as a function of  the angle from apogee.

This method comes straight from Pedersen but I’ll be doing it in the context of Toomer’s translation1.

As usual, let’s start with a diagram:

 

By and large, this image is what we’ve seen before. $\overline{AG}$ is the line of apsides. Points $Z$, $D$, and $E$ are the same as they were when we set up Mercury’s model. In other words, $Z$ is the point around which the eccentre that carries the epicycle rotates clockwise, $H$ is its geometric center, $D$ is the point about which Mercury itself rotates counter-clockwise, and $E$ is the observer on earth.

As we discussed when we set up Mercury’s model, $\overline{ED} = \overline{DZ} = \overline{ZH}$. Instead, of typing these out every time, we’ll just use a shorthand and call that length $e$ as it is a constant in this model.

Similarly, we’ll also call $\overline{KH}$ (the radius of the eccentre the epicycle rides on) $R$ as this is also a constant.

Lastly, $\angle AZH$ is always equal and opposite $\angle ADK$. We’ll call these angles $\Theta$.

We’ve connected points $H$ to $K$ and $K$ to $E$. We’ve also extended $\overline{KD}$ to point $B$ where we’ve dropped a perpendicular on it from $H$.

So, let’s get started on the derivation.

First, we’ll concentrate on $\triangle ZDH$. In this triangle, $\angle DZH = 180º – \Theta$ as it’s the supplemental angle to $\Theta$.

This is also an isosceles triangle since two of its sides $\overline{DZ}$ and $\overline{ZH}$ are equal. This means that, within this triangle, $\angle ZDH = \angle ZHD$.

We can solve for these angles since the angles in a triangle add up to $180º$ and we know what the third angle is.

Thus:

$$\angle ZDH + \angle ZHD = 180º – (180º – \Theta)$$

$$\angle ZDH + \angle ZHD = \Theta$$

Since these angles are equal,

$$\angle ZDH = \angle ZHD = \frac{\Theta}{2}$$

Next, we’ll start looking at the angles about $D$. We already stated that $\angle ZDK = \Theta$ as this is part of the hypothesis/model. We also just solved for $\angle ZDH$. So this means the only piece left on $\overline{KB}$ is $\angle{HDB}$ and the sum of these three angles must be $180º$ since they add up to the straight line.

Thus, we can write:

$$\angle DZK + \angle ZDH + \angle HDB = 180º$$

And substituting in:

$$\Theta + \frac{\Theta}{2} + \angle HDB = 180º$$

Solving for $\angle HDB$ and simplifying:

$$\angle HDB = 180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2}$$

Next, we’ll want to start working on $\triangle DHB$, but we’ll start by returning to $\triangle ZDH$ and find the shared side, $\overline{ZH}$.

Again, this triangle is isosceles, so we’ll divide it in half about $Z$. This allows us to state:

$$cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) = \frac{\frac{1}{2} \overline{DH}}{e}$$

Solving:

$$\overline{DH} = 2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2})$$

Now, we know both an angle and the hypotenuse in $\triangle DHB$, so we can go ahead and solve the other two sides. I’ll start with $\overline{BH}$:

$$sin(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2}) = \frac{\overline{BH}}{\overline{DH}}$$

$$\overline{BH} = \overline{DH} \cdot sin(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2})$$

And substituting in for $\overline{DH}$:

$$\overline{BH} = 2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) \cdot sin(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2})$$

Next, we’ll solve for $\overline{DB}$ in the same triangle:

$$cos(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2}) = \frac{\overline{DB}}{\overline{DH}}$$

$$\overline{DB} = \overline{DH} \cdot cos(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2})$$

$$\overline{DB} = 2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) \cdot cos(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2})$$

Next, we’ll turn our attention to $\triangle KBH$.

First, $\overline{KB} = \overline{KD} + \overline{DB}$. We don’t know $\overline{KD}$ currently, so let’s work on that.

This triangle is a right triangle, so applying the Pythagoren theorem we have:

$$\overline{KH}^2 = R^2 – \overline{BH}$$

Substituting in some:

$$(\overline{KD} + \overline{DB})^2 = R^2 – [2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) \cdot sin(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2})]^2$$

$$\overline{KD} + \overline{DB} = \sqrt{R^2 – [2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) \cdot sin(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2})]^2}$$

And solving for $\overline{KD}$:

$$\overline{KD} = \sqrt{R^2 – [2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) \cdot sin(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2})]^2} – \overline{DB}$$

And substituting in for $\overline{DB}$:

$$\overline{KD} = \sqrt{R^2 – [2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) \cdot sin(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2})]^2} – 2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) \cdot cos(180 – \frac{3 \Theta}{2})$$

We can do a bit of simplification using the identities $cos(180º – \Theta) = – cos (\Theta)$ and $sin(180º – \Theta) = sin(\Theta)$.

$$\overline{KD} = \sqrt{R^2 – [2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) \cdot sin(\frac{3 \Theta}{2})]^2} + 2e \cdot cos(\frac{\theta}{2}) \cdot cos(\frac{3 \Theta}{2})$$

Finally, we can turn to $\triangle KDE$. In it, we know that $\angle KDE = 180º – \Theta$ as it’s the supplement to $\angle ADK$. We also just solved for one side, $\overline{KD}$.

It’s not a right triangle, so we’ll need to use the law of cosines to solve for $\overline{KE}$ which is what we’re really after here as it’s the distance from earth at any given value of $\Theta$.

$$\overline{KE} = \sqrt{\overline{KD}^2 + e^2 – 2 \cdot \overline{KD} \cdot e \cdot cos(180 – \Theta)}$$

I could substitute in for $\overline{KD}$ but this is already messy enough2 . So I’ll just simplify the final $cos$ term again.

$$\overline{KE} = \sqrt{\overline{KD}^2 + e^2 + 2 \cdot \overline{KD} \cdot e \cdot cos(\Theta)}$$

I’ve turned this into a Google sheet to see how it behaves3. There’s an obvious question of what values to use for $e$ and $R$, so I’ll jump ahead and tell you now that Ptolemy will get a value of $e = 3^p$ when $R = 60^p$.

We can plot that, and in doing so, get the following:

While there is clearly a double minimum here (indicating a double perigee), we can’t tell directly from the graph where it is. However, since the points I calculated were $0.1º$ apart, we can look at the data set to get a pretty good understanding.

Doing so, I find the minimum values at $120.5º$ and $239.5º$ (from apogee). This means that, if apogee is $10º$ into Libra, which places the nearest points in Gemini and Aquarius and is consistent with what Ptolemy reported in the last post.


 

  1. I.e., use the lettering from Toomer’s diagram to maintain consistency.
  2. And this is about to get dumped into a Google Sheet in which we can just calculate $\overline{KD}$ and then reference it.
  3. Feel free to make a copy of this Sheet and play with the ratios yourself!