{"id":1624,"date":"2019-11-09T18:37:34","date_gmt":"2019-11-10T00:37:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/?p=1624"},"modified":"2019-11-09T18:43:16","modified_gmt":"2019-11-10T00:43:16","slug":"almagest-book-iii-hypotheses-for-circular-motion-similarities-in-apparent-apogee-and-perigee-distances","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/2019\/11\/almagest-book-iii-hypotheses-for-circular-motion-similarities-in-apparent-apogee-and-perigee-distances\/","title":{"rendered":"Almagest Book III: Hypotheses for Circular Motion \u2013 Similarities in Apparent Apogee and Perigee Distances"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The last symmetry between the two models Ptolemy wants to point out is that,<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>where the apparent distance of the body from apogee [at one moment] equals its apparent distance from perigee [at another], the equation of anomaly will be the same at both positions.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>Fortunately, the proofs for this are quite simple.<!--more--><\/p>\n<p>We&#8217;ll start off with the eccentric hypothesis with eccentre ABG having center E and an observer at Z.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-7a.jpg?ssl=1\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1625\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-7a.jpg?resize=285%2C300&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"285\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-7a.jpg?resize=285%2C300&amp;ssl=1 285w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-7a.jpg?w=647&amp;ssl=1 647w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 285px) 100vw, 285px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>We&#8217;ll consider the angular distance from apogee at point B, which is $\\angle{AZB}$ and note that this is equal to $\\angle{DZG}$ because they are vertical angles. The two points, B and D, are the ones Ptolemy is referring to. At B the angular distance from apogee is the same as the angular distance point B is from perigee. And B doesn&#8217;t have to be at that specific location. It could be anywhere and there will always be a point D opposite B through Z that meets this criteria.<\/p>\n<p>According to Ptolemy, at these two points, the equation of anomaly<span id='easy-footnote-1-1624' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/2019\/11\/almagest-book-iii-hypotheses-for-circular-motion-similarities-in-apparent-apogee-and-perigee-distances\/#easy-footnote-bottom-1-1624' title='Which means the angular distance between the apparent position and the mean position.'><sup>1<\/sup><\/a><\/span> is equal. To show this, we&#8217;ll draw in lines connecting B and D to E.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-7b.jpg?ssl=1\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1626\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-7b.jpg?resize=285%2C300&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"285\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-7b.jpg?resize=285%2C300&amp;ssl=1 285w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-7b.jpg?w=647&amp;ssl=1 647w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 285px) 100vw, 285px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Here, look at $\\triangle{EBD}$. Since $\\overline{EB}$ and $\\overline{ED}$ are equal (since they&#8217;re both radii), this means that $\\triangle{EBD}$ is isosceles and its base angles, $\\angle EBZ$ and $\\angle EDZ$, must be equal. And since we showed back in <a href=\"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/2019\/10\/almagest-book-iii-hypotheses-for-circular-motion-part-2\/\">this post<\/a> that $\\angle EBZ$ is the equation of anomaly at B, we can use the same logic to state $\\angle EDZ$ is the equation of anomaly at D. Their being equal proves Ptolemy&#8217;s claim.<\/p>\n<p>Next up, we&#8217;ll look at the same argument for the epicyclic model. I&#8217;m not a big fan of the diagram in the book as it&#8217;s hard to understand where it came from so I&#8217;m going to deviate and then bring things back to try to explain what Ptolemy has done.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8a.jpg?ssl=1\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1639\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8a.jpg?resize=239%2C300&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"239\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8a.jpg?resize=239%2C300&amp;ssl=1 239w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8a.jpg?w=614&amp;ssl=1 614w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 239px) 100vw, 239px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>First, let&#8217;s start with the object at Z&#8217; while it&#8217;s at apogee. We&#8217;ll let some interval of time pass recalling that, because we&#8217;re exploring the case where the epicycle rotates clockwise at the same angular speed as the epicycle moves counter-clockwise on the deferent, it will retain it&#8217;s upwards positioning.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8b.jpg?ssl=1\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1640\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8b.jpg?resize=256%2C300&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"256\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8b.jpg?resize=256%2C300&amp;ssl=1 256w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8b.jpg?w=657&amp;ssl=1 657w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 256px) 100vw, 256px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Now, the point that the object was on the epicycle (Z&#8217;) is now called E and the object has moved to point Z. We&#8217;ll draw in $\\overline{DZ}$ which represents the line of sight for the observer. From the observer&#8217;s point of view, the angular distance of the object from apogee is $\\angle Z&#8217; D Z$. However, <a href=\"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/2019\/10\/almagest-book-iii-hypotheses-for-circular-motion-part-2\/\">in this post<\/a>, we showed that this angle is equal to $\\angle{AZD}$<span id='easy-footnote-2-1624' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/2019\/11\/almagest-book-iii-hypotheses-for-circular-motion-similarities-in-apparent-apogee-and-perigee-distances\/#easy-footnote-bottom-2-1624' title='Except there we called it $\\angle{AHD}$.'><sup>2<\/sup><\/a><\/span>.<\/p>\n<p>Now, let&#8217;s continue letting time pass until the object is the same angular distance before the perigee as the previous image was from apogee:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8c.jpg?ssl=1\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1641\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8c.jpg?resize=250%2C300&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"250\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8c.jpg?resize=250%2C300&amp;ssl=1 250w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8c.jpg?w=657&amp;ssl=1 657w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 250px) 100vw, 250px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>Here, I&#8217;ve renamed the object from Z to H. You&#8217;ll see why in a moment.<\/p>\n<p>As with before, $\\overline{DH}$ is the line of sight to the object and so it is apparent distance from perigee of $\\angle{HDG}$, which is the same as $\\angle{BHA}$ and, as required by the hypothesis is also equal to $\\angle{A&#8217; D A}$ which in turn was equal to $\\angle{AZD}$ as discussed above. Therefore these two angles ($\\angle{BHA}$ and $\\angle{AZD}$) are equal.<\/p>\n<p>But they&#8217;re not the equations of anomaly, so we&#8217;ll still need to do a bit more work. To get us to the equation of anomaly, I&#8217;ll now switch back to Ptolemy&#8217;s proof <span id='easy-footnote-3-1624' class='easy-footnote-margin-adjust'><\/span><span class='easy-footnote'><a href='https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/2019\/11\/almagest-book-iii-hypotheses-for-circular-motion-similarities-in-apparent-apogee-and-perigee-distances\/#easy-footnote-bottom-3-1624' title='Or at least how Toomer illustrated it in the book I&amp;#8217;m using.'><sup>3<\/sup><\/a><\/span> in which he stacked these three images on top of one another:<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8.jpg?ssl=1\"><img data-recalc-dims=\"1\" loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-1643\" src=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8.jpg?resize=240%2C300&#038;ssl=1\" alt=\"\" width=\"240\" height=\"300\" srcset=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8.jpg?resize=240%2C300&amp;ssl=1 240w, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/AlmagestFig3-8.jpg?w=614&amp;ssl=1 614w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 240px) 100vw, 240px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>This seems really odd to do but it ends up working out. To understand why, take a look at $\\triangle{AHZ}$. This is a triangle with $\\overline{ZH}$ as its base and we just proved that the two base angles were equal. The sides are equal because they&#8217;re both radii. So even if it&#8217;s an odd way of doing things, geometrically it all works out. And what falls out of it is rather magical: We see that H falls on the same line, $\\overline{DZ}$ as Z which forms the same angle, $\\angle{ADZ}$. This shows that they both have the same equation of anomaly again proving Ptolemy&#8217;s claim.<\/p>\n<p>In both of these cases, Ptolemy gives one more statement without proof stating that:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>the mean motion exceeds the apparent near the apogee (i.e. $\\angle{EAZ}$ exceeds $\\angle{AZD}$ by the same equation (namely $\\angle{ADH}$ as the mean motion is exceeded by the (same) apparent motion (i.e. $\\angle{HAD}$ by $\\angle{AHZ}$) near the perigee.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>However, since Ptolemy does not delve into this any deeper I shall refrain from doing so as well.<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The last symmetry between the two models Ptolemy wants to point out is that, where the apparent distance of the body from apogee [at one moment] equals its apparent distance from perigee [at another], the equation of anomaly will be the same at both positions. Fortunately, the proofs for this are quite simple.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[24],"tags":[25,28,26,14],"class_list":["post-1624","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-almagest","tag-almagest","tag-geometry","tag-mathematics","tag-ptolemy"],"acf":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9ZpvC-qc","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1624","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1624"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1624\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1649,"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1624\/revisions\/1649"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1624"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1624"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jonvoisey.net\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1624"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}