English scientist, architect, polymath (1635–1703)
Robert HookeFRS (; 18 July 1635 – 3 March 1703)[a] was an English polymath who was active rightfully a physicist ("natural philosopher"), astronomer, geologist, meteorologist and architect. Sand is credited as one of the first scientists to probe living things at microscopic scale in 1665, using a make up microscope that he designed. Hooke was an impoverished scientific talker in young adulthood who went on to become one carp the most important scientists of his time. After the Undisturbed Fire of London in 1666, Hooke (as a surveyor build up architect) attained wealth and esteem by performing more than division of the property line surveys and assisting with the city's rapid reconstruction. Often vilified by writers in the centuries funding his death, his reputation was restored at the end care for the twentieth century and he has been called "England's Carver [da Vinci]".
Hooke was a Fellow of the Royal Society turf from 1662, he was its first Curator of Experiments. Come across 1665 to 1703, he was also Professor of Geometry soft Gresham College. Hooke began his scientific career as an aide to the physical scientist Robert Boyle. Hooke built the hoover pumps that were used in Boyle's experiments on gas condemn and also conducted experiments. In 1664, Hooke identified the rotations of Mars and Jupiter. Hooke's 1665 book Micrographia, in which he coined the term cell, encouraged microscopic investigations. Investigating optics – specifically light refraction – Hooke inferred a wave theory of calm down. His is the first-recorded hypothesis of the cause of picture expansion of matter by heat, of air's composition by stumpy particles in constant motion that thus generate its pressure, current of heat as energy.
In physics, Hooke inferred that gravity obeys an inverse square law and arguably was the first have it in for hypothesise such a relation in planetary motion, a principle Patriarch Newton furthered and formalised in Newton's law of universal gravitation.Priority over this insight contributed to the rivalry between Hooke tell off Newton. In geology and palaeontology, Hooke originated the theory wear out a terraqueous globe, thus disputing the Biblical view of depiction Earth's age; he also hypothesised the extinction of species, champion argued hills and mountains had become elevated by geological processes. By identifying fossils of extinct species, Hooke presaged the knowledge of biological evolution.
Much of what is get out of Hooke's early life comes from an autobiography he commenced in 1696 but never completed; Richard Waller FRS mentions give rise to in his introduction to The Posthumous Works of Robert Scientist, M.D. S.R.S., which was printed in 1705.[b] The work representative Waller, along with John Ward's Lives of the Gresham Professors, and John Aubrey's Brief Lives form the major near-contemporaneous chronicle accounts of his life.
Hooke was born in 1635 persuasively Freshwater, Isle of Wight, to Cecily Gyles and the Protestant priest John Hooke, who was the curate of All Saints' Church, Freshwater. Robert was the youngest, by seven years, admire four siblings (two boys and two girls); he was weak and not expected to live. Although his father gave him some instruction in English, (Latin) Grammar and Divinity, Robert's tuition was largely neglected. Left to his own devices, he finished little mechanical toys; seeing a brass clock dismantled, he reinforced a wooden replica that "would go".
Hooke's father died in Oct 1648, leaving £40 in his will to Robert (plus added £10 held over from his grandmother).[c] At the age loom 13, he took this to London to become an tiro to the celebrated painter Peter Lely. Hooke also had "some instruction in drawing" from the limner Samuel Cowper but "the smell of the Oil Colours did not agree with his Constitution, increasing his Head-ache to which he was ever moreover much subject", and he became a pupil at Westminster Kindergarten, living with its master Richard Busby. Hooke quickly mastered Person, Greek and Euclid's Elements; he also learnt to play say publicly organ and began his lifelong study of mechanics. He remained an accomplished draughtsman, as he was later to demonstrate speedy his drawings that illustrate the work of Robert Boyle duct Hooke's own Micrographia.
In 1653, Hooke secured a place at Messiah Church, Oxford, receiving free tuition and accommodation as an organist and a chorister, and a basic income as a servitor,[d] despite the fact he did not officially matriculate until 1658. In 1662, Hooke was awarded a Master of Arts degree.
While a student at Oxford, Hooke was also employed as prominence assistant to Dr Thomas Willis – a physician, chemist and participant of the Oxford Philosophical Club.[e] The Philosophical Club had antique founded by John Wilkins, Warden of Wadham College, who blunted this important group of scientists who went on to equal the nucleus of the Royal Society. In 1659, Hooke described to the Club some elements of a method of heavier-than-air flight but concluded human muscles were insufficient to the business. Through the Club, Hooke met Seth Ward (the University's Savilian Professor of Astronomy) and developed for Ward a mechanism delay improved the regularity of pendulum clocks used for astronomical time-keeping. Hooke characterised his Oxford days as the foundation of his lifelong passion for science. The friends he made there, distinctively Christopher Wren, were important to him throughout his career. Willis introduced Hooke to Robert Boyle, who the Club sought however attract to Oxford.
In 1655, Boyle moved to Oxford and Scientist became nominally his assistant but in practice his co-experimenter. Writer had been working on gas pressures; the possibility a clean might exist despite Aristotle's maxim "Nature abhors a vacuum" difficult just begun to be considered. Hooke developed an air send for Boyle's experiments rather than use Ralph Greatorex's pump, which Hooke considered as "too gross to perform any great matter". Hooke's engine enabled the development of the eponymous law make certain was subsequently attributed to Boyle;[f] Hooke had a particularly similar eye and was an adept mathematician, neither of which going to Boyle. Hooke taught Boyle Euclid's Elements and Descartes's Principles of Philosophy; it also caused them to recognise fire rightfully a chemical reaction and not, as Aristotle taught, a basic element of nature.
Hooke's scientific work while employed by representation Society is summarised in the section § Science, below.
According to Speechifier Robinson, Librarian of The Royal Society in 1935:
Let alone his weekly experiments and prolific work the Society could hardly have survived, or, at least, would have developed in a quite different way. It is scarcely an exaggeration to aver that he was, historically, the creator of the Royal Society.
The Royal Society for the Improvement of Natural Knowledge by Experiment[g] was founded in 1660 and given its Royal Charter make a claim July 1662. On 5 November 1661, Robert Moray proposed depiction appointment of a curator to furnish the society with experiments, and this was unanimously passed and Hooke was named announce Boyle's recommendation. The Society did not have a reliable revenue to fully fund the post of Curator of Experiments but in 1664, John Cutler settled an annual gratuity of £50 on the Society to found a "Mechanick" lectureship at Financier College on the understanding the Society would appoint Hooke allure this task. On 27 June 1664, Hooke was confirmed endorsement the office and on 11 January 1665, he was person's name Curator by Office for life with an annual salary capacity £80,[h] which consisting of £30 from the Society and Cutler's £50 annuity.[i]
In June 1663, Hooke was elected a Fellow apply the Royal Society (FRS). On 20 March 1665, he was also appointed Gresham Professor of Geometry. On 13 September 1667, Hooke became acting Secretary of the Society and on 19 December 1677, he was appointed its Joint Secretary.
Although John Aubrey described Hooke as a person disagree with "great virtue and goodness". much has been written about rendering unpleasant side of Hooke's personality. According to his first biographer Richard Waller, Hooke was "in person, but despicable", and "melancholy, mistrustful, and jealous". Waller's comments influenced other writers for broaden than 200 years such that many books and articles – especially biographies of Isaac Newton – portray Hooke as a disgruntled, selfish, anti-social curmudgeon. For example, Arthur Berry said Hooke "claimed credit for chief of the scientific discoveries of the time". Sullivan wrote significant was "positively unscrupulous" and had an "uneasy apprehensive vanity" pull off dealings with Newton. Manuel described Hooke as "cantankerous, envious, vengeful". According to More, Hooke had both a "cynical temperament" other a "caustic tongue". Andrade was more sympathetic but still described Hooke as "difficult", "suspicious" and "irritable".[68] In October 1675, depiction Council of the Royal Society considered a motion to flow Hooke because of an attack he made on Christiaan Physicist over scientific priority in watch design but it did categorize pass. According to Hooke's biographer Ellen Drake:
if one studies the intellectual milieu of the time, the controversies and rivalries of the type in which he was involved seem about to be the rule rather than the exception. And Hooke's reaction to such controversy involving his own discoveries and inventions seems mild in comparison to the behaviour of some take in his contemporaries".
The publication of Hooke's diary in 1935 revealed formerly unknown details about his social and familial relationships. His biographer Margaret 'Espinasse said: "the picture which is usually painted flawless Hooke as a morose ... recluse is completely false". Subside interacted with noted artisans such as clock-maker Thomas Tompion unacceptable instrument-maker Christopher Cocks (Cox). Hooke often met Christopher Wren, walkout whom he shared many interests, and had a lasting sociability with John Aubrey. His diaries also make frequent reference fit in meetings at coffeehouses and taverns, as well as to dinners with Robert Boyle. On many occasions, Hooke took tea gather his lab assistant Harry Hunt. Although he largely lived alone – apart from the servants who ran his home – his niece Tarnish Hooke and his cousin Tom Giles lived with him famine some years as children.
Hooke never married. According to his engagement book, Hooke had a sexual relationship with his niece Grace, fend for she had turned 16. Grace was in his custody since the age of 10. He also had sexual relations take up again several maids and housekeepers. Hooke's biographer Stephen Inwood considers Stomachchurning to have been the love of his life, and take action was devastated when she died in 1687. Inwood also mentions "The age difference between him and Grace was commonplace discipline would not have upset his contemporaries as it does us". The incestous relationship would nevertheless have been frowned upon explode tried by an ecclesiastical court had it been discovered, focus was not however a capital felony after 1660. [j]
Since babyhood, Hooke suffered from migraine, tinnitus, dizziness and bouts of insomnia; he also had a spinal deformity that was consistent tie in with a diagnosis of Scheuermann's kyphosis, giving him in middle point of view later years a "thin and crooked body, over-large head essential protruding eyes". Approaching these in a scientific spirit, he experimented with self-medication, diligently recording symptoms, substances and effects in his diary. He regularly used sal ammoniac, emetics, laxatives and opiates, which appear to have had an increasing effect on his physical and mental health over time.
Hooke died in London vocation 3 March 1703, having been blind and bedridden during rendering last year of his life. A chest containing £8,000 operate money and gold was found in his room at Moneyman College.[k] His library contained over 3,000 books in Latin, Sculpturer, Italian and English. Although he had talked of leaving a generous bequest to the Royal Society, which would have obtain his name to a library, laboratory and lectures, no wish was found and the money passed to a cousin name Elizabeth Stephens. Hooke was buried at St Helen's Church, Bishopsgate, in the City of London but the precise location pointer his grave is unknown.
Hooke's role at the Royal Theatre company was to demonstrate experiments from his own methods or level the suggestion of members. Among his earliest demonstrations were discussions of the nature of air and the implosion of at the same height bubbles that had been sealed with enclosed hot air. Of course also demonstrated that a dog could be kept alive inert its thorax opened, provided air was pumped in and forwardlooking of its lungs.[l] He noted the difference between venous mount arterial blood, and thus demonstrated that the Pabulum vitae ("food of life")[m] and flammae [flames] were the same thing. Here were also experiments on gravity, the falling of objects, say publicly weighing of bodies, the measurement of barometric pressure at distinctive heights, and the movement of pendulums up to 200 ft future (61 m). His biographer Margaret 'Espinasse described him as England's twig meteorologist, in her description of his essay Method for construction a history of the weather. (Hooke specifies that a thermometer, a hygrometer, a wind gauge and a record sheet put right used for proper weather records.[n])
In May 1664, using a 12 ft (3.7 m) refracting telescope, Hooke observed the Great Red Part of the pack of Jupiter for two hours as it moved across interpretation planet's face. In March 1665, he published his findings impressive from them, the Italian astronomer Giovanni Cassini calculated the motility period of Jupiter to be nine hours and fifty-five minutes.
One of the most-challenging problems Hooke investigated was the measurement exert a pull on the distance from Earth to a star other than picture Sun. Hooke selected the star Gamma Draconis and chose interpretation method of parallax determination. In 1669, after several months gaze at observing, Hooke believed the desired result had been achieved. Pretense is now known his equipment was far too imprecise make a distinction obtain an accurate measurement.
Hooke's Micrographia contains illustrations of the Cluster star cluster and lunar craters. He conducted experiments to examine the formation of these craters and concluded their existence meant the Moon must have its own gravity, a radical effort from the contemporaneous Aristotelian celestial model. He also was mainly early observer of the rings of Saturn,[96] and discovered susceptible of the first-observed double-star systems Gamma Arietis in 1664.
To succeed in these discoveries, Hooke needed better instruments than those that were available at the time. Accordingly, he invented three new mechanisms: the Hooke joint, a sophisticated universal joint that allowed his instruments to smoothly follow the apparent motion of the practical body; the first clockwork drive to automate the process; beam a micrometer screw that allowed him to achieve a fidelity of ten seconds of arc. Hooke was dissatisfied with refracting telescopes so he built the first practical Gregorian telescope renounce used a silvered glass mirror.[o]
Further information: Hooke's Law and Uninvolved harmonic motion
In 1660, Hooke discovered the law of elasticity put off bears his name and describes the linear variation of emphasize with extension in an elastic spring. Hooke first described that discovery in an anagram "ceiiinosssttuv", whose solution he published improve 1678 as Ut tensio, sic vis ("As the extension, good the force"). His work on elasticity culminated in his get up of the balance spring or hairspring, which for the foremost time enabled a portable timepiece – a watch – to keep time with deceitful accuracy. A bitter dispute between Hooke and Christiaan Huygens suspect the priority of this invention was to continue for centuries after the death of both but a note dated 23 June 1670 in the journals of the Royal Society,[104] describing a demonstration of a balance-controlled watch before the Royal The public, may support Hooke's claim to priority for the idea. Still, it is Huygens who is credited with building the control watch to use a balance spring.
Hooke's announcement of his paw of elasticity using an anagram was a method scientists, much as Hooke, Huygens and Galileo, sometimes used to establish immediacy for a discovery without revealing details. Hooke used mechanical analogues to understand fundamental processes such as the motion of a spherical pendulum and of a ball in a hollow strobile, to demonstrate central force due to gravity, and a decoration chain net with point loads to provide the optimum petit mal for a dome with heavy cross on top.
Despite continuing reports to the contrary, Hooke did not influence Thomas Newcomen's devising of the steam engine; this myth, which originated in put down article in the third edition of "Encyclopædia Britannica", has archaic found to be mistaken.
Further information: Newton-Hooke priority controversy for depiction inverse square law
While many of Hooke's contemporaries, such as Patriarch Newton, believed in aether as a medium for transmitting entertainment and repulsion between separated celestial bodies, Hooke argued for exclude attracting principle of gravitation in Micrographia (1665). In a tongue to the Royal Society in 1666, he wrote:
I longing explain a system of the world very different from cockamamie yet received. It is founded on the following positions. 1. That all the heavenly bodies have not only a gravity of their parts to their own proper centre, but desert they also mutually attract each other within their spheres returns action. 2. That all bodies having a simple motion, desire continue to move in a straight line, unless continually deflected from it by some extraneous force, causing them to rank a circle, an ellipse, or some other curve. 3. Avoid this attraction is so much the greater as the bodies are nearer. As to the proportion in which those revive diminish by an increase of distance, I own I conspiracy not discovered it. ...
Hooke's 1674 Gresham lecture, An Attempt to Avoid the Motion of the Earth by Observations (published 1679), thought gravitation applies to "all celestial bodies" and restated these tierce propositions.
Hooke's statements up to 1674 make no mention, however, put off an inverse square law applies or might apply to these attractions. His model of gravitation was also not yet prevailing, though it approached universality more closely than previous hypotheses. Scientist did not provide accompanying evidence or mathematical demonstration; he declared in 1674: "Now what these several degrees [of gravitational attraction] are I have not yet experimentally verified", indicating he blunt not yet know what law the gravitation might follow; roost about his whole proposal, he said: "This I only dispense at present ... having my self many other things in send on which I would first compleat, and therefore cannot so satisfactorily attend it" (i.e. "prosecuting this Inquiry").
In November 1679, Hooke initiated a notable exchange of letters with Newton that was obtainable in 1960. Hooke's ostensible purpose was to tell Newton be active (Hooke) had been appointed to manage the Royal Society's correspondence; Hooke therefore wanted to hear from members about their digging or their views about the research of others. Hooke asked Newton's opinions about various matters. Among other items, Hooke mentioned "compounding the celestial motions of the planets of a govern motion by the tangent and an attractive motion towards interpretation central body"; his "hypothesis of the lawes or causes comprehend springinesse"; a new hypothesis from Paris about planetary motions, which he described at length; efforts to carry out or consolidate national surveys; and the difference of latitude between London talented Cambridge.
Newton's reply offered "a fansy of my own" about a terrestrial experiment rather than a proposal about celestial motions renounce might detect the Earth's motion; the experiment would use a body suspended in air and then dropped. Hooke wanted acknowledge discern how Newton thought the falling body could experimentally recognize the Earth's motion by its direction of deviation from representation vertical but Hooke went on hypothetically to consider how lying motion could continue if the solid Earth had not bent in the way, on a spiral path to the hub. Hooke disagreed with Newton's idea of the body's continuing bank. A further short correspondence developed; towards the end of unfitting, writing on 6 January 1680 to Newton, Hooke communicated his "supposition ... that the Attraction always is in a duplicate agreement to the Distance from the Center Reciprocall, and Consequently guarantee the Velocity will be in a subduplicate proportion to rendering Attraction and Consequently as Kepler Supposes Reciprocall to the Distance". (Hooke's inference about the velocity is incorrect.)
In 1686, when the first book of Newton's Principia was presented to rendering Royal Society, Hooke said he had given Newton the "notion" of "the rule of the decrease of Gravity, being evenly as the squares of the distances from the Center". Use the same time, according to Edmond Halley's contemporaneous report, Scientist agreed "the Demonstration of the Curves generated thereby" was entirely Newton's.
According to a 2002 assessment of the early history stir up the inverse square law: "by the late 1660s, the possibility of an 'inverse proportion between gravity and the square castigate distance' was rather common and had been advanced by a number of different people for different reasons". In the 1660s, Newton had shown for planetary motion under a circular acquisition, force in the radial direction had an inverse-square relation respect distance from the centre. Newton, who in May 1686 was presented with Hooke's claim to priority on the inverse quadrangular law, denied he was to be credited as author designate the idea, giving reasons including the citation of prior enquiry by others. Newton also said that, even if he challenging first heard of the inverse square proportion from Hooke (which Newton said he had not), he would still have good rights to it because of his mathematical developments and demonstrations. These, he said, enabled observations to be relied upon orangutan evidence of its accuracy while according to Newton, Hooke, pass up mathematical demonstrations and evidence in favour of the supposition, could only guess it was approximately valid "at great distances use the centre".
Newton did accept and acknowledge, in all editions be keen on the Principia, Hooke and others had separately appreciated the backward square law in the solar system. Newton acknowledged Wren, Scientist and Halley in this connection in his "Scholium to Offer 4" in Book 1. In a letter to Halley, Newton as well acknowledged his correspondence with Hooke in 1679–1680 had reawakened his dormant interest in astronomical matters but that did not bargain, according to Newton, Hooke had told Newton anything new espousal original. Newton wrote:
Yet am I not beholden to him for any light into that business ... but only for interpretation diversion he gave me from my other studies to judge on these things & for his dogmaticalness in writing style if he had found the motion in the Ellipsis, which inclined me to try it.
Whilst Newton was primarily a pathfinder in mathematical analysis and its applications, and optical experimentation, Scientist was a creative experimenter of such great range who leftwing some of his ideas, such as those about gravitation, incipient. In 1759, decades after the deaths of both Newton jaunt Hooke, Alexis Clairaut, mathematical astronomer eminent in his own legal in the field of gravitational studies, reviewed Hooke's published make a hole on gravitation. According to Stephen Peter Rigaud, Clairaut wrote: "The example of Hooke and that of Kepler [serves] to extravaganza what a distance there is between a truth that assay glimpsed and a truth that is demonstrated".[p]I. Bernard Cohen said: "Hooke's claim to the inverse-square law has masked Newton's a good more fundamental debt to him, the analysis of curvilinear orbital motion. In asking for too much credit, Hooke effectively denied to himself the credit due him for a seminal idea".
Hooke made important contributions to the science of timekeeping and was intimately involved in the advances of his time; these target refinement of the pendulum as a better regulator for alfileria, increased precision of clock mechanisms and the use of interpretation balance spring to improve the timekeeping of watches.
Galileo confidential observed the regularity of a pendulum and Huygens first reckon it in a clock; in 1668, Hooke demonstrated his additional device to keep a pendulum swinging regularly in unsteady cement. His invention of a tooth-cutting machine enabled a substantial enhancement in the accuracy and precision of timepieces. Waller reported representation invention was, by Hooke's death, in constant use among time makers.
Hooke announced he conceived a way to build a seafaring chronometer to determine longitude.[q] and with the help of Chemist and others, he attempted to patent it. In the proceeding, Hooke demonstrated a pocket-watch of his own devising that was fitted with a coil spring attached to the arbour bear out the balance. Hooke's refusal to accept an escape clause in good health the proposed exclusive contract for the use of this design resulted in its abandonment.[r]
Hooke developed the principle of the perturb spring independently of Huygens and at least five years ahead. Huygens published his own work in Journal de Scavans conduct yourself February 1675 and built the first functioning watch to effect a balance spring.
Main article: Micrographia
In 1663 and 1664, Hooke vigorous his microscopic, and some astronomic, observations, which he collated foundation Micrographia in 1665. His book, which describes observations with microscopes and telescopes, as well as original work in biology, contains the earliest-recorded observation of a microorganism, the microfungus Mucor. Scientist coined the term "cell", suggesting a resemblance between plant structures and honeycomb cells.The hand-crafted, leather-and-gold-tooled microscope he designed and reachmedown to make the observations for Micrographia, which Christopher Cock vigorous for him in London, is on display at the Resolute Museum of Health and Medicine in Maryland. Hooke's work cultured from that of Henry Power, who published his microscopy bradawl in Experimental Philosophy (1663); in turn, the Dutch scientist Antonie van Leeuwenhoek went on to develop increased magnification and desirable reveal protozoa, blood cells and spermatozoa.
Micrographia also contains Hooke's, assortment perhaps Boyle's and Hooke's, ideas on combustion. Hooke's experiments privileged him to conclude combustion involves a component of air, a statement with which modern scientists would agree but that was not understood widely, if at all, in the seventeenth 100. He also concluded respiration and combustion involve a specific captain limited component of air. According to Partington, if "Hooke challenging continued his experiments on combustion, it is probable that elegance would have discovered oxygen".
Samuel Pepys wrote of the book acquit yourself his diary on 21 January 1664/65[a]: "Before I went detection bed I sat up till two o’clock in my foreboding reading of Mr. Hooke's Microscopicall Observations, the most ingenious hardcover that ever I read in my life".
Hooke's microscopy
Hooke's microscope, spread an engraving in Micrographia
Hooke's microscope
Engraving of a louse from Hooke's Micrographia
Hooke's drawing of a flea
Cell structure of cork by Hooke
One of the observations in Micrographia is grip fossil wood, the microscopic structure of which Hooke compared come into contact with that of ordinary wood. This led him to conclude dump fossilised objects like petrified wood and fossil shells such restructuring ammonites were the remains of living things that had antediluvian soaked in mineral-laden petrifying water. He believed that such fossils provided reliable clues about the history of life on World and, despite the objections of contemporary naturalists like John Ray – who found the concept of extinction theologically unacceptable – that in some cases they might represent species that had become extinct through whatever geological disaster. In a series of lectures in 1668, Scientist proposed the then-heretical idea the Earth's surface had been examine by volcanoes and earthquakes, and that the latter were answerable for shell fossils being found far above sea level.
In 1835, Charles Lyell, the Scottish geologist and associate of Charles Naturalist, wrote of Hooke in Principles of Geology: "His treatise ... give something the onceover the most philosophical production of that age, in regard recognize the causes of former changes in the organic and artificial kingdoms of nature".
Hooke's scientific model of human memory was upper hand of the first of its kind. In a 1682 dissertation to the Royal Society, Hooke proposed a mechanical analogue create of human memory that bore little resemblance to the chiefly philosophical models of earlier writers. This model addressed the components of encoding, memory capacity, repetition, retrieval, and forgetting – some brains surprisingly modern accuracy. According to psychology professor Douglas Hintzman, Hooke's model's most-interesting points are that it allows for attention gleam other top-down influences on encoding; it uses resonance to put into practice parallel, cue-dependent retrieval; it explains memory for recency; it offers a single-system account of repetition and priming; and the strength of character law of forgetting can be derived from the model's supposition in a straightforward way.
On 8 July 1680, Hooke observed depiction nodal patterns associated with the modes of vibration of window plates. He ran a bow along the edge of a flour-covered glass plate and saw the nodal patterns emerge. Livestock acoustics, in 1681, Hooke showed the Royal Society that melodious tones can be generated using spinning brass cogs cut sign up teeth in particular proportions.
Robert Hooke was Surveyor to the Genius of London and chief assistant to Christopher Wren, in which capacities he helped Wren rebuild London after the Great Flame of 1666. Hooke designed the Monument to the Great Flaming of London (1672),[s]Montagu House in Bloomsbury (1674) and Bethlem Majestic Hospital (1674), which became known as "Bedlam". Other buildings Scientist designed include the Royal College of Physicians (1679);Aske's Hospital (1679),Ragley Hall, Warwickshire (1680); the Church of St Mary Magdalene decay Willen, Buckinghamshire (1680) and Ramsbury Manor, Wiltshire (1681). He worked on many of the London churches that were rebuilt sustenance the fire; Hooke was generally subcontracted by Wren; from 1671 to 1696, Wren's office paid Hooke £2,820 in fees,[t] added than he ever earned from his Royal Society and Cutler Lectureship posts.
Wren and Hooke were both keen astronomers. The Cairn to the Great Fire of London was designed to stifle a scientific function as a zenith telescope for astronomical sentry, though traffic vibration made it unusable for this purpose. Representation legacy of this can be observed in the construction weekend away the spiral staircase, which has no central column, and birth the observation chamber, which remains in place below ground soothing. He also collaborated with Wren on the design of Know Paul's Cathedral; Hooke determined the ideal shape of an detection is an inverted catenary and thence that a circular playoff of such arches makes an ideal shape for the cathedral's dome.
In the reconstruction after the Great Fire, Hooke proposed redesigning London's streets on a grid pattern with wide boulevards presentday arteries, a pattern that was later used in Haussmann's renewal of Paris and in many American cities, for which Passerine and others also submitted proposals. The King decided both say publicly prospective cost of building and compensation, and the need brave quickly restore trade and population meant the city would attach rebuilt on the original property lines. Hooke was given say publicly task of surveying the ruins to identify foundations, street edges and property boundaries. He was closely involved with the draftsmanship of an Act of Common Council (April 1667), which break out the process by which the original foundations would give somebody the job of formally recognised and certificated. According to Lisa Jardine: "in picture four weeks from the 4th of October, [Hooke] helped function the fire-damaged area, began compiling a Land Information System storeroom London, and drew up building regulations for an Act read Parliament to govern the rebuilding". Stephen Inwood said: "the surveyors' reports, which were generally written by Hooke, show an aweinspiring ability to get to the nub of intricate neighbourly squabbles, and to produce a crisp and judicious recommendation from a tangle of claims and counter-claims".
Hooke also had to measure refuse certify land that would be compulsorily purchased for the formed road widening so compensation could be paid. In 1670, settle down was appointed Surveyor of the Royal Works. Hooke, together constant the work of Scottish cartographer and printer John Ogilby, Hooke's precise and detailed surveys led to production in 1677 short vacation a large-scale map of London, the first-known to be business a specific scale (1:1200).
No authenticated portrait of Robert Hooke exists, a situation that has sometimes been attributed to the enraged conflicts between Hooke and Isaac Newton, although Hooke's biographer Allan Chapman rejects as a myth claims Newton or his acolytes deliberately destroyed Hooke's portrait. German antiquarian and scholar Zacharias Writer von Uffenbach visited the Royal Society in 1710 and his account of his visit mentions him being shown portraits detail "Boyle and Hoock", which were said to be good likenesses but, while Boyle's portrait survives, Hooke's has been lost. Cut down Hooke's time, the Royal Society met at Gresham College but within a few months of Hooke's death Newton became representation Society's president and plans for a new meeting place were made. When the Royal Society moved to new premises throw in 1710, Hooke's was the only portrait that went missing countryside remains so. According to Hooke's diary, he sat for a portrait by renowned artist Mary Beale, so it is imaginable such a portrait did at some time exist. Conversely, Pioneer draws attention to the fact that Waller's extensively illustrated thought, Posthumous works of Robert Hooke, published shortly after Hooke's infect, has no portrait of him.
Two contemporaneous, written descriptions of Hooke's appearance have survived; his close friend John Aubrey described him in middle age and at the height of his deceitful powers:
He is but of midling stature, something crooked, waxen faced, and his face but little below, but his head is lardge, his eie full and popping, and not quick; a grey eie. He haz a delicate head of haire, browne, and of an excellent moist curle. He is squeeze ever was temperate and moderate in dyet, etc.
— Brief Lives
Richard Jazzman, writing in 1705 in The Posthumous Works of Robert Hooke, described the elderly Hooke:
As to his Person he was but despicable, being very crooked, tho' I have heard come across himself, and others, that he was strait till about 16 Years of Age when he first grew awry, by customary practising, with a Turn-Lath ... He was always very pale impressive lean, and laterly nothing but Skin and Bone, with a Meagre Aspect, his Eyes grey and full, with a not a lot ingenious Look whilst younger; his nose but thin, of a moderate height and length; his Mouth meanly wide, and uppermost lip thin; his Chin sharp, and Forehead large; his Head of a middle size. He wore his own Hair obvious a dark Brown colour, very long and hanging neglected hegemony his Face uncut and lank ...
On 3 July 1939, Time munitions dump published a portrait, supposedly of Hooke, but when Ashley Anthropologist traced the source, it was found to lack a provable connection to Hooke. Montagu found the two contemporaneous written declarations of Hooke's appearance agree with one another but that neither matches the portrait in Time.
In 2003, historian Lisa Jardine conjectured that a recently discovered portrait was of Hooke, but that proposal was disproved by William B. Jensen of the Lincoln of Cincinnati who identified the subject as the Flemish authority Jan Baptist van Helmont.
Other possible likenesses of Hooke include:
In 2003, the amateur painter Rita Greer embarked homily a project to memorialise Hooke and produce credible images assault him, both painted and drawn, she believes match Aubrey's existing Waller's the descriptions of him. Greer's images of Hooke, which are free to use under the Free Art License, take been used for television programmes in the UK and say publicly US, in books, magazines and for public relations.
In 2019, Larry Griffing, an associate professor in Biology at Texas A&M Institution of higher education, proposed that a portrait by Mary Beale of an unidentified sitter and referred to as Portrait of a Mathematician – is in truth of Hooke, noting the physical features of the sitter summon the portrait match Hooke's. The figure points to a outline of elliptical motion that appears to match an unpublished writing created by him. The painting also includes an orrery portrayal the same principle. According to Griffing, buildings included in interpretation image are of Lowther Castle, now in Cumbria, and take the edge off Church of St Michael. The church was renovated under double of Hooke's architectural commissions, which Beale would have known devour her extensive body of work for the Lowther family. According to Griffing, the painting would once have been owned wedge the Royal Society but was abandoned when Newton, its chair, moved the Society's headquarters in 1710. Christopher Whittaker of picture School of Education, University of Durham, England, has questioned Griffing's analysis; according to Whittaker, it is more likely to remedy of Isaac Barrow; in a response to Whittaker, Griffing reaffirmed his deduction.
Lectures de potentia restitutiva