-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Old surveying techniques
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2011 19:59:26 +0000
From: Kollen, Chris <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>

Hi:

I received the following question.  Can anyone recommend a book or books
that I can refer him to?  He emailed me that he has looked at the
following, but they only scratched the surface:
1. "The Measure of All Things: The Seven-Year Odyssey and Hidden Error
that Transformed the World" by Ken Alder (ISBN 0-7432-1675-X)
2. "Introduction to Geodesy: The History and Concepts of Modern Geodesy"
by James R. Smith (ISBN 0-471-16660-X).

Thanks

Chris


----- Forwarded message from [log in to unmask] -----
     Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 17:42:45 -0700
     From: Ken Harris <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Ken Harris <[log in to unmask]>
  Subject: Old surveying techniques
       To: [log in to unmask]

=============================================================
NOTE:  This message was sent from the UA Library Web server
=============================================================
REMOTE ADDRESS:     69.254.197.219
HTTP_USER_AGENT:    Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 6.1;
WOW64;
Trident/4.0; SLCC2; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.5.30729; .NET CLR
3.0.30729; Media Center PC 6.0)

Name: Ken Harris

Contact: [log in to unmask]  520.742.4218<br />

I'd like to know if there is someone I can talk to about old surverying
and mapping techniques - 18th century and before.

For instance, when measuring a meridian, how did they ensure a true
north-south track?

How did they accurately plot the position of each observation station?

Why did they choose such rough terrain for establishing a meridian, such
as when Mechain was surveying the Paris meridian?

How did they compensate for a geodetic triangle not equaling 180 degrees?

How did they compensate for difference in altitude between observation
stations in rough terrain?

How did they incorporate refraction when taking observations and that
the degree of refraction changes with elevation?

If the pendulum method had been chosen, placed at 45 degrees (midway
between the North Pole and Equator), how would they have determined a
method for establishing a natural or universal standard for the time-
dependent constant, such as a second? It seems to me that defining a
unit of time would prove more difficult than a unit of distance.

I have other questions but those are enough to get the drift, I guess.
Sorry about all the questions. It&#39;s just that I&#39;ve read several
books and none of them are specific on the actual techniques and that,
to me, is much more interesting than, say, the details of the French
Revolution or the political wranglings concerning the Cassinis, the
French Academie, King Louis XIV, or Neapoleon. I&#39;m also interested
in the evolution of units from human-based (cubits, foot, toises, and
lignes) to natural standards (meters, grams, seconds).

I'm hoping the U of A has a subject matter expert or professor that
wouldn't mind me dropping by and having a conversation. A really good,
clear book would be an okay substitute but I&#39;d rather talk to
someone who really knows the history and the ingenuity used to overcome
all the physical difficulties and compensating for things they could
observe but not explain like the effect of gravity and large masses on
the plumb line, air density and refraction on shooting the transit of
stars, and the effects of procession.

Thank you,

Ken Harris

----- End forwarded message -----