Page:Edinburgh Review Volume 59.djvu/290

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
278
Babbage's Calculating Engine.
July,

It is quite apparent that this remarkable coincidence of error must have arisen from the various tables being copied successively one from another. The earliest work in which they appeared was Vlacq's Logarithms, (folio, Gouda, 1628); and from it, doubtless, those which immediately succeeded it in point of time were copied; from which the same errors were subsequently transcribed into all the other, including the Chinese logarithms.

The most certain and effectual check upon errors which arise in the process of computation, is to cause the same computations to be made by separate and independent computers; and this check is rendered still more decisive if they make their computations by different methods. It is, nevertheless, a remarkable fact, that several computers, working separately and independently, do frequently commit precisely the same error; so that falsehood in this case assumes that character of consistency, which is regarded as the exclusive attribute of truth. Instances of this are familiar to most persons who have had the management of the computation of tables. We have reason to know, that M. Prony experienced it on many occasions in the management of the great French tables, when he found three, and even a greater number of computers, working separately and independently, to return him the same numerical result, and that result wrong. Mr Stratford, the conductor of the Nautical Almanac, to whose talents and zeal that work owes the execution of its recent improvements, has more than once observed a similar occurrence. But one of the most signal examples of this kind, of which we are aware, is related by Mr Baily. The catalogue of stars published by the Astronomical Society was computed by two separate and independent persons, and was afterwards compared and examined with great care and attention by Mr Stratford. On examining this catalogue, and recalculating a portion of it, Mr Baily discovered an error in the case of the star, χ. Cephei. Its right ascension was calculated wrongly, and yet consistently, by two computers working separately. Their numerical results agreed precisely in every figure; and Mr Stratford, on examining the catalogue, failed to detect the error. Mr Baily having reason, from some discordancy which he observed, to suspect an error, recomputed the place of the star with a view to discover it; and he himself, in the first instance, obtained precisely the same erroneous numerical result. It was only on going over the operation a second time that he accidentally discovered that he had inadvertently committed the same error.[1]


  1. Memoirs Ast. Soc. vol. iv., p. 290.