Xing Yunlu's Determination of the Length of Tropical Year Revisited

石云里,王淼
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1000-0224.2003.02.004
2003-01-01
Abstract:According to ancient sources, the late Ming Dynasty astronomer Xing Yunlu (fl.1596-1625) once set up a gnomon of sixty chi (around 14.715 meters) high, measured its shadows and hence arrived at a length value of tropical year that turns out to be the most exact ever obtained by astronomers up to his time. As it is generally thought , the main cause for his achievement of this value lies in the fact that he applied the highest gnomon ever used by ancient astronomers, which greatly diminished the systematic errors involved in shadow measurements. In contrast to this imagination, however, we are going to show in the present paper that the results of shadow measurements reported by Xing Yunlu are surprisingly inaccurate, and there were totally different reasons for him to acquire his length value of tropical year. In fact, he had somehow arrived at a value with a similar exactitude more than ten years before his practical measurement with the sixty chi gnomon. Based on that value he revealed the inexactness of the out of date official system of calendrical astronomy and campaigned for its reform. After his opinion and campaign were severely criticized and suppressed by the official Bureau of Astronomy, he deliberately arranged the high gnomon measurement to enhance the weight of his argument, since this measurement was trusted by ancient astronomers as the most sound and necessary base for the determination of the solar motion. However, for astronomical reason, the method he used to derive the length value of tropical year from shadow measurements only has a limited reliability in his time. Therefore, he had to adjust the measured results so that he could get from them the desired value of tropical year. It remains that the problems about how he originally achieved such an exact value and why he was so confident of its reliability are till open.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?