Pierre-Simon Laplace
Born: 23 March 1749 in Beaumont-en-Auge, Normandy, France
Died: 5 March 1827 in Paris, France
Pierre-Simon Laplace's father, Pierre Laplace, was
comfortably well off in the cider trade. Laplace's mother, Marie-Anne
Sochon, came from a fairly prosperous farming family who owned land at
Tourgéville. Many accounts of Laplace say his family were 'poor farming
people' or 'peasant farmers' but these seem to be rather inaccurate
although there is little evidence of academic achievement except for an
uncle who is thought to have been a secondary school teacher of
mathematics. This is stated in [1] in these terms:-
There is little record of intellectual distinction in
the family beyond what was to be expected of the cultivated provincial
bourgeoisie and the minor gentry.
Laplace attended a Benedictine priory school in
Beaumont-en-Auge, as a day pupil, between the ages of 7 and 16. His father
expected him to make a career in the Church and indeed either the Church
or the army were the usual destinations of pupils at the priory school. At
the age of 16 Laplace entered Caen University. As he was still intending
to enter the Church, he enrolled to study theology. However, during his
two years at the University of Caen, Laplace discovered his mathematical
talents and his love of the subject. Credit for this must go largely to
two teachers of mathematics at Caen, C Gadbled and P Le Canu of whom
little is known except that they realised Laplace's great mathematical
potential.
Once he knew that mathematics was to be his subject,
Laplace left Caen without taking his degree, and went to Paris. He took
with him a letter of introduction to d'Alembert from Le Canu, his teacher
at Caen. Although Laplace was only 19 years old when he arrived in Paris
he quickly impressed d'Alembert. Not only did d'Alembert begin to direct
Laplace's mathematical studies, he also tried to find him a position to
earn enough money to support himself in Paris. Finding a position for such
a talented young man did not prove hard, and Laplace was soon appointed as
professor of mathematics at the Ecole Militaire. Gillespie writes in [1]:-
Imparting geometry, trigonometry, elementary analysis, and statics to
adolescent cadets of good family, average attainment, and no commitment to
the subjects afforded little stimulus, but the post did permit Laplace to
stay in Paris.
He began producing a steady stream of remarkable
mathematical papers, the first presented to the Académie des Sciences in
Paris on 28 March 1770. This first paper, read to the Society but not
published, was on maxima and minima of curves where he improved on methods
given by Lagrange. His next paper for the Academy followed soon
afterwards, and on 18 July 1770 he read a paper on difference equations.
Laplace's first paper which was to appear in print
was one on the integral calculus which he translated into Latin and
published at Leipzig in the Nova acta eruditorum in 1771. Six years later
Laplace republished an improved version, apologising for the 1771 paper
and blaming errors contained in it on the printer. Laplace also translated
the paper on maxima and minima into Latin and published it in the Nova
acta eruditorum in 1774. Also in 1771 Laplace sent another paper
Recherches sur le calcul intégral aux différences infiniment petites, et
aux différences finies to the Mélanges de Turin. This paper contained
equations which Laplace stated were important in mechanics and physical
astronomy.
The year 1771 marks Laplace's first attempt to gain election to the
Académie des Sciences but Vandermonde was preferred. Laplace tried to
gain admission again in 1772 but this time Cousin was elected. Despite
being only 23 (and Cousin 33) Laplace felt very angry at being passed over
in favour of a mathematician who was so clearly markedly inferior to him.
D'Alembert also must have been disappointed for, on 1 January 1773, he
wrote to Lagrange, the Director of Mathematics at the Berlin Academy of
Science, asking him whether it might be possible to have Laplace elected
to the Berlin Academy and for a position to be found for Laplace in
Berlin.
Before Lagrange could act on d'Alembert's request,
another chance for Laplace to gain admission to the Paris Academy arose.
On 31 March 1773 he was elected an adjoint in the Académie des Sciences.
By the time of his election he had read 13 papers to the Academy in less
than three years. Condorcet, who was permanent secretary to the Academy,
remarked on this great number of quality papers on a wide range of topics.
We have already mentioned some of Laplace's early
work. Not only had he made major contributions to difference equations and
differential equations but he had examined applications to mathematical
astronomy and to the theory of probability, two major topics which he
would work on throughout his life. His work on mathematical astronomy
before his election to the Academy included work on the inclination of
planetary orbits, a study of how planets were perturbed by their moons,
and in a paper read to the Academy on 27 November 1771 he made a study of
the motions of the planets which would be the first step towards his later
masterpiece on the stability of the solar system.
Laplace's reputation steadily increased during the
1770s. It was the period in which he [1]:-
... established his style, reputation, philosophical position, certain
mathematical techniques, and a programme of research in two areas,
probability and celestial mechanics, in which he worked mathematically for
the rest of his life.
The 1780s were the period in which Laplace produced the depth of results
which have made him one of the most important and influential scientists
that the world has seen. It was not achieved, however, with good
relationships with his colleagues. Although d'Alembert had been proud to
have considered Laplace as his protégé, he certainly began to feel that
Laplace was rapidly making much of his own life's work obsolete and this
did nothing to improve relations. Laplace tried to ease the pain for
d'Alembert by stressing the importance of d'Alembert's work since he
undoubtedly felt well disposed towards d'Alembert for the help and support
he had given.
It does appear that Laplace was not modest about his
abilities and achievements, and he probably failed to recognise the effect
of his attitude on his colleagues. Lexell visited the Académie des
Sciences in Paris in 1780-81 and reported that Laplace let it be known
widely that he considered himself the best mathematician in France. The
effect on his colleagues would have been only mildly eased by the fact
that Laplace was right! Laplace had a wide knowledge of all sciences and
dominated all discussions in the Academy. As Lexell wrote:-
... in the Academy he wanted to pronounce on
everything.
It was while Lexell was in Paris that Laplace made an excursion into a new
area of science [2]:-
Applying quantitative methods to a comparison of living and nonliving
systems, Laplace and the chemist Antoine Lavoisier in 1780, with the aid
of an ice calorimeter that they had invented, showed respiration to be a
form of combustion.
Although Laplace soon returned to his study of mathematical astronomy,
this work with Lavoisier marked the beginning of a third important area of
research for Laplace, namely his work in physics particularly on the
theory of heat which he worked on towards the end of his career.
In 1784 Laplace was appointed as examiner at the Royal Artillery Corps,
and in this role in 1785, he examined and passed the 16 year old Napoleon
Bonaparte. In fact this position gave Laplace much work in writing reports
on the cadets that he examined but the rewards were that he became well
known to the ministers of the government and others in positions of power
in France.
Laplace served on many of the committees of the Académie des Sciences,
for example Lagrange wrote to him in 1782 saying that work on his Traité
de mécanique analytique was almost complete and a committee of the
Académie des Sciences comprising of Laplace, Cousin, Legendre and
Condorcet was set up to decide on publication. Laplace served on a
committee set up to investigate the largest hospital in Paris and he used
his expertise in probability to compare mortality rates at the hospital
with those of other hospitals in France and elsewhere.
Laplace was promoted to a senior position in the Académie des Sciences in
1785. Two years later Lagrange left Berlin to join Laplace as a member of
the Académie des Sciences in Paris. Thus the two great mathematical
geniuses came together in Paris and, despite a rivalry between them, each
was to benefit greatly from the ideas flowing from the other. Laplace
married on 15 May 1788. His wife, Marie-Charlotte de Courty de Romanges,
was 20 years younger than the 39 year old Laplace. They had two children,
their son Charles-Emile who was born in 1789 went on to a military career.
Laplace was made a member of the committee of the Académie des Sciences
to standardise weights and measures in May 1790. This committee worked on
the metric system and advocated a decimal base. In 1793 the Reign of
Terror commenced and the Académie des Sciences, along with the other
learned societies, was suppressed on 8 August. The weights and measures
commission was the only one allowed to continue but soon Laplace, together
with Lavoisier, Borda, Coulomb, Brisson and Delambre were thrown off the
commission since all those on the committee had to be worthy:-
... by their Republican virtues and hatred of kings.
Before the 1793 Reign of Terror Laplace together with his wife and two
children left Paris and lived 50 km southeast of Paris. He did not return
to Paris until after July 1794. Although Laplace managed to avoid the fate
of some of his colleagues during the Revolution, such as Lavoisier who was
guillotined in May 1794 while Laplace was out of Paris, he did have some
difficult times. He was consulted, together with Lagrange and Laland, over
the new calendar for the Revolution. Laplace knew well that the proposed
scheme did not really work because the length of the proposed year did not
fit with the astronomical data. However he was wise enough not to try to
overrule political dogma with scientific facts. He also conformed, perhaps
more happily, to the decisions regarding the metric division of angles
into 100 subdivisions.
In 1795 the Ecole Normale was founded with the aim of training school
teachers and Laplace taught courses there including one on probability
which he gave in 1795. The Ecole Normale survived for only four months for
the 1200 pupils, who were training to become school teachers, found the
level of teaching well beyond them. This is entirely understandable. Later
Laplace wrote up the lectures of his course at the Ecole Normale as Essai
philosophique sur les probabilités published in 1814. A review of the
Essai states:-
... after a general introduction concerning the principles of probability
theory, one finds a discussion of a host of applications, including those
to games of chance, natural philosophy, the moral sciences, testimony,
judicial decisions and mortality.
In 1795 the Académie des Sciences was reopened as the Institut National
des Sciences et des Arts. Also in 1795 the Bureau des Longitudes was
founded with Lagrange and Laplace as the mathematicians among its founding
members and Laplace went on to lead the Bureau and the Paris Observatory.
However although some considered he did a fine job in these posts others
criticised him for being too theoretical. Delambre wrote some years
later:-
... never should one put a geometer at the head of an observatory; he will
neglect all the observations except those needed for his formulas.
Delambre also wrote concerning Laplace's leadership of the Bureau des
Longitudes:-
One can reproach [Laplace] with the fact that in more than 20 years of
existence the Bureau des Longitudes has not determined the position of a
single star, or undertaken the preparation of the smallest catalogue.
Laplace presented his famous nebular hypothesis in 1796 in Exposition du
systeme du monde, which viewed the solar system as originating from the
contracting and cooling of a large, flattened, and slowly rotating cloud
of incandescent gas. The Exposition consisted of five books: the first was
on the apparent motions of the celestial bodies, the motion of the sea,
and also atmospheric refraction; the second was on the actual motion of
the celestial bodies; the third was on force and momentum; the fourth was
on the theory of universal gravitation and included an account of the
motion of the sea and the shape of the Earth; the final book gave an
historical account of astronomy and included his famous nebular
hypothesis. Laplace states his philosophy of science in the Exposition as
follows:-
If man were restricted to collecting facts the sciences were only a
sterile nomenclature and he would never have known the great laws of
nature. It is in comparing the phenomena with each other, in seeking to
grasp their relationships, that he is led to discover these laws...
In view of modern theories of impacts of comets on the Earth it is
particularly interesting to see Laplace's remarkably modern view of this:-
... the small probability of collision of the Earth and a comet can become
very great in adding over a long sequence of centuries. It is easy to
picture the effects of this impact on the Earth. The axis and the motion
of rotation have changed, the seas abandoning their old position..., a
large part of men and animals drowned in this universal deluge, or
destroyed by the violent tremor imparted to the terrestrial globe.
Exposition du systeme du monde was written as a non-mathematical
introduction to Laplace's most important work Traité du Mécanique
Céleste whose first volume appeared three years later. Laplace had
already discovered the invariability of planetary mean motions. In 1786 he
had proved that the eccentricities and inclinations of planetary orbits to
each other always remain small, constant, and self-correcting. These and
many other of his earlier results formed the basis for his great work the
Traité du Mécanique Céleste published in 5 volumes, the first two in
1799.
The first volume of the Mécanique Céleste is divided into two books, the
first on general laws of equilibrium and motion of solids and also fluids,
while the second book is on the law of universal gravitation and the
motions of the centres of gravity of the bodies in the solar system. The
main mathematical approach here is the setting up of differential
equations and solving them to describe the resulting motions. The second
volume deals with mechanics applied to a study of the planets. In it
Laplace included a study of the shape of the Earth which included a
discussion of data obtained from several different expeditions, and
Laplace applied his theory of errors to the results. Another topic studied
here by Laplace was the theory of the tides but Airy, giving his own
results nearly 50 years later, wrote:-
It would be useless to offer this theory in the same
shape in which Laplace has given it; for that part of the Mécanique
Céleste which contains the theory of tides is perhaps on the whole more
obscure than any other part...
In the Mécanique Céleste Laplace's equation appears
but although we now name this equation after Laplace, it was in fact known
before the time of Laplace. The Legendre functions also appear here and
were known for many years as the Laplace coefficients. The Mécanique
Céleste does not attribute many of the ideas to the work of others but
Laplace was heavily influenced by Lagrange and by Legendre and used
methods which they had developed with few references to the originators of
the ideas.
Under Napoleon Laplace was a member, then chancellor,
of the Senate, and received the Legion of Honour in 1805. However
Napoleon, in his memoirs written on St Hélène, says he removed Laplace
from the office of Minister of the Interior, which he held in 1799, after
only six weeks:-
... because he brought the spirit of the infinitely small into the
government.
Laplace became Count of the Empire in 1806 and he was
named a marquis in 1817 after the restoration of the Bourbons.
The first edition of Laplace's Théorie Analytique
des Probabilités was published in 1812. This first edition was dedicated
to Napoleon-le-Grand but, for obvious reason, the dedication was removed
in later editions! The work consisted of two books and a second edition
two years later saw an increase in the material by about an extra 30 per
cent.
The first book studies generating functions and also
approximations to various expressions occurring in probability theory. The
second book contains Laplace's definition of probability, Bayes's rule (so
named by Poincaré many years later), and remarks on moral and
mathematical expectation. The book continues with methods of finding
probabilities of compound events when the probabilities of their simple
components are known, then a discussion of the method of least squares,
Buffon's needle problem, and inverse probability. Applications to
mortality, life expectancy and the length of marriages are given and
finally Laplace looks at moral expectation and probability in legal
matters.
Later editions of the Théorie Analytique des Probabilités also contains
supplements which consider applications of probability to: errors in
observations; the determination of the masses of Jupiter, Saturn and
Uranus; triangulation methods in surveying; and problems of geodesy in
particular the determination of the meridian of France. Much of this work
was done by Laplace between 1817 and 1819 and appears in the 1820 edition
of the Théorie Analytique. A rather less impressive fourth supplement,
which returns to the first topic of generating functions, appeared with
the 1825 edition. This final supplement was presented to the Institute by
Laplace, who was 76 years old by this time, and by his son.
We mentioned briefly above Laplace's first work on
physics in 1780 which was outside the area of mechanics in which he
contributed so much. Around 1804 Laplace seems to have developed an
approach to physics which would be highly influential for some years. This
is best explained by Laplace himself:-
... I have sought to establish that the phenomena of
nature can be reduced in the last analysis to actions at a distance
between molecule and molecule, and that the consideration of these actions
must serve as the basis of the mathematical theory of these phenomena.
This approach to physics, attempting to explain
everything from the forces acting locally between molecules, already was
used by him in the fourth volume of the Mécanique Céleste which appeared
in 1805. This volume contains a study of pressure and density,
astronomical refraction, barometric pressure and the transmission of
gravity based on this new philosophy of physics. It is worth remarking
that it was a new approach, not because theories of molecules were new,
but rather because it was applied to a much wider range of problems than
any previous theory and, typically of Laplace, it was much more
mathematical than any previous theories.
Laplace's desire to take a leading role in physics
led him to become a founder member of the Société d'Arcueil in around
1805. Together with the chemist Berthollet, he set up the Society which
operated out of their homes in Arcueil which was south of Paris. Among the
mathematicians who were members of this active group of scientists were
Biot and Poisson. The group strongly advocated a mathematical approach to
science with Laplace playing the leading role. This marks the height of
Laplace's influence, dominant also in the Institute and having a powerful
influence on the Ecole Polytechnique and the courses that the students
studied there.
After the publication of the fourth volume of the
Mécanique Céleste, Laplace continued to apply his ideas of physics to
other problems such as capillary action (1806-07), double refraction
(1809), the velocity of sound (1816), the theory of heat, in particular
the shape and rotation of the cooling Earth (1817-1820), and elastic
fluids (1821). However during this period his dominant position in French
science came to an end and others with different physical theories began
to grow in importance.
The Société d'Arcueil, after a few years of high
activity, began to become less active with the meetings becoming less
regular around 1812. The meetings ended completely the following year.
Arago, who had been a staunch member of the Society, began to favour the
wave theory of light as proposed by Fresnel around 1815 which was directly
opposed to the corpuscular theory which Laplace supported and developed.
Many of Laplace's other physical theories were attacked, for instance his
caloric theory of heat was at odds with the work of Petit and of Fourier.
However, Laplace did not concede that his physical theories were wrong and
kept his belief in fluids of heat and light, writing papers on these
topics when over 70 years of age.
At the time that his influence was decreasing, personal tragedy struck
Laplace. His only daughter, Sophie-Suzanne, had married the Marquis de
Portes and she died in childbirth in 1813. The child, however, survived
and it is through her that there are descendants of Laplace. Laplace's
son, Charles-Emile, lived to the age of 85 but had no children.
Laplace had always changed his views with the changing political events of
the time, modifying his opinions to fit in with the frequent political
changes which were typical of this period. This way of behaving added to
his success in the 1790s and 1800s but certainly did nothing for his
personal relations with his colleagues who saw his changes of views as
merely attempts to win favour. In 1814 Laplace supported the restoration
of the Bourbon monarchy and caste his vote in the Senate against Napoleon.
The Hundred Days were an embarrassment to him the following year and he
conveniently left Paris for the critical period. After this he remained a
supporter of the Bourbon monarchy and became unpopular in political
circles. When he refused to sign the document of the French Academy
supporting freedom of the press in 1826, he lost the remaining friends he
had in politics.
On the morning of Monday 5 March 1827 Laplace died.
Few events would cause the Academy to cancel a meeting but they did on
that day as a mark of respect for one of the greatest scientists of all
time. Surprisingly there was no quick decision to fill the place left
vacant on his death and the decision of the Academy in October 1827 not to
fill the vacant place for another 6 months did not result in an
appointment at that stage, some further months elapsing before Puissant
was elected as Laplace's successor.
Article by: J J O'Connor and E F Robertson
|