Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T01:15:40.675Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Fraction of stars with planetary systems, fp, pre-1961

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 July 2015

Douglas A. Vakoch
Affiliation:
SETI Institute, California
Matthew F. Dowd
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame, Indiana
Frank Drake
Affiliation:
SETI Institute, California
Get access

Summary

Abstract

The term fp – indicating the fraction of suitable stars with planetary systems – is anachronistic to much of the time period under discussion. This chapter will survey a number of theories about planetary systems in Western thought prior to 1961 and will consider what values the term would have been assigned based on the natural philosophy or science of periods before 1961. In antiquity, two strands of thought, the Aristotelian and the atomistic, would have provided very different values for fp. The former proposed a very clear value: zero. There are no planetary systems other than our own. The value that the latter would have proposed, however, presents a more complex situation, as atomists believed there are infinite other inhabited worlds, though none could be seen from our own. The Aristotelian view held sway in the West until the Copernican Revolution sparked a dramatic shift in cosmological ideas. Ultimately, the notion that our solar system was merely one of many planetary systems won out. Such a view was promoted, alongside the idea of plentiful extraterrestrial life, by two popularizers from the late seventeenth century: Christiaan Huygens and Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle. The view that planetary systems were plentiful persisted through the nineteenth century, and so fp must be understood to have a value of close to 1. Numerous authors posited life even in other places, such as comets and the Sun; planetary systems, then, were not the only abode for extraterrestrial life during this period of optimism about the plurality of worlds, suggesting that fp was an inadequate criterion for the location of life. In the second half of the nineteenth century, William Whewell posited that little was scientifically known about other planetary systems and made various arguments against their commonality. This was reinforced in the first half of the twentieth century with new theories on the origins of planetary systems, which suggested that fp would need to be assigned a much lower value.

The second term of the Drake Equation, fp, assumes that life outside the Earth will arise on planets. Only recently has observable evidence shown that other star systems have planets. In the long era prior to 1961, Western cosmological systems did not always assume the existence of other planetary systems. Only after the Copernican Revolution did Western natural philosophers and scientists understand that the stars in the sky potentially represented planetary systems. But even during that shorter period in which the modern cosmological worldview took form, a variety of theories suggested, in turn, that planets might not be the only source of life and then that planetary systems might not be so common. The historical survey of this chapter will highlight some of the theories in which applying a number to the term fp would be problematic.1

Type
Chapter
Information
The Drake Equation
Estimating the Prevalence of Extraterrestrial Life through the Ages
, pp. 53 - 70
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2015

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aristotle, . 1984. The Complete Works of Aristotle. 2 vols., ed. Barnes, Jonathan. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Brush, Stephen. 1996a. Nebulous Earth: The Origin of the Solar System and the Core of the Earth from Laplace to Jeffreys, vol. 1 of A History of Modern Planetary Physics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Brush, Stephen. 1996b. Fruitful Encounters: The Origin of the Solar System and of the Moon from Chamberlin to Apollo, vol. 3 of A History of Modern Planetary Physics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Crowe, Michael J. 1986. The Extraterrestrial Life Debate 1750–1900: The Idea of a Plurality of Worlds from Kant to Lowell. Cambridge University Press. Repr. 1999, as The Extraterrestrial Life Debate 1750–1900. Mineola, NY: Dover.Google Scholar
Crowe, Michael J. (ed.) 2008. The Extraterrestrial Life Debate, Antiquity to 1900: A Source Book. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Crowe, Michael J. 2011. “The Surprising History of Claims for Life on the Sun.” Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage 14(3): 169–79.Google Scholar
Dick, Steven J. 1982. Plurality of Worlds: The Origins of the Extraterrestrial Life Debate from Democritus to Kant. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dick, Steven J. 1998. Life on Other Worlds: The Twentieth-Century Extraterrestrial Life Debate. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dick, Thomas. 1847. Celestial Scenery, or, The Wonders of the Planetary System Displayed: Illustrating the Perfections of Deity and a Plurality of Worlds. West Brookfield, MA: Merriam and Cooke. Available online via the Hathi Trust Digital Library at http://babel.hathitrust.org/.Google Scholar
Epicurus, . 1926. Epicurus: The Extant Remains, ed. Bailey, Cyril. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ferguson, James. 1794. Astronomy Explained upon Sir Isaac Newton's Principles. 9th ed. London: T. Longman et al. Available online via the Hathi Trust Digital Library at http://babel.hathitrust.org/.Google Scholar
Fontenelle, Bernard. 1990. Conversations on the Plurality of Worlds. Trans. Hargreaves, H. A.. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graney, Christopher M. 2012. “The Work of the Best and Greatest Artist: A Forgotten Story of Religion, Science, and Stars in the Copernican Revolution.” Logos 15(4): 97124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graney, Christopher M. 2013. “Stars as the Armies of God: Landsbergen's Incorporation of Tycho Brahe's Star-Size Argument into the Copernican Theory.” Journal for the History of Astronomy 44: 165–72.Google Scholar
Grant, Edward. 1994. Planets, Stars, and Orbs: The Medieval Cosmos, 1200–1687. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Huygens, Chistiaan. 1698. Cosmotheoros, or The Celestial Worlds Discover'd. Available online via the Institute for History and Foundations of Science at www.staff.science.uu.nl/~gent0113/huygens/huygens_ct_en.htm/.Google Scholar
Kozhamthadam, Job. 1994. The Discovery of Kepler's Laws: The Interaction of Science, Philosophy, and Religion. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Macrobius. 1952. Commentary on the Dream of Scipio. Trans. Stahl, William Harris. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Martianus Capella, . 1977. Martianus Capella and the Seven Liberal Arts, vol. 2, The Marriage of Philology and Mercury. Trans. Stahl, William Harris and Johnson, Richard with Burge, E. L.. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Murdoch, John E. 1984. Album of Science: Antiquity and the Middle Ages. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
Pearman, J. P. T. 1963. “Extraterrestrial Intelligent Life and Interstellar Communication: An Informal Discussion.” In Interstellar Communication: A Collection of Reprints and Original Contributions, ed. Cameron, A. G. W., 287–93. New York: W. A. Benjamin.Google Scholar
Whewell, William. 1853. Of the Plurality of Worlds. Reprinted in a facsimile edition by Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001.Google Scholar
Williams, I. P., and Cremin, A. W.. 1968. “A Survey of Theories Relating to the Origin of the Solar System.” Quarterly Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society 9: 4062.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×