Takeoff! Read online

  And those who know his genius would take one look at it and say, in no irreverent tone: “My God! That’s a Frank Kelly Freas Church!”

  Selah.

  GENTLEMEN: PLEASE NOTE

  By Randall Garrett

  This might be considered an “alternate history” story, and in a way, I suppose it is. But not in the sense that, say, the Lord Darcy stories are. This is a takeoff, not on history, but on the way certain self-important know-it-alls do their best to put down the gifted person just because his notions don’t agree with theirs. And, far too often, they succeed.

  This is a study in “how to stomp on the crackpot.”

  With the exception of General B-f, all the characters mentioned in this story were actual historical persons, but, with the possible exception of King Charles II, were nothing like I have depicted them.

  My apologies especially to Isaac Barrow, who, as far as my historical reading has led me to believe, was a much nicer guy.

  18 June 1957

  Trinity College

  Cambridge

  Sir James Trowbridge

  No.14 Berkeley Mews

  London

  My dear James,

  I’m sorry to have lost touch with you over the past few years; we haven’t seen each other since the French War, back in 1948. Nine years! It doesn’t seem it.

  I’ll tell you right off I want a favour of you. (No, I do not want to borrow another five shillings! I haven’t had my pocket picked again, thank you. ) This has to do with a little historical research I’m doing here. I stumbled across something rather queer, and I’m hoping you can help me with it.

  I am enclosing copies of some old letters received by Isaac Newton nearly three hundred years ago. As you will notice, they are addressed to “Mr. Isaac Newton, A.B.”; it rings oddly on the ear to hear the great man addressed as anything but “your Grace,” but of course he was only a young man at the time. He hadn’t written his famous Principia yet—and wouldn’t for twenty years.

  Reading these letters is somewhat like listening to a conversation when only one of the speakers is audible, but they seem to indicate another side to the man, one which has not heretofore been brought to light.

  Dr. Henry Blake, the mathematician, has looked them over, and he feels that it is possible that Newton stumbled on something that modern thought has only recently come up with-the gravitational and light theories of the Swiss mathematician, Albert Einstein.

  I know it’s fantastic to think that a man of even Newton’s acknowledged genius could have conceived of such things three centuries before their proper place in history, but Blake says it’s possible. And if it is, Blake himself will probably do to Newton’s correspondents the same thing that was done to Oliver Cromwell at the beginning of the Restoration—disinter the bodies and have them publicly hanged or some such thing.

  Actually, Blake has managed to infect me with his excitement; he has pointed out phrases in several of the letters which tally very well with Einstein’s theory. But, alas, the information we have is woefully incomplete.

  What we need, you see, are Newton’s letters—the ones he sent which provoked these answers. We have searched through everything here at Cambridge, and we haven’t found even a trace; evidently the Newton manuscripts were simply discarded on the basis that they were worthless, anyway. Besides, records of that sort were poorly kept at that time.

  But we thought perhaps the War Office did a somewhat better job of record-keeping.

  Now, I realise full well that, due to the present trouble with the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the War Office can’t take a chance and allow just anyone to prowl through their files. It wouldn’t do to allow one of the Emperor’s spies to have a look at them. However, I wondered if it wouldn’t be possible for you to use your connexions and influence at the War Office to look for Newton’s letters to one of the correspondents, General Sir Edward Ballister-ffoulkes. You can find the approximate dates by checking the datelines on the copies I am sending you.

  The manuscripts are arranged in chronological order, just as they were received by Newton himself. Of them all, only the last one, as you will see, is perfectly clear and understandable in all its implications.

  Let me know what can be done, will you, old friend?

  With best wishes,

  SAM

  Dr. Samuel Hackett

  Department of History

  12 November 1666

  London

  Mr. Isaac Newton, A.B.

  Woolsthorpe

  Dear Mr. Newton:

  It was very good of you to offer your services to His Majesty’s Government at this time. The situation on the Continent, while not dangerous in the extreme, is certainly capable of becoming so.

  Your letter was naturally referred to me, since no one else at the War Office would have any need for the services of a trained mathematician.

  According to your précis, you have done most of your work in geometry and algebra. I feel that these fields may be precisely what are needed in our programme, and, although you have had no experience, your record at Trinity College is certainly good enough to warrant our using your services.

  If you will fill in the enclosed application blank, along with the proper recommendations and endorsements, we can put you to work immediately.

  Sincerely,

  Edward Ballister-ffoulkes, Bart.

  General of Artillery

  Ballistics Research Dept.

  12 November 1666

  Cambridge

  Mr. Isaac Newton, A.B.

  Woolsthorpe

  My dear Isaac,

  I am sorry to hear of your decision to remain at home for a while longer instead of returning to the College, but if you feel that your health is delicate, by all means rest until you are in better spirits.

  I think, however, that you should attempt to return as soon as possible; you have a great deal of work ahead of you, my boy. Mathematicians-like Rome-are not built in a day-nor in four years.

  If, however, you would like to do a part of your studies by post, I see no objection to it, under the circumstances, although, of course, it will be necessary to spend a part of your lime in residence here, and the final examinations will have to be taken here.

  Later on, when you are feeling better, I will send an outline of some work I intend to do on conic sections; I think it would be of great benefit to you to work with me on this. I have always had confidence in your ability. You are young yet, but, given time and plenty of study, you should make a place for yourself in the world of mathematics.

  I think that the work I have in mind for you should prove stimulating.

  Most sincerely,

  Isaac Barrow, Ph.D.

  16 November 1666

  London

  Dear Mr. Newton:

  It would most certainly be quite convenient for you to do your work there at Woolsthorpe.

  An explanation of the work we are trying to do and some of the problems we are up against will be despatched to you as soon as possible.

  Sincerely,

  Ballister-ffoulkes

  21 November 1666

  Cambridge

  My dear Isaac,

  Your paper has arrived. I haven’t had time to look it over yet, but I shall find time to peruse it during the forthcoming holidays. I am, of course, very interested in what problems concerned you during the summer.

  A very merry Christmas to you, my boy.

  Is. Barrow

  22 November 1666

  FROM: Ballistics Research Dept.,

  British Army Artillery

  TO: Isaac Newton, A.B.,

  Woolsthorpe

  SUBJECT: Ballistics research data.

  ENCLOSURE: Range table sample for 9 lb. artillery.

  2nd ENCLOSURE: Outline and general discussion of ballistics 1. In order to better understand the problems facing this Department, you will familiarise yourself with the enclosed material.

  2. This material is confidential, and i
s not to be allowed to fall into unauthorised hands.

  By order of the Commanding General

  SECOND ENCLOSURE

  The purpose of this project is to determine, with as great a degree of precision as possible, the range of artillery used by His Majesty’s Armed Forces, and the methods of accurately firing upon targets at various distances from the cannon.

  After a great deal of research, the following factors have been found to affect the distance which a cannon ball may be hurled by exploding gunpowder:

  1. Weight of the cannon ball.

  2. Weight of powder used.

  3. Angle of elevation of cannon.

  4. Length of cannon barrel.

  The first two factors are obvious; the heavier the cannon ball, the more powder it will take to blow it a certain distance, and contrariwise.

  The third is somewhat unwieldly to work with and definitely problematical in its effects. Up to a certain point, increasing the angle seems to increase the range, but after that point is reached, an increase in elevation decreases the range of the weapon. In view of this, it has been decided that all cannon will be fixed at the best angle for maximum range and the other factors varied to change the actual distance the cannon ball is fired.

  (Here it may be noted, incidentally, that the angle of elevation is of no use in the Royal Navy, since that angle is indeterminate, due to the roll of the ship.)

  The fourth factor, too, may be discarded, since a barrel of too great a length would make it unwieldy on the battlefield, although those of fixed fortresses could be somewhat greater. And, in view of the fact that changing the length of a cannon barrel on the field is out of the question, we may safely say that the fourth factor is a fixed quantity in each cannon and thus ignore it.

  It has, therefore, been decided to test each of the various types of cannon presently in use by Army Artillery and publish for each a range table for various cannon balls and charges of powder, and to furnish a copy of such table to the battery leader of each field piece.

  This programme, as may well be imagined, has required a great deal of cannon testing in the past year, and will undoubtedly require a great deal more before the project is finished. We hope, however, that it will be of at least limited use in the very near future, and will eventually greatly advance the science of cannon-firing.

  2 January 1667

  My dear Isaac,

  Your Christmas was, I trust, a pleasant one? I hope your mother is in good health, and I hope your own is improved.

  My dear boy, I have some advice for you; I do hope that you will take it as it is intended-as from an old friend and tutor who wishes you only well.

  It has come to my attention that you are—shall we say—prostituting your talents. A friend of mine who works at the War Office tells me that you are doing some mathematical work by correspondence-something to do with cannon, I believe?

  Now, I quite understand that you are in a somewhat precarious financial position, and believe me, I deeply sympathise with you. I know that the earning of a few pounds can mean a great deal to you in furthering your education.

  I do not say that such work is menial, either. I would not have you think that I deplore your choice! of work in any way; it is necessary work, and money is certainly necessary for life.

  However, let me warn you: a simple task like this, which pays rather well, can become soporific in its effect. Many men of talent, finding themselves comfortably fixed in a mediocre position, have found their minds have become stultified through long disuse. Please, dear boy, don’t fall into that trap; don’t throw away a fine career in mathematics for the sake of a few paltry pounds. You are young and inexperienced, I know, and have a great deal yet to learn, so please take the advice of one who is somewhat older and wiser.

  No, I haven’t gotten round to reading your paper yet; I’ll do it this evening, my boy, I promise.

  Most sincerely,

  Isaac Barrow

  3 January 1667

  Cambridge

  My dear Isaac,

  I read your paper, and I am, I must confess, somewhat nonplussed. What are you doing?

  I see that my letter of yesterday was somewhat premature; r should have waited until I had read your paper, since it is in exactly the same category.

  You ask: “What is the optimum shape for a wine barrel? Should it be tall and thin, or squat and broad?

  And I ask: “What on Earth difference does it make?”

  Surely you are not thinking of becoming a wine merchant? If so, what need is there to waste your time studying mathematics? On the other hand, if you intend to become a mathematician, why should you debase a noble and lofty study by applying it to wine barrels?

  As I told you, I have no objection to your making a few pounds by doing minor calculations for the Army, but this is foolishness. You have gone to a great deal of trouble for nothing; as you gain more experience, you will realize the folly of such things.

  As to your theory of “fluxions,” I admit myself to be completely at a loss. You seem to be assuming that a curve is made up of an infinite number of infinitely small lines. Where is your authority for such a statement? You append no bibliography and no references, and I cannot find it in the literature.

  Apparently, you are attempting to handle zero and infinity as though they were arithmetical entities. Where did you learn such nonsense?

  My boy, please keep it in mind that four years of undergraduate work does not qualify one as a mathematician. It is merely the first stepping stone on the way. You have a great deal of studying yet to do, a great many books yet to read and absorbbooks, I may say, written by men older, wiser, and more learned than yourself.

  Please don’t waste your time with such frivolous nonsense as toying with symbols derived from wine barrels. No good can come out of a wine barrel, my boy.

  I hope you will soon find yourself in a position to aid’me in some of the calculations on conic sections as I outlined them to you in my letter of the 28th December last.* I feel that this is important work and will do a great deal to further your career.

  With all best wishes,

  Sincerely,

  Isaac Barrow

  *This letter was either lost or returned to Dr. Barrow.-S.H.

  5 January 1667

  London

  Dear Mr. Newton:

  Thank you for your tabulations on the seven-pounder. I must say you were very prompt in your work; there was no need to work over the holidays.

  Your questions show that you are unacquainted with the difficulties of manufacturing military arms; I am not at all surprised at this, because it takes years of training and practical experience in order to learn how to handle the various problems that come up. It is something that no university or college can teach, nor can it be learned from books; only experience in the field can teach it, and you have had none of that.

  I can, however, explain our method of approach thus:

  Each cannon to be tested is fired with several balls—some of iron, some of lead, some of brass, and some which have been hollowed out to make room for a charge of gunpowder in order that they may explode upon reaching the target. With each type of ball, we find the amount of powder required to drive the ball five yards from the muzzle of the piece; this is considered the minimum range. (Naturally, with the testing of hollow, explosive missiles, we do not fill them with gunpowder, but with common earth of equal weight. To do otherwise would endanger the cannoneer.)

  After the minimum range is found, more balls are fired, using greater amounts of powder, added in carefully measured increments, and the distance achieved is measured off.

  This process is kept up until the safety limit of the weapon is reached; this point is considered the maximum range.

  Naturally, the weights of different balls will vary, even if they are made of the same metal, and the bores of cannon .will vary, too, but that can’t be helped. What would you have us do? Make all cannon identical to the nearest quarter-inch? It would
not be at all practical.

  I am happy to see that you are enthusiastic over the work we are doing, but please, I beg you, wait until you have learned a great deal more about the problem than you have done before you attempt to make suggestions of such a nature.

  As to the paper which you enclosed with your tabulations, I am afraid that it was of little interest to me. I am a military man, not a mathematician.

  Thanking you again for your excellent work, I remain.

  Yours sincerely,

  Edward Ballister-ffoulkes, Bart.

  9 January 1667

  Cambridge

  My dear Isaac,

  I have known you for more than five years, and I have, I might say, a more than parental interest in you and your career. Therefore, I feel it my duty to point out to you once again that your erratic temper will one day do you great harm unless you learn to curb it.

  You take me to task for saying to you what is most certainly true, viz.: that you are not yet a mathematician in the full sense of the word. You are young yet. When you have put in as many years at study as I have, you will understand how little you now know. Youth is inclined to be impetuous, to rush in, as the saying goes, where angels fear to tread. But better men than yourself have come to realise that the brashness of youth is no substitute for the wisdom of maturity.

  As to your other remarks, you know perfectly well what I meant when I said that no good can come out of a wine barrel. To accuse me of sacrilege and blasphemy is ridiculous. You are twisting my words.

  Please let us have no more of this name-calling, and get down to more important work.