DIO

The International Journal of Scientific History

Box 19935, Baltimore, MD 21211-0935 Tel: 410-889-1414. Email: dioi@mail.com.


What eminent scholars are saying about DIO:

"keep up the good work with DIO."

"DIO is delightful!"

"I would like to congratulate Dennis Rawlins, publisher of DIO. He has created a truly intriguing forum, dealing with a variety of subjects, presented often with his unique brand of humor, but always with strict adherence to a rigid code of scientific ethics. As viewed by the history-of-science 'establishment', Rawlins is a maverick; however, more often than not, his 'unorthodox' claims turn out to be correct. He has an extraordinary mind which, without pre-conceived biases, he applies to a given subject. The result frequently provides a refreshingly candid aspect which is in direct contrast to the 'accepted' viewpoint … I encourage others to read DIO, and I encourage the publisher to continue this ambitious and valuable journal."

"just marvellous … [the analysis] is right on all points!"

"enjoyed reading your brilliantly cutting criticisms of [establishment] ‘experts’ — and I am happy to tell you that, on the evidence of [your analyses (University of Cambridge [2000] & DIO vol.10 [2000]) of Byrd's 1926 North Pole claim], you haven't lost your touch!"

"DIO is fascinating. With a combination of mathematical competence (I've thoroughly checked his calculations), astronomical insight, judicious historical perspective, an inductive ingenuity that particularly appeals to me as an ex-cryptographer, and a proper disregard for received 'wisdom', Dennis Rawlins has solved some tough problems in early astronomy that have resisted attack for centuries, as well as some newer ones that are equally imposing. Where did Eratosthenes's famous figure of 5000 stades for the distance from Alexandria to Syene really come from? Was differential spherical trigonometry used in late antiquity? Why does the distribution of degree-fractions in the southern part of Hipparchus's catalog of stars differ from that in the northern part? Were the peculiar attested figures 3144 and 3122 1/2 in Hipparchus's work derived from ancient heliocentrists? Was Ptolemy's large equation, 8523 years = 105416 months, based upon continued-fractions development of eclipse-cycle data? How valid is physicist Robert Newton's criticism of Ptolemy? The answers to these questions and others like them are in DIO — with some surprising by-products: e.g., the investigation of the stars revealed the location of Hipparchus's long-lost observatory."

"The importance of Tycho's star catalogue is beyond question, and the present critical edition … can only be welcomed … [DIO] has produced a thorough work, in which Tycho's [1004 stellar] positions have been compared with [modern-calculated ones for epoch 1601.03], and analysed in both ecliptic and equatorial coordinates … extensive [least-squares] error analysis … demonstrates that [Tycho's] accuracy … is much better than is generally assumed…. [DIO] deserves our congratulations for bringing this important result to the fore …. an excellent investigation." (July 1996 Annals of Science)

"fearless…. [on] the operation of structures of [academic] power & influence … much recommended to [readers] bored with … the more prominent public journals, or open to the possibility of scholars being motivated by other considerations than the pursuit of objective truth."

DIO home page