The Shadow of Great Britain

Chapter 879: Revised: Chapter 12 The Issue of Beyond and Within the Scope of the College Entrance Examination

The morning at the Paris Academy of Sciences, the spring sunlight pierced through the classical style window lattices, projecting dappled light and shadow onto the polished marble floor, like a painting framed with golden borders.

Outside the window, the old plane trees swayed gently in the breeze, the tender green new leaves and the azure sky reflecting each other, adding a bit of vitality and tranquility to this sanctuary of knowledge.

On the tree-lined path under the plane trees, two French gentlemen were walking together.

Their pace was not fast, their steps unhurried, accompanied by the rustling of leaves in the breeze, and occasionally a few sounds of their intermittent laughter could be heard.

The slightly younger gentleman appeared to be in his early forties, his cheeks were gaunt and resolute, his nose was high, and a pair of deep blue eyes were set in his eye sockets. He wore a black silk top hat, under which revealed meticulously groomed silvery gray hair, and a deep blue double-breasted tailcoat, thick and well-cut, with a dark silk tie around his neck, further highlighting his scholarly demeanor. He wore a white high-collared shirt underneath, with exquisite lace at the cuffs, revealing his attention to detail.

The older gentleman wore a simple black woolen robe, with wide sleeves and a loose hem that swayed gently in the wind, showcasing his calm and composed academic temperament.

Occasionally, an assistant would pass by, and almost every assistant, upon passing them, would politely take off their hat and say: “Good morning, Mr. Navier. Good morning, Mr. Coriolis.”

For most people at the Paris Academy of Sciences, just these two surnames were enough to make one understand the distinguished academic abilities and professional experiences of these two gentlemen.

Claude-Louis Navier, a distinguished disciple succeeding the teachings of his mentor Jean-Baptiste Joseph Fourier, an academician of the French Academy of Sciences, former member of the senior committee of bridge construction at the Paris High Court, currently a professor of calculus and mechanics at the École Polytechnique and a professor of mechanics at the National School of Bridges and Roads.

Gustave Coriolis, a core scholar in the French scientific community under the tutelage of Augustin-Louis Cauchy, a member of the mechanics department of the French Academy of Sciences, former professor of geometric analysis and general physics at the École Centrale des Arts et Manufactures, currently a professor of applied physics at the National School of Bridges and Roads.

Almost every educated person would feel a sense of reverence in the presence of these two gentlemen. However, unlike the intellectual collisions imagined by many among academic elites, the two didn’t always discuss academic matters when they were together.

Coriolis felt the cool morning breeze and asked: “Mr. Navier, are you really not considering returning to the bridge construction committee?”

Navier shook his head gently with his cane: “It’s not that I don’t consider going back, but the bridge construction committee most likely wouldn’t take me back. Back when I was in charge of designing the bridge at the Hôpital des Invalides, I didn’t account for an adequate safety margin in my calculations, resulting in the bridge cracking and being dismantled for reconstruction. Ever since then, the government committee has had doubts about my design abilities; they believe my designs excessively rely on mathematical calculations, and they even sarcastically compared my engineering skills to those of an ordinary bricklayer. Although the committee was reorganized after the July Revolution, most of the previous members were re-elected. With them around, the bridge construction committee most likely wouldn’t consider letting me return to lead any engineering projects.”

Hearing this, Coriolis suddenly recalled something: “Ah! So, the structural design method you proposed—the allowable stress method—was summarized after the failure of that bridge construction?”

Navier nodded slightly: “Making the same mistake once is a miscalculation, but making it twice is foolish. Although I can’t be called a particularly smart person, I don’t want to be considered a fool either, so of course, I had to learn from that experience. After all, I still have a teaching position at the National School of Bridges and Roads. Even if I might never have the chance to lead bridge designs again, at least I should ensure my students won’t repeat my mistakes.”

Navier suddenly stopped and asked: “By the way, why did you suddenly come to the Academy of Sciences today? Today’s neither Wednesday nor Saturday, and there shouldn’t be any meetings of the mechanics department. Do you have some new findings?”

Coriolis couldn’t help but smile at these words: “It’s hard to hide anything from you. Do you remember the discovery I mentioned to you before? I found that when an object moves in a straight line within a rotating reference frame, due to inertia, the object tends to maintain its original direction of motion. However, due to the rotation of the reference frame itself, the actual trajectory of the object shifts. You found this discovery interesting and suggested I delve deeper into it. Lately, I’ve been pondering this issue, and to explain this phenomenon, I believe it’s feasible to introduce an additional force to describe the deviation of an object in a rotating reference frame.”

Navier frowned and thought for a while: “Introducing a completely new force? This conjecture is indeed bold, but until it’s completely disproved, I can’t say that this line of thinking is wrong. Hmm… have you found the mathematical expression for this force?”