I was surprised to note some of Alan Shapiro’s comments in his review of the book Math and the Mona Lisa: The Art and Science of Leonardo da Vinci by Bülent Atalay (Physics Today, July 2005, page 63). Shapiro wrote, “I believe [Atalay] overemphasizes da Vinci’s significance and originality as a scientist and engineer—as many do.” This may be true, if we evaluate da Vinci’s direct impact on science and engineering in the centuries after his death. It is certainly not his fault that nobody bothered to read his notebooks. I suggest da Vinci’s significance and originality as a scientist and engineer—not to mention his other multifarious talents and abilities—make him perhaps the most outstanding intellect and talent of recorded history. Webster’s Biographical Dictionary devotes three full lines to listing fields in which he made contributions; it finishes with the dreaded “etc.”
Reading da Vinci’s own writings (The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, translated by Edward MacCurdy, Garden City, 1941), one can scarcely grasp the breadth of his interests, or of his abilities in deductive and inductive logic. As a practicing geophysicist, I found the following observations in the first hundred or so pages da Vinci wrote around 1510. “A falling body will take the shortest route towards the Earth’s center.” And “two bodies of water equidistant from the Earth’s center, will not move towards each other.” No mean deductions regarding Earth’s gravitation and equipotential surfaces. More than 30 years before Copernicus, da Vinci wrote, “The Sun does not move.” I found hundreds of other observations about every scientific subject under the Sun—light, geology, aerodynamics, anatomy, flight, and more.
Perhaps da Vinci’s lack of serious mathematical training hindered his making deeper contributions in some fields. However, he knew the importance of that purest of all sciences: “Therefore, O students, study mathematics, and do not build without foundations.” What comes across clearly from his notebooks was his complete lack of interest in public acclaim. He carried out his activities and research for his own interest and moved on from them once completed.
Shakespeare was correct when he wrote “Here was a [man] Caesar! When comes such another?” But the Bard applied it to the wrong son of Italy.