Discovery Of Uranus Analysis

Because of my interest in Astronomy, I have picked "Astronomy: Discovery of Uranus by William Herschel in 1781". It was very educational for me to see, how the process of science worked in this particular case, and why it is so important for observations shared and discoveries to be replicated by others.
I have based my observations on the work by Simon Schaffer, St. John 's College, Cambridge called "URANUS and the establishment of Herschel 's astronomy". Below is a breakdown of the assignment questions:

What was the motivation that led to this discovery?
William Herschel was only an amateur astronomer and at that time having a royal patronage was everything. This discovery would provide an annual pension of 200 pounds from the Royal Society, support for further investigations of sidereal heavens that Herschel worked on and a position in a professional astronomers ' community.

What questions were asked?
- One of the main questions that other scientists were asking, was related to inconsistencies of Herschel 's discovery. He first claimed that he discovered a comet, but shared observations raised concern due to the comet having no 'beard or tail ', which most of the comets do.

In one of the notes to Herschel, one of his colleagues Charles Messier stated: "I am amazed with this

Conclusion:
Even though his work was highly criticized, Herschel was later admitted to the Royal Society and received a status of astronomer along with position and annual pension. I 've learned on the example of this discovery that it is very important to share your observations with the community of other scientists, in order to verify the evidence and replicate the results. If Herschel didn 't share his observations and his work, most likely, would have been rejected in the end and discovery of the planet Uranus delayed. Only through the effort of many different scientists this discovery was possible, even though only an amateur astronomer started it all by simple