Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Galileo was wrong



The Tychonic model, that is the one you are referring to had another problem. If the planets were still moving around on crystal sphere, they would run into each other.


Joseph J. Bellina, Jr. Ph.D.
Emeritus Professor of Physics
Co-Director
Northern Indiana Math Science and Engineering Collaborative
574-276-8294
inquirybellina@comcast.net




On Sep 21, 2010, at 5:48 PM, LaMontagne, Bob wrote:

Really fast :-) Like once a day.

Actually, a lot of Galileo's "proofs" we kind of short-circuited because there was a third contemporary system in use for producing navigational tables that was a hybrid of the earth centered system and the sun centered system. In it the earth was stationary with the sun orbiting the earth - but the other planets all orbited the sun. Observationally (except for the not yet discovered Foucault pendulum) there is no difference between the hybrid system and a true "Solar system". The planets have the same phases and the retrograde motions follow the same schedule. The true tipping point came when Kepler found the orbits to be elliptical which eliminated the need for equants.

Bob at PC

-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [mailto:phys-l-
bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of curtis osterhoudt
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 4:25 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Galileo was wrong

At what rate?

/**************************************
"The four points of the compass be logic, knowledge, wisdom and the
unknown.
Some do bow in that final direction. Others advance upon it. To bow
before the
one is to lose sight of the three. I may submit to the unknown, but
never to the
unknowable." ~~Roger Zelazny, in "Lord of Light"
***************************************/




________________________________
From: "LaMontagne, Bob" <RLAMONT@providence.edu>
To: Forum for Physics Educators <phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu>
Sent: Tue, September 21, 2010 2:22:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Galileo was wrong

Wouldn't the Foucault pendulum work just as well if the earth were
stationary
and the rest of the universe revolved around it?

Bob at PC

-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [mailto:phys-l-
bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Schnick
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 1:10 PM
To: Forum for Physics Educators
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Galileo was wrong

It is my understanding that the Church told Galileo that it would be
okay for him to say that it is much easier to describe/predict the
motion of the planets in an inertial reference frame centered on the
sun
but that he should not say that the sun IS the center of the solar
system / universe. Galileo was championing a good model for
understanding the motions of the planets but he refused to simply
claim
that it was a good model and insisted on claiming that it was
reality.
The arguments against the earth being the center with the stars
revolving around it were based on measurements of acceleration, e.g.
those that can be made by means of a Foucault pendulum. Is
acceleration
motion?

It seems to me that a reference frame rigidly attached to the earth
is
a
valid reference frame. It is not an itertial reference frame and
spacetime, as viewed from that reference frame is much more
complicated
than it would be as viewed from an inertial reference frame but that
just makes in an inconvenient reference frame. I don't think that
anyone can or has scientifically proved that one reference frame is
more
real than another. "Which is more real?" is not a physics question.

-----Original Message-----
From: phys-l-bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu [mailto:phys-l-
bounces@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu] On Behalf Of Joseph Bellina
Sent: Monday, September 20, 2010 7:12 AM
To: betwys1@sbcglobal.net; Forum for Physics Educators
Cc: Sharing resources for high school physics;
PHYSLRNR@LISTSERV.BOISESTATE.EDU
Subject: Re: [Phys-l] Galileo was wrong

I think asymmetry in background radiation is evidence that the
earth
is moving. What do others think?

I'd say that it is evidence that the earth has a non-zero velocity
relative to a reference frame in which the background radiation is
symmetric.


joe
Joseph J. Bellina, Jr. Ph.D.
Emeritus Professor of Physics
Co-Director
Northern Indiana Math Science and Engineering Collaborative
574-276-8294
inquirybellina@comcast.net




On Sep 19, 2010, at 8:04 PM, brian whatcott wrote:

Galileo was a towering figure. It's generally accepted that he
was in
error in several respects - like all of the intellectual giants -
of
which his most famous is the supposition that the acceleration
of
a
ball released down a channel varied in a particular way with the
angle
of the wood molding. It's the nature of the game. Do you object
to
people mentioning that earlier giants made errors, or just when
the
Church is involved?
As to geocentrism: the only observational evidence currently
available
places Earth at the center of the inhabited universe as far as
Human
like qualities are concerned. Though observing parallax
differences
for
the menstrual variation in Earth's location is difficult, it is
now
established quite well that Earth shows an annual displacement
consistent with an Earth orbit round a fast moving Sun. So one
can
say
with some confidence "il muove".
Then there was Lamarck - another figure who was soon
discredited,
and
now finds some support in the environmental effect now
discovered on
gene-expression and transmission. Well, waddaya know!

Discovery and model making, it is true, never ends.

Brian W

On 9/19/2010 6:18 PM, Bernard Cleyet wrote:
As Dean wrote, "our" work is never done:


Galileo Was Wrong


bc thinks may be a hoax

Original post:


If it didn't conflict with our upcoming NCNAAPT conference
(November 6 in Concord), I would highly recommend the upcoming
"Galileo Was Wrong! The Church was Right!" conference to be held
in the shadow of Notre Dame in South Bend, IN.

No, really; it's a serious geocentrism conference in 2010!

Lest you ever think your work as a science educator is ever
done...

http://phyzblog.blogspot.com/2010/09/galileo-was-wrong-oh-i-
dont-
think-so.html

Take care,
Dean
http://phyz.org
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l


_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l

_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l




_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l
_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l