|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Some Historical Dates
Newton's Principia was first published in 1686, and an English translation was
first published in 1728. It was in 1758 that the general rule placing books advocating helocentricism on the Index Prohibitorum was removed, although neither De Revolutionibis or the Dialogue Concerning the Two World Systems was explicitly removed at that time, they were absent when the next edition of the list came out in 1835. I hold that the timing was not coincidental. The Copernican hypothesis may have seemed to some people of a scientific spirit to be more elegant, more simple, more symmetrical than the Ptolemaic system which preceded it. However, a personal aesthetic preference... is something that is open to debate, and could quite understandably be held to be insufficient to contradict the apparent word of Scripture. Newton, however, provided a mechanism for the movements of the bodies in the Solar System. This mechanism gave a reason why the planets had to go around the Sun instead of the Earth; the Sun was bigger than the Earth. Well, _that_ could be considered to be merely hypothetical, but gravity and angular momentum could explain motion in a Keplerian ellipse, but it had no way to explain epicycles. It was in 1798 that the Cavendish experiment was reported... it is to its credit that the Church did not need to wait until then to relent on heliocentricism. John Savard |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Some Historical Dates
On Tuesday, 5 December 2017 07:38:57 UTC+1, Quadibloc wrote:
Newton's Principia was first published in 1686, and an English translation was first published in 1728. It was in 1758 that the general rule placing books advocating helocentricism on the Index Prohibitorum was removed, although neither De Revolutionibis or the Dialogue Concerning the Two World Systems was explicitly removed at that time, they were absent when the next edition of the list came out in 1835. I hold that the timing was not coincidental. The Copernican hypothesis may have seemed to some people of a scientific spirit to be more elegant, more simple, more symmetrical than the Ptolemaic system which preceded it. However, a personal aesthetic preference... is something that is open to debate, and could quite understandably be held to be insufficient to contradict the apparent word of Scripture. Newton, however, provided a mechanism for the movements of the bodies in the Solar System. This mechanism gave a reason why the planets had to go around the Sun instead of the Earth; the Sun was bigger than the Earth. Well, _that_ could be considered to be merely hypothetical, but gravity and angular momentum could explain motion in a Keplerian ellipse, but it had no way to explain epicycles. It was in 1798 that the Cavendish experiment was reported... it is to its credit that the Church did not need to wait until then to relent on heliocentricism. John Savard That's easy for you to say! 1461 is an absolute martyr to heliocentriffical spin on the blind bends of our differential orbital nodes of inferior, processional [iodal] wobblitudedness as a disadvantageous, minourly, latitudinal, relative velocities of planetoidal doobriwatsits before half past 13 cycloidals of Marchiness. Isn't it? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Some Historical Dates
On Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 11:26:20 AM UTC-7, Chris.B wrote:
That's easy for you to say! 1461 is an absolute martyr to heliocentriffical spin on the blind bends of our differential orbital nodes of inferior, processional [iodal] wobblitudedness as a disadvantageous, minourly, latitudinal, relative velocities of planetoidal doobriwatsits before half past 13 cycloidals of Marchiness. Isn't it? Given that Oriel36 is in Ireland, I suppose it is somewhat appropriate that you appear to be a fan of James Joyce, specifically Finnegan's Wake... John Savard |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Some Historical Dates
On Wednesday, 6 December 2017 19:43:17 UTC+1, Quadibloc wrote:
Given that Oriel36 is in Ireland, I suppose it is somewhat appropriate that you appear to be a fan of James Joyce, specifically Finnegan's Wake... I'm afraid don't have any of his "acoustic" albums. I much preferred Stanley Unwin's driving riffs on slæpped, electrisc basitude. Though "Women of Ireland" has its leprokornish moments of pure melodolitrude. Who is this Oriel 36 you speak of? He couldn't be that 1920s, French, boy band member nobody has ever heard of? I had no idea he had Irish roots? But then, so many completely unknown artists do. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Easter dates | p forsdick | UK Astronomy | 14 | February 28th 08 02:10 PM |
easter dates | p forsdick | UK Astronomy | 1 | February 19th 08 11:58 AM |
Pi Day and dates (A bit OT) | Roger Steer | Amateur Astronomy | 11 | March 15th 06 10:18 PM |
similarities three dates ??? | Eric | Misc | 2 | March 11th 06 06:22 PM |
Conversion of Chinese historical dates | Phong | Astronomy Misc | 0 | January 21st 04 02:29 PM |