A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Amateur Astronomy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Some Historical Dates



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old December 5th 17, 07:38 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default 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  
Old December 6th 17, 07:26 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris.B[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,001
Default 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  
Old December 6th 17, 07:43 PM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Quadibloc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,018
Default 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  
Old December 7th 17, 08:33 AM posted to sci.astro.amateur
Chris.B[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,001
Default 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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Easter dates p forsdick UK Astronomy 14 February 28th 08 03:10 PM
easter dates p forsdick UK Astronomy 1 February 19th 08 12:58 PM
Pi Day and dates (A bit OT) Roger Steer Amateur Astronomy 11 March 15th 06 11:18 PM
similarities three dates ??? Eric Misc 2 March 11th 06 07:22 PM
Conversion of Chinese historical dates Phong Astronomy Misc 0 January 21st 04 03:29 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:08 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.