DOCSLIB.ORG

Kepler's "War on Mars" and the Usurpation of Seventeenth-Century Astronomy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Kepler's ResearchOnline@JCU This file is part of the following reference: Dorsey, William Anthony Robert (2012) Kepler's "War on Mars" and the usurpation of seventeenth-century astronomy. Professional Doctorate (Research) thesis, James Cook University. Access to this file is available from: http://eprints.jcu.edu.au/29931/ The author has certified to JCU that they have made a reasonable effort to gain permission and acknowledge the owner of any third party copyright material included in this document. If you believe that this is not the case, please contact [email protected] and quote http://eprints.jcu.edu.au/29931/ 1 Kepler‟s “War on Mars” and the Usurpation of Seventeenth-Century Astronomy Thesis submitted by William Anthony Robert DORSEY, B.A. (New School University), Master of Astronomy (University of Western Sydney) in September 2012 for the degree of Doctor of Astronomy in the School of Engineering and Physical Sciences James Cook University 2 STATEMENT OF ACCESS I, the undersigned, author of this work, understand that James Cook University will make this thesis available for use within the University Library and, via the Australian Digital Thesis network, for use elsewhere. I understand that, as an unpublished work, a thesis has significant protection under the Copyright Act and; I do not wish to place any further restriction on access to this work. Signature Date 12-06-2012 3 STATEMENT OF SOURCES DECLARATION I declare that this thesis is my own work and has not been submitted in any form for another degree or diploma at any university of tertiary education. Information derived from the published or unpublished work of others has been acknowledged in the text and a list of references is given. Signature Date 12-06-2012 4 STATEMENT OF CONTRIBUTION BY OTHERS I, the undersigned, author of this work, confirm that I have not received any financial or editorial help in the preparation of this thesis. James Cook University Scholarship Signature Date 12-06-2012 5 ELECTRONIC COPY DECLARATION l, the undersigned, the author of this work, declare that the electronic copy of this thesis provided to the James Cook University Library is an accurate copy of the print thesis submitted, within the limits of the technology available. Signature Date 23-02-2011 6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, I thank my thesis supervisors Associate Professor Wayne Orchiston and Professor F. Richard Stephenson. Their enthusiastic support of my interest in the history of astronomy has been beyond the call of duty. It has been my good fortune to work with them on my project while at James Cook University. I also thank Professor Walter Watson who first inspired my interest in the philosophical foundations of physics and Dr William Gustch, who gave me the opportunity to teach my first course in the history of astronomy at the Hayden Planetarium, From Copernicus to Einstein. Lastly, to my devoted wife Jean for her dedication and support; her patience is truly a gift from the gods. 7 ABSTRACT This paper presents an interpretation of how Johannes Kepler changed the history and development of astronomy. It is proposed that in his metaphorical ―War with Mars‖, the Astronomia nova, Kepler used a revolutionary rhetoric to wage a ―War on Mars‖ to bring about the usurpation of seventeenth-century astronomy. Kepler rhetorically redefined the axiomatic structure of the traditional astronomical framework and summarily replaced it with his own new discoveries, thereby affecting how we study astronomy. Kepler proposed a new conceptual framework based upon a new approach and methodology that was an obvious deviation and involved an intensive and extraordinary interplay between quantitative observation and theoretical construction, and between tradition and innovation. Here we examine how Kepler treated traditional astronomy with the use of rhetoric to usurp the entire well-established conceptual framework within which the hypotheses of Claudius Ptolemy, Nicolas Copernicus and Tycho Brahe functioned. We examine the principles, methods and subject matters that make up the elemental structure and character of Kepler‘s new conceptual framework. We reveal that Kepler sought comprehensive physical principles that could determine the true form of the entire known Universe. This thesis suggests that although Kepler may have believed in and defended some Copernican ideas for a heliocentric system, the innovations in his ‗new astronomy‘ opened up a whole new vista. Key terms: Medieval science, rhetoric, rhetor, usurpatory rhetoric, philosophical rhetoric, philosophic rhetor, dialectics, rhetoric of science, metaphor, allegory, analogy, argument by analogy, deduction, ethos, logos and pathos. 8 LIST OF CONTENT Page Acknowledgements 6 Abstract 7 Table of Contents 8 List of Figures 10 Chapter 1 Introduction 11 1.1 Prelude 13 1.2 The Rhetoric of Science 14 1.3 Definitions 19 1.4 Review of the Literature 21 1.5 Relevance and Importance of this Study 24 1.6 Research Method 25 1.7 Structure of the Thesis 25 Chapter 2 Johannes Kepler: The Making of a Revolutionary 31 2.1 Kepler‟s Character and Self-defense 34 2.2 A Selected Biography: Kepler‟s Life 35 2.3 The Mysterium Cosmographicum 38 2.4 Discussion 46 Chapter 3 Tradition vs. Innovation 47 3.1 The Traditional Framework: Pre-Keplerian Astronomy 49 3.2 „War of the Worlds‟ 57 3.3 Innovation: Kepler‟s Perspective 60 3.4 The Martian Problem - “War with Mars” 61 3.5 The Rhetorical Nature of the Astronomia nova 63 3.6 The Rhetorical Composition of the Astronomia nova 65 3.7 Discussion 70 Chapter 4 Principle: From Physics 73 4.1 Physical Cause 75 4.2 Kepler‟s Approach 76 4.3 Discussion 81 Chapter 5 Method: Through Physics 83 5.1 Kepler‟s Method 85 5.2 Kepler‟s Methodological Differences 87 5.3 Mathematical/Rhetorical Analogies 92 5.4 The Magnetism Analogy 96 5.5 Kepler‟s Derivation of the Elliptical Path 98 5.6 Concept Formation-Definitions of Single Terms 104 5.7 Confrontation of Contraries: 2-term Relations 106 9 5.8 Patterns of Inference-Discovery 107 5.9 Discussion 107 Chapter 6 Subject Matter: To Physics - Physical Astronomy 109 6.1 Mixed Sciences 111 6.2 Physicalization of Astronomy 115 6.3 Discussion 116 Chapter 7 The Reception of Kepler‟s New Astronomical Ideas 117 7.1 A Revolution in Physical Science 119 7.2 The Harmonice Mundi 121 7.3 Celestial Harmony 125 7.4 Discussion 129 Chapter 8 The Epitome of Copernican Astronomy 130 8.1 The Purpose of the Epitome 132 8.2 Traditional Arguments 133 8.3 Kepler‟s Rejection of The Traditional Views 134 8.4 Discussion 135 Chapter 9 Keplerian Astronomy after Kepler 137 9.1 A Brief Summary of Kepler‟s Laws 139 9.2 The Reception of Kepler‟s New Astronomy 142 Chapter 10 Conclusion 146 Chapter 11 References 152 10 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1: Anonymous portrait dated 1610 of Johannes Kepler, 1571-1630 (source: Wikimedia). 33 Figure 2: Title page of the Mysterium Cosmographicum (source: Wikimedia). 40 Figure 3: Regular Platonic solids; clockwise from top left: tetrahedron, cube, octahedron, icosahedron and dodecahedron (source: Wikimedia). 41 Figure 4: Kepler‘s nested sphere models (source: Wikimedia). 42 Figure 5: Close-up of the inner section of the model in Figure 4 showing the inner planets (source: Wikimedia). 43 Figure 6: Ptolemy‘s Geocentric Universe (source: Wikimedia). 52 Figure 7: Ptolemy‘s epicycle and deferent (source Wikimedia). 53 Figure 8: Representations of Ptolemy‘s planetary motion (source: Wikimedia). 54 Figure 9: Further representations of Ptolemy‘s planetary motion (source: Wikimedia). 54 Figure 10: The Copernican heliocentric planetary paths (source: Wikimedia). 55 Figure 11: The Tychonic model (source: Wikimedia). 56 Figure 12: The three cosmological models. 58 Figure 13: Title page of the Astronomia nova (source: Wikimedia). 64 Figure 14: Diagram showing the mean Sun and the true Sun (adapted by the author from Martens, 2000: 72). 77 Figure 15: The orbit of Mars (adapted from Wikimedia). 80 Figure 16: The Vicarious Hypothesis, taken from Kepler‘s own diagram in Chapter 16 (after Kepler, 1992: 252). 80 Figure 17: An example of Kepler‘s astronomical calculations (source: Wikimedia). 85 Figure 18: The ferryman analogy, taken from Kepler‘s own diagram in Chapters 57 (after Kepler, 1992: 549). 95 Figure 19: Kepler‘s diagram showing Mars‘ elliptical orbit and taken from Kepler‘s own diagrams in Chapters 59 and 60 (after Kepler, 1992). 101 Figure 20: Kepler‘s equal area law. 102 Figure 21: Kepler‘s plotting of Ptolemy‘s Martian data, taken from Kepler‘s own diagram in Chapter 1 (after Kepler, 1992: 119). 104 Figure 22: Kepler‘s method and subject matter. 113 Figure 23: Title page of Harmonice Mundi (source: Wikimedia). 122 Figure 24: Kepler‘s ‗Music of the Spheres‘, adapted from Kepler‘s own diagram in Harmonice Mundi V, Chapter 6 (after Kepler, 1939b). 126 Figure 25: Fludd‘s monochord (after Wikimedia). 127 Figure 26: Title page of the Epitome of Copernican Astronomy, the posthumous edition of 1635, in which all seven books are published together. 132 Figure 27: In the Epitome III, Part II, Kepler illustrates the revolution of the Earth around the Sun. In the adjacent text the reader is told that the Sun does not move (source: Mathematical Sciences Digital Library). 136 Figure 28: Kepler‘s ‗First Law of Planetary Motion‘, a modern view 140 Figure 29: Kepler‘s ‗Second Law of Planetary Motion‘, a modern view. 140 Figure 30: A graphical representation of Kepler‘s ‗Third Law of Planetary Motion‘. 142 11 Chapter 1 Introduction 12 Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 Prelude 1.2 The Rhetoric of Science 1.3 Definitions 1.4 Review of the Literature 1.5 Relevance and Importance of this Study 1.6 Research Method 1.7 Structure of the Thesis 13 ―… I confess that when Tycho died, I quickly took advantage of the absence, or lack of circumspection, of the heirs, by taking the observations under my care, or perhaps usurping them...‖ Kepler (1992) ―…we come to our fundamental human understanding not by proofs but by persuasion.‖ Gingerich (2004) 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Prelude When Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo suggested that the Earth revolved around the Sun, they weren‘t asking scientists to observe new data, they were proposing a new framework for understanding century‘s old observations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Hints Into Kepler's Method
    Stefano Gattei [email protected] Hints into Kepler’s method ABSTRACT The Italian Academy, Columbia University February 4, 2009 Some of Johannes Kepler’s works seem very different in character. His youthful Mysterium cosmographicum (1596) argues for heliocentrism on the basis of metaphysical, astronomical, astrological, numerological, and architectonic principles. By contrast, Astronomia nova (1609) is far more tightly argued on the basis of only a few dynamical principles. In the eyes of many, such a contrast embodies a transition from Renaissance to early modern science. However, Kepler did not subsequently abandon the broader approach of his early works: similar metaphysical arguments reappeared in Harmonices mundi libri V (1619), and he reissued the Mysterium cosmographicum in a second edition in 1621, in which he qualified only some of his youthful arguments. I claim that the conceptual and stylistic features of the Astronomia nova – as well as of other “minor” works, such as Strena seu De nive sexangula (1611) or Nova stereometria doliorum vinariorum (1615) – are intimately related and were purposely chosen because of the response he knew to expect from the astronomical community to the revolutionary changes in astronomy he was proposing. Far from being a stream-of-consciousness or merely rhetorical kind of narrative, as many scholars have argued, Kepler’s expository method was carefully calculated both to convince his readers and to engage them in a critical discussion in the joint effort to know God’s design. By abandoning the perspective of the inductivist philosophy of science, which is forced by its own standards to portray Kepler as a “sleepwalker,” I argue that the key lies in the examination of Kepler’s method: whether considering the functioning and structure of the heavens or the tiny geometry of the little snowflakes, he never hesitated to discuss his own intellectual journey, offering a rational reconstruction of the series of false starts, blind alleys, and failures he encountered.
    [Show full text]
  • Kepler's Cosmological Synthesis
    Kepler’s Cosmological Synthesis History of Science and Medicine Library VOLUME 39 Medieval and Early Modern Science Editors J. M. M. H. Thijssen, Radboud University Nijmegen C. H. Lüthy, Radboud University Nijmegen Editorial Consultants Joël Biard, University of Tours Simo Knuuttila, University of Helsinki Jürgen Renn, Max-Planck-Institute for the History of Science Theo Verbeek, University of Utrecht VOLUME 20 The titles published in this series are listed at brill.com/hsml Kepler’s Cosmological Synthesis Astrology, Mechanism and the Soul By Patrick J. Boner LEIDEN • BOSTON 2013 Cover illustration: Kepler’s Supernova, SN 1604, appears as a new star in the foot of Ophiuchus near the letter N. In: Johannes Kepler, De stella nova in pede Serpentarii, Prague: Paul Sessius, 1606, pp. 76–77. Courtesy of the Department of Rare Books and Manuscripts, Milton S. Eisenhower Library, Johns Hopkins University. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Boner, Patrick, author. Kepler’s cosmological synthesis: astrology, mechanism and the soul / by Patrick J. Boner. pages cm. — (History of science and medicine library, ISSN 1872-0684; volume 39; Medieval and early modern science; volume 20) Based on the author’s doctoral dissertation, University of Cambridge, 2007. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-90-04-24608-9 (hardback: alk. paper) — ISBN 978-90-04-24609-6 (e-book) 1. Kepler, Johannes, 1571–1630—Philosophy. 2. Cosmology—History. 3. Astronomy—History. I. Title. II. Series: History of science and medicine library; v. 39. III. Series: History of science and medicine library. Medieval and early modern science; v. 20. QB36.K4.B638 2013 523.1092—dc23 2013013707 This publication has been typeset in the multilingual “Brill” typeface.
    [Show full text]
  • Florida State University Libraries
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2017 Si Tantus Amor Belli Tibi, Roma, Nefandi. Love and Strife in Lucan's Bellum Civile Giulio Celotto Follow this and additional works at the DigiNole: FSU's Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected] FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES SI TANTUS AMOR BELLI TIBI, ROMA, NEFANDI. LOVE AND STRIFE IN LUCAN’S BELLUM CIVILE By GIULIO CELOTTO A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Classics in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2017 Giulio Celotto defended this dissertation on February 28, 2017. The members of the supervisory committee were: Tim Stover Professor Directing Dissertation David Levenson University Representative Laurel Fulkerson Committee Member Francis Cairns Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above5na ed co ittee e bers, and certifies that the dissertation has been appro0ed in accordance 1ith uni0ersity require ents. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The co pletion of this dissertation could not ha0e been possible 1ithout the help and the participation of a nu ber of people. It is a great pleasure to be able to ac3no1ledge the here. I a ost grateful to y super0isor, Professor Ti Sto0er, for his guidance and dedication throughout the entire ti e of y research. I 1ish to e6tend y than3s to the other Co ittee e bers, Professors Laurel Ful3erson, Francis Cairns, and Da0id Le0enson, for their ad0ice at e0ery stage of y research. I 1ould li3e to e6press y deepest gratitude to Professor Andre1 7issos, 1ho read the entire anuscript at a later stage, and offered any helpful suggestions and criticis s.
    [Show full text]
  • Kepler Press
    National Aeronautics and Space Administration PRESS KIT/FEBRUARY 2009 Kepler: NASA’s First Mission Capable of Finding Earth-Size Planets www.nasa.gov Media Contacts J.D. Harrington Policy/Program Management 202-358-5241 NASA Headquarters [email protected] Washington 202-262-7048 (cell) Michael Mewhinney Science 650-604-3937 NASA Ames Research Center [email protected] Moffett Field, Calif. 650-207-1323 (cell) Whitney Clavin Spacecraft/Project Management 818-354-4673 Jet Propulsion Laboratory [email protected] Pasadena, Calif. 818-458-9008 (cell) George Diller Launch Operations 321-867-2468 Kennedy Space Center, Fla. [email protected] 321-431-4908 (cell) Roz Brown Spacecraft 303-533-6059. Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp. [email protected] Boulder, Colo. 720-581-3135 (cell) Mike Rein Delta II Launch Vehicle 321-730-5646 United Launch Alliance [email protected] Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Fla. 321-693-6250 (cell) Contents Media Services Information .......................................................................................................................... 5 Quick Facts ................................................................................................................................................... 7 NASA’s Search for Habitable Planets ............................................................................................................ 8 Scientific Goals and Objectives .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Kepler's Laws of Planetary Motion
    Kepler's laws of planetary motion In astronomy, Kepler's laws of planetary motion are three scientific laws describing the motion ofplanets around the Sun. 1. The orbit of a planet is an ellipse with the Sun at one of the twofoci . 2. A line segment joining a planet and the Sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time.[1] 3. The square of the orbital period of a planet is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit. Most planetary orbits are nearly circular, and careful observation and calculation are required in order to establish that they are not perfectly circular. Calculations of the orbit of Mars[2] indicated an elliptical orbit. From this, Johannes Kepler inferred that other bodies in the Solar System, including those farther away from the Sun, also have elliptical orbits. Kepler's work (published between 1609 and 1619) improved the heliocentric theory of Nicolaus Copernicus, explaining how the planets' speeds varied, and using elliptical orbits rather than circular orbits withepicycles .[3] Figure 1: Illustration of Kepler's three laws with two planetary orbits. Isaac Newton showed in 1687 that relationships like Kepler's would apply in the 1. The orbits are ellipses, with focal Solar System to a good approximation, as a consequence of his own laws of motion points F1 and F2 for the first planet and law of universal gravitation. and F1 and F3 for the second planet. The Sun is placed in focal pointF 1. 2. The two shaded sectors A1 and A2 Contents have the same surface area and the time for planet 1 to cover segmentA 1 Comparison to Copernicus is equal to the time to cover segment A .
    [Show full text]
  • The Watershed: a Biography of Johannes Kepler
    The Watershed By Arthur Koestler Spanish Tertament Gladiators Darkness at Noon Scum of the Earth Arrival andDeparture The Yogi and the Commissar Twilight Bctr Thieves in the Night Insight andOutlook The Structure of a Miracle Age of Longing Promise and Fulfillment .Arrow in the Blue The InvisibleWriting Trail of the Dinosaur Reflections on Hanging The Sleepwolkers ARTHUR KoESTLER, born in Budapest in 1905 and edu­ cated in Viemia, began his writing career as an editor of a German and Arabian weekly newspaper in Cairo. This led to his becoming the Near East correspondent for the Ullstein newspapers of Berlin. Future assign­ ments included the Graf Zepplin's flight over the Arctic in 1931 and the Civil War in Spain, where he was im­ prisoned, sentenced to death, and finally pardoned by the rebels. An active communist from 1931 to 1938, Koestler achieved world fame with DARKNESS AT NooN ( 1941), his explosive anti-communist novel. He now lives in England. A more comprehensive biography ap­ pears in John Durston's Foreword. THE WATERSHED A Biography of Johannes Kepler .Arthur Koestler Foreword by John Durston ILLUSTRATED BY R. PAUL LARKIN Published by Anchor Books Doubleday & Company, Inc. Garden City, New York LibrtJT)' of Congress Catalog Card Number 6o-13537 Copyright© 1960 by EducatiorudServices Incorporated From THE SLEEPWALKERS © Arthur Koestler 1959 by prmnjssion of the author and The Macmillan Company, New York and Hutchinson & Co. (Publishers) Ltd. All Rights Reserved Printed in the United Statesof Americtt THE SCIENCE STUDY SERIES The Science Study Series offers to students and to the general public the writing of distinguished authors on the most stirring and fundamental topics of physics, from the smallest known particles to the whole universe.
    [Show full text]
  • Astrology, Mechanism and the Soul by Patrick J
    Kepler’s Cosmological Synthesis: Astrology, Mechanism and the Soul by Patrick J. Boner History of Science and Medicine Library 39/Medieval and Early Modern Sci- ence 20. Leiden/Boston: Brill, 2013. Pp. ISBN 978–90–04–24608–9. Cloth $138.00 xiv + 187 Reviewed by André Goddu Stonehill College [email protected] Johannes Kepler has always been something of a puzzle if not a scandal for historians of science. Even when historians acknowledged Renaissance, magical, mystical, Neoplatonic/Pythagorean influences, they dismissed or minimized them as due to youthful exuberance later corrected by rigorous empiricism and self-criticism.The pressure to see Kepler as a mathematical physicist and precursor to Newton’s synthesis remains seductive because it provides such a neat and relatively simple narrative. As a result, the image of Kepler as a mechanistic thinker who helped to demolish the Aristotelian world view has prevailed—and this despite persuasive characterization of Kepler as a transitional figure, the culmination of one tradition and the beginning of another by David Lindberg [1986] in referring to Kepler’s work on optics and by Bruce Stephenson [1987, 1–7] in discussing Kepler on physical astronomy. In this brief study, Patrick Boner once again challenges the image of Kepler as a reductivist, mechanistic thinker by summarizing and quoting passages of works and correspondence covering many of Kepler’s ideas, both early and late, that confirm how integral Kepler’s animistic beliefs were with his understanding of natural, physical processes. Among Boner’s targets, Anneliese Maier [1937], Eduard Dijksterhuis [1961], Reiner Hooykaas [1987], David Keller and E.
    [Show full text]
  • A Priori and a Posteriori : Two Approaches to Heliocentrism
    chapter 6 A priori and a posteriori: Two Approaches to Heliocentrism One could consider the earliest reception of De revolutionibus to be concluded with the publication of Mysterium cosmographicum, an ambitious attempt to reaffirm the reality of heliocentrism which signaled its author, the young Kepler, as one of the most promising and original mathematical and philo- sophical minds of his time. He did not embrace the geo-heliocentric “third way” of Ursus and Brahe, and would later reject the infinitist viewpoint of Bruno and his followers. Rather, he reassessed the Copernican system from a completely new perspective. After a period of intense astronomical observa- tions (the approach supported by Landgrave Wilhelm IV and Brahe as well as by Mästlin and Magini), Kepler claimed that it was possible to grasp the design of the heavens from an a priori perspective. His intention was, in fact, to unveil the archetypal reasons for the planetary order rooted in Divine Providence. He called this hidden astronomical truth, in Latin, the mysterium cosmographi- cum, i.e. the cosmic secret. An important aspect of his speculations was the project of unifying mathematical and physical astronomy, which he would especially develop in Astronomia nova (1609) and in Harmonice mundi (1619). On the other hand, Galileo’s telescopic discoveries, first communicated in Sidereus nuncius (1610), strengthened the heliocentric cause by bringing new data that were not reconcilable with either Ptolemaic geocentrism or with the Aristotelian principle that the heavens are unalterable. The Copernican alliance between Kepler and Galileo was in many respects a historical contingency, since they came to support the heliocentric system for different reasons and starting from very different conceptions of science.
    [Show full text]
  • Kepler's Optical Part of Astronomy (1604)
    Kepler’s Optical Part of Astronomy (1604): Introducing the Ecliptic Instrument Giora Hon University of Haifa Yaakov Zik University of Haifa For William H. Donahue The year 2009 marks the 400th anniversary of the publication of one of the most revolutionary scientiªc texts ever written. In this book, appropriately en- titled, Astronomia nova, Johannes Kepler (1571–1630) developed an as- tronomical theory which departs fundamentally from the systems of Ptolemy and Copernicus. One of the great innovations of this theory is its dependence on the science of optics. The declared goal of Kepler in his earlier publication, Paralipomena to Witelo whereby The Optical Part of Astronomy is Treated (Ad Vitellionem Paralipomena, quibus astronomiae pars optica traditvr, 1604), was to solve difªculties and expose illusions astron- omers face when conducting astronomical observations with optical instru- ments. To avoid observational errors that had plagued the antiquated mea- Early versions of this paper were presented in XXV Scientiªc Instruments Commission Sympo- sium, “East and West: The Common European Heritage,” held in Krakow, Poland, 10–14 September, 2006; and in the meeting of the History of Science Society held in Vancouver, No- vember 2–5, 2006. We are indebted to the participants of these meetings for their com- ments. In particular, we thank Wilbur Applebaum for his valuable remarks. We thank Ron Alter of the University of Haifa Library for his help in acquiring material for our re- search. We are grateful to Dov Freiman and Avishi Marson of Elbit Systems, Electro- Optics ELOP, Ltd., for instructive discussions and optical simulations. We thank Ilan Manulis, director of The Harry Kay Observatory at the Technoda, Hadera, Israel, for using the Observatory infrastructure in September 2007.
    [Show full text]
  • Kepler's New Astronomy.Pdf
    Kepler's New Astronomy by John F. McGowan, Ph.D for Math-Blog.com Introduction This year (2009) is the 400th anniversary of the publication of Johannes Kepler's book New Astronomy (Astronomia Nova) announcing the discovery of the elliptical orbit of Mars to the world. The discovery of the elliptical orbit of Mars and the mathematical rule of motion for Mars on its elliptical orbit by Johannes Kepler in 1605 is one of the most important advances in astronomy, physics, and science. This discovery transformed the unproven heliocentric theory of Copernicus into a rigorous predictive theory that outperformed the traditional geocentric theory of Claudius Ptolemy and his successors. The discovery paved the way for Newton's theory of gravitation. It remains one of a small number of cases where a simple mathematical rule for seemingly complex and confusing data has been found. In many respects, the discovery of the elliptical orbit of Mars and other planets is more important than the better known work of Kepler's contemporary Galileo. In honor of Kepler, NASA has named its recent mission to look for extra-solar planets, especially possible other Earths that might support life or even intelli- gence, the Kepler mission. In Kepler's time the reigning Ptolemaic theory could predict the position of Mars to within a few degrees, usually less than a one percent error. How important is such a small error? Space missions routinely depend on modern orbital dynamics, a lineal descendant of Kepler's work, to make far more accurate calculations to succeed. The Mars Climate Orbiter mission in 1999 failed due to a tiny error.
    [Show full text]
  • By Christopher Reed
    Gingerich.final 10/6/03 7:07 PM Page 44 The Copernicus Quest How an astrophysicist with a “collecting gene” became the world’s authority on a revolutionary, allegedly unread book by Christopher Reed wen gingerich, ph.d. ’62, takes a seat revoluty-own-ibus” is a good approximation of its proper pro- on his “rocket cart”—a dolly with a steer- nunciation, says Gingerich. Its title page reminds him of an op- ing stick in front, a straight-backed chair tometrist’s chart: amidship, and a big fire-extinguisher NICOLAUS CO mounted at back. Donning a crash helmet PERNICUS OF TORUN and an aviator’s scarf for the trip, he reaches about the revolutions of behind him and turns on the extinguisher, the Heavenly Spheres in Six Books. which releases a propulsive jet of carbon dioxide. The cart begins to move across the floor of the Science Copernicus argued against the conventional wisdom, promul- Center lecture hall. Gingerich picks up speed until he is accelerat- gated by Claudius Ptolemy in Alexandria around a.d. 150, that ing furiously with a look of terror on his face toward a side door, the earth was fixed at the middle of the universe. He proposed which flies open just in time and out he goes. Assistants in the instead that what could be observed of planetary motion could wings drop “a big sack full of pipes,” he explains, which make a be explained if the sun was immovable in the middle, with the huge clatter o≠ stage. Gingerich is demonstrating Newton’s third earth and other planets going around it, the modern understand- Olaw, that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
    [Show full text]
  • In Retrospect: Kepler's Astronomia Nova
    NATURE|Vol 462|10 December 2009 OPINION In Retrospect: Kepler’s Astronomia Nova Jack J. Lissauer explains how the great astronomer’s insight into planetary orbits is still revealing new views of the Universe four centuries on — from extrasolar Earths to black holes. Astronomia Nova astronomer and mathematician Aristarchus of stars block more light, such planets are easiest to by Johannes Kepler Samos, who lived in the third century bc. Gali- detect using the transit method. Hence, to date, First published 1609. leo’s discovery of four moons orbiting Jupiter all of the planets discovered in this way from the using a telescope confirmed that Earth wasn’t ground are larger than Uranus and have orbital the centre of the Universe around which every- periods of less than 10 days. But the clear view The 2009 International Year of Astronomy thing in the celestial domain revolves. and unbroken observations available from space commemorates the 400th anniversary of two Kepler was the first to realize that orbits are mean that the Kepler mission should detect great discoveries: Galileo Galilei’s detection of better described by ellipses traversed at non- smaller and more distant planets, notably Earth- Jupiter’s four major moons and the publica- uniform speed than by combinations of ‘perfect’ like bodies with one-year orbital periods around tion of Johannes Kepler’s monumental book circular motions on which orbits had hitherto Sun-like stars. Even smaller planets orbiting Astronomia Nova. In this 1609 work, Kepler been modelled. Like a modern data analyst, he near their stars will be detectable, as will more demonstrated that planets follow elliptical incorporated all of the observations with their distant planets that are larger than Earth.
    [Show full text]