NavList:
A Community Devoted to the Preservation and Practice of Celestial Navigation and Other Methods of Traditional Wayfinding
Re: Universe of the ancient Greeks.
From: Alexandre Eremenko
Date: 2006 Mar 13, 23:26 -0500
From: Alexandre Eremenko
Date: 2006 Mar 13, 23:26 -0500
I would like to add few remarks to this discussion (and to defend the "ancient Greeks":-) Lu wrote: > >>Given the level of scientific knowledge, inquiry, and downright genius > >>among the ancient Greeks, I'm rather surprised that the idea of a > >>heliocentric universe didn't occur to one of them. and Bill replied: > > It did indeed occur to one or more of them, Aristarchus of Samos. 1. There are apparently hudge gaps in our knowledge about "ancient Greek's" science. There are indicatrions that the heliocentric system (and possibly the law of universal gravity) were common knowledge among educated "Greeks" in 3-1 cent BC. The problem is that very little of scientific writings of that time survived. At the time when Ptolemy wrote, this "ancient Greek" science was already very ancient indeed. (Like Kepler to us). There was a hudge regress in science in these centuries, accompanied with destruction of major scientific libraries. The "educated crowd" somehow lost interest to science. The epoch of Ptolemy was a brief and temporary and incomplete revival, before Europe finally fell into the Dark Age. In the modern times, I mean the times of Copernicus, Bruno, Galileo, and Kepler, heliocentric system was frequently called a "Pithagorean teaching". Newton refers to "the ancients" in connection with universal gravitation. (I understand that these views are not quite common. A good comprehensive source is the book L. Russo, Forgotten revolution.) 2. Now we understand that the difference between geocentric and heliocentric system is not so fundamental:-) It is the question of convenient choice of coordinate system. And we do use geocentric system in nautical almanach, for example. It is just the question of convenience. The real breakthrough (after the ancients) was the discovery of Kepler laws, not the heliocentric system. (In many cases, Copernicus system gives less precise predictions that Ptolemy system). > True, but then why didn't the rest of the "learned" crowd jump on the > idea as a solution for the motion of the planets? Or were they more > interested in a "logically satisfying" solution than one that provided > the easiest solution to a problem? I afraid that the "learned crowd", beginning approx 1 cent. AD just was not interested in these discussions, and was unable to understand the writings of astronomers and mathematicians of the previous century. Few centuries later there was no learned crowd at all... Alex. P.S. There are many signs that we are living in the beginning o a similar period of decline.