Author | Thomas S. Kuhn |
---|---|
Language | English |
Subject | History of astronomy |
Publisher | Harvard University Press |
Publication date | 1957 |
Publication place | United States |
Media type | Print (Hardcover and Paperback) |
Pages | 297 |
ISBN | 0-674-17103-9 |
The Copernican Revolution is a 1957 book by the philosopher Thomas Kuhn, in which the author provides an analysis of the Copernican Revolution, documenting the pre-Ptolemaic understanding through the Ptolemaic system and its variants until the eventual acceptance of the Keplerian system. [1]
Kuhn argues that the Ptolemaic system provided broader appeal than a simple astronomical system but also became intertwined in broader philosophical and theological beliefs. Kuhn argues that this broader appeal made it more difficult for other systems to be proposed. [2] [3] [4] [5]
Note that while some of the illustrations used are a bit complex, Kuhn limits the technical information included in the primary text, and leaves them for a technical appendix at the back of the book.
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (November 2019) |
Before diving into a historical overview of the scientific understanding of the planets, stars and other celestial bodies, Kuhn prefaces the main ideas in The Copernican Revolution (in Chapter 1) by arguing that the story of the shift from a geocentric understanding of the universe to a heliocentric one offers a great deal of insight far beyond the specifics of that shift. Kuhn would later develop his theory regarding the development of science in his later work “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions,” [6] which was originally published in 1962 and remains his best known work. In this work, he focuses on a one particular example; namely the Copernican Revolution, which is a paradigmatic example of such a change.
That Kuhn saw the significance and importance of this understanding as crucial for a contemporary understanding of science, and that he saw the Copernican Reboluvion as a representative example can be seen by what he focuses on in Chapter 1. Here, regarding the Copernican Revolution he notes: "...it has an additional significance which transcends its specific subject: it illustrates a process that today we badly need to understand. Contemporary Western civilization is more dependent, both for its everyday philosophy and for its bread and butter, upon scientific concepts than any past civilization has been. But the scientific theories that bulk so large in our daily lives are unlikely to be final... The mutability of its fundamental concepts is not an argument for rejecting science... But an age as dominated by science as our own does need a perspective from which to examine the scientific beliefs which it takes so much for granted." [1] Kuhn stresses that our lack of familiarity with the process of development of science is a dangerous gap in our knowledge because without it, we cannot expect to reasonably assess the success or accuracy of scientific ideas and theories. Kuhn passed away in 1996 [7] and did not live to experience the COVID-19 pandemic, but this event, and the confusion that it created, supports Kuhn's assertion regarding the need for an understanding of how to assess scientific beliefs and how science develops.
After the brief introduction which included at the beginning of the first chapter, Kuhn takes the remainder of the chapter to explain the pre-Copernican understanding of the celestial world. [8] He quickly shows that this worldview was not simply the result of a simple, unscientific perspective, but in fact contained many of the components that we expect to see in a sophisticated, scientific worldview. For example, Kuhn shows how a “two sphere universe” - the model that saw the earth as a small sphere at the center of the universe with an outer sphere or stars that rotates (and the sun traveling in between) provided a framework that matched observations, allowed for mathematical predictions about the locations of stars in the sky at a future date, simplified what otherwise seemed to be the confounding movement of the sun, provided a simple explanation for many observed phenomena, explained differences in observations that were made from different places on Earth etc. Kuhn develops this convincingly by walking the reader through a range of observations about the movement of the sun and stars and details about how these corresponded to the model of the universe. This is supported by the fact that there are use cases even today, as Kuhn highlights, where we continue to use a version of this model of the universe.
After using the first chapter to show how primitive conceptions of the celestial spheres satisfied many requirements for a scientific theory, Kuhn highlights the most vexing issues with the model. While the model was quite satisfactory in explaining and predicting the movement of the stars, it struggled mightily to explain the movement of the planets. The definition of a planet at that time differs somewhat from our own, so Kuhn explains: "The term planet is derived from a Greek word meaning, "wanderer" and it was employed until after Copnicus' lifetime to distinguish between those celestial bodies that moved or "wandered" among the stars from those who relative positions were fixed. For the Greeks and their successors the sun was one of the seven planets. The others were the moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. The stars and these seven planets were the only bodies recognized as celestial in antiquity." [9] While the stars generally moved in lockstep, in predictable and organized fashion, the planets seemingly had a much more complex motion. Tracking their movement in the sky (based on observations over time) there are many inconsistencies. While the planets (other than the sun and moon) generally moved eastward in the sky, at times they would be observed moving westward, or "retrograde". Further, unlike the stars, that moved in lockstep, the planets each seemed to have their own schedules, traveling at different speeds. Astrologers throughout the years had many different theories to explain the movement. Most (but not all) models involved the planets rotating around the earth inside the stellar sphere (the sphere that was assumed to hold the stars).
At the end of the book, Kuhn summarizes the achievements of Copernicus and Newton, while comparing the incompatibility of Newtonian physics with Aristotelian concepts that preceded the then new physics. Kuhn also noted that discoveries, such as that produced by Newton, were not in agreement with the prevailing worldview during his lifetime. [5]
In physical cosmology, the Copernican principle states that humans are not privileged observers of the universe, that observations from the Earth are representative of observations from the average position in the universe. Named for Copernican heliocentrism, it is a working assumption that arises from a modified cosmological extension of Copernicus' argument of a moving Earth.
The cosmos is an alternative name for the universe or its nature or order. Usage of the word cosmos implies viewing the universe as a complex and orderly system or entity.
In astronomy, the geocentric model is a superseded description of the Universe with Earth at the center. Under most geocentric models, the Sun, Moon, stars, and planets all orbit Earth. The geocentric model was the predominant description of the cosmos in many European ancient civilizations, such as those of Aristotle in Classical Greece and Ptolemy in Roman Egypt, as well as during the Islamic Golden Age.
In the Hipparchian, Ptolemaic, and Copernican systems of astronomy, the epicycle was a geometric model used to explain the variations in speed and direction of the apparent motion of the Moon, Sun, and planets. In particular it explained the apparent retrograde motion of the five planets known at the time. Secondarily, it also explained changes in the apparent distances of the planets from the Earth.
The cosmological model of concentricspheres, developed by Eudoxus, Callippus, and Aristotle, employed celestial spheres all centered on the Earth. In this respect, it differed from the epicyclic and eccentric models with multiple centers, which were used by Ptolemy and other mathematical astronomers until the time of Copernicus.
Heliocentrism is a superseded astronomical model in which the Earth and planets revolve around the Sun at the centre of the universe. Historically, heliocentrism was opposed to geocentrism, which placed the Earth at the center. The notion that the Earth revolves around the Sun had been proposed as early as the 3rd century BC by Aristarchus of Samos, who had been influenced by a concept presented by Philolaus of Croton. In the 5th century BC the Greek philosophers Philolaus and Hicetas had the thought on different occasions that the Earth was spherical and revolving around a "mystical" central fire, and that this fire regulated the universe. In medieval Europe, however, Aristarchus' heliocentrism attracted little attention—possibly because of the loss of scientific works of the Hellenistic period.
The Tychonic system is a model of the universe published by Tycho Brahe in 1588, which combines what he saw as the mathematical benefits of the Copernican system with the philosophical and "physical" benefits of the Ptolemaic system. The model may have been inspired by Valentin Naboth and Paul Wittich, a Silesian mathematician and astronomer. A similar cosmological model was independently proposed in the Hindu astronomical treatise Tantrasamgraha by Nilakantha Somayaji of the Kerala school of astronomy and mathematics.
The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is a book about the history of science by the philosopher Thomas S. Kuhn. Its publication was a landmark event in the history, philosophy, and sociology of science. Kuhn challenged the then prevailing view of progress in science in which scientific progress was viewed as "development-by-accumulation" of accepted facts and theories. Kuhn argued for an episodic model in which periods of conceptual continuity and cumulative progress, referred to as periods of "normal science", were interrupted by periods of revolutionary science. The discovery of "anomalies" accumulating and precipitating revolutions in science leads to new paradigms. New paradigms then ask new questions of old data, move beyond the mere "puzzle-solving" of the previous paradigm, alter the rules of the game and change the "map" directing new research.
The celestial spheres, or celestial orbs, were the fundamental entities of the cosmological models developed by Plato, Eudoxus, Aristotle, Ptolemy, Copernicus, and others. In these celestial models, the apparent motions of the fixed stars and planets are accounted for by treating them as embedded in rotating spheres made of an aetherial, transparent fifth element (quintessence), like gems set in orbs. Since it was believed that the fixed stars did not change their positions relative to one another, it was argued that they must be on the surface of a single starry sphere.
In astronomy, the fixed stars are the luminary points, mainly stars, that appear not to move relative to one another against the darkness of the night sky in the background. This is in contrast to those lights visible to naked eye, namely planets and comets, that appear to move slowly among those "fixed" stars. The fixed stars includes all the stars visible to the naked eye other than the Sun, as well as the faint band of the Milky Way. Due to their star-like appearance when viewed with the naked eye, the few visible individual nebulae and other deep-sky objects also are counted among the fixed stars. Approximately 6,000 stars are visible to the naked eye under optimal conditions.
De revolutionibus orbium coelestium is the seminal work on the heliocentric theory of the astronomer Nicolaus Copernicus (1473–1543) of the Polish Renaissance. The book, first printed in 1543 in Nuremberg, Holy Roman Empire, offered an alternative model of the universe to Ptolemy's geocentric system, which had been widely accepted since ancient times.
The Copernican Revolution was the paradigm shift from the Ptolemaic model of the heavens, which described the cosmos as having Earth stationary at the center of the universe, to the heliocentric model with the Sun at the center of the Solar System. This revolution consisted of two phases; the first being extremely mathematical in nature and the second phase starting in 1610 with the publication of a pamphlet by Galileo. Beginning with the 1543 publication of Nicolaus Copernicus’s De revolutionibus orbium coelestium, contributions to the “revolution” continued until finally ending with Isaac Newton’s work over a century later.
In Aristotelian physics and Greek astronomy, the sublunary sphere is the region of the geocentric cosmos below the Moon, consisting of the four classical elements: earth, water, air, and fire.
Islamic cosmology is the cosmology of Islamic societies. Islamic cosmology is not a single unitary system, but is inclusive of a number of cosmological systems, including Quranic cosmology, the cosmology of the Hadith collections, as well as those of Islamic astronomy and astrology. Broadly, cosmological conceptions themselves can be divided into thought concerning the physical structure of the cosmos (cosmography) and the origins of the cosmos (cosmogony).
Copernican heliocentrism is the astronomical model developed by Nicolaus Copernicus and published in 1543. This model positioned the Sun at the center of the Universe, motionless, with Earth and the other planets orbiting around it in circular paths, modified by epicycles, and at uniform speeds. The Copernican model displaced the geocentric model of Ptolemy that had prevailed for centuries, which had placed Earth at the center of the Universe.
The center of the Universe is a concept that lacks a coherent definition in modern astronomy; according to standard cosmological theories on the shape of the universe, it has no distinct spatial center.
The Copernican Question: Prognostication, Skepticism, and Celestial Order is a 704-page book written by Robert S. Westman and published by University of California Press in 2011 and in 2020 (paperback). The book is a broad historical overview of Europe's astronomical and astrological culture leading to Copernicus’s De revolutionibus and follows the scholarly debates that took place roughly over three generations after Copernicus.
Jacques du Chevreul was a French mathematician, astronomer, and philosopher.
Historical models of the Solar System first appeared during prehistoric periods and remain updated to this day.. The models of the Solar System throughout history were first represented in the early form of cave markings and drawings, calendars and astronomical symbols. Then books and written records became the main source of information that expressed the way the people of the time thought of the Solar System.
The Wittenberg Interpretation refers to the work of astronomers and mathematicians at the University of Wittenberg in response to the heliocentric model of the Solar System proposed by Nicholas Copernicus, in his 1543 book De revolutionibus orbium coelestium. The Wittenberg Interpretation fostered an acceptance of the heliocentric model and had a part in beginning the Scientific Revolution.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)