| ManusJustus said: Galileo wrote more than one book. Hmm, here is another book Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, its the one that upset the church, you know because the Church told him not to have the idea of heliocentrism and banned Copernicus' theory. You are realling going to have to start thinking for yourself and stop getting your ideas from whoever is spoon feeding them to you. This type of ignorant revisionist history is to be laughed at and to be feared at the same time. |
Hahaha... You made my point for me.
Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems was the name the inqusition gave the book what did Galieo call it before submitting it?
Dialogue on the Ebb and Flow of the Sea. (Hence what *he* called it)
They are the same book. Dialogue of the Ebb and Flow of the Sea was Galieo's original name for the book because it was the central theory in his whole arguement.
Which you'd know if you read the book. Who's the one being spoonfed here... me who actually knows facts and stuff about the book... or you, who can't even recognize one of the book's original titles, or for that matter... the contents of the book.
From wikipedia "Galileo considered his theory of the tides to provide the required physical proof of the motion of the earth. This theory was so important to Galileo that he originally intended to entitle his Dialogue on the Two Chief World Systems the Dialogue on the Ebb and Flow of the Sea. The reference to tides was removed by order of the Inquisition."
Though I did make one mistake, (as i had just woken up). Galeio wasn't killed by the Church... for some reason I always make that mistake.
As for Copernicus... he was argueing vs Ptolmey Geocentrascism.
Not the same theory that was around during Galieo's time.
Galleio was debating against the Tychonic system.(remembered the name.) (Though he did use the ptolmy model as a nice strawman.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tychonic_system
"Tycho argued that if the Earth is moving, then we should be able to detect a change in our position relative to stars (the technical term is parallax). But he was not able to detect that change in relative position, so he concluded that the Earth is not moving. In fact, our position relative to stars does change, but stars are so far away that the change in angles is so small that it cannot be observed by the naked eye. It was not until hundreds of years later that people built telescopes that were accurate enough to detect stellar parallax. Astronomers of Tycho's time did not realize how far away stars were. "
The differences between the two were fairly simple. The Tychonic system explained more, while the Galeio system was simpler but unproven.
The copernican system was observably wrong until we developed stronger telescopes. Much how a theory about sub atomic particles would of been called crazy until we developed strong enough microscopes.
Coperinican model belief wasn't low because of the church. It was low because the Tychonic Model did everything the Copernicus system did plus some based on what we could observe at the time.
