Galileo is a good guy,now!

  • Thread starter Thread starter That_one_guy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
adrift said:
The enemies of the Church have done a good job of propaganda and Galileo.

The Church never condemned his theories. Copernicus theories were accepted. The problem was that Galileo presented them as fact which they were not at the time and not just as theory. Galileo to his credit obeyed.
Click to expand...
It is not a fact then, that the earth revolves about the sun?
 
Sir_Anthony said:
well, I have read awhile back that it was not necessary the theory that got Galileo in trouble, but it’s just that he rubbed the pope and the curia in the wrong way, and well the pope got ticked at him and well an angry pope took it a little personal.

by the way, just for some food for thought, how do we know that the earth isn’t the centre of the universe? I just say this because tell me what is the center of the universe, if you think the universe in three dimensional terms that extend infinitely, therefore there would be no true center, but you can call earth an arbitrary center of the universe as a reference point for us, even if the earth revolves around the sun.
Click to expand...
How do you explain the forces which govern the motion of the earth about the sun?
 
bobzills said:
How do you explain the forces which govern the motion of the earth about the sun?
Click to expand...
I didn’t say that the earth doesn’t move around the sun, I am just saying that if necessary, we can set the earth as an arbitrary center of the universe, not the true center of the universe, however since space in infinite all direction, essentially we can designate any point in space as the center. It has nothing to do with physics, it just has to do with being a reference point, remember typically this is how we do measure in astronomy, we use the earth as the reference and calculate the distant from here.

Now I know what Galileo was condemned for was the literal interpretation of scripture that the earth was the center. I just wanted to throw out some thoughts, not challenging the idea that the earth revolves around the sun, because that would be silly.
 
My understanding is that the Church did not try Galileo as a heretic because of his scientific theories, but rather, on his theological arguments, which he use to attack the Church.

When Galileo became certain, that the earth revolved around the sun, he then jumped to the conclusion that the Church must be wrong on theology as well.

He should’ve stuck to science and leave theology to the Church.

Jim
 
Galileo could have safely proposed heliocentricity as a theory or a method to more simply account for the planets’ motions. His problem arose when he stopped proposing it as a scientific theory and began proclaiming it as truth, though there was no conclusive proof of it at the time. Even so, Galileo would not have been in so much trouble if he had chosen to stay within the realm of science and out of the realm of theology. But, despite his friends’ warnings, he insisted on moving the debate onto theological grounds. …Many people wrongly believe Galileo proved heliocentricity. He could not answer the strongest argument against it, which had been made nearly two thousand years earlier by Aristotle: If heliocentrism were true, then there would be observable parallax shifts in the stars’ positions as the earth moved in its orbit around the sun. However, given the technology of Galileo’s time, no such shifts in their positions could be observed. It would require more sensitive measuring equipment than was available in Galileo’s day to document the existence of these shifts, given the stars’ great distance. Until then, the available evidence suggested that the stars were fixed in their positions relative to the earth, and, thus, that the earth and the stars were not moving in space—only the sun, moon, and planets were.
Click to expand...
 
Sir_Anthony said:
well, I have read awhile back that it was not necessary the theory that got Galileo in trouble, but it’s just that he rubbed the pope and the curia in the wrong way, and well the pope got ticked at him and well an angry pope took it a little personal…
Click to expand...
There was also the issue the Galieo was presenting his theory as a fact.

This was especially a problem as astronomical predictions using Galileo’s model was substantially inaccurate.

Also the ‘hallmark’ prediction, that of stellar paralax, was never detected.

Using todays standard of peer review, Galileo would never have been published at all.

The problems were, of course, that Galileo used a circular model of planetary motion, when the planets actually move in an elliptical path.

Also, no one, including Galileo, had an idea of exactly how big the Universe was, so stellar paralax could not be detected until modern instramentation was developed.
 
The issue is now over and doesn’t merit much discussion, so I’m out of here. Thank you for sharing with me and allowing me to share.

Fraternally,

JR 🙂
 
Brendan said:
There was also the issue the Galieo was presenting his theory as a fact.

This was especially a problem as astronomical predictions using Galileo’s model was substantially inaccurate.

Also the ‘hallmark’ prediction, that of stellar paralax, was never detected.

Using todays standard of peer review, Galileo would never have been published at all.

The problems were, of course, that Galileo used a circular model of planetary motion, when the planets actually move in an elliptical path.

Also, no one, including Galileo, had an idea of exactly how big the Universe was, so stellar paralax could not be detected until modern instramentation was developed.
Click to expand...
The geocentrism that Galileo argued is wrong and is not the gecoentricity that is argued today.
 
This has been a nice sharing, but I’m moving on. I think this horse is dead. Rome has spoken.

I’ll see you around the threads.

Fraternally,

JR 🙂
 
And it came to pass that the thread on Galileo died.Many a poster was relieved that day.And everybody said,"HUZZAH!"
 
It does seem to be a pretty serious change in the teaching of the Catholic Church from the teaching that the sum moves about the earth.
 
adrift said:
The problem was that Galileo presented them as fact which they were not at the time and not just as theory.
Click to expand...
That’s not quite right. The heliocentric theory is just that - a theory. It can’t be a fact, because no one has observed the earth revolving around the sun.

Observations are facts. Generalizations from observations are theories. Galileo couldn’t have presented the heliocentric theory as a fact - the most he could do is posit the theory in a forceful and unyielding way.

The same can be said today. We can’t say that the earth revolves around the sun is a fact. At most we can say it is a theory (which accords with all observed facts).
 
Sir_Anthony said:
well, I have read awhile back that it was not necessary the theory that got Galileo in trouble, but it’s just that he rubbed the pope and the curia in the wrong way, and well the pope got ticked at him and well an angry pope took it a little personal.

by the way, just for some food for thought, how do we know that the earth isn’t the centre of the universe? I just say this because tell me what is the center of the universe, if you think the universe in three dimensional terms that extend infinitely, therefore there would be no true center, but you can call earth an arbitrary center of the universe as a reference point for us, even if the earth revolves around the sun.
Click to expand...
With the permission of the church he expounded on Copernicus’s theory but did it in such a way it appeared he was openly mocking the Pope. you can read all about it here.
law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/FTrials/galileo/galileo.html
 
adrift said:
The enemies of the Church have done a good job of propaganda and Galileo.

The Church never condemned his theories. .
Click to expand...
How does one explain the following:
On 25th February 1616: Pope Paul V wrote: "And because it has also come to attention of the aforementioned Sacred Congregation that the Pythagorean doctrine concerning the mobility of the earth and the immobility of the sun, which Nicholas Copernicus, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium . . . taught, and which is false and altogether incompatible with divine Scripture, is now spread abroad and accepted by many . . .; therefore in order that an opinion ruinous to Catholic truth not creep further in this manner, the Sacred Congregation decrees that the said Nicholas Copernicus . . . be suspended until corrected; and that all other books similarly teaching the same thing be prohibited: as accordingly it prohibits, damns, and suspends them all by the present Decree. " And Galileo was condemned by Urban VIII: Whereas you, Galileo, son of the late Vincenzo Galilei, Florentine, aged seventy years, were in the year 1615 denounced to this Holy Office for holding as true the false doctrine taught by some that the Sun is the centre of the world and immovable and that the Earth moves, and also with a diurnal motion; for having disciples… …
etc.
 
bobzills said:
How does one explain the following:
On 25th February 1616: Pope Paul V wrote: "And because it has also come to attention of the aforementioned Sacred Congregation that the Pythagorean doctrine concerning the mobility of the earth and the immobility of the sun, which Nicholas Copernicus, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium . . . taught, and which is false and altogether incompatible with divine Scripture, is now spread abroad and accepted by many . . .; therefore in order that an opinion ruinous to Catholic truth not creep further in this manner, the Sacred Congregation decrees that the said Nicholas Copernicus . . . be suspended until corrected; and that all other books similarly teaching the same thing be prohibited: as accordingly it prohibits, damns, and suspends them all by the present Decree. " And Galileo was condemned by Urban VIII: Whereas you, Galileo, son of the late Vincenzo Galilei, Florentine, aged seventy years, were in the year 1615 denounced to this Holy Office for holding as true the false doctrine taught by some that the Sun is the centre of the world and immovable and that the Earth moves, and also with a diurnal motion; for having disciples… …
etc.
Click to expand...
You really should cite what you are quoting. Until I can see the context, I can’t comment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top