At 09:06 AM 2/2/2005 -0500, Don Cunningham wrote:
>I wonder what the vote would be on gravity. Thats just a theory too.
Physics has had it's problems too, but many were centuries ago, so we forget.
Even within the field there have been tensions (God does not play dice!,
Einstein in response to quantum mechanics) , but in remote history has been
where physics has had most of its troubles. Copernicus faced the church and
public with the introductions to his major work:
"TO THE READER CONCERNING THE HYPOTHESES OF THIS WORK
Since the newness of the hypotheses of this work-which sets the earth in
motion and puts an immovable sun at the centre of the universe-has already
received a great deal of publicity, I have no doubt that certain of the
savants have taken grave offense and think it wrong to raise any disturbance
among liberal disciplines which have had the right set-up for a long time
now..."
and
"PREFACE AND DEDICATION TO POPE PAUL III
I can reckon easily enough, Most Holy Father, that as soon as certain people
learn that in these books of mine which I have written about the revolutions
of the spheres of the world I attribute certain motions to the terrestrial
globe, they will immediately shout to have me and my opinion hooted off the
stage... "
Copernicus
On the revolutions of the heavenly spheres
I'm pretty sure you can find more of this text on-line by googling some unique
phrase, but the book is inexpensive and full of marvelous diagrams and
tables. What helped to convince the church (I'm not quite sure I'm
remembering this point well) is that Copernicus' calculations made better
calendars, which were the purview of the church. What i wonder is, can
evolution also be brought to some practical advantage? There's this tension
between what one believes and what works...
-- -------- bb
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 01 2005 - 01:00:03 PST