Changes

The '''geocentric theory''' is a system for describing the universe with Earth-centered coordinates. It was extremely popular from ancient times until the 1600s, as it was particularly effective at cosmological predictions.

The '''geocentric theory''' is a system for describing the universe with Earth-centered coordinates. It was extremely popular from ancient times until the 1600s, as it was particularly effective at cosmological predictions.

The work of [[Galileo]] <ref> However, it is interesting to read Galileo's abjuration: "I believe now, and with God`’ help I will in future believe all that is held, preached, and taught by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. But whereas – after having been admonished by this Holy Office entirely to abandon the false opinion that the Sun is the center of the world and immovable." taken from: http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00002228&channel=university%20ave </ref> and [[Kepler]] began to change this (see [[Copernican Revolution]]). The idea that planets move around the sun, in nearly circular ellipses, gradually took hold. The difficulty of calculating the orbits was one factor which militated against quick acceptance of Kepler's laws of motion.  

The work of [[Galileo]] <ref> However, it is interesting to read Galileo's abjuration: "I believe now, and with God`’ help I will in future believe all that is held, preached, and taught by the Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. But whereas – after having been admonished by this Holy Office entirely to abandon the false opinion that the Sun is the center of the world and immovable." taken from: http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00002228&channel=university%20ave </ref>  <ref> Christian philosopher Francis Schaeffer, "When the Roman church attacked Copernicus and Galileo,it was not because teaching actually contained anything contrary to the Bible. The church authorities thought it did, but that was because Aristotelian elements had become part of church orthodoxy, and Galileo's notions clearly conflicted with them. In fact, Galileo defended the compatibility of Copernicus and the Bible, and this was one of the factors which brought about his trial" (Schaeffer, F. , 1976, How Shall We Then Live?)cited at : http://www.gnmagazine.org/booklets/EV/wrongassumptions.htm </ref> and [[Kepler]] began to change this (see [[Copernican Revolution]]). The idea that planets move around the sun, in nearly circular ellipses, gradually took hold. The difficulty of calculating the orbits was one factor which militated against quick acceptance of Kepler's laws of motion.  

By the 1800s, the spectacular successes of Newtonian theory convinced everyone that the Sun is a preferred frame of reference, and that the laws of physics must be applied in that frame. The geocentric theory was considered to be profoundly mistaken, and the [[Heliocentrism|heliocentric theory]] correct. However, this view is apparently based more on a philosphical rather than a scientific position <ref> For example, in 'The Fabric of Reality", by David Deutsch (1996), Deutsch states the following criterion for reality:  we should "... regard as real those complex entities which, if we did not regard them as real, would complicate explanations". This appears to be no more than a simple restatement of [[Occam's Razor]].</ref>. Bartosz Milewski (2006) states in reference to the Geocentric Theory: "Looking at the predictions it made of planetary movements, it is pretty good. One could probably derive it nowadays from the heliocentric theory by changing the system of coordinates (since the system attached to the Earth is not inertial, one would have to use Einstein's general relativity to do that correctly). Maybe physicists would be forced to introduce more cycles upon cycles to account for all the anomalies—maybe infinitely many. So even though the two theories differ in complexity, they are presumably equivalent in their predictive power." <ref>  http://www.relisoft.com/Science/Physics/MicroAnt.html </ref>  

By the 1800s, the spectacular successes of Newtonian theory convinced everyone that the Sun is a preferred frame of reference, and that the laws of physics must be applied in that frame. The geocentric theory was considered to be profoundly mistaken, and the [[Heliocentrism|heliocentric theory]] correct. However, this view is apparently based more on a philosphical rather than a scientific position <ref> For example, in 'The Fabric of Reality", by David Deutsch (1996), Deutsch states the following criterion for reality:  we should "... regard as real those complex entities which, if we did not regard them as real, would complicate explanations". This appears to be no more than a simple restatement of [[Occam's Razor]].</ref>. Bartosz Milewski (2006) states in reference to the Geocentric Theory: "Looking at the predictions it made of planetary movements, it is pretty good. One could probably derive it nowadays from the heliocentric theory by changing the system of coordinates (since the system attached to the Earth is not inertial, one would have to use Einstein's general relativity to do that correctly). Maybe physicists would be forced to introduce more cycles upon cycles to account for all the anomalies—maybe infinitely many. So even though the two theories differ in complexity, they are presumably equivalent in their predictive power." <ref>  http://www.relisoft.com/Science/Physics/MicroAnt.html </ref>