FACULTYDIRECTORY(HTTP://OGLETHORPE.

EDU/FACULTY/) |

MOODLE(HTTPS://MOODLE.OGLETHORPE.EDU/LOGIN/INDEX.PHP)

Michael K. Rulison
(http://sites.oglethorpe.
edu/mrulison/)
Professor of Physics

Chapter 2: History of Astronomy

Additional Notes (http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/astronomy-
web-lecture-notes/chapter-2-history-of-astronomy/additional-
notes-history-of-astronomy/)
Orbits (http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/astronomy-web-
lecture-notes/chapter-2-history-of-astronomy/motion-gravity-
and-orbits/)
Gravity (http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/astronomy-web-
lecture-notes/chapter-2-history-of-astronomy/gravity/)
Archaeo-astronomy
Virtually all ancient civilizations were involved in astronomy, with varying degrees of sophistication.
All observed, many constructed observatories of various kinds, and many recorded their
observations. The purposes of these observations were very often originally practical navigation,
agricultural, calendrical, etc. With time there often came to be a religious connection as well.
Well known surviving examples of such ancient observatories include Stonehenge and several South
American and Meso-American sites. But, there are many less well known examples from other
civilizations.

Links to archeo-astronomy sites:

http://www.le.ac.uk/archaeology/rug/image_collection/
(http://www.le.ac.uk/archaeology/rug/image_collection/)
http://osr.org/en-us/articles/stonehenge-an-astronomical-calculator/ (http://osr.org/en-
us/articles/stonehenge-an-astronomical-calculator/)

These earliest astronomies/cosmologies were almost exclusively mythological. The practical uses of the
astronomical knowledge existed side by side with the mythological/religious components which often
connected the astronomies/cosmologies with the larger culture. Of course from a structural point of
view the cosmos envisioned in nearly all cases was geocentric, with man, and his home earth,
occupying the central position.

Brief History of Astronomy Timeline:

http://www.bios.niu.edu/orion/history.html (http://www.bios.niu.edu/orion/history.html)

Geocentric Cosmologies
The mythological astronomies of the pre-classical world gradually were transformed into the more
rational astronomical models of the classical Greek period. Key to this transition were the models
proposed by the Pythagoreans and the Ionians/Milesians. The Ionians were among the first to bring a
rational approach to astronomical modeling. While record-keeping connected with astronomical
observations had always been systematic and rational, such had not been the case for astronomical
models of the cosmos. The Pythagoreans set astronomy on a quantitative path, and coincidentally
imagined a cosmos which was not geocentric, with a central fire around which the earth, counter-
earth, sun, moon, planets, and stars revolved. It should also be noted that a truly heliocentric model
was proposed by Aristarchus of Samos, in which the earth and other planets orbited the sun, with the
earth rotating on its axis once each day. In spite of these aberrations however, virtually all
astronomical models of this time were geocentric.

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/files/2016/07/eudox-

17rxb8r.gif)

The Aristotelian Tradition

The Aristotelian Tradition
Plato and Aristotle brought rational inquiry into the sciences, and in particular astronomy, to new
levels. Although their approaches were quite different, both advocated systematic and rational
investigation. Plato taught that the world around us is one of illusion that the senses could be easily
deceived and so the truth could best be discovered by applying logic and reasoning. (Nonetheless we
should remember Platos charge to save the phenomena.) Aristotle, in contrast, advocated searching
for the truth by first observing, and then constructing models which could explain the observations.
Thus Plato employs the philosophers approach to investigating the physical world, while Aristotle uses
the scientists methods.

Aristotelian Physical Theory and Its Astronomical/ Cosmological Aspects

Aristotles two realms
Terrestrial realm:

1. Four elements earth, water, air, fire

2. Motion is of two kinds natural and forced which can becombined
Natural motion is based upon the composition of the object
Natural motion is vertical
Forced motion occurs only when the source of the force contacts the object
3. Terrestrial realm is imperfect, changing, corruptible

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/files/2016/07/arist-

25wrx60.gif)

Celestial realm:

1. Single element aether/quintessence

2. Motion is of only a single kind uniform circular (natural)
3. Celestial realm is perfect, unchanging, incorruptible
 (http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/files/2016/07/geocen-

2jmz8vh.jpg)

Retrograde Motion
As time passes (over the course of weeks and months) planets are found to gradually move west to east
relative to the fixed stars. This normal motion of a planet is known as prograde motion. But, from
time to time all planets are found to appear to stop and move east to west for a period of time before
resuming the normal west to east motion. This apparently anomalous behavior is known as retrograde
motion. These retrogrades are seemingly erratic with regard to time of occurence, duration, and
details of the shape of the retrograde loop. Retrograde motion posed the greatest challenge to
astronomers for several centuries.

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/files/2016/07/retro1-

27xy5nx.jpg)

Ptolemaic Model

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/files/2016/07/Ptolem-

1txonlt.gif)

Copernican Revolution
Copernican Revolution
Copernican Model
Origins

Given the task of improving the calendar for church purposes, Copernicus found that a heliocentric
model was conceptually simpler. Copernicus was aware of the earlier non-geocentric models of the
Pythagoreans and Aristarchus. In investigating the question of planetary motion Copernicus sought a
model which was more faithful to Aristotelian principles, believing that Ptolemy had strayed from
those principles, particularly with regard to the equant.
The Model

While conceptually simpler than the Ptolemaic model, and giving a much more reasonable explanation
of retrograde motion, the original version of the Copernican model did not work even as well as the
Ptolemaic model. To improve its agreement with observation Copernicus re-introduced some of the
geometric devices used by Ptolemy specifically the epicycle and the eccentric. Even this compromised
version of the model worked no better than the Ptolemaic model.

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/files/2016/07/copern-1b3pmn2.gif)

Retrograde Motion

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/files/2016/07/retro2-1s0uyc6.jpg)

Acceptance of the Model

Because it worked no better than the Ptolemaic model and was not viewed favorably by the Church, the
Copernican model was not widely accepted. In addition, while the Ptolemaic model was based on
Aristotelian physical theory, the Copernican model had no comparable physical theory as its basis.

Tycho Brahes Observations

Accuracy of Observations Shortcomings of Aristotelian/ Ptolemaic Model
Owing to improvements made in observational instruments by Brahe, his observations revealed that
there were small discrepancies between the Ptolemaic model predictions and observations. While
observations were accurate to a degree or less, the model often made predictions which were in error
by more than 5o.
Supernova of 1572 and Comet of 1577

Two events occurred which revealed a flaw in the Aristotelian physical theory. When observations of
the location of the supernova of 1572 and the comet of 1577 relative to the distant stars made by
observers in different locations were compared, it was found that all observers recorded the same
position. In other words the objects showed no detectable parallax. This meant that these objects
must be located at a very great distance from the earth clearly in the celestial realm rather than in
the earths atmosphere. This indicated that Aristotles contention that the celestial realm was
unchanging was incorrect. This, in turn, brought the entire Aristotelian scheme into question.

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/les/2016/07/aricomet-1hfaj6e.jpg)
Keplers Laws of Planetary Motion
(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/les/2016/07/lunar_eclipse-2wp99.gif)

1st Law Law of Ellipses

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/les/2016/07/kepler1-17z19gf.gif)
2nd Law Law of Equal Areas

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/les/2016/07/kepler2-onkb18.gif)
3rd Law Harmonic Law
T2 ~ r3

Actual Orbit Shapes

(https://www.ucls.uchicago.edu/students/projects/martiansuntimes/docs/orbits.html)

Galileos Observations and Contributions to a New Theory of Motion

Contributions to Understanding of Motion
Telescopic Observations

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/astronomy-web-lecture-notes/chapter-2-

history-of-astronomy/galileo_1-2/)
Spots on the sun

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/astronomy-web-lecture-notes/chapter-2-

history-of-astronomy/galileo_2/)
mountains and seas (maria) on the Moon

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/astronomy-web-lecture-notes/chapter-2-

history-of-astronomy/galileo_3/)
Milky Way is made of lots of stars
 (http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/astronomy-web-lecture-notes/chapter-2-

history-of-astronomy/galileo_5/)
Jupiter has moons (Galilean moons: Io, Europa, Callisto, Ganymede)

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/astronomy-web-lecture-notes/chapter-2-

history-of-astronomy/galileo_4/)
Venus has phases

(http://sites.oglethorpe.edu/mrulison/files/2016/07/venus-

14nebpw.jpg)

Confrontation with Church

Link to Copernican (and related) sites:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/andrew_white/Chapter3.html
(http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/andrew_white/Chapter3.html)

Newtonian Physics
Newtons Laws of Motion
1st Law Law of Inertia

2nd Law Law of Force

3rd Law Law of Action & Reaction

Newtonian Gravitation
Contrast with Aristotelian Ideas on Gravity

F = GM1M2/r2

Consequences of Newtonian Gravitation

Connecting Newtons Laws of Motion & Gravitation with Keplers Laws

Newtonian Cosmology
Link to general history of astronomy sites:
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/andrew_white/Chapter3.html
(http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/andrew_white/Chapter3.html)

Search

Proudly powered by WordPress (http://wordpress.org/) | Theme: Amadeus

(http://flyfreemedia.com/themes/amadeus) by FlyFreeMedia.

This site is maintained by the author as authorized by Oglethorpe Universitys communication

policies. The content and opinions expressed on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of
Oglethorpe University.