Quote:
Originally Posted by hhEb09'1
I've found some copies of the Dialogues on the net, and one that says it's complete is missing Day Four, but it explains that's the part about tides. (And, apparently, about this subject) IIRC, Galileo asserted that there would be only one tide per day--which might have fueled some ire. He suffered from the lack of strong Med tides.
|
I have had a chance to learn a little more about how Galileo saw the tides from Drake's book, which I haven't finished, so I'm still learning.
He delayed
Dialogues for many years for many reasons such as his work with civil engineers and lengthy health problems. [One amusing project came from a completed job that ran a water line over a tall hill but it would not syphon. The engineer complained that the water ran down the line on both sides of the hill. Galileo told them they should have contacted him before building since he knew the highest allowable hill could only be about 30 feet.
]
As I see it so far, subject to change, Galileo was convinced that tides were due to water build-up onto the shores. He invisioned that there was a differential force created between the Earth's near side and far side to the Sun. As the Earth rotated, therefore, the tides would come and go. He disagreed with Kepler's Lunar assesement because the Moon's "pull" [my term] is not synchronous with the tides, though close, and he seemed to know that islands did not experience tides (so a simple Moon lifting of water would not work). He also seem to question Kepler's lack of first hand tidal experience, since Kepler was not near the coast.
I find it interest that they were each both right and wrong on certian points!
Establishing some sort of proof favoring Copernicus was a huge issue at the time. Although Galileo was very much favored and supported in his views, he was told in no uncertain terms in an edict in 1616 to not attempt to reconcile Copernicus to scripture. This allowed hypothetical or mathematical presentations, which was how
de Revolutionibus easily passed censorship in 1543, thanks to the preface, written by a Lutheran, which stated the book was to be considered only hypothetical.
The variation the sunpsot directions and the tides were big arguments he used, though I haven't read muc of his
Dialogue, yet. I think he pushed harder with his tidal argument later, but I could be confused on this point.