11-July-2009, 05:53 AM
|
 |
Order of Kilopi
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: San Antonio, Tx.
Posts: 8,440
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuckerfan
|
Copernicus was a well-respected Church canon and not a polemic for them. Books had to pass Church censorship, so Ossiander, apparently, added the hypothetical twist at the intro. to avoid the censors returning the book for corrections. [He may have done it, however, because he was opposed to it, but it is unclear just why he did it, and why he did it without conferring with Copernicus or Rheticus (? it's late). However, if one reads the book, there is no way one can suggest that Copernicus thought his model was merely a hypothetical model for simplicity sake, so the intro. amendment may well have been a wise one.
Quote:
|
It doesn't specify when they started in with the opposition, exactly, but I don't think its unreasonable to conclude that it was certainly possible that he was hearing grumblings from them by 1613, which would have been in the time frame of these observations.
|
There were many who didn't like him before he even made a telescope, because he opposed the Peripatetics (Aristotelians). [He knew Aristotle was wrong about some things, especially on the rate at which objects fall.] Yet he became internationally famous with his Starry Messenger.
Quote:
|
But, as the above Wiki quote shows, they were not above harassing Galileo for advocating the idea. Don't forget that since he had two children outside of wedlock by this point, Galileo would have been considered a bit suspect by a number of people.
|
I have not read that this hurt him much at all. Copernicus was known to have a mistress and may have turned down a bishop's position partly for this reason. Those were different times regarding fidelity, but, then again, maybe not that much after all.
Quote:
|
So you don't consider Galileo's house arrest to be considered "jail time" or "due to astronomical viewpoints"?
|
You appeared to be making a general statement about the Church's views, and it did not appear that you were referring to Galileo. My error. I do recall that a clergy member (Forcini sp?) did write favoring the Copernican view and got in trouble for it, so I was hopeful you knew of others.
__________________
Lighten up! This is a stellar board!
|