Development of geocentrism
Refusal of geocentrism
During the scientific revolution of the XVII century, geocentrism is incompatible with astronomical facts and contradicts physical theory; Geliocentric system of the world gradually established. The main events that led to the abandonment of the geocentric system were the creation of a heliocentric theory of planetary movements by Copernicus, the telescopic discoveries of Galilee, the opening of the laws of Kepler and, most importantly, the creation of classical mechanics and the opening of the law of Newton worldwide.
Geocentrism and Religion
Already one of the first ideas, opposition geocentrism (Heliocentric Hypothesis of Aristarch Samossky) led to the reaction from representatives of religious philosophy: Cleanf Stoic called to attract Aristarha to the court for moving from the site "Foci of the World", having in mind the land; It is not known, however, whether the efforts of Cleanf were crowned with success. In the Middle Ages, since the Christian Church taught that the whole world was created by God for the sake of man (see Anthropocentrism), geocentrism was also successfully adapted to Christianity. This was also facilitated by the literal reading of the Bible. The scientific revolution of the XVII century was accompanied by attempts by the administrative ban of the heliocentric system, which led, in particular, to a lawsuit on a supporter and propaganda of Heliocentrism Galileo Galileem. Currently, geocentrism as a religious faith is found among some conservative Protestant groups in the United States.
Links
see also
Literature
- T. L. Heath, "Aristarchus of Samos, The Ancient Copernicus: a History of Greek Astronomy to Aristarchus", Oxford, Clarendon, 1913; REPRINTED NEW YORK, DOVER, 1981.
Introduction
Claudius Ptolemy - famous Alexandrian astronomer, mathematician and geographer of the eyelids of our era, one of the largest scientists of antiquity. For the whole millennium in the field of astronomy with Ptolem, no one could compare. There are no mention of his life and activities of the historians of this period. Even approximate date of birth and death of Ptolemy, as well as any facts of his biography, were also unknown.
But thanks to his writings, he remained in history. To greatly fortunate modern historians, almost all its main essays have been preserved. The chief labor of Ptolemy - "Almagest" - the beginning of the XVII century was the main textbook of astronomy.
In Almagest, Ptolemy extensively applies the results of the observations of his great predecessor of Hippark (II century BC. Er). Hipparch watched and watched heavenly bodies and sought to detect the patterns of motion of the planets, as they represented a big riddle for astronomers. Planets during their movement across the sky as if described loops. This difficulty is associated with the movement of the earth itself. When the earth seems to be "catching up" another planet, then at first glance it may seem that the planet is as it may be suspended, and then moves back. However, the ancient astronomers thought that the planets actually make such complex movements around the earth and pushing out from this they built their theories.
Chapter I. Geocentric Peace System Ptolemy
1.1. Developing geocentrism
Since ancient times, the Earth was considered the center of the Universe. At the same time, the existence of the central axis of the universe and asymmetry "Verkhnya" was assumed. Land from the fall saved some kind of support. In early civilizations, a huge mythical animal or animals (elephants, whales, turtles) acted as a support. The first ancient Greek thinker and philosopher Falez Miletsky as this support represented a natural object - the world ocean. Anaximander Miretsky made the thought that the Universe is centrally symmetric and it does not have any definite orientation. For this reason, in the center of space, the land is lacking grounds to move in any direction, that is, it is directly resting in the center of the Universe without support. The student of Anaximandra Anaximen did not agree with the theory of his teacher, believing that the compressed air keeps the earth from falling. Anaxahors adhered to this point of view. The position of Anaximandra was divided, however, Pythagoreans, Parmenid and Ptolemy. The position of the democritus was not understood: according to different testimonies, he followed Anaximandra or Anaximen.
Anaximandr assumed that the earth has a form of a low cylinder with a height of three times less than the base diameter. Anaximen, Anaksagor, Levkipp assumed that the land is flat, something like a table covers. A brand new step was made by Pythagoras, who made that the earth has a shape of a ball. In this assumption, not only the Pythagoreans, but also Plato, Parmenid, Aristotle followed him. So the canonical form of a geocentric system appeared, which was subsequently developed by the ancient Greek astronomers: a spherical earth-in the center of the spherical universe; The visible daily movement of the celestial luminaries is the reflection of the rotation of the space around the world axis.
Anaximandr believed that the stars were closest to the ground, then the moon and the sun were located. Anaximen The first suggested that the stars are the most distant objects from the ground, which are fixed on the outer shell of space. In this he followed all the subsequent scientists (the exception: Empedocla; he adhered to the theory of Anaximandra). A judgment appeared (for the first time, most likely, at Anaximen or Pythagoreans), that the larger the period of appealing the heavenly sphere, the higher and, therefore, is further. Thus, the order of Luminage was the following: Moon, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn and, then, Stars. This list does not include Mercury and Venus, since the Greeks have arisen on their score: Aristotle and Plato placed them immediately behind the sun, Ptolemy - between the moon and the sun. Aristotle believed that there are nothing above the sphere of fixed stars, including the space, while the Stoics believed that our world was immersed in an infinite empty space; Following the judgments of Democritus, they assumed that they had other worlds for our world (which was limited to the sphere of stationary stars). This opinion was supported by epicuretes, and he also outlined Lucretia in the poem "On the nature of things."
1.2. General geocentrism
Ancient Greek scientists had different opinions, justifying the central location and immobility of the Earth. Anaximandr as a reason indicated the spherical symmetry of space. He was not supported by Aristotle, who put forward a countersdown: in this case, a person located in the center of the room, the walls of which is the food, must die with hunger. This argument was later attributed to Buridan. Aristotle himself, directly, justified geocentrism as follows: The Earth is a heavy body, and the center of the Universe is a natural place for heavy bodies; And, as experience shows, all the heavy bodies falling steeply, and since they move to the center of the world, the land is in the center. In addition, the Earth's orbital movement (this was assumed by Pythagorean Philolai) Aristotle denied on the grounds that it should lead to the parallactic displacement of stars, which is not observed.
Multiple authors and other empirical arguments. Plinles Elder in his encyclopedia "Natural History" argues the central location of the land to the equality of the day and night during equinoxies, as well as the fact that during the equinox period, the sunrise can be observed on the same line, and the sunrise on the day of the summer solstice is located on The same line as coming on the day of the winter solstice. From the point of view of astronomy, these arguments and arguments are naturally delusion. Not better and arguments that led to the Advisor in the textbook "Lectures on Astronomy". He explains the centrality of the Earth from Nasty. He believed that if the earth was located east of the center of the Universe, then the shadows at dawn would be shorter than at sunset, the celestial bodies would seem to see more than when entering, and duration from dawn to noon would be less than from noon before sunset. But since this is not there, we can conclude that the earth cannot be shifted to the west of the center of the world. By analogy, it is proved that the Earth cannot be shifted to the West. Next, if the Earth was located north or south of the center, the shadows at the sunrise would be, respectively, in the northern or southern direction. In addition, at dawn in the days of the equinox, the shadow would have the direction accurately in the direction of sunset these days, and at sunrise on the day of the summer solstice, the shadows would point out the sunset point on the day of the winter solstice. It also explains the fact that the land is not shifted to the north or south of the center. In the event that the Earth was located above the center, it would be possible to observe less than half of the sky, including less than six zodiac signs; What would lead to that night would always be longer than the day. By analogy: the land can not be below the center of the world. From the foregoing, it can be concluded that it can be located only in the center. Approximately such arguments in favor of the centrality of the Earth expressed the Ptolemy in Almagest, the book I.Bezvlyo, the arguments of Adhesion and Ptolemy confirm only the fact that the universe is incomparably much more than the Earth, and for this reason are also unjust.
1.3.Gocentric system of the world Ptolemy
Ptolemy, making an emphasis and based on the achievements of Hippark, explored movable heavenly shining. He made a significant contribution in addition and clarify the concept of movement of the moon, and also improved the theory of eclipses. However, a truly great scientific feat of a scientist was the formation of a mathematical theory of the visible movement of the planets. This theory relied on the following principles:
· Fear of land;
· Huge remoteness from the sphere of stars;
· Uniformity and circular nature of the movements of heavenly bodies;
· Earth immobility;
· Central position of the Earth in the Universe.
The theory of Ptolemy combined the concept of epicycles and eccentrics. He made the assumption that the circumference (Deferrant) is located around the fixed land, somewhat shifted relative to the center of the Earth (Eccentric). According to the Deference, the center of a smaller circle is moving - epicycle - with an angular speed, unchanged with respect to the deferent's own center and Not to the earth itself, but to a point that is located symmetrically the center of the Deferent relative to the Earth (Equant). The planet itself in the Ptolemy system is evenly moving along the epicycle. In order to describe the newly discovered unevenness in the movements of the planets and the moon, new additional epicycles were introduced - the second, third, etc. The planet was located on the latter. The theory of Ptolemy made it possible to pretend the complex loop-shaped movements of the planets (their acceleration and deceleration, standing and the opponent movement). On the basis of the arrangement of astronomical tables, the location of the planets could be calculated with a very high at that time accuracy (there was an error less than 10 ").
Of the basic properties of planetary movements, the concept of which was determined by Ptolem, you can select several very important patterns:
1. The conditions for the movement of the upper and lower planets from the sun differ significantly.
2. A characteristic role for movement of both those and other planets represents the sun.
The stages of circulation of planets either by drawing (at the lower planets), or by epicycles (at the top) will be equal to the period of the conversion of the Sun, that is, long per year. The focus of the lower planets and the upper epicycles is due to the plane of the ecliptic. A thorough study of these properties of the planetary movements would bring Ptolemy to a simple conclusion, which would be the following: the sun, and not the earth is the center of the planetary system. This conclusion long before Ptolemy put forward Aristarh Samos. He argued that the Earth is several times less than the sun. Without a doubt, it is clear that the smaller body moves around more, but not the opposite. Although the scale of other planets directly by Ptolemy was not able to determine if it was clear that they were all much less than the sun.
The Ptolemy's system not only clarified the visible movements of the planets, but also made the opportunity to calculate their position for the future with an accuracy that completely satisfied the imperfect studies with the naked eye. That is why, although incorrectly based, the system first did not encourage serious contradictions, and later open objections to her brutally suppressed by the Christian church.
The discrepancy of this concept with observations that appeared as the accuracy of observations increases, were excluded by complicating the system. For example, some inaccuracies in the visible movements of the planets disclosed by subsequent observations were explained by the fact that the planet is not drawn around the center of the first epicycle, and the center of the second epicycle, in the circumference of which the planet is already moving. When and in such a building for any planet, inaccuracies appeared, they were injected the third, fourth, etc. Epicials, as long as the position of the planet on the circumference of the last of them did not give more or less acceptable consent with observations and research.
By the beginning of the XVI century. The Ptolemy system was so difficult to ensure that it was no longer able to satisfy the conditions and requirements that were presented to astronomy practical life, and first of all the shipping. We needed simpler methods to calculate the location of the planets. And thanks to the creation of the brilliant Polish scientist Nikolai Copernicus, who later developed and laid the database of astronomy, such methods were created and modern astronomy could not develop and develop.
In any course on the history of philosophy for students, the first thing is said that philosophy began with Falez, who said that everything comes from the water. It discourages a beginner who tries - perhaps, it is not very accurate - to feel that respect for philosophy, on the appearance of which, apparently, is designed by the curriculum. Nevertheless, for a feeling of respect, Fales gives enough bases, although, maybe more as a man of science than as a philosopher in the current sense of the word.
Fales was a native of a mile in Malaya Asia, a prosperous shopping city. In this city there was a big slave population; Among the public between the rich and poor there was an acute class struggle. "In the first time, the people who killed women and children of aristocrats turned out to be the winner; Then the aristocrats were dominated, which were burned by living their opponents, covering city squares with alive torches. " At the time of Falez, a similar situation was formed in most cities of Malaya Asia.
During the VII and VI centuries BC Millet, like other trade ionic cities, experienced significant development in economic and politically. At first in the hands of the landowner aristocracy, political power gradually passed into the hands of merchant plutocracy. The latter, in turn, gave way to the power of the Tirana, who (as it was usually) sought power with the support of the Democratic Party. The Lidiorsk kingdom, lying to the east of the Greek seaside cities, up to the fall of Ninevei (612 BC) retained with them only friendly relations. Nineveland's fall untied the hands of Lydia, and she could now pay his attention to the West, but mostly milethe managed to maintain friendly relations with this neighboring state, especially with the last Lidius king creek, in which the Lidius kingdom was conquered by Kyrome in 546 BC . The Greeks also supported significant ties with Egypt, whose king needed Greek mercenaries and discovered some cities for Greek trafficking. The first Greek settlement in Egypt was a fortress taken by the Miletsky garrison; But in the period 610-560 BC. The city of Daphne had the greatest importance. In this city, found their refuge, fleeing from Nebuchadnezzar (Ierm. 43; 5 and Cl.), Jeremiah and many other Jewish refugees; But while Egypt undoubtedly had an impact on the Greeks, there was no such influence from the Jews. We cannot imagine that Jeremiah felt anything other than horror in relation to skeptical ionians.
As mentioned above, the best testimony, allowing to determine the lifetime of Falez, is that this philosopher has become famous for the prediction of a solar eclipse, which, as astronomers say, happened in 585 BC. Other data similar to the testimony is fully consistent in order to attribute Falez's activities at approximately this time. The prediction of the eclipse was not evidence of the emergency genius of Falez. The mite was in allied relations with Lydia, who supported cultural connections with Babylonia. The Babylonian astronomers discovered that eclipses are repeated approximately every 19 years. These astronomers could predict the eclipse of the moon quite successfully, but when the case concerned the solar eclipse, they were confused, the fact that the eclipse could be apparently visible in one place and invisibly in the other. Therefore, they could only know that such a time can be expected to expect an eclipse, and it probably was all that Fales knew. Neither he nor Babylonian astronomers understood than this cycle of eclipses were due.
It is said that Fales took a trip to Egypt and brought information on geometry to the Greeks. All the knowledge of the Egyptians in the field of geometry consisted mainly in purely empirical techniques. And there is no reason to think that Fales came to deductive evidence, such as those who were open to the Greeks later. Probably, Fales discovered, as, based on observations made of two coastal points, determine the distance to the ship to the sea, as well as, knowing the length of the shadow of the pyramid, find its height. It is attributed to many other geometric theorems, but, apparently, erroneously.
Fales was one of the seven Greek wise men. Each of these seven wise men became famous for either the wise statement. According to tradition, the saying of Falez was that "water is the best."
According to Aristotle, Fales thought that the water was a primary substance, and everything else is formed from it, he also argued that the earth rests on the water. According to Aristotle's testimony, Fales said that the magnet has a soul, because it attracts iron; Further that all things are full of gods.
The position that everything originated from the water should be considered as a scientific hypotheses, and not as absurd hypothesis. Twenty years ago, the look is that everything consists of hydrogen, which is two thirds of the water, was a recognized point of view.
The Greeks in their hypotheses were too bold, but the Miletsky school at least was ready to experience their hypotheses empirically. It is known too little about Falez in order to be able to quite satisfactorily restore his teachings, but it knows much more about his followers in a millet, so it is reasonable to assume that something contained in their views passed to them from Falez. And the science and philosophy of Falez were rude, but they were able to stimulate both thought and observation.
About Falez has a lot of legends, but I don't think something is known for something, in addition to the facts that I mentioned. Some of these stories are amazing, for example, the one that Aristotle leads in its "politics" (1259a):
"When Falez replaced his poverty, since de classes of philosophy do not bring any lady, then they tell, Fales, foreseen on the basis of astronomical data, a rich yield of olives, even before the expiration of winter distributed to them a small amount of money in the deposit to the owners of all Mulkoen in a millet and in Chios; Oblobyuni Fales contracted cheap, since no one competed with him. When Olive was taken, there was a sudden demand at the same time from many people on the marvel. Fales began to give off the scrapper contracted them for the price for what wished for them. By typing in this way a lot of money, Fales proved that and philosophers, if desired, it is not difficult to get rich, only this case is the subject of their interests. "
Anaximandr, the second philosopher of the Miletsky school, much more interesting than Fales. The dates of his life are uncertain, but they say, he was 54 years old in 546 BC. . There is reason to assume that it is close to the truth. Anaximandr argued that all things happened from a single primary substance, but this is not water, as Thales thought, and not any other substance known to us. The first is infinite, eternal, random and "Volume of all worlds", for Anaximandr believed our world only one of many. The foremost is turning into various substances known to us, and they go into each other. On this occasion, Anaximandr makes an important and significant note:
"And from what all things arise, they are permitted to the same, according to necessity. For they are punished for their wickedness and get retribution from each other at the set time. "
The idea of \u200b\u200bboth cosmic and human justice plays such a role in Greek religion and philosophy, which is not easy to fully understand our contemporary. Indeed, our very word "justice" hardly expresses its meaning, but it is difficult to find any other word that could be preferred. Apparently, Anaximandr expresses the following idea: water, fire and land must be in the world in a certain proportion, but each element (understood as God) is eternally seeking to expand their possessions. But there is some kind of need, or a natural law that constantly restores the balance. Where there was, for example, fire, remains ash, that is, the Earth. This concept of justice is not to overplace boundaries established from the century - it was one of the deepest Greek convictions. Like people, the gods are subordinated to justice, but this highest strength itself was not personal power, was not some kind of higher God.
Anaximandr found the proof of its position, according to which the first is not a water, or any other known element, in the following argument: if one of the elements were basic, then he would absorb all other elements. Aristotle reports that Anaximandr considered these elements known to him as the elements that are each other regarding the opposite. "The air is cold, water is wet, fire hot." And therefore, "if one of them [from these elements. - Transl.] He was infinite, then the rest had long been killed. " Consequently, the primary substance should be neutral in this cosmic struggle.
According to Anaximandra, there is an eternal movement; During this movement, the formation of worlds. Worlds arose not as a result of creation, as is considered in Jewish or Christian theology, but as a result of development. And in the animal kingdom there was evolution. Live creatures originated from a wet element when he was evaporated by the sun. Like all other animals, a person occurred from fish. The person had to happen from the beings of another kind, because thanks to the characteristic of him now a long period of infancy, with his appearance, he could not survive.
Anaximandr is an extremely curious figure in scientific attitude. It is said that he was the first to make a map. He argued that the earth has a cylinder form. We have reached a variety of testimonies, according to which he considered the sun, that equal to the size of the Earth, which is superior to it in the amount of twenty-seven or twenty-eight times.
Everywhere, where Anaximandr is original, his views are scientific and rationalistic.
Anaximen is the last of the Miletsky Triad - is far from being so interesting as Anaximandr, but he makes some important step forward. The dates of his life are completely uncertain. There is no doubt that he lived after Anaximandra, and, apparently, the flourishing of his activities was preceded by 494 BC, since this year the mite was destroyed by Persians when suppressing the Ionian uprising.
Anaximen said that the main substance is air. The soul consists of air, fire - filling air; Completing, the air becomes first with water, then, with further condensation, the earth and finally a stone. This theory has that dignity that it makes all the differences between different substances quantitative differences, depending solely on the degree of thickening.
He believed that the land in shape is similar to the round table and that the air is all the volume. "Similarly," he says, "as our soul, being air, restrains us, so breathing and air is soluble the whole world." It seems that the world is breathing.
Anaximen caused more admiration in antiquity than Anaximandr, although almost any modern society would give the opposite assessment. He had a significant impact on Pythagora, as well as many subsequent philosophical constructions. The Pythagoreans discovered that the land is a ball breaker, but the atomists adhered to the look of Anaximen, according to which the Earth has a form similar to the disk.
Miletsky school is not important with their achievements, but with their own quest. This school was caused by the existence due to the contact of the Greek spirit with Babylonia and Egypt. Millet was a rich trading city; Thanks to the remarks of a mile with many nations, primitive prejudices and superstitions in this city were weakened. Before Ionia was at the beginning of the V century BC. It is subored by Giving, she was culturally an essential part of the Ellinsky world. Religious movement associated with Vakhoma and Orphem almost did not affect her; Her religion was Olympic, but she apparently was not seriously taken seriously. The philosophical constructions of Falez, Anaximandra and Anaximen should be considered as scientific hypotheses, and they rarely experience any inappropriate influence of anthropomorphic aspirations and moral ideas. The questions set by them deserved attention, and their courage inspired subsequent researchers.
The next stage in the development of Greek philosophy associated with Greek cities in southern Italy, more religious and, in particular, more orphied in nature. In some respects, it is more interesting; Its achievements are more remarkable, but in its spirit it is less scientific than Miret School.
Geocentric system of the world (from Dr.-Greek. Γῆ, γαῖα - Earth) - an idea of \u200b\u200bthe device of the universe, according to which the central position in the universe occupies a fixed land, around which the sun, moon, planets and stars rotate. Alternative to geocentrism is.
Development of geocentrism
From ancient times, the Earth was considered the center of the Universe. At the same time, the presence of the central axis of the universe and the asymmetry "Verkhnya" was assumed. The land from the fall retained some kind of support, as a giant mythical animal or animals (turtles, elephants, whales) thought in the early civilizations (turtles, elephants, whales). The first ancient Greek philosopher Falez Mieta as this support saw a natural object - the world ocean. Anaximandr Miletsky suggested that the universe is centrally symmetric and there is no dedicated direction in it. Therefore, in the center of space, the land is lacking grounds to move in any direction, that is, it is freely resting in the center of the universe without support. Anximandra's student Anaximen did not follow the teacher, believing that the Earth is held from falling with compressed air. Anaxahors adhered to the same opinion. Anximandra's point of view was divided, however, Pythagoreans, Parmenid and Ptolemy. The position of the democritus is not clear: according to various testimonies, he followed Anaximandra or Anaximen.
One of the earliest images of the images of a geocentric system (macrobius, a comment on Sodipion's sleep, a manuscript of the IX century)
Anaximandr considered the land having a form of a low cylinder with a height of three times less than the base diameter. Anaxeman, Anaksagor, Levkipp considered the land flat, like the table lid. A fundamentally new step made Pythagoras, who suggested that the earth has a ball shape. This was followed by not only Pythagoreans, but also Parmenid, Plato, Aristotle. So the canonical form of the geocentric system appeared, subsequently actively developed by the ancient Greek astronomers: the spherical land is located in the center of the spherical universe; The visible daily movement of celestial luminaries is a reflection of the rotation of the space around the world axis.
Medieval image of a geocentric system (from the cosmography of Peter Apiana, 1540)
As for the order of the shining, the Anaximander considered the stars located closest to the ground, then followed the moon and the sun. Anaximen first suggested that the stars are the most distant objects fastened on the outer sheath of space. In this he followed all subsequent scientists (with the exception of EmPedocla, who supported Anaximandra). There was an opinion (for the first time, Anaximna or Pythagoreans probably), that the larger the period of appealing the heavenly sphere, the higher. Thus, the layout of the Luminage turned out to be: Moon, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Stars. Mercury and Venus are not included here, because the Greeks had disagreements on their account: Aristotle and Plato placed them immediately behind the sun, Ptolemy - between the moon and the sun. Aristotle believed that there is nothing above the sphere of fixed stars, even space, while the Stoiki believed that our world was immersed in an infinite empty space; Atomists following the Democritus were believed that other worlds were found in the world (limited sphere of fixed stars). This opinion was supported by the epicuretes, he was brightly outlined by Lucretia in the poem "On the nature of things."
"The figure of heavenly bodies" is an illustration of a Geocentric system of the world Ptolemy, made by Portuguese cartographer Bartolome Velu in 1568.
Stored in the National Library of France.
Justification of geocentrism
Ancient Greek scientists in different ways, however, justified the central position and immobility of the Earth. Anaximandr, as already mentioned, as a reason indicated spherical symmetry of space. He did not support Aristotle, putting forward a countersdown, ascribed later to Buridan: in this case, a person who is in the center of the room, in which the walls have food, must die with the hunger (see dried borudanov). Aristotle himself justified geocentrism as follows: the Earth is a heavy body, and the center of the Universe is a natural place for heavy bodies; As the experience shows, all heavy bodies fall pointing, and since they move towards the center of the world, the land is in the center. In addition, the orbital movement of the Earth (which was assumed by Pythagoretz Philolay) Aristotle rejected on the grounds that it should lead to the parallactic displacement of stars, which is not observed.
Drawing of a geocentric system of the world from an Icelandic manuscript dated about 1750 year
A number of authors lead other empirical arguments. Plinles Senior in his encyclopedia "Natural History" justifies the central position of the earth by the equality of the day and night during the equinoxies and the fact that during the equinoxy, the sunrise and the occasion is observed on the same line, and the sunrise on the day of the summer solstice is on the same line As an approach on the day of the winter solstice. From an astronomical point of view, all these arguments, of course, are a misunderstanding. Low better and arguments given by the Advisor in the textbook "Lectures on Astronomy", where he justifies the centrality of the Earth from Nasty. In his opinion, if the Earth was east of the center of the Universe, then the shadows at dawn would be shorter than at sunset, the celestial bodies would seem to see more than when entering, and the duration from dawn to noon would be less than from noon before sunset. Since all this is not observed, the Earth cannot be shifted to the west of the center of the world. Similarly, it is proved that the Earth cannot be shifted to the West. Further, if the Earth was located north or south of the center, the shadows at sunrise would extend in the northern or southern direction, respectively. Moreover, at dawn in the days of equinox, the shade are directed precisely in the direction of the sunset these days, and at sunrise on the day of the summer solstice, the shadows point to the sunset point on the day of the winter solstice. It also indicates that the land is not shifted to the north or south of the center. If the land was above the center, it would be possible to observe less than half of the sky, including less than six zodiac signs; As a result, the night would always be longer than the day. Similarly, it is proved that the Earth cannot be located below the center of the world. Thus, it can only be in the center. Approximately the same arguments in favor of the centrality of the Earth leads the Ptolemy in Almagesta, the book I. Of course, the arguments of the Adhesion and Ptolemy prove only that the Universe is much greater than the Earth, and therefore are also untenable.
Pages from Sacrobosco "Tractatus de Sphaera" with Ptolemy's system - 1550
Ptolemy is trying to also justify the immobility of the Earth (Almagest, Book I). First, if the earth had shifted from the center, they would have been observed just described effects, and since they are not, the Earth is always in the center. Another argument is the verticality of the trajectories of falling tel. The lack of axial rotation of the land of Ptolemy justifies as follows: if the Earth rotated, "then" ... All objects that do not rely on Earth should seem to be committed by the same movement in the opposite direction; Neither the clouds nor other flying or soaring objects will never see moving to the east, since the earth's movement to the east will always discard them, so that these objects will seem moving to the West in the opposite direction. " The failure of this argument was clear only after the opening of the fundamentals of mechanics.
The Harmonia Macrocosmica of Andreas Cellarius - 1660/61
Explanation of astronomical phenomena from the standpoint of geocentrism
The greatest difficulty for the ancient Greek astronomy was the uneven movement of the skiing luminaries (especially the opponent movements of the planets), since in the Pythagorean-Platonian tradition (which, largely followed Aristotle), they were considered the deities that only uniform movements should be made. To overcome this difficulty, models were created in which complex visible movements of the planets were explained as a result of the addition of several uniform movements around the circles. The concrete incarnation of this principle was supported by Aristotle theory of homocentric spheres of Evdox Callippa and the theory of epicycles of Apollonia Perga, Hippark and Ptolemy. However, the latter was forced to partially abandon the principle of uniform movements by introducing an exfill model.
Refusal of geocentrism
During the scientific revolution of the XVII century, geocentrism is incompatible with astronomical facts and contradicts physical theory; Geliocentric system of the world gradually established. The main events that led to the abandonment of the geocentric system were the creation of a heliocentric theory of planetary movements by Copernicus, the telescopic discoveries of Galilee, the opening of the laws of Kepler and, most importantly, the creation of classical mechanics and the opening of the law of Newton worldwide.
Geocentrism and Religion
Already one of the first ideas, opposition geocentrism (Heliocentric Hypothesis of Aristarch Samossky) led to the reaction from representatives of religious philosophy: Cleanf Stoic called to attract Aristarha to the court for moving from the site "Foci of the World", having in mind the land; It is not known, however, whether the efforts of Cleanf were crowned with success. In the Middle Ages, since the Christian Church taught that the whole world was created by God for the sake of man (see Anthropocentrism), geocentrism was also successfully adapted to Christianity. This was also facilitated by the literal reading of the Bible. The scientific revolution of the XVII century was accompanied by attempts by the administrative ban of the heliocentric system, which led, in particular, to a lawsuit on a supporter and propaganda of Heliocentrism Galileo Galileem. Currently, geocentrism as a religious faith is found among some conservative Protestant groups in the United States.
Source: http://ru.wikipedia.org/
Development of geocentrism
From ancient times, the Earth was considered the center of the Universe. At the same time, the preprocentral axis of the universe and asymmetry "Verkhnya" was assumed. The land from the fall retained some kind of support, which in the early civilizations mentioned some kind of giant mythical animal or animals (turtles, elephants, whales). "Father of Philosophy" Falez Miletsky as this support saw a natural object - the world ocean. Anaximandr Miletsky suggested that the universe is centrally symmetric and there is no dedicated direction in it. Therefore, there is no reason to move in the Centraosmospampium of the Earth to move in any direction, that is, it is freely resting to the center of the Universe without support. Anximandra's student, Anaximen did not follow the teacher, believing that he was held from falling with compressed air. Anaxahors adhered to the same opinion. Anaximandra's pooler separated Pythagoreans, Parmenid and Ptolemy. The position of the democritus is not clear: according to various testimonies, he followed Anaximandra or Anaximen.
One of the earliest donas images of the geocentric system (macrobius, Comments Sad Scipion, manuscript of the IX century)
Anaximandr considered the land having a form of a low cylinder with a height of three times less diametrus. Anaximen, Anaksagor, Levkipp considered the land flat, like the table covers. Incipient, the new step made Pythagoras, which suggested that the earth has a shape of the ball. This followed not only the Pythagoreans, but also Parmenid, Plato, Aristotle. So the occurree form of the geocentric system, subsequently actively developed by the ancient Greek-estrons: the spherical land is located in the center of the spherical universe; The visible dullness of the celestial luminaries is a reflection of the rotation of the space around the world axis.
As for the order of the shining, the Anaximander considered the stars located closest to the ground, then followed the moon and the sun. Anaximen for the first time suggested that the stars are the most far from the ground with objects fixed on the outer shell of space. The view is that the larger the period of circulation shone the rejevenous sphere, the higher. Thus, the layout of the Luminage turned out to be: Moon, Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Stars. Mercury and Venus are not included here, because the Greeks have had troubles for their account: Aristotle and Plato placed them immediately behind the sun, Ptolemy - between the moon of the aliment. Aristotle believed that above the sphere of fixed stars there is nothing, even space, at that time of the Stoiki believed that our world was immersed in an infinite empty space; Atomists, after the latch, they believed that other worlds were found behind our world (limited sphere of fixed stars).
Medieval portrait system (from Cosmography Peter Apiana, 1540)
Justification of geocentrism
Ancient Greek scientists are different, however, justified the central position and immobility. Anaximandr, as a reason, indicated the spherical symmetry of space. It did not support Aristotle. It justified geocentrism as follows: the land is a heavyweight, and a natural place for heavy bodies is the center of the Universe; As experience shows, the vague bodies fall sharply, and since they move to the center of the world, the land is in the center. The edge, orbital movement of the Earth) Aristotle rejected at the tomosovania, which it should lead to the parallact displacement of stars, which is not observed.
A number of authors lead other empirical arguments. Plinles Elder in his Encyclopedia "Natural History" justifies the central position of the Earth to the equality of the day and night during the equinoxies Ithem, during the equinox, the sunrise and the occasion is observed on the same line, and the sunrise in the summer solstice is on the same line as the same line as Going on the day of the winter solstice. From an astronomical point of view, all these arguments, of course, are a misunderstanding. Slightly better, the guidelines given by the Advisor in the textbook "Lectures on Astronomy", where he justifies Centrally from Nasty. In his opinion, if the Earth was east of the center of the Universe, the shadows would be shorter than at sunset, the celestial bodies seemed to see more than when entering, the dawn from dawn before noon would be less than from noon before Sunset. Since probably not observed, the earth cannot be shifted east of the center of the world. Similarly, it is proved that the Earth cannot be shifted to the West. Further, if the Earth was located north or South Center, the shadows at sunrise would extend in the northern or southern direction, respectively. The shadow is more important at dawn in the days of equinoxy, and at sunrise on the day of summer solst flow shadow Point to the sunset per day of wintering platforms. It also indicates that the land is not shifted to the north or south of the center. If the byee is above the center, it would be possible to observe less than half of the sky, including the lessons of the zodiac signs; As a result, the night would always be longer than the day. Similarly, it is proved that earthlings can be located below the center of the world. Thus, it can only be in the center.
Scheme of the Geocentric System of the world (from the book of David Hans "Nehmad Vienim", the XVI century). The spheres are specified: air, moon, Mercury, Venus, Sun, the sphere of stationary stars, the sphere that answered the invinolations