Advertisement

Synthese

, Volume 83, Issue 2, pp 317–323 | Cite as

Copernicus, the orbs, and the equant

  • Peter Barker
Article

Abstract

I argue that Copernicus accepted the reality of celestial spheres on the grounds that the equant problem is unintelligible except as a problem about real spheres. The same considerations point to a number of generally unnoticed liabilities of Copernican astronomy, especially gaps between the spheres, and the failure of some spheres to obey the principle that their natural motion is to rotate. These difficulties may be additional reasons for Copernicus's reluctance to publish, and also stand in the way of strict realism as applied to De Revolutionibus, although a realistic astronomy may be envisioned as a goal for Copernicus's research program.

Keywords

Research Program Additional Reason Equant Problem Natural Motion Real Sphere 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aiton, E. J.: 1987, ‘Peurbach's Theorica novae planetarum’, Osiris 3, 5–44.Google Scholar
  2. Ariew, R.: 1987, ‘The Phases of Venus Before 1610’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 18, 81–92.Google Scholar
  3. Barker, P.: 1985, ‘Jean Pena and Stoic Physics in the Sixteenth Century’, in R. H. Epp (ed.), Recovering the Stoics, Southern Journal of Philosophy, 23 Supplement, 93–107.Google Scholar
  4. Barker, P. and B. R. Goldstein: 1984, ‘Is Seventeenth Century Physics Indebted to the Stoics?’, Centaurus 27, 148–64.Google Scholar
  5. Barker, P. and B. R. Goldstein: 1988, ‘The Role of Comets in the Copernican Revolution’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 19, 299–319.Google Scholar
  6. Copernicus, N.: 1976, On The Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres, A. M. Duncan (trans.), Barnes & Noble, New York.Google Scholar
  7. Gabbey, A.: forthcoming, ‘Newton and the Libration of the Rotating Moon’ in P. Barker and R. Ariew (eds.), Revolution and Continuity, Catholic University of America Press, Washington.Google Scholar
  8. Goldstein, B. R.: 1967, ‘The Arabic Version of Ptolemy's Planetary Hypotheses’, Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 57, part 4, 3–55.Google Scholar
  9. Grant, E.: 1987, ‘Eccentrics and Epicycles in Medieval Cosmology’, in E. Grant and J. E. Murdoch (eds.), Mathematics and Its Applications in Science and Natural Philosophy in the Middle Ages, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, pp. 189–214.Google Scholar
  10. Jardine, N.: 1982, ‘The Significance of the Copernican Orbs’, Journal for the History of Astronomy 13, 168–94.Google Scholar
  11. Neugebauer, O.: 1968, ‘On the Planetary Theory of Copernicus’, Vistas in Astronomy 10, 89–103.Google Scholar
  12. Rosen, E.: 1975, ‘Copernicus' Spheres and Epicycles’, Archive Internationale d'Histoire des Sciences 25, 82–92.Google Scholar
  13. Swerdlow, N.: 1972, ‘Aristotelian Planetary Theory in the Renaissance: Giovanni Battista Amico's Homocentric Spheres’, Journal for the History of Astronomy 3, 36–48.Google Scholar
  14. Swerdlow, N.: 1973, ‘The Derivation and First Draft of Copernicus's Planetary Theory: A Translation of the Commentariolus with Commentary’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 117, 423–512.Google Scholar
  15. Swerdlow, N.: 1976, ‘Pseudodoxia Copernicana’, Archives Internationales d'Histoire des Sciences 26, 108–58.Google Scholar
  16. Swerdlow, N. and O. Neugebauer: 1984, Mathematical Astronomy in Copernicus's De Revolutionibus, Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Van Helden, A.: 1985, Measuring the Universe, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  18. Weisheiphl, J. A.: 1985, Nature and Motion in the Middle Ages, Catholic University Press of America, Washington.Google Scholar
  19. Westman, R. S.: 1980, ‘The Astronomer's Role in the Sixteenth Century: A Preliminary Study’, History of Science 18, 105–147.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Barker
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for the Study of Science in SocietyVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityBlacksburgUSA

Personalised recommendations