Changes

A Polish scientist named '''Nicolaus == Life ==Copernicus''' (Polish:Mikołaj Kopernik, was born in 1473-1543) published a model in Thorn as the youngest of the four children. Between 1491 and about 1494 he studied liberal arts, as well as [[solar systemastronomy]] that combined the and [[heliocentrismastrology]] at the University of [[AristarchusCracow]] with the epicycles of . He left before completing his degree, resuming his studies in [[PtolemyItaly]]. "Finally we shall place the Sun himself at the center University of the Universe. All this is suggested by the systematic procession of events and the harmony of the whole Universe, if only we face the facts, as they say[[Bologna]], 'where he intensively dealt with both eyes openastronomy.'" <ref>http://www.britannica.com/biography/Nicolaus-Copernicus</ref>

Copernicus worked for years on his book describing his theoryof the [[solar system]], and published it near the very end of his life. He entitled it, "De revolutionibus orbium coelestium" ("On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres"), and published it in 1543. The major parts of Copernican theory are:

The reception to his work was initially positive within the [[Catholic Church]]. Years later, the Church reconsidered in connection with claims by [[Galileo]] that the Copernican model had been proven correct. Copernicus' book was suspended until corrected by the [[Index Librorum Prohibitorum|Index]] of the Catholic Church in 1616, because the Pythagorean doctrine of the motion of the Earth and the immobility of the Sun "is false and altogether opposed to the [[Holy Scripture]]". <ref> Decree of General Congregation of the Index, March 5, 1616 (Translated from Latin)</ref> <ref>Trial of Galileo [http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/admonition.htmlTrial of Galileo]</ref> These corrections were indicated in 1620, and nine sentences had to be either omitted or changed.<ref>Catholic Encyclopedia [http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04352b.htmCatholic Encyclopedia]</ref> The book stayed on the Index untill until 1758. In the 20th century, scientists adopted a view closer to the Church scientists. The consensus is now that motion is relative, that Earth-centered and Sun-centered coordinate systems are equally valid for astronomical calculations, that Galileo's main argument for the Copernican system was fallacious,<ref>Galileo argued that the motion of the Earth caused the tides.</ref> and that the doctrine of the immobility of the Sun is false.<ref>The Sun orbits around a black hole at the center of the Milky Way galaxy.</ref>

In fact the Copernican theory was no more accurate than the Ptolemaic model. It had no compelling physical arguments for its superiority, and it proposed no experiments for testing its novel features. In some respects, it was actually less accurate, as more epicycles had to be added (in place of Ptolemy's [[equant]]). Copernicus' main argument in favor of his theory was that it was aesthetically more pleasing as it allowed the planets to move in uniform circular motion, an idea later proven false by Kepler. Many of the ancient Greek arguments for and against [[heliocentrism]] remained unresolved for some time. <ref>Ancient Greeks objected to Aristarchus's heliocentrim because (1) we don't feel the Earth's motion, (2) unattached objects don't fly off, and (3) no annual stellar parallax. [http://physics.gmu.edu/~jevans/astr103/CourseNotes/history_greekGeocentricHeliocentric.html] Stellar parallax was not measured until 1838, while (1) and (2) were resolved by the work of [[Isaac Newton]].</ref>

== Copernican Principle == The Copernican Principle says that the earth has no special place in the universe* ... This idea is the foundation of original Copernican model was approximately as accurate as the [[mediocrity principle]], which says that there is nothing special about Man or the earthPtolemaic but performed worse for some planets. According Galileo and Copernicus used perfect circles to some, this principle has an almost Biblical significancemodel planetary motion. For example, Encyclopedia Britannica says<ref>[http://www.scientus.org/Galileo-Battle-for-Heavens.html Galileo's Battle for the Heavens]</ref>

:''The implications of It had no compelling physical arguments for its superiority, and it proposed no experiments for testing its novel features. Copernicus' work can not be exaggerated. His views challenged the literal interpretation s main argument in favor of Scripture, the philosophical and metaphysical foundations of moral his theory, and even common sense itself. The result was a massive opposition to his reported ideas. It that it was aesthetically more pleasing as it allowed the slowplanets to move in uniform circular motion, sure acceptance of the heliocentric theory an idea later proven false by natural philosophers that ultimately quieted the general clamor, however the name Kepler. Many of Copernicus is still a battle cry against the establishment in religion, philosophy ancient Greek arguments for and scienceagainst [[heliocentrism]] remained unresolved for some time. In later years with Freud, man lost his Godlike mind; with Darwin his exalted place among the creatures of <ref>Ancient Greeks objected to Aristarchus's heliocentrim because (1) we don't feel the Earth; with Copernicus man had lost his privileged position in the Universe.'s motion, (2) unattached objects don'<ref>t fly off, and (3) no annual stellar parallax. [http://abyssphysics.uoregongmu.edu/~jsjevans/glossaryastr103/copernican_principleCourseNotes/history_greekGeocentricHeliocentric.html] Stellar parallax was not measured until 1838, while (1) and (2) were resolved by the work of [[Isaac Newton]].</ref>

All of this would have been unrecognizable to Copernicus. His model was readily accepted to the extent that it agreed with observation, and abandoned when better models came along later. He didn't challenge any moral theory, and he got Catholic Church approval for his book. Not everyone views the history of science as the story of how Man became insignificant.==Modern Ideas==The [[Copernican Principle ]] is incompatible with two of named after Copernicus. This viewpoint states that the leading creationist cosmological theories, Russell Humphreys’ [[White Hole CosmologyEarth]] and Moshe Carmeli's [[Cosmological Relativity]]. <ref>http://creationwiki.org/White_hole_cosmology</ref><ref>http://creationwiki.org/Cosmological_relativity</ref> These cosmological models assume a privileged position of the earth has no special place in the universe, placing but it at the center. They can be argued to be a new form of a geocentric view of the universewas not espoused by Copernicus.