154:
743:"Some of this is to show what Galileo considered good science, such as the discussion of William Gilbert's work on magnetism." The point of the section on magnetism is to show that there are bodies in nature that have two natural motions -- in the case of the magnet, weight and magnetism. This is a refutation of the Aristotelian argument that bodies can only have one natural motion (such as downwards, or circular), which would disallow the double motion of the Earth (rotation and revolution). Thus, this section is by no means a digression from astronomy. (I think this was pointed out by Finocchiaro, but I don't have the reference handy.)
1115:
had signalled it), but the fact that he explained the reasons to consider geocentrism as superior were "irrelevant". They were, but that statement seemed at the time an insult towards
Aristotes and the university teachers (as well as a blasphemy, for the Church). Galileo, overestimating the intelligence of his peers, has already irritated most university professors at the time by showing Aristote's affirmation that heaviest objects always fell faster was incorrect (by dropping weights from the tower of Pisa).
84:
628:
406:
390:
374:
546:
144:
117:
570:
455:
434:
658:
560:
535:
75:
21:
465:
276:
241:
696:
286:
775:
Colombe and
Cremonini, the real-life models for Simplicio, appear to have been much concerned with the Aristotelean perfection of the Heavens, which the Tychonian system tends to disrupt. In fact, Simplicio quotes many times, with approval, a philosopher who was no fan of Tycho: Scipio Chiaramonte, author of the
1114:
If I remember it well, what was concerned was not the conclusions of
Galileo himself (as at the time, and because nobody had thought about the yet to come Foucault pendulum experiment, both systems could be seen as functionally identical, one of them allowing just much easier computations as Copernic
1079:
of my own—that the explanation of the apparent motion of sunspots in geostatic systems doesn't need to be quite as complicated as the cited sources appear to make out. It could be accounted for by having the Sun's axis of rotation precess uniformly about another axis, parallel to the Earth's, with a
770:
BTW I've heard many times the statement that the Church had moved from
Ptolemy to Tycho by that time, but it seems always to have been people citing each other or giving no citation at all. I wouldn't mind seeing a development of this claim based on primary sources, or a citation of a good secondary
1171:
That word "supposedly" conveys doubt as to the truth of the origin of that name. Had
Galileo been cited as the origin of the name, that word would have conveyed doubt as to the truth of Galileo's account. However, since Galileo has not been mentioned in that context it instead carries the imputation
1071:
A recent edit added text which maintained that
Galileo's argument in favour of Copernicus's system from the apparent motion of sunspots "is wrong, as the relative motions of sunspots are the same whether in both the Ptolemaic and Copernican system". No source was provided for this assertion, and it
774:
In any case, I don't know of any strong
Tychonic tendencies among the academic philosophers. Theories that Simplicio was a taunt at the Pope should not distract us from the fact that his role in the Dialogue is that of a conservative philosopher, follower of Simplicius, and not a churchman at all.
1320:
Whether the expression enclosed in square brackets should be "concentric" or "not concentric" is not entirely clear, because the expression is not repeated in Cesi's
Italian, and has to be inferred from its first occurrence. But, as is the standard practice in Italian, Cesi uses a double negative,
1340:
The view that Cesi's letter shows Kepler's first two laws to have been "common knowledge" doesn't appear to be widely held by respected authorites in the history of science. While I have found two such authorities who have held that view (James
Voelkel, in the reference linked to above, is one;
1311:
of July 21, 1612. Neither Kepler's second law nor the location of the Sun at one of the foci of a planet's elliptical orbit is mentioned anywhere in the letter. Nor does it appear to me that Cesi's choice of language gives much of a clue as to whether he thought Kepler's proposal for elliptical
825:
Shouldn't there be a mention that the book was written in
Italian, which the general population could read? Had it been written in Latin, the norm for scholarly work of the period, I believe , the general population would not have been able to read it. This was supposed to have been a particular
1466:
As far as I can tell, most respected authorities on Galileo consider it very likely that Kepler's proposal of elliptical orbits was known to him. However, if he ever made any comments on any of Kepler's laws, no record of them seems to have survived. Thus, all the evidence of what Galileo knew
782:
Galileo's directing no arguments directly at Tycho's system can be thought a sort of intellectual dishonesty, a straw-man approach, if his purpose was to attack the Church. It's another matter if, as the text pretty clearly indicates, he was aiming at fuddy-duddy philosophers who insisted on the
762:
It's fine for the fight not to be Martyr Galileo versus the Evil Church Empire; but if the idea is that Galileo was attacking the Church and being dishonest with the issues, I've already argued against that point. Those points. The concept that Galileo was not launching an assault on the Church
1179:
Simplicio is modeled on two contemporary conservative philosophers, Ludovico delle Colombe (1565-1616?), Galileo's fiercest detractor, and Cesare Cremonini (1550–1631), a Paduan colleague who had refused to look through the telescope. Colombe was the leader of a group of Florentine opponents of
787:
By the way, during the entire difficulty process of negotiating a license for publication of the book, did any Church authority whatever raise any problem about its supposedly treating the Church unfairly by omitting Tycho's system? I've never run into evidence of that, but I could be wrong.
2154:
If a theory predicts an effect which is small or difficult to observe, then not observing it is not evidence against the theory. For example, Einstein's General Relativity predicts gravitational waves, yet it took nearly 100 years to actually detect them, because doing so is really difficult.
805:
Adding the pointer to on-line text was a well-intentioned idea, but that page appears to be a copyright violation; specifically, it's lifted from Dartmouth, which I think has a license to use the text privately, but not to post it or let it be posted publicly. Zapped it pending clarification.
791:
If not, then the whole idea that G omitted T's system in order to make the Church look bad (I think that's the idea) looks like a red herring. It's not as if the problem, if it were one, could have been overlooked because nobody thought of Tycho; the "T" section of an index to the
1496:
have read it, especially since he is known to have owned a copy. By all accounts, however, it was very obscure and difficult to read, even by experts, and no hint of the conclusion that Mars's orbit is elliptical appears before the end of chapter 58. In
888:
was written in Italian. Just at the moment, though, I can't see any obviously natural place to slot it in. I'll therefore put off doing it until either someone else beats me to it, or I can come up with a wording that will smoothly fit somewhere into the
865:
I believe I have seen something like this claim made in print, but—as far as I can recall—not in any source I would regard as authoritative. In all the surviving documents from Galileo's trial, there is only one brief comment about his having written the
2155:
Copernicus argued that the non-observation of stellar parallax meant that the stars are far away. He was, in fact, right. It took nearly 300 years for stellar parallax to finally be observed, but scientists accepted heliocentrism long before that. -
1315:" ... and because, just like Your Lordship, I knew of motions concentric with neither the Sun nor the Earth, of some with the Earth, and of some—or perhaps all, if the paths of the planets are elliptical, as Kepler would have it— with the Sun."
1155:
In other words ALL THREE characters derive from real individuals, not just Sagredo & Salviati. In the case of "Simplicio", however, Galileo chose to conceal the name of the real individual behind a nom-de-guerre, doubtless for good reason!
2040:
In 1953, in his Preface to Stillman Drake's translation of the "Dialogue", Einstein said, "To be sure, he wanted to avoid an open commitment in these controversial questions that would have delivered him to destruction by the Inquisition."
1575:
I should point out that the "Ship" thought experiment for frame of reference did not originate with Galileo as the text suggests, it appears centuries earlier in Oresme's "Livre du ciel et du monde" and also in Cusa's "Learned Ignorance".
1088:. However, this is still rather more implausible than the simple explanation available in Copernicus's system, and, in any case, I don't see how it can be included in the article until someone has found a reliable source which contains it.
1172:
that the Simplicius origin is a mere hypothesis by some OTHER individual trying to work out where Galileo got these names from--which in turn would make the double entendre alternative a competing hypothesis by yet another individual.
1467:
about Kepler's laws, of which Cesi's letter of 1612 is apparently one of the most important pieces, is indirect, and there is apparently none to indicate that his knowledge went any further than the mere proposal of elliptic orbits.
870:
in Italian. This was in the report of Melchior Inchofer, one of the theologians tasked with providing an opinion on the orthodoxy of its contents. Inchofer argued that by using Italian Galileo showed that he had written the
1150:
Nor shall the good Peripatetic lack a place; because of his excessive affection toward the Commentaries of Simplicius, I have thought fit to leave him under the name of the author he so much revered, without mentioning his
1255:
Even the word "condensed" is deceptive, as it gives the impression that the effort was to save time only, when it is actually for ideological reasons. The omissions are made to put Einstein and Galileo in a good light.
1141:
I often talked with these two of such matters in the presence of a certain Peripatetic philosopher whose greatest obstacle in apprehending the truth seemed to be the reputation he had acquired by his interpretations of
1034:
1375:
Galileo might have heard about Kepler's laws by a variety of methods. A group of supporters of Kepler formed in England, including William Crabtree, Jeremiah Horrocks and William Gascoigne. This was in 1636.
1349:, Kepler's ideas were "rather slow in establishing themselves, and until about 1630 there are few references to them in the literature of the time." I therefore don't believe Knowledge should be stating as
1166:
He is supposedly named after Simplicius of Cilicia, a sixth-century commentator on Aristotle, but it was suspected the name was a double entendre, as the Italian for "simple" (as in "simple minded") is
1193:
For my own part I can't argue one way or the other, nor do I want to. I merely point out that on such matters the article would seem to be deficient and misleading and needs to be modified. --
753:
It is not clear to me why the popularity of Tycho's system in the Church is especially relevant. The Church, after all, was not the only group with a vested interest in non-Copernican ideas.
2249:
381:
251:
1508:". But Kepler's tidal theory appears in the introduction. I have seen at least one other scholar assert that that's probably the only part of the book that Galileo might have read, and
1072:
is contradicted by numerous modern reliable sources. I have therefore provided three such sources and rewritten the relevant passage to conform to what is contained in those sources.
2264:
36:
2299:
2254:
1159:
So what does the article have to say? First of all it does not state that the origin of all of three names (let alone Simplicio's) is given by Galileo himself in the Dialogue.
2279:
2219:
2269:
2244:
517:
2199:
1175:
All of which is kind of weird given that the statement in the article which follows would appear to itself be an hypothesis despite being presented as undisputed fact:
952:
Sorry, I know Knowledge is not a forum but still, where can I find the full text of the Dialogue? "Acceptable" languages for me would be German, English or Russian.--
307:
on Knowledge. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the
2329:
2324:
2319:
2259:
1934:
1814:
1678:
1547:
Hans Blumenberg's name seems to have been Blumenberg, not Blumenthal. Hans might have thought that his claim put Galileo in a good light, as independent of Kepler.
52:
2284:
2224:
1982:
1978:
1964:
1872:
1868:
1854:
1754:
1750:
1736:
2136:
Because it predicted a parallex, and none could be observed, even with Galeleo's telescope. Theories need to be tested against the data available at the time.
210:
2063:
Galileo actually said, "A questo fine ho presa nel discorso la parte Copernicana, procedendo in pura ipotesi matematica". "I have taken the Copernican side".
875:
not to appeal either to foreigners, as he had stated in his preface, nor to other learned men, but to induce the common people to adopt the Copernican opinion.
2239:
1830:
1308:
334:
222:
127:
2139:
I think Ptolemy was aware of that and is why he rejected heliocentric. Anyway, a note along those lines by someone more knowledgeable would be interesting.
2274:
1498:
344:
1460:
1450:
2294:
507:
2189:
2184:
1134:
The origin given in the article for the "Simplicio" character appears to be contrary to the one Galileo gave in the prologue of the Dialogue itself.
2309:
2214:
1950:
397:
255:
200:
1693:
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add
2204:
2194:
413:
259:
1137:
The Dialogue's prologue (I'm using the English translation by Stillman Drake, which can be found at various places on the Net) has this to say:
2229:
763:
deserves a better hearing than it has got from either "side" since White's time; the possibility that he meant what he said can explain a lot.
153:
1840:
1650:
1321:
in which the first occurrence of the expression is actually "not concentric", and this makes the Italian ambiguous. My reading agrees with
1116:
309:
88:
2234:
1583:
1537:
1441:
1416:
1392:
1365:
1263:
1241:
1219:
1099:
1051:
997:
903:
55:. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see
2314:
2289:
1629:
1608:
1292:
1194:
980:
972:
953:
928:
847:
636:
590:
2091:
2070:
2048:
176:
2209:
2112:
1960:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1850:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
1285:
Prince Cesi's letter to Galileo was written in 1612. This mentioned Kepler's two laws of 1609 as common knowledge, at that time.
921:
The site given in Note 6 omits anything that puts Galileo or Einstein in a poor light. The original Preface should be consulted.
976:
669:
594:
299:
246:
2179:
478:
439:
2304:
2056:
1831:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070205213233/http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/galileochronology.html
1011:, at which point, an infobox template could be added to this article which links to it. That'd be rather nice actually. -
167:
122:
1190:
I have no idea and the article is itself short on details as to why Colombe and Cremonini are suspected to be Simplicio.
2025:
1915:
97:
584:
540:
757:
It is relevant because it makes the story of Galileo versus the Church less good and evil than the popular rendition.
1345:, is another), most I have seen discuss Cesi's letter say merely that it mentions elliptical orbits. According to
2164:
2148:
2120:
2099:
2078:
2030:
1920:
1800:
1658:
1637:
1616:
1591:
1542:
1370:
1300:
1271:
1249:
1227:
1202:
1124:
1104:
1056:
1020:
1002:
961:
936:
908:
855:
834:
747:
1834:
1951:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070205210102/http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/dialogue.html
1654:
32:
1981:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1871:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1753:
to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
1587:
1533:
1455:
1400:
Caspar, in his biography of Kepler, implies the Galileo might have read Kepler's 1609 book. See pages 192-197.
1361:
1267:
1245:
1223:
1120:
1095:
1047:
993:
899:
1633:
1612:
1437:
1412:
1388:
1296:
1198:
957:
2160:
2095:
2084:
Galileo's house arrest was spent in five places. He visited the French ambassador in Poggibonsi, in Italy.
2074:
2052:
2016:
1942:
1906:
1822:
1342:
1334:
1322:
1184:
So instead of Galileo's one anonymous individual masquerading as "Simplicio" we now have an amalgam of two!
932:
851:
2116:
1938:
1841:
https://web.archive.org/web/20070925083931/http://milestones.buffalolib.org/books/books/dialogo/impact.htm
1818:
721:
1954:
2000:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1988:
1890:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1878:
1792:
1772:
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
1760:
1433:
1408:
1384:
744:
682:
678:
674:
103:
1941:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1821:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit
1701:
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
2108:
2087:
2066:
2044:
1727:
1646:
1625:
1604:
1579:
1551:
1429:
1404:
1380:
1288:
1259:
1237:
1215:
924:
843:
598:
74:
1528:
1356:
1090:
1042:
988:
894:
771:
source as distinct from all the tertiary and n-ary sources. And null-ary source, if I may say so.
729:
1844:
1520:
asserts that Galileo had not read the book at all before he made his telescopic discoveries (how
175:
on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
2156:
2144:
1509:
1329:), which seems to me to make more sense. But there are at least two scholars (James Voelkel and
1312:
orbits was "common knowledge at that time". Here's my own translation of the relevant passage:
1016:
1985:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1875:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1757:
before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
1481:
2001:
1891:
1773:
979:
in this case—are the proper places to ask questions like this. I have copied your question to
1688:
814:
728:
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
291:
48:
1449:
Galileo and Kepler could be said to have been on good terms from August 1597 when the former
1346:
1307:
This is not quite accurate. The letter in which Cesi mentions Kepler's elliptical orbits is
1788:
1598:
1353:
that Cesi's letter mentions either of Kepler's laws as being "common knowledge" at the time.
708:
470:
2008:
1898:
1780:
627:
1696:
1513:
1504:
says "Galileo's familiarity with Kepler's tidal explanation suggests that he had read the
1476:
602:
2105:
Galileo was in Rome, Siena, Poggibonsi, Florence and Arcetri during his house arrest.
1967:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1857:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1739:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
1601:
made several remarks that are close to modern ideas. Kepler might have mentioned him.
1501:
1330:
968:
159:
2007:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1897:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
1779:
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
405:
389:
373:
2173:
2140:
1012:
807:
798:
783:
inerrancy of Aristotle. (And see the paragraph I'm about to add to the main entry.)
764:
569:
1326:
1085:
1076:
827:
767:
21:07 25 Jul 2003 (UTC) Gack! Did I fail to sign my original posting? Mea culpa,
575:
1484:) is that Kepler longed for Galileo's acknowledgement of what he had achieved in
1180:
Galileo's, which some of the latter's friends referred to as "the pigeon league".
1974:
1864:
1746:
1075:
It does seem to me to be true—if I may be permitted to peddle a modest piece of
143:
116:
1835:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/galileochronology.html
657:
1973:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1863:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1745:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
1425:
In general, Galileo and Kepler were on good terms with one another from 1610.
1008:
565:
460:
304:
281:
149:
664:
483:
454:
433:
545:
559:
534:
716:
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
303:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to
172:
1955:
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/galileo/dialogue.html
1110:
Galileo was convicted of "grave suspicion of heresy" based on the book
589:. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can
1643:
Nicholas of Cusa might have come to the notice of Galileo in 1597.
275:
240:
1706:
1234:
There is no actual deception, as the word "condensed" is used.
1212:
About four passages have been omitted from Einstein's remarks.
1033:
A copy of the original Italian text is available on the Italian
1845:
http://milestones.buffalolib.org/books/books/dialogo/impact.htm
690:
652:
68:
15:
1162:
Bearing that failure in mind, it makes the following claims:
1712:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the
626:
404:
388:
372:
1488:—an acknowledgement which he never got. Nevertheless, It
1945:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
1825:
for additional information. I made the following changes:
884:
I agree that the article should mention the fact that the
1677:
I have just added archive links to one external link on
1682:
1554:
had come to the notice of Galileo is hard to ascertain.
1470:
I can't find any implication on pp.192–97 of Caspar's
1037:. Please feel free to add an infobox with a link to it.
983:
at the humanities reference desk and answered it there.
60:
56:
27:
663:
A fact from this article was featured on Knowledge's
1524:
Blumenberg thinks he knows this is anybody's guess).
1187:
So who do we believe? Galileo or the hypothesizers?
813:
Does it state how long it took Galileo to write it?
171:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
1977:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1867:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
1749:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
355:
720:] The anchor (#17th and 18th centuries) has been
2250:High-importance philosophical literature articles
1935:Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems
1815:Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems
1679:Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems
1146:A little further on it adds (parenthetically):
1007:The full text would be appropriate content for
601:. To improve this article, please refer to the
53:Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems
2265:High-importance philosophy of science articles
1963:This message was posted before February 2018.
1853:This message was posted before February 2018.
1735:This message was posted before February 2018.
8:
2300:C-Class Astronomy articles of Mid-importance
2255:Philosophical literature task force articles
1622:Kepler mentioned Nicholas of Cusa in 1597.
482:, which collaborates on articles related to
635:This article has been marked as needing an
2280:High-importance Modern philosophy articles
2220:C-Class physics articles of Mid-importance
2106:
2085:
2064:
2042:
1933:I have just modified one external link on
1644:
1623:
1602:
1577:
597:. To use this banner, please refer to the
529:
428:
352:
235:
111:
2270:Philosophy of science task force articles
2245:C-Class philosophical literature articles
1813:I have just modified 2 external links on
2200:Knowledge level-5 vital articles in Arts
1474:that "Galileo might have read" Kepler's
1335:who adopt the alternative interpretation
595:discuss matters related to book articles
603:relevant guideline for the type of work
531:
430:
237:
113:
72:
2330:Selected anniversaries (February 2016)
2325:Selected anniversaries (February 2014)
2320:Selected anniversaries (February 2012)
2260:C-Class philosophy of science articles
1926:External links modified (January 2018)
313:about philosophy content on Knowledge.
2285:Modern philosophy task force articles
2225:C-Class physics publications articles
1724:to let others know (documentation at
7:
581:This article is within the scope of
476:This article is within the scope of
297:This article is within the scope of
165:This article is within the scope of
2240:High-importance Philosophy articles
102:It is of interest to the following
2275:C-Class Modern philosophy articles
14:
2295:Mid-importance Astronomy articles
1937:. Please take a moment to review
1817:. Please take a moment to review
1681:. Please take a moment to review
2190:Knowledge vital articles in Arts
2185:Knowledge level-5 vital articles
694:
656:
568:
558:
544:
533:
463:
453:
432:
319:Knowledge:WikiProject Philosophy
284:
274:
239:
152:
142:
115:
82:
73:
19:
2310:Book articles without infoboxes
2215:Mid-importance physics articles
512:This article has been rated as
492:Knowledge:WikiProject Astronomy
339:This article has been rated as
322:Template:WikiProject Philosophy
205:This article has been rated as
2205:C-Class vital articles in Arts
2195:C-Class level-5 vital articles
1707:http://csicop.org/si/2001-09//
1705:Attempted to fix sourcing for
1203:11:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
1130:Origin of the Name "Simplicio"
943:Note 6 has now become Note 14.
495:Template:WikiProject Astronomy
1:
2230:Physics publications articles
2132:Copernicus was actually wrong
835:18:22, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
821:Written in Italian, not Latin
220:This article is supported by
185:Knowledge:WikiProject Physics
179:and see a list of open tasks.
2149:07:36, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
2031:01:55, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
1921:03:59, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
188:Template:WikiProject Physics
2235:C-Class Philosophy articles
1480:of 1609. All Caspar says (
1301:10:46, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
1125:16:17, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
826:irritation to the Church.
611:Knowledge:WikiProject Books
2346:
2315:WikiProject Books articles
2290:C-Class Astronomy articles
1994:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1930:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1884:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1810:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1801:11:39, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
1766:(last update: 5 June 2024)
1699:|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
1674:Hello fellow Wikipedians,
1638:09:44, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
1617:09:38, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
1592:00:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
1543:12:13, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
1371:16:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
1343:in his biography of Kepler
1057:09:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
1021:20:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
1003:15:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
962:11:22, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
937:13:16, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
909:15:00, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
856:13:25, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
810:22:45, Jul 24, 2004 (UTC)
614:Template:WikiProject Books
518:project's importance scale
345:project's importance scale
211:project's importance scale
2165:07:17, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
2121:12:46, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
2100:12:33, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
2079:12:25, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
2057:12:17, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
1453:complimenting him on his
1272:10:38, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
1250:15:15, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
1228:15:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
1105:18:19, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
748:02:19, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
634:
553:
511:
448:
412:
396:
380:
351:
338:
269:
219:
204:
137:
110:
59:; for its talk page, see
2210:C-Class physics articles
1659:13:29, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
1461:replied enthusiastically
1456:Mysterium Cosmographicum
1444:) 10:11, April 15, 2015‎
1419:) 10:09, April 15, 2015‎
1395:) 09:47, April 15, 2015‎
1323:that of Shea and Artigas
840:Who did the supposing?
801:21:19 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)
382:Philosophical literature
2035:
1806:External links modified
1670:External links modified
356:Associated task forces:
2180:C-Class vital articles
1463:the following October.
722:deleted by other users
631:
409:
393:
377:
300:WikiProject Philosophy
223:Publications Taskforce
28:Christopher Wursteisen
2305:C-Class Book articles
630:
479:WikiProject Astronomy
408:
398:Philosophy of science
392:
376:
89:level-5 vital article
1975:regular verification
1865:regular verification
1747:regular verification
1552:Seleucus of Seleucia
1499:this article (p.105)
817:10:26, Nov 26, 2006
47:. Its contents were
43:with a consensus to
1965:After February 2018
1855:After February 2018
1737:After February 2018
1716:parameter below to
1451:wrote to the latter
325:Philosophy articles
168:WikiProject Physics
2036:Einstein's opinion
2019:InternetArchiveBot
1970:InternetArchiveBot
1909:InternetArchiveBot
1860:InternetArchiveBot
1742:InternetArchiveBot
1492:true that Galileo
796:will confirm this.
632:
498:Astronomy articles
410:
394:
378:
310:general discussion
98:content assessment
31:was nominated for
2123:
2111:comment added by
2102:
2090:comment added by
2081:
2069:comment added by
2059:
2047:comment added by
1995:
1885:
1799:
1767:
1661:
1649:comment added by
1640:
1628:comment added by
1619:
1607:comment added by
1594:
1582:comment added by
1541:
1446:
1432:comment added by
1421:
1407:comment added by
1397:
1383:comment added by
1369:
1325:(also adopted by
1291:comment added by
1262:comment added by
1240:comment added by
1218:comment added by
1103:
1055:
1001:
927:comment added by
907:
846:comment added by
736:
735:
711:in most browsers.
689:
688:
683:February 22, 2016
679:February 22, 2014
675:February 22, 2012
651:
650:
647:
646:
643:
642:
585:WikiProject Books
528:
527:
524:
523:
427:
426:
423:
422:
419:
418:
414:Modern philosophy
292:Philosophy portal
234:
233:
230:
229:
67:
66:
2337:
2029:
2020:
1993:
1992:
1971:
1919:
1910:
1883:
1882:
1861:
1795:
1794:Talk to my owner
1790:
1765:
1764:
1743:
1731:
1700:
1692:
1599:Nicholas of Cusa
1531:
1445:
1426:
1420:
1401:
1396:
1377:
1359:
1303:
1274:
1252:
1230:
1093:
1077:original reseach
1045:
991:
939:
897:
858:
831:
730:Reporting errors
698:
697:
691:
660:
653:
619:
618:
615:
612:
609:
591:join the project
578:
573:
572:
562:
555:
554:
549:
548:
547:
537:
530:
500:
499:
496:
493:
490:
473:
471:Astronomy portal
468:
467:
466:
457:
450:
449:
444:
436:
429:
363:
353:
327:
326:
323:
320:
317:
294:
289:
288:
287:
278:
271:
270:
265:
262:
243:
236:
193:
192:
191:physics articles
189:
186:
183:
162:
157:
156:
146:
139:
138:
133:
130:
119:
112:
95:
86:
85:
78:
77:
69:
23:
22:
16:
2345:
2344:
2340:
2339:
2338:
2336:
2335:
2334:
2170:
2169:
2134:
2038:
2023:
2018:
1986:
1979:have permission
1969:
1943:this simple FaQ
1928:
1913:
1908:
1876:
1869:have permission
1859:
1823:this simple FaQ
1808:
1798:
1793:
1758:
1751:have permission
1741:
1725:
1694:
1686:
1672:
1651:103.245.205.174
1573:
1506:Astronomia nova
1486:Astronomia nova
1477:Astronomia nova
1427:
1402:
1378:
1286:
1283:
1257:
1235:
1213:
1210:
1132:
1117:212.198.146.177
1112:
1069:
969:reference desks
950:
922:
919:
841:
829:
823:
741:
732:
714:
713:
712:
695:
616:
613:
610:
607:
606:
574:
567:
543:
497:
494:
491:
488:
487:
469:
464:
462:
442:
361:
341:High-importance
324:
321:
318:
315:
314:
290:
285:
283:
264:High‑importance
263:
249:
190:
187:
184:
181:
180:
158:
151:
131:
125:
96:on Knowledge's
93:
83:
20:
12:
11:
5:
2343:
2341:
2333:
2332:
2327:
2322:
2317:
2312:
2307:
2302:
2297:
2292:
2287:
2282:
2277:
2272:
2267:
2262:
2257:
2252:
2247:
2242:
2237:
2232:
2227:
2222:
2217:
2212:
2207:
2202:
2197:
2192:
2187:
2182:
2172:
2171:
2168:
2167:
2133:
2130:
2129:
2128:
2127:
2126:
2125:
2124:
2037:
2034:
2013:
2012:
2005:
1958:
1957:
1949:Added archive
1927:
1924:
1903:
1902:
1895:
1848:
1847:
1839:Added archive
1837:
1829:Added archive
1807:
1804:
1791:
1785:
1784:
1777:
1710:
1709:
1685:. You may add
1671:
1668:
1667:
1666:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1584:202.160.98.101
1572:
1569:
1568:
1567:
1566:
1565:
1564:
1563:
1562:
1561:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1557:
1556:
1555:
1526:
1525:
1502:Stillman Drake
1468:
1464:
1434:119.237.177.5
1409:119.237.177.5
1385:119.237.177.5
1354:
1338:
1331:Erwin Panofsky
1318:
1317:
1316:
1282:
1279:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1275:
1264:86.145.205.224
1242:86.145.205.224
1220:86.145.205.224
1209:
1206:
1182:
1181:
1169:
1168:
1153:
1152:
1144:
1143:
1131:
1128:
1111:
1108:
1089:
1068:
1065:
1064:
1063:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1039:
1038:
1026:
1025:
1024:
1023:
985:
984:
949:
946:
945:
944:
918:
915:
914:
913:
912:
911:
891:
890:
879:
878:
877:
876:
860:
859:
822:
819:
804:
797:
785:
761:
759:
758:
751:
740:
737:
734:
733:
727:
726:
725:
709:case-sensitive
703:
702:
701:
699:
687:
686:
661:
649:
648:
645:
644:
641:
640:
633:
623:
622:
620:
580:
579:
563:
551:
550:
538:
526:
525:
522:
521:
514:Mid-importance
510:
504:
503:
501:
475:
474:
458:
446:
445:
443:Mid‑importance
437:
425:
424:
421:
420:
417:
416:
411:
401:
400:
395:
385:
384:
379:
369:
368:
366:
364:
358:
357:
349:
348:
337:
331:
330:
328:
296:
295:
279:
267:
266:
244:
232:
231:
228:
227:
218:
215:
214:
207:Mid-importance
203:
197:
196:
194:
177:the discussion
164:
163:
160:Physics portal
147:
135:
134:
132:Mid‑importance
120:
108:
107:
101:
79:
65:
64:
39:was closed on
37:The discussion
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2342:
2331:
2328:
2326:
2323:
2321:
2318:
2316:
2313:
2311:
2308:
2306:
2303:
2301:
2298:
2296:
2293:
2291:
2288:
2286:
2283:
2281:
2278:
2276:
2273:
2271:
2268:
2266:
2263:
2261:
2258:
2256:
2253:
2251:
2248:
2246:
2243:
2241:
2238:
2236:
2233:
2231:
2228:
2226:
2223:
2221:
2218:
2216:
2213:
2211:
2208:
2206:
2203:
2201:
2198:
2196:
2193:
2191:
2188:
2186:
2183:
2181:
2178:
2177:
2175:
2166:
2162:
2158:
2157:Thucydides411
2153:
2152:
2151:
2150:
2146:
2142:
2137:
2131:
2122:
2118:
2114:
2110:
2104:
2103:
2101:
2097:
2093:
2089:
2083:
2082:
2080:
2076:
2072:
2068:
2062:
2061:
2060:
2058:
2054:
2050:
2046:
2033:
2032:
2027:
2022:
2021:
2010:
2006:
2003:
1999:
1998:
1997:
1990:
1984:
1980:
1976:
1972:
1966:
1961:
1956:
1952:
1948:
1947:
1946:
1944:
1940:
1936:
1931:
1925:
1923:
1922:
1917:
1912:
1911:
1900:
1896:
1893:
1889:
1888:
1887:
1880:
1874:
1870:
1866:
1862:
1856:
1851:
1846:
1842:
1838:
1836:
1832:
1828:
1827:
1826:
1824:
1820:
1816:
1811:
1805:
1803:
1802:
1796:
1789:
1782:
1778:
1775:
1771:
1770:
1769:
1762:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1744:
1738:
1733:
1729:
1723:
1719:
1715:
1708:
1704:
1703:
1702:
1698:
1690:
1684:
1680:
1675:
1669:
1660:
1656:
1652:
1648:
1642:
1641:
1639:
1635:
1631:
1630:185.43.110.15
1627:
1621:
1620:
1618:
1614:
1610:
1609:185.43.110.15
1606:
1600:
1597:
1596:
1595:
1593:
1589:
1585:
1581:
1571:Ship Argument
1570:
1553:
1549:
1548:
1546:
1545:
1544:
1539:
1535:
1530:
1527:
1523:
1519:
1517:
1511:
1507:
1503:
1500:
1495:
1491:
1487:
1483:
1479:
1478:
1473:
1469:
1465:
1462:
1458:
1457:
1452:
1448:
1447:
1443:
1439:
1435:
1431:
1424:
1423:
1418:
1414:
1410:
1406:
1399:
1398:
1394:
1390:
1386:
1382:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1367:
1363:
1358:
1355:
1352:
1348:
1344:
1339:
1336:
1332:
1328:
1324:
1319:
1314:
1313:
1310:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1302:
1298:
1294:
1293:146.247.25.51
1290:
1280:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1261:
1254:
1253:
1251:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1229:
1225:
1221:
1217:
1207:
1205:
1204:
1200:
1196:
1195:114.73.70.230
1191:
1188:
1185:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1173:
1165:
1164:
1163:
1160:
1157:
1149:
1148:
1147:
1140:
1139:
1138:
1135:
1129:
1127:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1109:
1107:
1106:
1101:
1097:
1092:
1087:
1083:
1078:
1073:
1066:
1058:
1053:
1049:
1044:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1006:
1005:
1004:
999:
995:
990:
986:
982:
981:a new section
978:
974:
970:
966:
965:
964:
963:
959:
955:
954:141.20.53.121
947:
942:
941:
940:
938:
934:
930:
929:81.158.207.21
926:
916:
910:
905:
901:
896:
892:
887:
883:
882:
881:
880:
874:
869:
864:
863:
862:
861:
857:
853:
849:
848:81.158.207.21
845:
839:
838:
837:
836:
833:
832:
820:
818:
816:
811:
809:
802:
800:
795:
789:
784:
780:
778:
772:
768:
766:
756:
755:
754:
750:
749:
746:
745:67.186.28.212
738:
731:
723:
719:
718:
717:
710:
706:
700:
693:
692:
684:
680:
676:
672:
671:
666:
662:
659:
655:
654:
638:
629:
625:
624:
621:
617:Book articles
604:
600:
599:documentation
596:
592:
588:
587:
586:
577:
571:
566:
564:
561:
557:
556:
552:
542:
539:
536:
532:
519:
515:
509:
506:
505:
502:
486:on Knowledge.
485:
481:
480:
472:
461:
459:
456:
452:
451:
447:
441:
438:
435:
431:
415:
407:
403:
402:
399:
391:
387:
386:
383:
375:
371:
370:
367:
365:
360:
359:
354:
350:
346:
342:
336:
333:
332:
329:
312:
311:
306:
302:
301:
293:
282:
280:
277:
273:
272:
268:
261:
257:
253:
248:
245:
242:
238:
225:
224:
217:
216:
212:
208:
202:
199:
198:
195:
178:
174:
170:
169:
161:
155:
150:
148:
145:
141:
140:
136:
129:
124:
121:
118:
114:
109:
105:
99:
91:
90:
80:
76:
71:
70:
62:
58:
54:
50:
46:
42:
41:3 August 2023
38:
34:
30:
29:
25:
18:
17:
2138:
2135:
2107:— Preceding
2092:87.10.31.162
2086:— Preceding
2071:87.10.31.162
2065:— Preceding
2049:87.10.31.162
2043:— Preceding
2039:
2017:
2014:
1989:source check
1968:
1962:
1959:
1932:
1929:
1907:
1904:
1879:source check
1858:
1852:
1849:
1812:
1809:
1786:
1761:source check
1740:
1734:
1721:
1717:
1713:
1711:
1676:
1673:
1645:— Preceding
1624:— Preceding
1603:— Preceding
1578:— Preceding
1574:
1529:David Wilson
1521:
1515:
1505:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1475:
1471:
1454:
1428:— Preceding
1403:— Preceding
1379:— Preceding
1357:David Wilson
1350:
1341:Max Caspar,
1327:Edward Rosen
1287:— Preceding
1284:
1258:— Preceding
1236:— Preceding
1214:— Preceding
1211:
1192:
1189:
1186:
1183:
1174:
1170:
1161:
1158:
1154:
1145:
1136:
1133:
1113:
1091:David Wilson
1086:sidereal day
1081:
1074:
1070:
1043:David Wilson
989:David Wilson
951:
920:
895:David Wilson
885:
872:
867:
828:
824:
815:VLCMSTNHXXXC
812:
803:
793:
790:
786:
781:
776:
773:
769:
760:
752:
742:
715:
707:Anchors are
704:
668:
583:
582:
576:Books portal
513:
477:
340:
308:
298:
221:
206:
166:
128:Publications
104:WikiProjects
87:
44:
40:
26:
2113:78.62.50.39
1728:Sourcecheck
1459:. Kepler
1167:"semplice".
923:—Preceding
842:—Preceding
673:section on
670:On this day
57:its history
2174:Categories
2026:Report bug
1916:Report bug
1522:Blumenthal
1518:Blumenberg
1516:Blumenthal
1347:this paper
1142:Aristotle.
1080:period of
1035:wikisource
1009:Wikisource
973:humanities
948:Full text?
777:Anti-Tycho
316:Philosophy
305:philosophy
252:Literature
247:Philosophy
2009:this tool
2002:this tool
1899:this tool
1892:this tool
1781:this tool
1774:this tool
1208:Omissions
1082:precisely
665:Main Page
489:Astronomy
484:Astronomy
440:Astronomy
92:is rated
2141:Tuntable
2109:unsigned
2088:unsigned
2067:unsigned
2045:unsigned
2015:Cheers.—
1905:Cheers.—
1787:Cheers.—
1689:cbignore
1647:unsigned
1626:unsigned
1605:unsigned
1580:unsigned
1550:How far
1442:contribs
1430:unsigned
1417:contribs
1405:unsigned
1393:contribs
1381:unsigned
1309:this one
1289:unsigned
1260:unsigned
1238:unsigned
1216:unsigned
1067:Sunspots
1013:Verdatum
971:—either
925:unsigned
889:article.
886:Dialogue
873:Dialogue
868:Dialogue
844:unsigned
808:Dandrake
799:Dandrake
794:Dialogue
765:Dandrake
739:Comments
33:deletion
1939:my edit
1819:my edit
1797::Online
1714:checked
1683:my edit
977:science
830:Sagredo
724:before.
667:in the
637:infobox
516:on the
343:on the
256:Science
209:on the
182:Physics
173:Physics
123:Physics
94:C-class
1722:failed
1697:nobots
1472:Kepler
1281:Letter
917:Note 6
681:, and
260:Modern
100:scale.
49:merged
1514:Hans
1494:might
1482:p.195
608:Books
541:Books
81:This
51:into
45:merge
2161:talk
2145:talk
2117:talk
2096:talk
2075:talk
2053:talk
1718:true
1655:talk
1634:talk
1613:talk
1588:talk
1538:cont
1534:talk
1510:here
1438:talk
1413:talk
1389:talk
1366:cont
1362:talk
1351:fact
1297:talk
1268:talk
1246:talk
1224:talk
1199:talk
1151:own.
1121:talk
1100:cont
1096:talk
1084:one
1052:cont
1048:talk
1017:talk
998:cont
994:talk
967:The
958:talk
933:talk
904:cont
900:talk
852:talk
705:Tip:
593:and
335:High
61:here
1983:RfC
1953:to
1873:RfC
1843:to
1833:to
1755:RfC
1732:).
1720:or
975:or
508:Mid
201:Mid
35:.
2176::
2163:)
2147:)
2119:)
2098:)
2077:)
2055:)
1996:.
1991:}}
1987:{{
1886:.
1881:}}
1877:{{
1768:.
1763:}}
1759:{{
1730:}}
1726:{{
1695:{{
1691:}}
1687:{{
1657:)
1636:)
1615:)
1590:)
1536:·
1512:,
1490:is
1440:•
1422:.
1415:•
1391:•
1364:·
1333:)
1299:)
1270:)
1248:)
1226:)
1201:)
1123:)
1098:·
1050:·
1019:)
996:·
960:)
935:)
902:·
854:)
779:.
677:,
362:/
258:/
254:/
250::
126::
2159:(
2143:(
2115:(
2094:(
2073:(
2051:(
2028:)
2024:(
2011:.
2004:.
1918:)
1914:(
1901:.
1894:.
1783:.
1776:.
1653:(
1632:(
1611:(
1586:(
1540:)
1532:(
1436:(
1411:(
1387:(
1368:)
1360:(
1337:.
1295:(
1266:(
1244:(
1222:(
1197:(
1119:(
1102:)
1094:(
1054:)
1046:(
1041:—
1015:(
1000:)
992:(
987:—
956:(
931:(
906:)
898:(
893:—
850:(
685:.
639:.
605:.
520:.
347:.
226:.
213:.
106::
63:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
