Showing 1–36 of 36 results for author: Graney, C M

The Challenging History of Other Earths

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: This paper provides an overview of recent historical research regarding scientifically-informed challenges to the idea that the stars are other suns orbited by other inhabited earths -- an idea that came to be known as "the Plurality of Worlds". Johannes Kepler in the seventeenth century, Jacques Cassini in the eighteenth, and William Whewell in the nineteenth each argued against "pluralism" based… ▽ More This paper provides an overview of recent historical research regarding scientifically-informed challenges to the idea that the stars are other suns orbited by other inhabited earths -- an idea that came to be known as "the Plurality of Worlds". Johannes Kepler in the seventeenth century, Jacques Cassini in the eighteenth, and William Whewell in the nineteenth each argued against "pluralism" based on what in their respective times was solid science. Nevertheless, pluralism remained popular despite these and other scientific challenges. This history will be of interest to the astronomical community so that it is better positioned to avoid difficulties should the historical trajectory of pluralism continue, especially as it persists in the popular imagination. △ Less

Submitted 17 September, 2024; originally announced September 2024.

Comments: 17 pages, 6 figures. Posted to arXiv 6+ months after publication, in accordance with Cambridge University Press & Assessment "Licence to Publish" regarding "accepted manuscript"

Journal ref: International Journal of Astrobiology, Volume 22, Issue 6, December 2023, pp. 729 - 738

Galileo and Buonamici on the Tides of the Sea: Was Something Omitted from the Dialogue?

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: In his 1616 discourse on the tides, Galileo claimed that diurnal tides occurred in Lisbon, Portugal, bolstering his theory of the tides. Lisbon does not feature such tides, but in an exchange of letters in 1629-1630, Giovanfrancesco Buonamici provided Galileo with information on where such tides could be found. Buonamici referred Galileo to the Regimiento de Navegación of Andrés García de Céspedes… ▽ More In his 1616 discourse on the tides, Galileo claimed that diurnal tides occurred in Lisbon, Portugal, bolstering his theory of the tides. Lisbon does not feature such tides, but in an exchange of letters in 1629-1630, Giovanfrancesco Buonamici provided Galileo with information on where such tides could be found. Buonamici referred Galileo to the Regimiento de Navegación of Andrés García de Céspedes, and to the Descrittione di Tutti i Paesi Bassi of Lodovico Guicciardini. Galileo omitted any information on where diurnal tides occurred from his 1632 Dialogue, perhaps unintentionally, leaving him open to criticism. Buonamici's material militates against that criticism. △ Less

Submitted 17 September, 2024; originally announced September 2024.

Comments: 13 pages, 3 figures

Journal ref: Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage, Volume 27, Issue 1: 200 - 208 (2024)

The Vatican and the Fallibility of Science: Augustine, Copernicus, Darwin and Race

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: This paper provides an overview of work, published since the opening of the archives of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith at the end of the twentieth century, regarding the Vatican confronting evolution in the nineteenth century. It argues that this work, considered in light of recent studies of scientific writings by Jesuit astronomers who in the seventeenth century were oppo… ▽ More This paper provides an overview of work, published since the opening of the archives of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith at the end of the twentieth century, regarding the Vatican confronting evolution in the nineteenth century. It argues that this work, considered in light of recent studies of scientific writings by Jesuit astronomers who in the seventeenth century were opposed to the ideas of Copernicus, points to interesting things yet to be learned regarding the Vatican's actions on heliocentrism. Concern for Scripture and for the fallible and consequential nature of science, together with the processes used by the Vatican in these confrontations, inevitably led to messy results in these well-known "religion and science" confrontations. Nevertheless, these confrontations suggest that what the Vatican was attempting to do in confronting evolution or heliocentrism is something that is needed in science, and something that will be done in the future, probably not by the Vatican, and probably in a fashion not less messy. △ Less

Submitted 8 March, 2024; originally announced March 2024.

Comments: 27 pages, 4 figures -- For conference on "Unity & Disunity in Science: Philosophical, Historical, and Theological Perspectives (Spring 2024)", University of Notre Dame, April 4-6, 2024

Stolzenberg's "The Holy Office in The Republic of Letters" Revisited: On an Astronomical Diagram and Whether the Papacy Tacitly Permitted the Circulation of an Explicitly Copernican Book in 1660

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Did the papacy tacitly permit the circulation of an explicitly Copernican book in 1660? One scholar has recently argued that it did. A close analysis of a unique illustration from that book, Andreas Cellarius's atlas Harmonia Macrocosmica, illuminates this argument. This is because the illustration, a diagram showing the relative sizes of the sun, moon, planets, and stars, was among the material r… ▽ More Did the papacy tacitly permit the circulation of an explicitly Copernican book in 1660? One scholar has recently argued that it did. A close analysis of a unique illustration from that book, Andreas Cellarius's atlas Harmonia Macrocosmica, illuminates this argument. This is because the illustration, a diagram showing the relative sizes of the sun, moon, planets, and stars, was among the material reviewed (at the request of the book's publisher) by the Holy Office prior to the book's publication and was pro-Copernican. △ Less

Submitted 18 January, 2024; originally announced January 2024.

Comments: 15 pages, 5 figures

Whence Tycho's Case against Copernicus? On Genesis, Augustine, and the Stars

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: This paper argues that Tycho Brahe's "principal argument against Copernicus" (as the astronomer Christiaan Huygens called it) likely derived from a much older argument regarding the sizes of the "two great lights" described in the first chapter of the book of Genesis. Brahe's argument, that in the Copernican system stars would have to be absurdly large, played an important role in opposition to th… ▽ More This paper argues that Tycho Brahe's "principal argument against Copernicus" (as the astronomer Christiaan Huygens called it) likely derived from a much older argument regarding the sizes of the "two great lights" described in the first chapter of the book of Genesis. Brahe's argument, that in the Copernican system stars would have to be absurdly large, played an important role in opposition to the Copernican system in the seventeenth century. Brahe presented the argument in an exchange of letters with Christoph Rothmann in 1588-89. Within that exchange Rothmann and Brahe touched both on the question of the two great lights of Genesis and on theologians such as Augustine of Hippo who treated that question. The fundamentals of Brahe's important line of argument against Copernicus thus well pre-dated Copernicus and Brahe. △ Less

Submitted 15 December, 2023; originally announced December 2023.

Comments: 11 pages, 3 figures

Galileo between Jesuits: The Fault is in the Stars

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: In the middle of the seventeenth century, André Tacquet, S.J. briefly discussed a scientific argument regarding the structure of a Copernican universe, and commented on Galileo Galilei's discussion of that same argument -- Galileo's discussion in turn being a commentary on a version of the argument by Christoph Scheiner, S.J. The argument was based on observations of the sizes of stars. This excha… ▽ More In the middle of the seventeenth century, André Tacquet, S.J. briefly discussed a scientific argument regarding the structure of a Copernican universe, and commented on Galileo Galilei's discussion of that same argument -- Galileo's discussion in turn being a commentary on a version of the argument by Christoph Scheiner, S.J. The argument was based on observations of the sizes of stars. This exchange involving Galileo and two Jesuits illustrates how through much of the seventeenth century, science -- meaning observations measurements, and calculations -- supported a view of the Copernican universe in which stars were not other suns, but were dim bodies, far larger than the sun. Johannes Kepler emphasized this, especially in arguing against Giordano Bruno. Jesuit astronomers like Tacquet and Scheiner understood this. Those who might have listened to Jesuit astronomers would likewise have understood this -- Robert Bellarmine, for example, whose role in the debate over Copernicanism is well known. To many, such a universe was, in the words of Galileo's Dialogue character Sagredo, "beyond belief," and no modern view of a universe of many distant suns would be scientifically supportable until after Tacquet's death in 1660. The Copernican universe of the seventeenth century looked radically different from the universe as modern astronomers understand it, and recognizing this fact allows for interesting questions to be asked regarding the actions of those, such as Bellarmine, who were responding to the work of Copernicus. △ Less

Submitted 21 December, 2021; originally announced December 2021.

Comments: 39 pages, 10 figures -- originally published in the Catholic Historical Review, Volume 107, Number 2, Spring 2021 -- posted to arXiv after six months in accordance with CHR policy

Journal ref: Catholic Historical Review, Volume 107, Number 2, Spring 2021, pages 191-225

Not the Earth, but its orbit: Andre Tacquet and the question of star sizes in a heliocentric universe

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: This paper consists of a translation of Andre Tacquet's discussion of the question of sizes of stars in a heliocentric universe, as published in his posthumous Opera Mathematica of 1668, along with introductory material and analysis. While Robert Hooke mentions Tacquet as one of the "great Anti-copernicans", who argued the question of star sizes against the heliocentric theory with "great vehemenc… ▽ More This paper consists of a translation of Andre Tacquet's discussion of the question of sizes of stars in a heliocentric universe, as published in his posthumous Opera Mathematica of 1668, along with introductory material and analysis. While Robert Hooke mentions Tacquet as one of the "great Anti-copernicans", who argued the question of star sizes against the heliocentric theory with "great vehemency and insulting", Tacquet's discussion has received only scant attention. The kernel of Tacquet's argument is that the absence of any detectable parallax in the stars, combined with the measured apparent sizes of the stars, means that, in a heliocentric universe, the sizes of stars compare to the size of Earth's orbit via the same proportion that they compare to the size of the Earth in a geocentric universe. The translated material presents this argument in a straightforward manner, insulting absent. △ Less

Submitted 26 September, 2019; originally announced September 2019.

Comments: 16 pages, 3 figures

The Starry Universe of Johannes Kepler

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Johannes Kepler described the Copernican universe as consisting of a central, small, brilliant sun with its planetary system, all surrounded by giant stars. These stars were far larger than, and much dimmer than, the sun -- his De Stella Nova shows that every visible star must exceed the size of the Earth's orbit, and the most prominent stars may exceed the size of the entire planetary system. His… ▽ More Johannes Kepler described the Copernican universe as consisting of a central, small, brilliant sun with its planetary system, all surrounded by giant stars. These stars were far larger than, and much dimmer than, the sun -- his De Stella Nova shows that every visible star must exceed the size of the Earth's orbit, and the most prominent stars may exceed the size of the entire planetary system. His other writings, including his response to Ingoli, his Dissertatio cum Nuncio Sidereo, and his Epitome Astronomiae Copernicanae, also reflect this Copernican universe. To Kepler, such a universe was an illustration of divine power -- and solid evidence against the stars being suns, against the universe of Giordano Bruno. Kepler's starry universe was in fact the Copernican universe supported by observations of the stars, which showed them to have measureable apparent sizes. Not until the later seventeenth century were those apparent sizes shown to be spurious, allowing for a universe in which the stars were suns. △ Less

Submitted 10 June, 2019; originally announced June 2019.

Comments: 28 pages, 6 figures. This is the originally submitted version of paper now published in the Journal for the History of Astronomy, posted to arXiv per SAGE Publishing's Archiving and Sharing Policy

Journal ref: Journal for the History of Astronomy, Vol. 50, Num. 2 (May 2019), pp. 155-173

How to make the Earth orbit the Sun in 1614

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: In 1614 Johann Georg Locher, a student of the Jesuit astronomer Christoph Scheiner, proposed a physical mechanism to explain how the Earth could orbit the sun. An orbit, Locher said, is a perpetual fall. He proposed this despite the fact that he rejected the Copernican system, citing problems with falling bodies and the sizes of stars under that system. In 1651 and again in 1680, Jesuit writers Gi… ▽ More In 1614 Johann Georg Locher, a student of the Jesuit astronomer Christoph Scheiner, proposed a physical mechanism to explain how the Earth could orbit the sun. An orbit, Locher said, is a perpetual fall. He proposed this despite the fact that he rejected the Copernican system, citing problems with falling bodies and the sizes of stars under that system. In 1651 and again in 1680, Jesuit writers Giovanni Battista Riccioli and Athanasius Kircher, respectively, considered and rejected outright Locher's idea of an orbit as a perpetual fall. Thus this important concept of an orbit was proposed, considered, and rejected well before Isaac Newton would use an entirely different physics to make the idea that an orbit is a perpetual fall the common way of envisioning and explaining orbits. △ Less

Submitted 12 February, 2019; originally announced February 2019.

Comments: 13 page, 11 figures. Originally submitted version of paper published in the Journal for the History of Astronomy, posted to arXiv per SAGE Publishing's Archiving and Sharing Policy

Journal ref: Journal for the History of Astronomy, Vol. 50, Num. 1 (Feb. 2019), pp. 16-30

Of Mites and Men: Johannes Kepler on Stars and Size

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: In his 1606 De Stella Nova, Johannes Kepler attempted to answer Tycho Brahe's argument that the Copernican heliocentric hypothesis required all the fixed stars to dwarf the Sun, something Brahe found to be a great drawback of that hypothesis. This paper includes a translation into English of Chapter 16 of De Stella Nova, in which Kepler discusses this argument, along with brief outlines of both Ty… ▽ More In his 1606 De Stella Nova, Johannes Kepler attempted to answer Tycho Brahe's argument that the Copernican heliocentric hypothesis required all the fixed stars to dwarf the Sun, something Brahe found to be a great drawback of that hypothesis. This paper includes a translation into English of Chapter 16 of De Stella Nova, in which Kepler discusses this argument, along with brief outlines of both Tycho's argument and Kepler's answer (which references snakes, mites, men, and divine power, among other things). △ Less

Submitted 9 February, 2018; originally announced February 2018.

Comments: Includes an English translation of Chapter 16 of Johannes Kepler's 1606 De Stella Nova. 19 pages, 4 figures

The Coriolis Effect Further Described in the Seventeenth Century

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Claude Francis Milliet Dechales described the Coriolis effect in his 1674 Cursus seu Mundus Mathematicus. Dechales discussed and illustrated the deflection of both falling bodies and of projectiles launched toward the poles that should occur on a rotating Earth. Interestingly, this was done as an argument against the Earth's rotation, the deflections not having been observed at the time. Dechales'… ▽ More Claude Francis Milliet Dechales described the Coriolis effect in his 1674 Cursus seu Mundus Mathematicus. Dechales discussed and illustrated the deflection of both falling bodies and of projectiles launched toward the poles that should occur on a rotating Earth. Interestingly, this was done as an argument against the Earth's rotation, the deflections not having been observed at the time. Dechales's work follows on that of Giovanni Battista Riccioli, who had also described the effect in his Almagestum Novum of 1651. △ Less

Submitted 23 November, 2016; originally announced November 2016.

Comments: 9 pages, 4 figures

Journal ref: Physics Today 70, 7, 12 (2017)

The Inquisition's Semicolon: Punctuation, Translation, and Science in the 1616 Condemnation of the Copernican System

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: This paper presents high-resolution images of the original document of the 24 February 1616 condemnation of the Copernican system, as being "foolish and absurd in philosophy", by a team of consultants for the Roman Inquisition. Secondary sources have disagreed as to the punctuation of the document. The paper includes a brief analysis of the punctuation and the possible effects of that punctuation… ▽ More This paper presents high-resolution images of the original document of the 24 February 1616 condemnation of the Copernican system, as being "foolish and absurd in philosophy", by a team of consultants for the Roman Inquisition. Secondary sources have disagreed as to the punctuation of the document. The paper includes a brief analysis of the punctuation and the possible effects of that punctuation on meaning. The original document and its punctuation may also have relevance to public perception of science and to science education. △ Less

Submitted 4 March, 2014; v1 submitted 25 February, 2014; originally announced February 2014.

Comments: 22 pages, 1 table, 3 figures (2 very high resolution). Revised version (v2) includes minor changes based on feedback to v1. These include correction of several typos, two small adjustments to translation, etc

Mass, Speed, Direction: John Buridan's 14th century concept of momentum

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: In the 14th century the French thinker John Buridan developed a theory of motion that bears a strong resemblance to Newtonian momentum. Buridan's ideas include a quantity of motion which is determined by an object's mass, speed, and direction; in the absence of resistive effects, this quantity remains with the object. Buridan's work is an interesting story in the history of physics. Buridan's insi… ▽ More In the 14th century the French thinker John Buridan developed a theory of motion that bears a strong resemblance to Newtonian momentum. Buridan's ideas include a quantity of motion which is determined by an object's mass, speed, and direction; in the absence of resistive effects, this quantity remains with the object. Buridan's work is an interesting story in the history of physics. Buridan's insights have value for introducing concepts of inertia and momentum to physics students. △ Less

Submitted 17 September, 2013; originally announced September 2013.

Comments: This article has appeared in The Physics Teacher 51, 411 and may be found at http://link.aip.org/link/?PTE/51/411. Copyright (2013) AAPT. Article may be downloaded for personal use only. Other use requires prior permission of the author and AAPT. This e-print has been posted in accordance with the AAPT guidelines for web posting, found at http://ajp.aapt.org/authors/web_posting_guides

Journal ref: The Physics Teacher 51 (October 2013), 411-414

Francesco Ingoli's essay to Galileo: Tycho Brahe and science in the Inquisition's condemnation of the Copernican theory

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: In January of 1616, the month before before the Roman Inquisition would infamously condemn the Copernican theory as being "foolish and absurd in philosophy", Monsignor Francesco Ingoli addressed Galileo Galilei with an essay entitled "Disputation concerning the location and rest of Earth against the system of Copernicus". A rendition of this essay into English, along with the full text of the essa… ▽ More In January of 1616, the month before before the Roman Inquisition would infamously condemn the Copernican theory as being "foolish and absurd in philosophy", Monsignor Francesco Ingoli addressed Galileo Galilei with an essay entitled "Disputation concerning the location and rest of Earth against the system of Copernicus". A rendition of this essay into English, along with the full text of the essay in the original Latin, is provided in this paper. The essay, upon which the Inquisition condemnation was likely based, lists mathematical, physical, and theological arguments against the Copernican theory. Ingoli asks Galileo to respond to those mathematical and physical arguments that are "more weighty", and does not ask him to respond to the theological arguments at all. The mathematical and physical arguments Ingoli presents are largely the anti-Copernican arguments of the great Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe; one of these (an argument based on measurements of the apparent sizes of stars) was all but unanswerable. Ingoli's emphasis on the scientific arguments of Brahe, and his lack of emphasis on theological arguments, raises the question of whether the condemnation of the Copernican theory was, in contrast to how it is usually viewed, essentially scientific in nature, following the ideas of Brahe. △ Less

Submitted 1 April, 2013; v1 submitted 18 November, 2012; originally announced November 2012.

Comments: 61 pages (including two appendices), 4 figures. Revised version includes correction of typos, some streamlining, a little more discussion related to theological arguments

Beyond Galileo: A translation of Giovanni Battista Riccioli's experiments regarding falling bodies and "air drag", as reported in his 1651 Almagestum Novum

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: The Italian astronomer Giovanni Battista Riccioli is commonly credited with performing the first precise experiments to determine the acceleration of a freely falling body, but he also went further, experimentally investigating what today would be called the effect of "air drag" on falling bodies. This paper consists of a translation of those experiments, with a brief analysis and commentary. Ricc… ▽ More The Italian astronomer Giovanni Battista Riccioli is commonly credited with performing the first precise experiments to determine the acceleration of a freely falling body, but he also went further, experimentally investigating what today would be called the effect of "air drag" on falling bodies. This paper consists of a translation of those experiments, with a brief analysis and commentary. Riccioli arrived at conclusions consistent with modern understanding of "air drag". △ Less

Submitted 21 May, 2012; originally announced May 2012.

Doubting, Testing, and Confirming Galileo: A translation of Giovanni Battista Riccioli's experiments regarding the motion of a falling body, as reported in his 1651 Almagestum Novum

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: The Italian astronomer Giovanni Battista Riccioli is commonly credited with performing the first precise experiments to determine the acceleration of a freely falling body. Riccioli has been discussed by historians of science, sometimes positively but often not, but translations of his work into modern languages are not readily available. Presented here is a translation of his experiments regardin… ▽ More The Italian astronomer Giovanni Battista Riccioli is commonly credited with performing the first precise experiments to determine the acceleration of a freely falling body. Riccioli has been discussed by historians of science, sometimes positively but often not, but translations of his work into modern languages are not readily available. Presented here is a translation of his experiments regarding the nature of the motion of a falling body. Riccioli provides a thorough description of his experiments, and his data are quite good. He appears to have a model approach to science: He attacks the question of free fall with the expectation of disproving Galileo's ideas, yet he is convinced by his data that Galileo is indeed correct, and he promptly informs a former protégée of Galileo's of the results. △ Less

Submitted 15 April, 2012; originally announced April 2012.

Regarding how Tycho Brahe noted the absurdity of the Copernican Theory regarding the Bigness of Stars, while the Copernicans appealed to God to answer that absurdity

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Tycho Brahe, the most prominent and accomplished astronomer of his era, made measurements of the apparent sizes of the Sun, Moon, stars, and planets. From these he showed that within a geocentric cosmos these bodies were of comparable sizes, with the Sun being the largest body and the Moon the smallest. He further showed that within a heliocentric cosmos, the stars had to be absurdly large - with… ▽ More Tycho Brahe, the most prominent and accomplished astronomer of his era, made measurements of the apparent sizes of the Sun, Moon, stars, and planets. From these he showed that within a geocentric cosmos these bodies were of comparable sizes, with the Sun being the largest body and the Moon the smallest. He further showed that within a heliocentric cosmos, the stars had to be absurdly large - with the smallest star dwarfing even the Sun. (The results of Tycho's calculations are illustrated in this paper.) Various Copernicans responded to this issue of observation and geometry by appealing to the power of God: They argued that giant stars were not absurd because even such giant objects were nothing compared to an infinite God, and that in fact the Copernican stars pointed out the power of God to humankind. Tycho rejected this argument. △ Less

Submitted 6 January, 2012; v1 submitted 8 December, 2011; originally announced December 2011.

Comments: 20 pages, 4 figures, 2 tables + figures. v2 includes improved Gingerich reference on Tycho, minor corrections

Teaching Galileo? Get to know Riccioli! -- What a forgotten Italian astronomer can teach students about how science works

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: What can physics students learn about science from those scientists who got the answers wrong? Students encounter little science history, and what they have encountered typically portrays scientists as The People with the Right Answers. But those who got the wrong answers can teach students that in science answers are often elusive -- not found in the back of a book or discovered in a bold stroke… ▽ More What can physics students learn about science from those scientists who got the answers wrong? Students encounter little science history, and what they have encountered typically portrays scientists as The People with the Right Answers. But those who got the wrong answers can teach students that in science answers are often elusive -- not found in the back of a book or discovered in a bold stroke of genius. Giovanni Battista Riccioli, a 17th-century astronomer who argued that science supported a geocentric universe, and whose arguments made sense given the knowledge of the time -- is an example of such a person. △ Less

Submitted 18 July, 2011; originally announced July 2011.

Comments: This article has been accepted for publication by The Physics Teacher. After it is published, it will be found at http://scitation.aip.org/tpt/; http://tpt.aapt.org/resource/1/phteah/v50/i1/p18_s1?bypassSSO=1

Journal ref: The Physics Teacher, 50 (2012), pp. 18-21

126 Arguments Concerning the Motion of the Earth, as presented by Giovanni Battista Riccioli in his 1651 Almagestum Novum

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: In 1651 the Italian astronomer Giovanni Battista Riccioli published within his Almagestum Novum, a massive 1500 page treatise on astronomy, a discussion of 126 arguments for and against the Copernican hypothesis (49 for, 77 against). A synopsis of each argument is presented here, with discussion and analysis. Seen through Riccioli's 126 arguments, the debate over the Copernican hypothesis appears… ▽ More In 1651 the Italian astronomer Giovanni Battista Riccioli published within his Almagestum Novum, a massive 1500 page treatise on astronomy, a discussion of 126 arguments for and against the Copernican hypothesis (49 for, 77 against). A synopsis of each argument is presented here, with discussion and analysis. Seen through Riccioli's 126 arguments, the debate over the Copernican hypothesis appears dynamic and indeed similar to more modern scientific debates. Both sides present good arguments as point and counter-point. Religious arguments play a minor role in the debate; careful, reproducible experiments a major role. To Riccioli, the anti-Copernican arguments carry the greater weight, on the basis of a few key arguments against which the Copernicans have no good response. These include arguments based on telescopic observations of stars, and on the apparent absence of what today would be called "Coriolis Effect" phenomena; both have been overlooked by the historical record (which paints a picture of the 126 arguments that little resembles them). Given the available scientific knowledge in 1651, a geo-heliocentric hypothesis clearly had real strength, but Riccioli presents it as merely the "least absurd" available model - perhaps comparable to the Standard Model in particle physics today - and not as a fully coherent theory. Riccioli's work sheds light on a fascinating piece of the history of astronomy, and highlights the competence of scientists of his time. △ Less

Submitted 14 March, 2011; v1 submitted 10 March, 2011; originally announced March 2011.

Comments: 130 pages, 17 figures (v2 includes missing original Latin at argument A41, plus correction of some typographical errors)

Journal ref: Journal for the History of Astronomy, volume 43 (2012), pages 215-226

The Coriolis Effect Apparently Described in Giovanni Battista Riccioli's Arguments Against the Motion of the Earth: An English Rendition of Almagestum Novum Part II, Book 9, Section 4, Chapter 21, Pages 425, 426-7

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: In his encyclopedic work on astronomy, the 1651 Almagestum Novum, the Italian Jesuit Giovanni Battista Riccioli (1598-1671) argued against the movement of the Earth on the grounds that (among other things), if the Earth rotated, that rotation should produce a deflection in the trajectories of projectiles. This argument appears to be an early description of the Coriolis effect. In his encyclopedic work on astronomy, the 1651 Almagestum Novum, the Italian Jesuit Giovanni Battista Riccioli (1598-1671) argued against the movement of the Earth on the grounds that (among other things), if the Earth rotated, that rotation should produce a deflection in the trajectories of projectiles. This argument appears to be an early description of the Coriolis effect. △ Less

Submitted 16 December, 2010; originally announced December 2010.

Comments: 11 pages, 2 figures

Giovanni Battista Riccioli's Seventy-Seven Arguments Against the Motion of the Earth: An English Rendition of Almagestum Novum Part II, Book 9, Section 4, Chapter 34, Pages 472-7

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: In 1651 the Italian Jesuit Giovanni Battista Riccioli (1598-1671) published in his encyclopedic work on astronomy, the Almagestum Novum, 77 arguments against the Copernican movement of the Earth. These arguments are often mentioned in secondary sources, but a complete listing has not been readily available - thus one is provided here, in English. The 77 include interesting arguments from physics a… ▽ More In 1651 the Italian Jesuit Giovanni Battista Riccioli (1598-1671) published in his encyclopedic work on astronomy, the Almagestum Novum, 77 arguments against the Copernican movement of the Earth. These arguments are often mentioned in secondary sources, but a complete listing has not been readily available - thus one is provided here, in English. The 77 include interesting arguments from physics and astronomy that went on to become subjects of further investigation after the advent of Newtonian physics. △ Less

Submitted 16 November, 2010; originally announced November 2010.

Comments: 33 pages (mostly a long table of arguments) and 3 figures

Further Argument Against the Motion of the Earth, Based on Telescopic Observations of the Stars: An English Rendition of Chapter 30, Book 9, Section 4, Pages 460-463 of the Almagestum Novum Volume II of G. B. Riccioli

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: The Italian Jesuit astronomer Giovanni Battista (Giambattista) Riccioli constructed a powerful, thoroughly scientific argument in favor of geocentrism - an argument based on telescopic observations of stars. This paper contains a rendition of a chapter from Riccioli's Almagestum Novum in which he lays out this argument. Riccioli opposed Galileo's heliocentrism, but like Galileo, relied on telescop… ▽ More The Italian Jesuit astronomer Giovanni Battista (Giambattista) Riccioli constructed a powerful, thoroughly scientific argument in favor of geocentrism - an argument based on telescopic observations of stars. This paper contains a rendition of a chapter from Riccioli's Almagestum Novum in which he lays out this argument. Riccioli opposed Galileo's heliocentrism, but like Galileo, relied on telescopic observations to make his case. Riccioli's observations and argument were both valid, lacking only in that the functioning of the telescope was not fully understood at the time. △ Less

Submitted 9 November, 2010; originally announced November 2010.

Changes in the Cloud Belts of Jupiter, 1630-1664, as reported in the 1665 Astronomia Reformata of Giovanni Battista Riccioli

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: A translation of a section from the 1665 Astronomia Reformata of G. B. Riccioli discussing the appearance of the disk of Jupiter during the years 1630-1664; changes in the Jovian cloud belts as recorded by a variety of observers are a major feature of Riccioli's discussion. A translation of a section from the 1665 Astronomia Reformata of G. B. Riccioli discussing the appearance of the disk of Jupiter during the years 1630-1664; changes in the Jovian cloud belts as recorded by a variety of observers are a major feature of Riccioli's discussion. △ Less

Submitted 3 August, 2010; originally announced August 2010.

Journal ref: Baltic Astronomy, volume 19 (2010), 265-271

Riccioli Measures the Stars: Observations of the telescopic disks of stars as evidence against Copernicus and Galileo in the middle of the 17th century

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: G. B. Riccioli's 1651 Almagestum Novum contains a table of diameters of stars measured by Riccioli and his associates with a telescope. These telescopically measured star diameters are spurious, caused by the diffraction of light waves through the circular aperture of the telescope, but astronomers of the time, including Riccioli and Galileo Galilei, were unaware of this phenomenon. They believe… ▽ More G. B. Riccioli's 1651 Almagestum Novum contains a table of diameters of stars measured by Riccioli and his associates with a telescope. These telescopically measured star diameters are spurious, caused by the diffraction of light waves through the circular aperture of the telescope, but astronomers of the time, including Riccioli and Galileo Galilei, were unaware of this phenomenon. They believed that they were seeing the physical bodies of stars. In the Almagestum Novum Riccioli uses these telescopically measured disks to determine the physical sizes of stars under both geocentric (or geo-heliocentric - Tychonic) and heliocentric (Copernican) hypotheses. The physical sizes obtained under the Copernican hypothesis are immense - dwarfing the Earth, the Sun, and the Earth's orbit; even exceeding the distances to the stars given by Tycho Brahe. Thus Riccioli felt that telescopic observations were an effective argument against the Copernican system. △ Less

Submitted 29 April, 2010; v1 submitted 22 April, 2010; originally announced April 2010.

Comments: Revised version includes extended Table 4; better Airy pattern image for Figure 1; wording changes to improve clarity of the paper, especially so as to distinguish more clearly between star sizes seen through the telescope and calculated physical sizes of stars.

On the telescopic disks of stars - a review and analysis of stellar observations from the early 17th through the middle 19th centuries

Authors: Christopher M. Graney, Timothy P. Grayson

Abstract: Since the dawn of telescopic astronomy astronomers have observed and measured the "spurious" telescopic disks of stars, generally reporting that brighter stars have larger disks than fainter stars. Early observers such as Galileo Galilei interpreted these disks as being the physical bodies of stars; later observers such as William Herschel understood them to be spurious; some, such as Christian Hu… ▽ More Since the dawn of telescopic astronomy astronomers have observed and measured the "spurious" telescopic disks of stars, generally reporting that brighter stars have larger disks than fainter stars. Early observers such as Galileo Galilei interpreted these disks as being the physical bodies of stars; later observers such as William Herschel understood them to be spurious; some, such as Christian Huygens, argued that stars show no disks at all. In the early 19th century George B. Airy produced a theoretical explanation of star images sufficient to explain all historical observations, but astronomers were slow to fully recognize this. Even today conventional wisdom concerning stars and telescopes stands at odds to both historical observations and Airy's theory. We give a detailed analysis of both historical observations and Airy's theory, illustrating how Airy's theory explains the historical observations, from Galileo to Huygens to Herschel. We argue that the observations themselves appear in all cases to be valid and worth further study. △ Less

Submitted 28 October, 2010; v1 submitted 25 March, 2010; originally announced March 2010.

Comments: This is a preprint of an Article eventually submitted for consideration in Annals of Science, which is available online at: http://www.informaworld.com/. The published version is available at http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a928642468~frm=titlelink

Journal ref: Annals of Science, iFirst 27 October 2010

17th Century Photometric Data in the Form of Johannes Hevelius's Telescopic Measurements of the Apparent Diameters of Stars

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Johannes Hevelius's 1662 Mercurius in Sole Visus Gedani contains a table of magnitudes and apparent telescopic diameters of nineteen stars. The data conform to a simple model, suggesting that Hevelius produced what is essentially a table of surprisingly precise photometric data. Johannes Hevelius's 1662 Mercurius in Sole Visus Gedani contains a table of magnitudes and apparent telescopic diameters of nineteen stars. The data conform to a simple model, suggesting that Hevelius produced what is essentially a table of surprisingly precise photometric data. △ Less

Submitted 15 January, 2010; v1 submitted 8 January, 2010; originally announced January 2010.

Comments: To Appear in Baltic Astronomy Revision includes two additional references (Buchwald; Shara, Moffat, Webbink)

Journal ref: Baltic Astronomy 2009, Vol. 18, p. 253-263

Is Magnification Consistent? Why people from amateur astronomers to science's worst enemy have some basic physics wrong, and why

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: This paper is a discussion of the physics of magnification in telescopes. Special attention is given to the question of whether telescopes magnify stars. Telescopes do magnify star images, although opinions to the contrary abound. This paper is a discussion of the physics of magnification in telescopes. Special attention is given to the question of whether telescopes magnify stars. Telescopes do magnify star images, although opinions to the contrary abound. △ Less

Submitted 24 November, 2009; originally announced November 2009.

Comments: The following article has been accepted by The Physics Teacher. After it is published, it will be found at http://scitation.aip.org/tpt/

Journal ref: The Physics Teacher, Volume 48, Number 7 (October 2010), pp. 475-477

How Marius Was Right and Galileo Was Wrong Even Though Galileo Was Right and Marius Was Wrong

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Astronomers in the early 17th century misunderstood the images of stars that they saw in their telescopes. For this reason, the data a skilled observer of that time acquired via telescopic observation of the heavens appeared to support a geocentric Tychonic (or semi-Tychonic) world system, and not a heliocentric Copernican world system. Galileo Galilei made steps in the direction of letting obse… ▽ More Astronomers in the early 17th century misunderstood the images of stars that they saw in their telescopes. For this reason, the data a skilled observer of that time acquired via telescopic observation of the heavens appeared to support a geocentric Tychonic (or semi-Tychonic) world system, and not a heliocentric Copernican world system. Galileo Galilei made steps in the direction of letting observations lead him towards a Tychonic or semi-Tychonic world system. However, he ultimately backed the Copernican system, against the data he had on hand. By contrast, the German astronomer Simon Marius understood that data acquired by telescopic observation supported a Tychonic world system. △ Less

Submitted 22 March, 2009; v1 submitted 19 March, 2009; originally announced March 2009.

Comments: Or, how telescopic observations in the early 17th century supported the Tychonic geocentric theory and how Simon Marius realized this

Visible Stars as Apparent Observational Evidence in Favor of the Copernican Principle in the Early 17th Century

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: The Copernican Principle (which says the Earth and sun are not unique) should have observational consequences and thus be testable. Galileo Galilei thought he could measure the true angular diameters of stars with his telescope; according to him, stars visible to the naked eye range in diameter from a fraction of a second to several seconds of arc. He used this and the Copernican Principle assum… ▽ More The Copernican Principle (which says the Earth and sun are not unique) should have observational consequences and thus be testable. Galileo Galilei thought he could measure the true angular diameters of stars with his telescope; according to him, stars visible to the naked eye range in diameter from a fraction of a second to several seconds of arc. He used this and the Copernican Principle assumption that stars are suns as a method of determining stellar distances. The expected numbers of naked eye stars brighter than a given magnitude can be calculated via Galileo's methods; the results are consistent with data obtained from counting naked eye stars. Thus the total number of stars visible to the naked eye as a function of magnitude would appear to Galileo to be data supporting the Copernican Principle. △ Less

Submitted 17 January, 2009; originally announced January 2009.

Comments: To appear in Baltic Astronomy volume 17

Journal ref: Baltic Astronomy, vol. 17 (2008), pp. 425-438

Regarding the Potential Impact of Double Star Observations on Conceptions of the Universe of Stars in the Early 17th Century

Authors: Christopher M. Graney, Henry Sipes

Abstract: Galileo Galilei believed that stars were distant suns whose sizes, measured via his telescope, were a direct indication of distance -- fainter stars (appearing smaller in the telescope) were farther away than brighter ones. Galileo argued in his Dialogue that telescopic observation of a chance alignment of a faint (distant) and bright (closer) star would reveal annual parallax, if such double st… ▽ More Galileo Galilei believed that stars were distant suns whose sizes, measured via his telescope, were a direct indication of distance -- fainter stars (appearing smaller in the telescope) were farther away than brighter ones. Galileo argued in his Dialogue that telescopic observation of a chance alignment of a faint (distant) and bright (closer) star would reveal annual parallax, if such double stars could be found. This would provide support both for Galileo's ideas concerning the nature of stars and for the motion of the Earth. However, Galileo actually made observations of such double stars, well before publication of the Dialogue. We show that the results of these observations, and the likely results of observations of any double star that was a viable subject for Galileo's telescope, would undermine Galileo's ideas, not support them. We argue that such observations would lead either to the more correct conclusion that stars were sun-like bodies of varying sizes which could be physically grouped, or to the less correct conclusion that stars are not sun-like bodies, and even to the idea that the Earth did not move. Lastly, we contrast these conclusions to those reached through applying Galileo's ideas to observations of visible stars as a whole. △ Less

Submitted 10 June, 2009; v1 submitted 19 December, 2008; originally announced December 2008.

Comments: To appear in Baltic Astronomy, vol. 18 (34 pages, 6 figures)

Journal ref: Baltic Astronomy v18 (2009), pp. 93-108

The Naked Eye Stars as Data Supporting Galileo's Copernican Views

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: The aggregate appearance of the naked-eye stars would appear to Galileo to be direct observational support for his ideas about the stars, and indirect observational support for the Copernican theory over the rival Tychonic theory. Brief historical background is also included. The aggregate appearance of the naked-eye stars would appear to Galileo to be direct observational support for his ideas about the stars, and indirect observational support for the Copernican theory over the rival Tychonic theory. Brief historical background is also included. △ Less

Submitted 18 November, 2008; originally announced November 2008.

Comments: 10 pages, 5 figures, under 1700 words

Objects In Telescope Are Farther Than They Appear: How diffraction tricked Galileo into mismeasuring the distances to the stars

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Galileo determined distances to stars based on the assumption that stars were suns, the apparent sizes of stars as seen through his telescope, and basic geometry. However, the apparent sizes that he measured were the result of diffraction and not related to the actual sizes of the stars. Galileo's methods and observations were good, but since he was unknowingly observing diffraction artifacts an… ▽ More Galileo determined distances to stars based on the assumption that stars were suns, the apparent sizes of stars as seen through his telescope, and basic geometry. However, the apparent sizes that he measured were the result of diffraction and not related to the actual sizes of the stars. Galileo's methods and observations were good, but since he was unknowingly observing diffraction artifacts and not the physical bodies of stars he greatly underestimated the distances to the stars. △ Less

Submitted 25 August, 2008; originally announced August 2008.

Comments: Eight pages, 4 figures. This article has been accepted for publication by The Physics Teacher. After it is published, it will be found at http://scitation.aip.org/tpt/

Journal ref: The Physics Teacher, v 47 (Sept. 2009), pp 362-365

On the Accuracy of Galileo's Observations

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Galileo Galilei had sufficient skill as an observer and instrument builder to be able to measure the positions and apparent sizes of objects seen through his telescopes to an accuracy of 2" or better. However, Galileo had no knowledge of wave optics, so when he was measuring stellar apparent sizes he was producing very accurate measurements of diffraction artifacts and not physical bodies. Galileo Galilei had sufficient skill as an observer and instrument builder to be able to measure the positions and apparent sizes of objects seen through his telescopes to an accuracy of 2" or better. However, Galileo had no knowledge of wave optics, so when he was measuring stellar apparent sizes he was producing very accurate measurements of diffraction artifacts and not physical bodies. △ Less

Submitted 8 February, 2008; originally announced February 2008.

Comments: Post-publication version with large figures, posted to arxiv with OK of Baltic Astronomy

Journal ref: Baltic Astonomy (2007), vol. 16, pg. 443

Letter to the Editor of Sky and Telescope Concerning Galileo's Observations of Mizar

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Work published in Sky and Telescope in 2004 discusses Galileo's observations of the star Mizar. These observations raise questions regarding Galileo's assumptions about the universe and the conclusions he drew from his observations. Galileo would have expected Mizar to reveal annual parallax and thus provide evidence of Earth's motion, but Mizar shows no such parallax. Work published in Sky and Telescope in 2004 discusses Galileo's observations of the star Mizar. These observations raise questions regarding Galileo's assumptions about the universe and the conclusions he drew from his observations. Galileo would have expected Mizar to reveal annual parallax and thus provide evidence of Earth's motion, but Mizar shows no such parallax. △ Less

Submitted 27 December, 2007; originally announced December 2007.

Comments: Text of letter with footnotes to distinguish author's material from material editorially added (and later corrected) by Sky and Telescope

Journal ref: Sky and Telescope: May 2006 p. 12 (letter); July 2007 p. 12 (correction)

The Accuracy of Galileo's Observations and the Early Search for Stellar Parallax

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: The question of annual stellar parallax is usually viewed as having been a "win-win situation" for seventeenth-century astronomers who subscribed to the Copernican view of universe in which the Earth orbits the Sun and the Sun is one of many suns (the fixed stars) scattered throughout space. Detecting parallax would be solid evidence for the Earth's motion, but failure to detect parallax could b… ▽ More The question of annual stellar parallax is usually viewed as having been a "win-win situation" for seventeenth-century astronomers who subscribed to the Copernican view of universe in which the Earth orbits the Sun and the Sun is one of many suns (the fixed stars) scattered throughout space. Detecting parallax would be solid evidence for the Earth's motion, but failure to detect parallax could be explained by the stars lying at great distances. Recent work pertaining to Galileo's observations of double stars illustrates Galileo's skill as an observer. It also indicates that, given the knowledge of optics of the time, Galileo could expect his measurements to be accurate enough that they would have revealed stellar parallax had it existed. Thus parallax was not a "win-win situation" after all. It could be solid evidence against the Earth's motion, evidence which fortunately did not dissuade Galileo from the Copernican view. △ Less

Submitted 20 December, 2006; v1 submitted 9 December, 2006; originally announced December 2006.

Comments: The second of two papers (both available on arXiv.org) on the subject of Galileo, stellar parallax, and the motion of the Earth. Of the two, this paper is written for a more specialized audience. It provides much more detail and includes much more thorough referencing but includes little background information. First revision on arxiv (formatting changes, typographical error corrections, minor additional references added, a few minor wording changes). 19 pages including 4 figures

Galileo's Double Star: The Experiment That "Proved" the Earth Did Not Move

Authors: Christopher M. Graney

Abstract: Great opportunities arise for teaching physics, astronomy, and their histories when new discoveries are made that involve concepts accessible to students at every level. Such an opportunity currently exists thanks to the fact that notes written by Galileo indicating that he observed the double star Mizar in the "Big Dipper" have recently come to light. His measurements of this star, given the sc… ▽ More Great opportunities arise for teaching physics, astronomy, and their histories when new discoveries are made that involve concepts accessible to students at every level. Such an opportunity currently exists thanks to the fact that notes written by Galileo indicating that he observed the double star Mizar in the "Big Dipper" have recently come to light. His measurements of this star, given the scientific knowledge at the time, strongly supported the theory that the Earth was fixed in space and not moving. Had Galileo published these results, it is likely that widespread acceptance of the heliocentric theory in scientific circles would have been significantly delayed. In light of these notes, his later reference in his Dialogue to using double stars as a means of proving that the Earth was in motion is puzzling. The physics and mathematics behind Galileo's work is easily within reach of students in introductory physics and astronomy courses, so discussion of Galileo's Mizar work and its interesting implications can be used in virtually any class. △ Less

Submitted 20 December, 2006; v1 submitted 29 June, 2006; originally announced June 2006.

Comments: The first of two papers (both available on arXiv.org) on the subject of Galileo, stellar parallax, and the motion of the Earth. Of the two, this paper is written for a more general audience. It includes historical background information and explanation of the general phenomenon of parallax. The paper is particularly oriented towards use with introductory physics or astronomy classes. Second revision on arxiv (formatting improvements, typographical error corrections, a few minor wording changes). 16 pages including 3 figures