The ptolemaic model accounted for the apparent motions of the planets in a very direct way, by assuming that each planet moved on a small sphere or circle, called an epicycle, that moved on a larger sphere or circle, called a deferent. In what sense is the newtonian universe simpler than ptolemy's suppose observations had shown that the two did equally well at explaining the data construct an argument to say that newton's universe should still be preferred. It was just noise to them, because they weren't proficient in telescope observations, philosophically they didn't really believe that optics gives you a 'real' image of the world (it's an artificial observation), and they had little reason to believe galileo (nor should they have galileo was wrong about pretty much everything he ever said. But to make his system fit the observations as well as ptolemy's - to save the appearances - copernicus had to introduce still more epicycles that, of course, was a mistake. Be shown, in a sense, to be optimally truth conducive the trick is that theory choice is an ongoing, essentially fallible procedure and, hence, cannot possibly be guaranteed.
All of the previous observations, including those of hipparchus and ptolemy, had been made sporadically so all of the work of the centuries developing tables of motion, theories of astrological mysticism, religious dogma, etc had been based on naked eye observations taken sporadically. 1 light: observations 1 light propagates in straight lines from a source makes triangulation, surveying, star location, etc possible this property of light was known to the ancients. A) the idea that scientists should prefer the simpler of two models that agree equally well with observations b) the principle that everyone should agree on a theory before it is considered correct c) a long, steep cliff on mercury that may have been produced as the planet contracted as it formed.
Intro to physical science galaxy the atlantic ocean in what sense is the newtonian universe simpler than ptolemy's suppose observations had shown that the two. 5in what sense is the newtonian universe simpler than ptolemy's suppose observations had shown that the two did equally well at explaining the data construct an argument to say that newton's universe should still be preferred. And this would not happen if the magnitude of the earth with respect to its distance from the heavens were perceptible but only the plane drawn through the point at the earth's centre would exactly cut the sphere in half, and those drawn through any other part of the earth's surface would make the sections below the earth greater than those above. In order to get the actual motion of the planets correct, both ptolemy and copernicus had to bolster their models with many more epicycles, and epicycles upon epicycles, than shown in the above figure and video. Models of the universe are described and classified into three major categories: historic, expanding, and cellular it is shown that all expanding universe models violate the cosmic edge and containment principle.
Observations of tycho brahe, by kepler's ingenious descriptive laws and by galilei's famous ﬁrst use of the telescope, was a diﬃcult process until it terminated with the general acceptance of newton's law of. But in none of these scientific revolutions were the old newtonian ideas relegated to the dustbin of history, as ptolemy's theory had been by the newtonian revolution. Furthermore, ptolemy's epicycles were not ad hoc in any relevant sense of that expression, they were built into his theory, which was the first to provide a theoretical basis for making. In what sense is the newtonian universe simpler than ptolemy's suppose observations had shown that the two did equally well at explaining data.
It is also known as the newtonian universe, the clockwork universe, and mechanism sir isaac newton formed the theory this man came up with classical physics, also known as newton's laws of motion. People didn't want to abandon ptolemy's model, since it had worked in the past to make it keep working, they just altered it slightly - usually by adding more epicycles after a while there were so many epicycles attached it became rather complicated to determine the motion of planets. It's all faith, to just believe in something, without any actual evidence, other than one's own perception of data and imagination i do agree with the side topic of this video that critical thinking has been lost.
What ptolemy achieved with his circles within circles was an advanced design of gears and gearing -- gearing that worked well and was quite reliable -- as had been shown in the creation of clocks. The goal of this paper, both historical and philosophical, is to launch a new case into the scientific realism debate: geocentric astronomy scientific realism about unobservables claims that the non-observational content of our successful/justified empirical theories is true, or approximately true. 5 in what sense is the newtonian universe simpler than ptolemy's suppose observations had shown that the two did equally well at explaining the data construct an argument to say that newton's universe should still be preferred.
Copernicus' theory was at least as accurate as ptolemy's but never achieved the stature and recognition of ptolemy's theory in scarcely more than a hundred years, copernicus would be overcome by events set in motion by johannes kepler and galileo galilei. - descartes had developed a physics that was radically different than aristotle's, and had an explicit philosophical agenda that went much beyond the available data. Ptolemy argued that the earth was a sphere in the center of the universe, from the simple observation that half the stars were above the horizon and half were below the horizon at any time (stars on rotating stellar sphere), and the assumption that the stars were all at some modest distance from the center of the universe.
In what sense is the newtonian universe simpler than ptolemy's suppose observations had shown that the show more submitted by: llwalker7. The absolute constancy of the speed of light in a vacuum is the fundamental postulate of einstein's relativity modern physicists consider this postulate to be one of the fundamental physical laws of the universe to the point where space and time must be warped to make certain that the law holds true. However, the 254-particle universe cannot reveal new particles it's already shown everything that it has remember, we're not talking about elaborate data analysis, where there could be mirages or aliasing, patterns in the data that look initially like a new particle, but later reveal themselves to be explicable using known particles.