Aristotle's Model Of The Universe Research Paper

1228 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Aristotle's understanding of the world

Preliminary Physics Assessment Task 1

Christos Toras

MODELS OF THE UNIVERSE - TIMELINE

From the time of Aristotle up until the time of Newton there were five models of what humans thought of the universe. The astronomers who developed these models were Aristotle, Ptolemy, Copernicus, Tycho Brahe, Kepler, Galileo and Newton.
Aristotle’s model of the universe was a geocentric universe. This meant that the Earth was at the centre of the universe and that all stars were on a celestial sphere. A celestial sphere is an imaginary sphere which acts as a dome around the Earth from which you can see the stars and the universe. Although Aristotle’s model was good for its time it could not explain retrograde motion of the planets. Retrograde motion is
Ptolemy’s model of the universe was still a geocentric one but it included epicycles in order to explain retrograde motion which Aristotle’s model could not explain. Ptolemy was able to determine that not only did the planets orbit around the sun on a deferent but they also orbited themselves on what he called an n epicycle.
Copernicus model was a heliocentric one, placing the sun stationary in the centre and also had everything revolving around it in circles. He developed his model in secret as so not to anger the church. Before he died in 1543 he published his ideas, and as expected his ideas were labelled as sins against the church.
During the 1500’s however the Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe meticulously studied and plotted the night sky with great accuracy. As telescopes were not invented yet he developed his own tools for measuring astronomy. His methods were so detailed and were within an accuracy of 0.5 arc minutes. His model was a combination of both geocentric and hel...

... middle of paper ...

...at the Gods of Olympus created everything including the universe and therefore the creation of the Universe had no explanation. In the article by Surendra Singh, Ph.D. , Professor of Biology, Et al they claim that “ In ancient times, nature had been explained as the actions of the gods. The early Greek philosophers questioned the role of the gods as the cause of events and by the fifth century B.C. “. This proves that religion at the time influenced Aristotle’s model greatly.

In conclusion, there are many advances in technology in the 21st century. After Aristitole and the other astronomers, many technological advances were made, such as the use of the telescope in order to be able to see further into the known universe. Aristotles model of the universe created a solid foundation of the universe to other astronomers in order for them to create their own models.

Show More
Related

  • The Scientific Revolution: The Disenchanting Of The Universe

    1331 Words  | 3 Pages

    So from that facts and his theory to solve the planet problem, he explained the retrograde motion. (Retrograde motion is actually an optical illusion because it appears to go backward as Earth passes).

    Read More

  • Reconstruction of Aristotle's Argument from Physics Book 2, Chapter 8.

    614 Words  | 2 Pages

    In this paper, I offer a reconstruction of Aristotle’s argument from Physics Book 2, chapter 8, 199a9. Aristotle in this chapter tries to make an analogy between nature and action to establish that both, nature and action, have an end.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Hesiod And Greek Mythology

    947 Words  | 2 Pages

    Roman and Greek mythology are filled with multiple interpretations of how the creator, be it the gods or nature, contributed to the birth of the world. These stories draw the backgrounds of the gods and goddesses that govern much of classical mythology. Ovid’s Metamorphoses and Hesiod’s Theogony are two pieces of work that account for how our universe came to be. A comparison of Theogony with Metamorphoses reveals that Hesiod’s creation story portrays the deities as omnipresent, powerful role whose actions triggered the beginning of the universe whereas in Metamorphoses, the deities do not play a significant role; rather the humans are center of the creation. The similarities and differences are evident in the construction of the universe, ages of man, and the creation of men and women on earth.

    Read More

  • Julius Copernicus Biography

    1415 Words  | 3 Pages

    Over the next 50 years Copernicus’s book would slowly make its way across Europe. In 1566 a second edition was published without the false preface. The church denounced the book and Copernicus for “going against the bible”, but eventually began to accept it and allow it to be taught. Copernicus’s work was profound and changed the direction of Astronomy. It dared to challenge the notion that the Earth was the center of the universe, and that heavenly matter was unchanging and perfect. Over the next several hundred years Brahe would observe, Kepler and Newton would pour over the numbers and they would find the Copernicus’s model had underlying truths, some flaws, but with tweaking and vigilant observations of the celestial motions it would be the basis that lead them to the model we know today. Bringing forth what we know as the Copernican Revolution.

    Read More

  • Galileo and the History of the Catholic Church

    1932 Words  | 4 Pages

    In 1543 Nicholas Copernicus, a Polish Canon, published “On the Revolution of the Celestial Orbs”. The popular view is that Copernicus discovered that the earth revolves around the sun. The notion is as old as the ancient Greeks however. This work was entrusted by Copernicus to Osiander, a staunch Protestant who though the book would most likely be condemned and, as a result, the book would be condemned. Osiander therefore wrote a preface to the book, in which heliocentrism was presented only as a theory which would account for the movements of the planets more simply than geocentrism did, one that was not meant to be a definitive description of the heavens--something Copernicus did not intend. The preface was unsigned, and everyone took it to be the author’s. That Copernicus believed the helioocentric theory to be a true description of reality went largely unnoticed. In addition to the preface, this was partly because he still made reassuring use of Ptolemy's cycles and epicycles; he also borrowed from Aristotle the notion that the planets must move in circles because that is the only perfect form of motion.

    Read More

  • Enlightenment and the Scientific Revolution: A Comparative Study

    834 Words  | 2 Pages

    The first record of the movement of the planets was produced by Nicolaus Copernicus. He proposed that the earth was the center of everything, which the term is called geocentric. Kepler challenged the theory that the sun was the center of the earth and proposed that the sun was the center of everything; this term is referred to as heliocentric. Kepler’s heliocentric theory was accepted by most people and is accepted in today’s society. One of Kepler’s friends was a famous person named Galileo. Galileo is known for improving the design and the magnification of the telescope. With improvement of the telescope Galileo could describe the craters of the moon and the moons of Jupiter. Galileo also created the number for acceleration of all free falling objects as 9.8 meters per second. Galileo’s and Kepler’s theories were not approved by all people. Their theories contradicted verses in the bible, so the protestant church was extremely skeptical of both Galileo and Kepler’s

    Read More

  • Creationism, Evolutionists Among Other Theories

    1427 Words  | 3 Pages

    Named after Nicolaus Copernicus the Copernican principle states that Earth is not situated in a favored or central position in the universe (Bondi, 1952). It is a shift from the Ptolemaic system which states that the earth is at the center of the universe and dates back to the 16th and 17th century. The Copernican principle is one of the primary principles in astronomy. It states that the sun is the center of the solar system. Copernicus was not satisfied with the earlier system and created a heliocentric model which demotes Earth from its central role in the universe (Kuhn, 1957). The Copernican principle implies that the universe appears isotropic in all directions from Earth which also implies that the universe is homogenous everywhere. This statement contradicts with modern astronomy which observes that the universe is ...

    Read More

  • The Scientific Revolution and The Enlightenment

    1738 Words  | 4 Pages

    Copernicus was a scientist and philosopher whose theory proposed that the sun was stationary, and the heavens orbit around the sun. Galileo tried to convince the Church not to abolish the Copernican theory but was told that he was not to entertain such thoughts with others.... ... middle of paper ... ...(n.d.).

    Read More

  • Physics of Aristotle

    1385 Words  | 3 Pages

    Aristotle is regarded by many as one of the most important thinkers of the ancient era. Although many of his theories regarding the physics of the natural world were later disproved by Galileo, Aristotle nevertheless offered the world at that time a relevant and consistent explanation of physics of impressive breadth and explanatory ability. Many of his theories endured for up to 1200 years, and helped to form the basis of the midieval christian perspective of the natural world. Much of his physics, when combined with Ptolemy's mathematical model of planetary motions, was used by midieval thinkers to describe the behavior of the cosmos.

    Read More

  • Chapter 6 Of Aristotle's View Of God

    1188 Words  | 3 Pages

    Explain the place of God in Aristotle’s view of the world. How does Aristotle think that we can know that God exists? What role does God play in explaining why things in the world exist and behave the way they do? How persuasive do you find Aristotle’s account of these matters?

    Read More

  • The Theory of Origin in Aristotle's Metaphysics

    394 Words  | 1 Pages

    Aristotle believes that before the concept of time there were three kinds of substances, two of them being physical and one being the unmovable. The three substances can be described as one being the “sensible eternal”, the second being the “sensible perishable” and the third substance being the immovable. To further this theory the sensible perishable can be seen as matter, the sensible eternal as potential, and the immovable can be seen as that which is Metaphysical and belongs to another science. According to Aristotle, the immovable is God. It is the immovable that sets the sensible perishable into motion and therefore turns the potential into the actual.

    Read More

  • Aristotle

    957 Words  | 2 Pages

    To the modern reader, Aristotle's views on astronomy, as presented in Metaphysics, Physics, De Caelo (On the Heavens) and Simplicius' Commentary, will most likely seem very bizarre, as they are based more on a priori philosophical speculation than empirical observation. Although Aristotle acknowledged the importance of "scientific" astronomy - the study of the positions, distances and motions of the stars - he nevertheless treated astronomy in the abstract, linking it to his overall philosophical world picture. As a result, the modern distinction between physics and metaphysics is not present in Aristotle, and in order to fully appreciate him we must try to abandon this pre-conception. Aristotle argued that the universe is spherical and finite. Spherical, because that is the most perfect shape; finite, because it has a center, viz. the center of the earth, and a body with a center cannot be infinite. He believed that the earth, too, is a sphere. It is relatively small compared to the stars, and in contrast to the celestial bodies, always at rest. For one of his proofs of this latter point, he referred to an empirically testable fact: if the earth were in motion, an observer on it would see the fixed stars as moving, just as he now observes the planets as moving, that is from a stationary earth. However, since this is not the case, the earth must be at rest. To prove that the earth is a sphere, he produced the argument that all earthly substances move towards the center, and thus would eventually have to form a sphere.

    Read More

  • Scientific Empiricism

    994 Words  | 2 Pages

    Tycho Brahe, a Danish astronomer, held a great belief in the importance of empiricism in relation to scientific theories. He was one of the greatest opposer of Copernicusís On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres. Brahe believed the Copernicus theory was not founded on a sufficient amount of "practice." Charles W. Morris, an author of The Encyclopedia and Unified Science who specialized in Scientific Empiricism, believes that practice is found at the heart of empiricism. Morris defines the importance of practice in scientific theories as: "The activity which gives rise to the sentences of science is, like any other systematic activity proceeding in terms of rules or canons(72)." It was based on these feelings of empiricism that inspired Brahe to, "collect the most accurate astronomical data that have ever been acquired by observation with the naked eye(Kagan331)." Brahe held the common belief among empiricist that, "It is willing and able to admit i...

    Read More

  • The Impact of the Scientific Revolution on Society and Religion

    1058 Words  | 3 Pages

    The cosmological views of the Late Middle Ages revolved around the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic theory. This theory was adapted by the Church to explain the universe, as a result, many people believed the Aristotelian-Ptolemaic theory was perfect because the pope believed it, and he was infallible. The Church took many ideas from the Bible. One example would be that they believed that the universe was six thousand years old. Another major idea was that the universe was made up of a series of concentric spheres with a motionless earth at the center. Planets, commonly referred to as “heavenly bodies”, were made up of crystalline substance and moved in circular orbits. Stars are attached to these planets and are “pushed by angels”.

    Read More

  • The Copernican Revolution and Its Importance According to Thomas S. Kuhn

    907 Words  | 2 Pages

    ...centred universe, like Aristotle, and Ptolemy posed new questions for Copernicus's successors. Galileo, Kepler, Descartes, and finally Newton would be viewed as the successors to the Copernicus theory, and their contributions would complete the Copernicus revolution. Galileo with his telescope, Kepler with his ellipses, and Newton with his laws of motion and gravity.

    Read More

More about Aristotle's Model Of The Universe Research Paper

Open Document