4 ms·
I don't think they were exactly equally wrong. The Tychonic system doesn't quite predict stellar parallax, for example. I'd say it's the worse model of those tw
by qb45 10y ago
I don't think they were exactly equally wrong. The Tychonic system doesn't quite predict stellar parallax, for example. I'd say it's the worse model of those two.
And it looks less pretty on pictures, too.
EDIT: Ironically, the lack of observable (at the time) parallax was reportedly used by Tycho Brahe to argue against heliocentrism, because "stars obviously can't be far enough to make prallax unobservable". Now, that's clearly wrong.
- huxley 10y agoTycho Brahe was wrong but on stronger scientific ground given the observations available, stellar parallax wasn't observed until around 1806 by Giuseppe Calandrelli and not definitively measured until 1838 by Friedrich Bessel.
- cygx 10y agoTycho Brahe was wrong but on stronger scientific ground given the observations available Depends on how much weight you place on different lines of reasoning. One of Galileo's key insights was that there's no fundamental difference between the terrestrial and the celestial. In contrast, the Aristotelian heavens are made of aether, in part to be able to account for the diurnal motion of far-distant planets and stars.