> Here we have a theory which turned out to be fundamentally wrong What makes you think so? How is Ptolemaic theory "fundamentally wrong" where our best curren

> Here we have a theory which turned out to be fundamentally wrong What makes you think so? How is Ptolemaic theory "fundamentally wrong" where our best current physical theories are not? > Maybe every physical theory is just a model approximating something that can at any time be replaced by by a better model that is still just that, a model. This is indeed our current view of physical theories. But you realize, don't you, that once you accept this, it invalidates your criticism of Ptolemaic theory? Ptolemaic theory was a model. For centuries it was the best model known in terms of the accuracy of its predictions, which were accurate enough to predict things like eclipses years in advance. We now have better models, but none of that invalidates Ptolemaic theory's achievements. It just means we have now found better approximations. In fact, our modern viewpoint, specifically relativity, even helps us to understand why the Ptolematic model worked as well as it did: it is one way of describing what you get if you use an inertial frame centered on the Earth to analyze the motions of the Sun, Moon, and planets! IIRC Steven Weinberg, years ago, wrote a paper that expounded this in some detail.