Nicolaus Copernicus
Born: 19 February
1473, Torun, Poland, Died: 24 May 1543, Frombork, Poland
Polish astronomerNicolaus Copernicus (Polish: Mikołaj Kopernik) proposed that the planets have the Sun as the fixed point to which their motions are to be referred; that the Earth is a planet which, besides orbiting the Sun annually, also turns once daily on its own axis; and that very slow, long-term changes in the direction of this axis account for the precession of the equinoxes. This representation of the heavens is usually called the heliocentric, or “Sun-centred,” system—derived from the Greek helios, meaning “Sun.”
Copernicus’s
theory had important consequences for later thinkers of the scientific
revolution, including such major figures as Galileo, Kepler, Descartes, and
Newton. Copernicus probably hit upon his main idea sometime between 1508 and
1514, and during those years he wrote a manuscript usually called the
Commentariolus (“Little Commentary”). However, the book that contains the final
version of his theory, De revolutionibus orbium coelestium libri vi (“Six Books
Concerning the Revolutions of the Heavenly Orbs”), did not appear in print
until 1543, the year of his death.
Science of the Stars
In Copernicus’s
period, astrology and astronomy were considered subdivisions of a common
subject called the “science of the stars,” whose main aim was to provide a
description of the arrangement of the heavens as well as the theoretical tools
and tables of motions that would permit accurate construction of horoscopes and
annual prognostications. At this time the terms astrologer, astronomer, and
mathematician were virtually interchangeable; they generally denoted anyone who
studied the heavens using mathematical techniques. Furthermore, practitioners
of astrology were in disagreement about everything, from the divisions of the
zodiac to the minutest observations to the order of the planets; there was also
a long-standing disagreement concerning the status of the planetary models.
From antiquity,
astronomical modeling was governed by the premise that the planets move with
uniform angular motion on fixed radii at a constant distance from their centres
of motion. Two types of models derived from this premise. The first,
represented by that of Aristotle, held that the planets are carried around the
centre of the universe embedded in unchangeable, material, invisible spheres at
fixed distances. Since all planets have the same centre of motion, the universe
is made of nested, concentric spheres with no gaps between them. As a
predictive model, this account was of limited value. Among other things, it had
the distinct disadvantage that it could not account for variations in the
apparent brightness of the planets since the distances from the centre were
always the same.
A second
tradition, deriving from Claudius Ptolemy, solved this problem by postulating
three mechanisms: uniformly revolving, off-centre circles called eccentrics;
epicycles, little circles whose centres moved uniformly on the circumference of
circles of larger radius (deferents); and equants.
The equant,
however, broke with the main assumption of ancient astronomy because it
separated the condition of uniform motion from that of constant distance from
the centre. A planet viewed from a specific point at the centre of its orbit
would appear to move sometimes faster, sometimes slower. As seen from the Earth
and removed a certain distance from the specific centre point, the planet would
also appear to move nonuniformly. Only from the equant, an imaginary point at a
calculated distance from the Earth, would the planet appear to move uniformly.
A planet-bearing sphere revolving around an equant point will wobble; situate
one sphere within another, and the two will collide, disrupting the heavenly
order.
In the 13th
century a group of Persian astronomers at Marāgheh discovered that, by
combining two uniformly revolving epicycles to generate an oscillating point
that would account for variations in distance, they could devise a model that
produced the equalized motion without referring to an equant point. This
insight was the starting point for Copernicus’s attempt to resolve the conflict
raised by wobbling physical spheres.
An Orderly Universe
In the
Commentariolus, Copernicus postulated that, if the Sun is assumed to be at rest
and if the Earth is assumed to be in motion, then the remaining planets fall
into an orderly relationship whereby their sidereal periods increase from the
Sun as follows: Mercury (88 days), Venus (225 days), Earth (1 year), Mars (1.9
years), Jupiter (12 years), and Saturn (30 years). This theory did resolve the
disagreement about the ordering of the planets but, in turn, raised new
problems. To accept the theory’s premises, one had to abandon much of
Aristotelian natural philosophy and develop a new explanation for why heavy
bodies fall to a moving Earth.
It was also
necessary to explain how a transient body like the Earth, filled with
meteorological phenomena, pestilence, and wars, could be part of a perfect and
imperishable heaven. In addition, Copernicus was working with many observations
that he had inherited from antiquity and whose trustworthiness he could not
verify. In constructing a theory for the precession of the equinoxes, for
example, he was trying to build a model based upon very small, long-term
effects. Also, his theory for Mercury was left with serious incoherencies.
Any of these
considerations alone could account for Copernicus’s delay in publishing his
work. (He remarked in the preface to De revolutionibus that he had chosen to
withhold publication not for merely the nine years recommended by the Roman
poet Horace but for 36 years, four times that period.) When a description of
the main elements of the heliocentric hypothesis was first published in 1540
and 1541 in the Narratio Prima (“First Narration”), it was not under
Copernicus’s own name but under that of the 25-year-old Georg Rheticus, a
Lutheran from the University of Wittenberg, Germany, who stayed with Copernicus
at Frauenburg for about two and a half years, between 1539 and 1542.
The Narratio prima was, in effect, a joint
production of Copernicus and Rheticus, something of a “trial balloon” for the
main work. It provided a summary of the theoretical principles contained in the
manuscript of De revolutionibus, emphasized their value for computing new
planetary tables, and presented Copernicus as following admiringly in the
footsteps of Ptolemy even as he broke fundamentally with his ancient
predecessor. It also provided what was missing from the Commentariolus: a basis
for accepting the claims of the new theory.
Both Rheticus
and Copernicus knew that they could not definitively rule out all possible
alternatives to the heliocentric theory. But they could underline what
Copernicus’s theory provided that others could not: a singular method for
ordering the planets and for calculating the relative distances of the planets
from the Sun. Rheticus compared this new universe to a well-tuned musical
instrument and to the interlocking wheel-mechanisms of a clock. In the preface
to De revolutionibus, Copernicus used an image from Horace’s Ars poetica (“Art
of Poetry”). The theories of his predecessors, he wrote, were like a human
figure in which the arms, legs, and head were put together in the form of a
disorderly monster. His own representation of the universe, in contrast, was an
orderly whole in which a displacement of any part would result in a disruption
of the whole. In effect, a new criterion of scientific adequacy was advanced
together with the new theory of the universe.
0 Comments