Re: VMs: Copernican manuscript?

[elvogt@xxxxxxxxxxx]

Zitat von Jeff <jeff@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> ... tell me if this is not a Copernican representation.
> 

If I had to place my money on a bet: It is not.

> It could even represent the orbit of mars. After all the planet-like body it
> is coloured red. The shape at the centre looks like the sun to me.

Half of the shapes are red -- the others are a vague brown.

The center looks much more like any star than like the sun. Sun and moon in the
VM are usually depicted with a humanoid face, which is missing in this illustration.

No lines resembling trajectories are drawn in the manuscript. Earth is missing
completely.

The "planet" decpited in the circle of symbols seems to show something like
phases. Planets exhibit those faces like the moon, but assuming that this is the
idea would date the MS after the invention of the telescope -- ie 1610 or
something. Besides, all "planets" in the illustration's circle show the same
phase, which is wrong. (Depending on whether they're inner (Mercury, Venus) or
outer planets (the rest), they show particular patterns of phases, which are
missing here.)

So, if you take an unbiased look at the page, you're being left with a number of
celestial (?) bodies, arranged around a central "star". I wouldn't call this
compelling evidence for a Copernican model of the solar sytem.

Cheers,

   Elmar





-------------------------------------------------
debitel.net Webmail
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list