I think that Copernicus was the first one to discover that a geocentric universe wasn't the case.
As for the second one, it could've been Johannes Kepler or Tycho Brahe.
Working from memory here, details are sketchy at best.
Brahe actually collected the data. Copernicus tried to reconcile Brahe's observations with the Ptolemaic model which was widely accepted at the time. He couldn't do it, so he worked on a new model.
His model wasn't geo-centric, but it also wasn't correct. He couldn't let go of uniform circular motion, so he had to keep the epicycles. He did have fewer epicycles than Ptolemy, so that was nice.
Kepler was Brahe's employee. After Brahe's death and Copernicus's book, he came up with his 3 laws of planetary motion, and the idea that the planets' orbits were elliptical.
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 11:29 pm
by Vince
And on his desk I saw he had a diagram of the structure of a flagellum. Uh oh.
Cool! Looking forward to hearing about it (really).
And for the record, I fully believe in evolution. There are just certain areas of "natural selection" that I have some trouble with. Again, not that it doesn't happen, but will it explain everything we've got?
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 11:31 pm
by Vince
Kepler was Brahe's employee. After Brahe's death and Copernicus's book, he came up with his 3 laws of planetary motion, and the idea that the planets' orbits were elliptical.
Sorry I couldn't have had a better memory. I was remembering from a lecture in a physics class that I took over a decade ago back at a time in my life when I was probably showing up still half drunk.
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2005 11:37 pm
by GORDON
Well, I personally think it will, and the final solution will be brilliant. So many other things I've learned about have been.
I was planning on doing independant research on the flagellum situation... and for the record, in 11th grade Bio 1 class the teacher gave an overview of the structure and said it was pretty amazing, and they're not yet sure how it came about... so I've known since then.
Biology was always my first love, but all the money was in programming.
Another "for the record," I'm more inclined to believe that a planet full of genetically engineered critters exploded and fragments of that planet hit earth a few billion years later in the form of ice comets and it deposited little single celled orgs with outboard motors on earth.... before I am inclined to believe "God did it." Maybe it was the original 5th planet of our solar system and now exists only as an asteroid field.
For the record.
Posted: Tue Aug 16, 2005 12:04 am
by Vince
Another "for the record," I'm more inclined to believe that a planet full of genetically engineered critters exploded and fragments of that planet hit earth a few billion years later in the form of ice comets and it deposited little single celled orgs with outboard motors on earth.... before I am inclined to believe "God did it." Maybe it was the original 5th planet of our solar system and now exists only as an asteroid field.
For the record.
I can accept that if you will agree never to refer to the belief in God as "magic" or "superstion" in front of me ever again.
An interesting alternate theory to the "5th planet" theory (not that this has anything to do with evolution, but it's a cool theory).
The idea of the asteroid belt being another planet that blew up or never formed is because there seems to be a gap there. However if you take Venus out of the solar system, there doesn't appear to be a gap anymore.
The new theory is that there was some cosmic event that brought an ass load of deris into our solar system and most of it settled where the astroid belt is now. I big chunk passed us and took up orbit as Venus (which is why it's the only planet in our system that rotates "backwards" compared to the other planets). Another big chunk took up orbit around earth. Many astronomers (if not most) agree that the moon isn't a natural moon for our planet. It's too big (being about 25% the mass of earth).
And it's a good thing it ended up here because it is what keeps earth's orbit from wobbling the way other planets do. This absence of wobble keeps temperatures from being too extreme. This is another one of those facts in the mix that make many scientists doubt the existance of intelligent life elsewhere.
Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 11:11 am
by thibodeaux
I was in a presentation at work the other day, and the presenter said something like, “Today we’re going to discuss the evolution of such-and-such product of ours,” and I said, “Evolution? I thought we used Intelligent Design here.”
I crack me up.
Posted: Sun Aug 28, 2005 12:50 pm
by TheCatt
I said, “Evolution? I thought we used Intelligent Design here.”
Interesting piece. Don't know what it means beyond we really don't know nearly as much as we think we know. Placed it here because this seemed like the best spot for it. Found we insert evolution and Darwin into a BUNCH of threads
