Sheila Panyam

Honors 392A
04/11/18
Reading Assignment 5
Pg. Question Answer

166- Redraw one half of Figure 32 and use it to

167 explain the apparent retrograde motion of
Mars.

The Earth moves faster around the sun than Mars does, so at certain
points, it ‘laps’ Mars. It is during this ‘lapping’ that retrograde
motion appears to occur (in the case of inferior planets -- ones
closer to the sun, they lap ​the Earth​). The planet appears to be
moving backwards because of the angle at which it is being viewed
on Earth. This apparent westward motion only occurs when the
Earth is closest to Mars, which is why it is brightest during this
time.

167- Are planets’ cycles around the ecliptic regular?
Describe how Copernicus’ theory explains why or
why not.
This question has a two part answer. First, yes, on average, a planet’s orbit will
take the same amount of time as circling the ecliptic. However, individual trips
can vary greatly. In the case of the superior planets, the Earth completes its orbit
faster, so it’s further along its second orbit by the time Mars, for example, finishes
its first. That places Mars at a different apparent position on the ecliptic (not quite
at one full cycle). The next time, however, the Earth shifts down the orbit again,
and Mars appears to overcompensate, making over a full ecliptic cycle.

169 What was the “propaganda victory” that Kuhn argues that most of the Copernican system, while efficient,
- Copernicus’ followers emphasized, and was not as accurate as Ptolemy’s epicycle/deferent system. It
170 why is the victory only apparent according cannot describe the position of the planets as quantitatively as
to Kuhn? Ptolemy did, and ultimately used so many eccentrics and minor
epicycles that wasn’t much less complicated than Ptolemy. Once
these epicycles and eccentrics were added, Copernicus’ results
weren’t any ​more a​ ccurate than Ptolemy’s, either. In that regard,

172- In no more than two sentences, explain why
173 Mercury and Venus never appear very far from the
ecliptic in the Copernican system. Then explain, in
no more than two sentences, why this explanation
was thought to be a reason favoring Copernicus’
rather than Ptolemy’s system.
174 In no more than a paragraph, explain (in rough
detail) how Copernicus’ system can be used to
calculate the number of days it takes Mercury to
orbit the sun. Your explanation need not employ
calculations unless you’d like to do so; just try to
give the general idea. Then briefly explain how the
lengths of the planets’ orbits was used to order the
inferior planets in distance from the sun.
175- Recall that, in Ptolemaic models, the inferior
176 planets could be ordered (by distance from the
Earth) in different ways, and the resulting
predictions would be consistent with observation. In
contrast, the superior planets’ order was fixed.
However, the relative sizes of all planetary orbits –
even those of the superior planets – could be
changed in a way that would not render the model
inconsistent with observation. Is the same true of
planetary orbits in Copernicus’ model?
179 Copernicus is often attributed with
endorsing a form of Ockham’s razor when
he writes, “We thus rather follow Nature,
who producing nothing vain or
superfluous often prefers to endow one
cause with many effects.” What “one
cause” is Copernicus discussing in this
passage and which “many effects” does
the cause explain? Hint: You may wish to
consider reading until the next page to
identify what Copernicus thinks the cause
is.
183 With what was the Copernican Revolution
“completed” according to Kuhn?
Kuhn asserts that Copernicus did not solve the problem of the
planets.
Unlike in the Ptolemaic system, where the movement of Mercury and Venus are
restricted because their epicycles must always lie between the Earth and the sun,
the Copernican system simply locks them into the Earth’s orbit. When the inferior
planet is visible, it cannot be too far from the sun, and the maximum elongation
angle describes how far away the planet can possibly get from the sun.
This explanation was favored because it seemed more natural (and
straightforward) than Ptolemy’s; the latter requires additional aligned epicycles
that locks the inferior planets with the sun. Copernicus did not have to use the
additional epicycles and resorted to simple geometry.
Since Mercury retrogresses every 116 days, that must be the amount of time it
requires to ‘lap’ the Earth (because retrograde motion only happens when the
planet is visible to us). Given this number, astronomers can find how many orbits
the Earth has completed in that time, and then, how many orbits Mercury has
travelled. Then, given the number of orbits it has travelled in 116 days,
astronomers can find the length (in days) of an orbit (which, for Mercury, is 88).
The planets with the smallest orbits were placed closer to the sun, as they required
less time to complete an orbit. In that way, Mercury was placed closest with an
orbit of 88 days, and Venus between it and the Earth with an orbit of 225 days.
The superior planets were all distanced similarly, with the Earth in between Venus
and Mars.
In the Ptolemaic model, observing planetary positions consistent with models did
not always depend on the order or size of the planetary orbits. However, in the
Copernican model, both of these factors were consequential. An example of this is
in finding the maximum elongation angle of a planet between the Earth and the
sun. This angle is found by drawing in a right angle triangle with the Earth, the
inferior planet, and the sun as its vertices. One of the acute angles, the one that
branches from the Earth, can determine the ratio between the inferior planet’s
orbit and the Earth’s orbit. Knowledge of the ratio is vital to determining the
length of an unknown orbit. If these distances were to be changed, then the angles
(and consequently the orbit lengths) would all be disastrously erroneous.
Copernicus believes that the cause leading to all the various effects
he describes is that the Earth is in constant motion. One effect is
the illusion of retrograde motion -- and why planets differ in the
amount of time they are ‘regressing.’ Another effect is that the
Earth laps more distant planets (like Jupiter and Saturn) more
frequently than Mars because they move a lot slower. The Earth’s
motion explains why certain planets appear closer and brighter than
others (and at different parts of their orbits).
With the completion of his book, Copernicus turned the world away from a
geocentric model of the universe in favor of a heliocentric one. With this new
model came lots of new unanswered questions and problems, which he promptly
directed towards the new generation of astronomers. These new problem-solvers
looked to Copernicus’ research in the same way he had looked to Ptolemy, thus

86, On page 86, Kuhn claims that, “[For
180- Aristotle], astronomy and terrestrial
184 physics are not independent sciences.” In
no more than a paragraph, assess whether
Copernicus would agree.
ending the revolution and beginning a new era of astronomy.
I think that Copernicus would agree with Aristotle indirectly. His
work was not just about astronomy itself. It was about scientific
principles (like utilizing Ockham’s razor) that I believe are
applicable across all disciplines. Like William Harvey
overthrowing Galen’s theory of blood circulation, Copernicus
cleared the way for fresh astronomical thinking, which in turn,
increased reception towards the likes of Newton. However, at the
same time, Copernicus kept his work narrowly focused on the stars
and ignored any discrepancies between a cosmology and the math
that he was directly working with, so perhaps he wasn’t
consciously trying to link the world together the way Aristotle did.
Ultimately, though, given that the words “symmetry” and
“harmony” are repeated throughout his book, I would assert that he
saw some sort of connection between all the entities of the
universe, and like Aristotle, found some satisfaction in it.