I History of astronomy and the Phases of Venus

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the realization of the heliocentric model's implications for the phases of Venus, primarily attributed to Galileo's observations in the 17th century. Prior to Galileo, planets were perceived merely as points of light, and the concept of them exhibiting phases was not considered. Some participants mention Nicholas of Cusa, who lived before Galileo, speculating on the nature of planets, but there is uncertainty regarding his specific views on planetary phases. The conversation emphasizes that Galileo's findings were pivotal in supporting the heliocentric theory. Overall, the phases of Venus were not recognized as a consequence of heliocentrism until Galileo's telescope observations.
windy miller
Messages
306
Reaction score
28
Does anyone know when it was first realized that a heliocentric model of the cosmos should show the phases of Venus in the way Galileo saw them in the 17th century.?Was it known in the time of Aristarchus or did people only realize this was a consequence of helicoentrism later on, perhaps only in the 17th century Ad or ...?
Many thanks
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I could be wrong, but I don't think anyone thought about it until Galileo pointed his telescope at the skies and discovered the phases of Venus. Before then the planets were just points of light. How could a point source show phases? It was Galileo that first realized that the phases of Venus were a powerful argument in favor of the heliocentric model.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes russ_watters and berkeman
phyzguy said:
I could be wrong, but I don't think anyone thought about it until Galileo pointed his telescope at the skies and discovered the phases of Venus. Before then the planets were just points of light. How could a point source show phases? It was Galileo that first realized that the phases of Venus were a powerful argument in favor of the heliocentric model.
Didn't Nicholas of Cusa (who was alive about 200 years before Galileo saw Venus through his telescope ) think of planets as bodies with living beings on them?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
windy miller said:
Didn't Nicholas of Cusa (who was alive about 200 years before Galileo saw Venus through his telescope ) think of planets as bodies with living beings on them?
Maybe. If so, I'd like to see the documentation. Why would you single out the planets from the stars? They look the same except that the planets move.
 
Well he also thought the universe was infinite, I'm not sure there was observational evidence for that either but people like to speculate. As for documentation, I have read many sources that refer to his views but I can't claim to have read his original texts. But here is an example of a brief biography, there are many others : https://www.catholicscientists.org/catholic-scientists-of-the-past/nicholas-of-cusa

Source https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/history-of-astronomy-and-the-phases-of-venus.1009674/
 

Thread 'Potential biosignature found in Mars rock'

Publication: Redox-driven mineral and organic associations in Jezero Crater, Mars Article: NASA Says Mars Rover Discovered Potential Biosignature Last Year Press conference The ~100 authors don't find a good way this could have formed without life, but also can't rule it out. Now that they have shared their findings with the larger community someone else might find an explanation - or maybe it was actually made by life.
View full post »

Thread 'Does it make sense to build new radio telescopes?'

TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
View full post »
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'

Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'

This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
View full post »

Similar threads

How was Galileo able to observe Venus's phases?
Replies
6
Views
4K
Who Determined the Phase and Period of Epicycles in Greek Astronomy?
Replies
3
Views
3K
I Phase Contrast Telescope - Part II
Replies
25
Views
2K
I Solar anomaly and the Antikythera Mechanism
Replies
6
Views
3K
I How feasible is home radio astronomy?
2
Replies
53
Views
9K
I New Developments In The Search For Planet X
Replies
2
Views
3K
Astronomy book listing Ceres as a planet?
Replies
10
Views
4K
I Decoherent histories for Young's experiment (with and without gas)
Replies
1
Views
747
I Four Questions on vacuum phase transitions in the Universe...
Replies
29
Views
2K
How Did the Transit of Venus Shape Modern Astronomy?
Replies
7
Views
4K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top