THE MERCURY MODELS OF IBN AL-ŠĀṬIR AND COPERNICUS

IF 0.3 2区 哲学 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Sajjad Nikfahm-Khubravan, F. J. Ragep
{"title":"THE MERCURY MODELS OF IBN AL-ŠĀṬIR AND COPERNICUS","authors":"Sajjad Nikfahm-Khubravan, F. J. Ragep","doi":"10.1017/S0957423918000085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Copernicus' complex Mercury model in De revolutionibus is virtually identical, geometrically, to Ibn al-Šāṭir's (ca. 1305 – ca. 1375). However, the model in his earlier Commentariolus is different and in many ways unworkable. This has led some to claim that the younger Copernicus did not understand his predecessor's model; others have maintained that Copernicus was working totally independently of Ibn al-Šāṭir. We argue that Copernicus did have Ibn al-Šāṭir's models but needed to modify them to conform to a “quasi-homocentricity” in the Commentariolus. This modification, and the move from a geocentric to heliocentric cosmology, was facilitated by the “heliocentric bias” of Ibn al-Šāṭir's models, in which the Earth was the actual center of mean motion, in contrast to Ptolemy and most Islamicate astronomers. We show that: 1) Ibn al-Šāṭir sought to reproduce Ptolemy's critical elongation at the trines(±120°), but changed the Ptolemaic values at 0, ±90, and 180°; 2) in the Commentariolus, Copernicus does not try to produce viable elongations for Mercury; and 3) by the time of writing De revolutionibus, Copernicus is in full control of the Mercury model and is able to faithfully reproduce Ptolemy's elongations at all critical points. We also argue that claims regarding “natural” solutions undermining transmission are belied by historical evidence.","PeriodicalId":43433,"journal":{"name":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0957423918000085","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arabic Sciences and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0957423918000085","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Copernicus' complex Mercury model in De revolutionibus is virtually identical, geometrically, to Ibn al-Šāṭir's (ca. 1305 – ca. 1375). However, the model in his earlier Commentariolus is different and in many ways unworkable. This has led some to claim that the younger Copernicus did not understand his predecessor's model; others have maintained that Copernicus was working totally independently of Ibn al-Šāṭir. We argue that Copernicus did have Ibn al-Šāṭir's models but needed to modify them to conform to a “quasi-homocentricity” in the Commentariolus. This modification, and the move from a geocentric to heliocentric cosmology, was facilitated by the “heliocentric bias” of Ibn al-Šāṭir's models, in which the Earth was the actual center of mean motion, in contrast to Ptolemy and most Islamicate astronomers. We show that: 1) Ibn al-Šāṭir sought to reproduce Ptolemy's critical elongation at the trines(±120°), but changed the Ptolemaic values at 0, ±90, and 180°; 2) in the Commentariolus, Copernicus does not try to produce viable elongations for Mercury; and 3) by the time of writing De revolutionibus, Copernicus is in full control of the Mercury model and is able to faithfully reproduce Ptolemy's elongations at all critical points. We also argue that claims regarding “natural” solutions undermining transmission are belied by historical evidence.
伊本·阿尔-ŠĀṬir和哥白尼的水银模型
哥白尼在《进化论》中提出的复杂的水星模型在几何上与伊本-Šāṭir(约1305 -约1375)的模型几乎完全相同。然而,他早期的《注释》中的模型是不同的,并且在许多方面是不可行的。这导致一些人声称小哥白尼不理解他的前辈的模型;另一些人则认为哥白尼的研究完全独立于伊本-Šāṭir。我们认为哥白尼确实有伊本-Šāṭir的模型,但需要修改它们以符合《注释》中的“准同心性”。这种修正,以及从地心说到日心说的宇宙论的转变,是由伊本·阿尔·-Šāṭir模型的“日心说偏差”促成的,在这个模型中,地球是平均运动的实际中心,与托勒密和大多数伊斯兰天文学家形成对比。我们发现:1)Ibn al-Šāṭir试图重现托勒密在三边(±120°)处的临界伸长,但改变了0、±90和180°处的托勒密值;2)在《注释》中,哥白尼没有试图为水星提供可行的延伸;3)在写《革命论》的时候,哥白尼已经完全控制了水星模型,并且能够忠实地再现托勒密在所有临界点上的拉长。我们还认为,关于破坏传播的“自然”解决方案的说法是不符合历史证据的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Arabic Sciences and Philosophy (ASP) is an international journal devoted to the Arabic sciences, mathematics and philosophy in the world of Islam between the eighth and eighteenth centuries, in a cross-cultural context. In 2009, the journal extended its scope to include important papers on scientific modernization from the nineteenth century in the Islamic world. Together with original studies on the history of all these fields, ASP also offers work on the inter-relations between Arabic and Greek, Indian, Chinese, Latin, Byzantine, Syriac and Hebrew sciences and philosophy. Casting new light on the growth of these disciplines, as well as on the social and ideological context in which this growth took place, ASP is essential reading for those interested in these areas.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信