Citat:
În prealabil postat de abaaaabbbb63
|
Tu nu auzi ca nu-i diferit ? E diferit in modelul lui Ptolemeu, in modelul lui Tycho Brahe e la fel.
http://users.clas.ufl.edu/ufhatch/pa...CHO2-WSYS.html
"One of the principal advantages, not celebrated in practice until after Tycho's death, is that the model accounts for the change of phases (the apparent illumination, similar to earth's moon) undergone by Mercury and Venus. The fact is, these two inferior planets go through phases (most notably Venus) ranging from a nearly perfect full disk to a thin large crescent shape. That the Tychonic Model could account (indeed would predict) such changes, notably in the wake of Galileo's telescopic discoveries, proved a very strong attraction. These changes of phase could not be accounted for in the Ptolemaic Model, which assumed that Mercury and Venus moved on circles on a line between the earth and Sun, hence, they could not be imagined to go through phase. In Tycho's Model, as in the Copernican, Mercury and Venus were understood to revolve around the Sun and, hence, they would go through phases like the earth's moon."
La vremea lui, a fost un model genial, pe cand modelul heliocentrist era mai prost decat cel al lui Ptolemeu vechi de aproape 2000 de ani.
