a history of science-2-第16章
按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页,按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页,按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部!
————未阅读完?加入书签已便下次继续阅读!
cean stars。 Turning attention to the sun itself; Galileo observed on the surface of that luminary a spot or blemish which gradually changed its shape; suggesting that changes were taking place in the substance of the sunchanges obviously incompatible with the perfect condition demanded by the metaphysical theorists。 But however disquieting for the conservative; the sun's spots served a most useful purpose in enabling Galileo to demonstrate that the sun itself revolves on its axis; since a given spot was seen to pass across the disk and after disappearing to reappear in due course。 The period of rotation was found to be about twenty…four days。 It must be added that various observers disputed priority of discovery of the sun's spots with Galileo。 Unquestionably a sun…spot had been seen by earlier observers; and by them mistaken for the transit of an inferior planet。 Kepler himself had made this mistake。 Before the day of the telescope; he had viewed the image of the sun as thrown on a screen in a camera…obscura; and had observed a spot on the disk which be interpreted as representing the planet Mercury; but which; as is now known; must have been a sun…spot; since the planetary disk is too small to have been revealed by this method。 Such observations as these; however interesting; cannot be claimed as discoveries of the sun…spots。 It is probable; however; that several discoverers (notably Johann Fabricius) made the telescopic observation of the spots; and recognized them as having to do with the sun's surface; almost simultaneously with Galileo。 One of these claimants was a Jesuit named Scheiner; and the jealousy of this man is said to have had a share in bringing about that persecution to which we must now refer。 There is no more famous incident in the history of science than the heresy trial through which Galileo was led to the nominal renunciation of his cherished doctrines。 There is scarcely another incident that has been commented upon so variously。 Each succeeding generation has put its own interpretation on it。 The facts; however; have been but little questioned。 It appears that in the year 1616 the church became at last aroused to the implications of the heliocentric doctrine of the universe。 Apparently it seemed clear to the church authorities that the authors of the Bible believed the world to be immovably fixed at the centre of the universe。 Such; indeed; would seem to be the natural inference from various familiar phrases of the Hebrew text; and what we now know of the status of Oriental science in antiquity gives full warrant to this interpretation。 There is no reason to suppose that the conception of the subordinate place of the world in the solar system had ever so much as occurred; even as a vague speculation; to the authors of Genesis。 In common with their contemporaries; they believed the earth to be the all…important body in the universe; and the sun a luminary placed in the sky for the sole purpose of giving light to the earth。 There is nothing strange; nothing anomalous; in this view; it merely reflects the current notions of Oriental peoples in antiquity。 What is strange and anomalous is the fact that the Oriental dreamings thus expressed could have been supposed to represent the acme of scientific knowledge。 Yet such a hold had these writings taken upon the Western world that not even a Galileo dared contradict them openly; and when the church fathers gravely declared the heliocentric theory necessarily false; because contradictory to Scripture; there were probably few people in Christendom whose mental attitude would permit them justly to appreciate the humor of such a pronouncement。 And; indeed; if here and there a man might have risen to such an appreciation; there were abundant reasons for the repression of the impulse; for there was nothing humorous about the response with which the authorities of the time were wont to meet the expression of iconoclastic opinions。 The burning at the stake of Giordano Bruno; in the year 1600; was; for example; an object…lesson well calculated to restrain the enthusiasm of other similarly minded teachers。 Doubtless it was such considerations that explained the relative silence of the champions of the Copernican theory; accounting for the otherwise inexplicable fact that about eighty years elapsed after the death of Copernicus himself before a single text…book expounded his theory。 The text…book which then appeared; under date of 1622; was written by the famous Kepler; who perhaps was shielded in a measure from the papal consequences of such hardihood by the fact of residence in a Protestant country。 Not that the Protestants of the time favored the heliocentric doctrinewe have already quoted Luther in an adverse sensebut of course it was characteristic of the Reformation temper to oppose any papal pronouncement; hence the ultramontane declaration of 1616 may indirectly have aided the doctrine which it attacked; by making that doctrine less obnoxious to Lutheran eyes。 Be that as it may; the work of Kepler brought its author into no direct conflict with the authorities。 But the result was quite different when; in 1632; Galileo at last broke silence and gave the world; under cover of the form of dialogue; an elaborate exposition of the Copernican theory。 Galileo; it must be explained; had previously been warned to keep silent on the subject; hence his publication doubly offended the authorities。 To be sure; he could reply that his dialogue introduced a champion of the Ptolemaic system to dispute with the upholder of the opposite view; and that; both views being presented with full array of argument; the reader was left to reach a verdict for himself; the author having nowhere pointedly expressed an opinion。 But such an argument; of course; was specious; for no one who read the dialogue could be in doubt as to the opinion of the author。 Moreover; it was hinted that Simplicio; the character who upheld the Ptolemaic doctrine and who was everywhere worsted in the argument; was intended to represent the pope himselfa suggestion which probably did no good to Galileo's cause。 The character of Galileo's artistic presentation may best be judged from an example; illustrating the vigorous assault of Salviati; the champion of the new theory; and the feeble retorts of his conservative antagonist: 〃Salviati。 Let us then begin our discussion with the consideration that; whatever motion may be attributed to the earth; yet we; as dwellers upon it; and hence as participators in its motion; cannot possibly perceive anything of it; presupposing that we are to consider only earthly things。 On the other hand; it is just as necessary that this same motion belong apparently to all other bodies and visible objects; which; being separated from the earth; do not take part in its motion。 The correct method to discover whether one can ascribe motion to the earth; and what kind of motion; is; therefore; to investigate and observe whether in bodies outside the earth a perceptible motion may be discovered which belongs to all alike。 Because a movement which is perceptible only in the moon; for instance; and has nothing to do with Venus or Jupiter or other stars; cannot possibly be peculiar to the earth; nor can its seat be anywhere else than in the moon。 Now there is one such universal movement which controls all othersnamely; that which the sun; moon; the other planets; the fixed starsin short; the whole universe; with the single exception of the earthappears to execute from east to west in the space of twenty…four hours。 This now; as it appears at the first glance anyway; might just as well be a motion of the earth alone as of all the rest of the universe with the exception of the earth; for the same phenomena would result from either hypothesis。 Beginning with the most general; I will enumerate the reasons which seem to speak in favor of the earth's motion。 When we merely consider the immensity of the starry sphere in comparison with the smallness of the terrestrial ball; which is contained many million times in the former; and then think of the rapidity of the motion which completes a whole rotation in one day and night; I cannot persuade myself how any one can hold it to be more reasonable and credible that i