Friday, 18 February 2011

SS-FN: The Flat Earth

What we know to be as a round, relatively small object suspended in an infinitely massive Universe was once a mystery deliberated over by the greatest minds that the world has ever seen. For Centuries and Millennia, theories have changed, evolved and adapted to fit best what humanity could observe and deduce. With advancements in science and technology, more accurate, more plausible and sometimes revolutionary and controversial discoveries were made about the home to all mankind.
Though possibly previously acknowledged and cited in ancient Hebrew texts, our first evidence of Man’s theory of a solar model comes from Anaximander (611 – 545 BC), a man who can be credited as one of the ancient Greek’s earliest great minds. His model depicted earth as the centre of everything, a flat cylindrical world with a projected Y axis, like a short stack of coins. Anaximander also stated that there were three continents; Europe, Libya and Asia. Immediately overhead this was clouds, beyond that (interestingly) was stars before the inclusion of the moon and then the sun. Stars were thought to be small and insignificant with no connection to our sun, something that humanity found to be a star many centuries of years later. The final idea Anaximander contributed was the inclusion of a ‘Region of Fire’ beyond all other objects visible to man. This was the furthest thing from Earth and was said to be an eternal fire beyond which nothing else existed.
                          Anaximander’s model.
Leucippus (450 BC), another Greek philosopher, took Anaximander’s century old theory and subtly altered it. At first glance, the models composed by both men seem similar; this is because Leucippus changed only the ordering of the solar bodies surrounding Earth (which was now shown to be a half sphere with man on the flat surface). In terms distance from the earth, Leucippus was correct. The moon came first in the earths orbit, then planets, then the sun followed by stars. 
                                    Leucippus’s model
From Dante and the Early Astronomers;
M. A. Orr (Mrs. John Evershed), 1913.)

From the previous model, Aristotle (384 – 322 BC) took ideas and the main structure of the cosmos and further altered the ever evolving model. This would be what was accepted by the Greeks and persisted for 1800 years. In what may be seen by a modern man as a backwards step, Aristotle placed the sun between Venus and Mars (only a slight alteration is needed to make this an incomplete modern model of our solar system; swapping the earth and its moon with the sun). In this model, five non-earth planets are accounted for, from Mercury through Saturn. Beyond this were stars and another addition to the solar model, The Sphere of The Prime Mover.  Aristotle included this beyond the stars as a way of including the Gods into a model of the cosmos.
                                               Aristotle’s Model

This, however, this was not the most groundbreaking theory. Aristotle took an idea first considered but never pursued by Pythagoras, that the world was spherical. He had several reasons for concluding this fact. His primary evidence was based neither on philosophy or science but rather religion. He though that if God were to create and object he would make it entirely symmetrical and perfectly formed as a sphere.[1] This evidence was backed up by other observations, such as the curved shadow on the moon when lunar eclipses occurred and ‘Every portion of the Earth tends toward the center until by compression and convergence they form a sphere.’(de Caelo 297a9-21). Furthermore, Aristotle’s theory of a round earth explained the way in which constellations moved up or down when tracking the latitude of the Earth. Aristotle’s reputation preceded him, and his word was gospel truth, thus explaining the endurance of his theory.

1 comment:

  1. Love this! I am writing a paper comparing human conceptual changes in the mind to revolutionary theoretical changes in the collective mind of science. This has been informative--thanks!

    ReplyDelete