Why You Should Read On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres

On the Revolutions of Heavenly Spheres (Great Minds): Copernicus ...

On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres was written by Nicolaus Copernicus, and was the book that started the heliocentric revolution in Europe. This was my second time reading this book, the first time being last year for a project I did. I reread it because I felt that I may not have understood the book to its fullest when I read it as a subbie, and felt like I would be able to grasp the concepts better now that I am a freshman. I can firmly say that I did, and I these are the reasons I would recommend this book to any of my classmates.

1. It shows us the basic proof for heliocentrism. Heliocentrism is the idea that the sun is at the center of the solar system, which is almost the opposite of geocentrism, the belief that the earth is at the center. I'm going to make an assumption and say that everyone who reads this blogpost takes the idea that the earth revolves around the sun as a basic fact and assumes it to be true. That makes perfect sense, it almost feels like it is as basic as proving that water is a liquid. However, it took many years and difficult mathematics to prove this fact and have it be accepted. During Copernicus' time, obviously satellites and such did not exist. So there would be no visual evidence for heliocentrism, and common sense says that if the sun moves on the sky, it revolves around it the earth. Though, through observations of star patterns in the sky throughout the year, Copernicus saw that something didn't add up. He looked through various data from different scholars, such as Al-Biruni, and worked on mathematically figuring out what model was actually true. By reading this book, you get a sense of the complexities of proving something as basic as this, giving you a better sense of this basic discovery.
2. It was a banned book. This book was banned by the Roman Catholic Church because it conflicted with their ideas, and I find that very interesting. Reading this book gives an insight into the ideas that the Church tried so hard to suppress, and that gives you an idea of what the Church was like. Beyond that, though, you can decide for yourself whether or not this book should have been banned. I can probably guess the majority of your guys' opinions though.
3. It expands your view of geometry and its uses. The applications of some relatively basic concepts from geometry that Copernicus uses to draw some astounding conclusions really help you understand the concepts better. Additionally, there are some topics that we would most likely never cover in school, such as spherical trigonometry. While the math is difficult to understand at the beginning, by reading it slowly and thinking it through it really opens your eyes to the wonder of the more basic areas of math.






Comments

  1. Haha, I loved your second paragraph talking about how the book has basic proof for heliocentrism. We think it's simple to prove, but I bet without any outside technology, a significant portion of humanity wouldn't be able to prove the concept.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I did not know what heliocentrism was until I read this blog post, so thank you for that. This was really well written and you presented well articulated reasons as to why this book is worthy of everyone's interest. I liked how you talked about the uses of geometry and how the book addresses the application of it's concepts to real life. Great post!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Again as I always say when commenting on your posts, it's difficult to write a blog post on non-fiction books. Despite this fact you did a great job describing this book. I really liked how you mentioned it's a banned book and why it was banned which really shows what the views were like back then. Great job!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I really appreciate how you have continued to stick with non-fiction books for your blog posts this year. I think it was interesting to see how something as obvious to the general population nowadays, like heliocentrism was so controversial back then. Good job.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog