Help


from Brown Corpus
« »  
Without careful qualification this can be misleading.
If in any one calculation Ptolemy had had to invoke 83 epicycles all at once, while Copernicus never required more than one third this number, then ( in the sense obvious to Margenau ) Ptolemaic astronomy would be simpler than Copernican.
But no single planetary problem ever required of Ptolemy more than six epicycles at one time.
This, of course, results from the non-systematic, ' cellular ' character of Ptolemaic theory.
Calculations within the Copernican framework always raised questions about planetary configurations.
These could be met only by considering the dynamical elements of several planets at one time.
This is more ambitious than Ptolemy is ever required to be when he faces his isolated problems.
Thus, in no ordinary sense of ' simplicity ' is the Ptolemaic theory simpler than the Copernican.
The latter required juggling several elements simultaneously.
This was not simpler but much more difficult than exercises within Ptolemy's astronomy.

1.810 seconds.