Copernicus, Galileo, and Kepler's challenge to Ptolemaic astronomy

Copernican revolution has a pivotal role in the establishment of the modern sciences. We are very much familiar with the fact that the human mind had always been fascinated greatly by the changes taking place around him almost constantly. Human observation and sense of argument and ability to be logical has made him the most intelligent and consequently most powerful species on the planet.

It is very comfortable to believe that Earth is located at the centre of the universe and other planets rotate around it because Earth itself does not seem or feel to be moving and there are only sun, moon and other planets appearing and disappearing at their exact timings. It is quite logical and unless and until something really revolutionary come forward to refute this believe, it looks quite reasonable to carry on believing the same idea (Kuhn, pp 187).

Nicholas Copernicus

The most significant change did happen at the reverse of this very well kept thought when Copernicus tried to alter the model proposed by Ptolemy, which had earth in the center. To prove his point he had to come up with some credible model that could potentially break the one strongly established before, which he unluckily failed to do. His proposal lacked reliability so was excessively ridiculed by his contemporaries.

Galileo

A noticeable transformation in the domain of science occurred when Galileo came forward with properly defined answers to the idea of putting sun in the center and proposing the continuous motion of earth around it. As known by many, a moving object comes to a stop eventually after moving for some time which is due to friction. To keep a moving object carry on its motion, a constant pushing force has to be applied on it. This idea was sounded as reasonable to the philosophers of that time as the idea of moving sun and moon. This proposed outline was plausible. He further added that with this having in mind, in the absence of friction, the object will carry on its regular speed. Though he did not have any model to put forward and elucidate his point additionally, Galileo did manage to force many heads to crack the final answer.

Abandoning Ptolemy's paradigm

Later on, scientists pondered over the credibility of the model presented by Ptolemy. They established that it might not be of any additional help in search of finding the correct moving and stationary heavenly bodies.

It was Kepler who started thinking of using a model other than Ptolemaic paradigm to deal with the aforesaid issue. He came up with the idea of elliptical orbits instead of circular ones. After too much struggle, he finally came up with a mathematical explanation of the proposed idea of moving earth which is now acknowledged as the law of equal areas (L'Abate pp 5-8).

Science itself mainly deals with the true reality of every single phenomena of the universe. It is quite possible that believes powerfully held at one time alter altogether at the introduction of another new discovery of the fact hidden from scientists and philosophers earlier.

Science and Religion

At the time of Galileo presenting the idea of heliocentric model of the universe, the Church came out to be the worse rival of the proposed idea. Biblical records were based on Aristotle's views and challenging them was challenging the word of God. Galileo had to die for his bluntness but Church also had to correct its records later on when it was no more possible to keep the truth from general public. This gave the Church a valuable lesson not to holding steadfastly to a certain piece of Scripture or a scientific model, which can possibly contain an error.

Science is in direct clash with religion which is based at large on ideas and dogmas appearing less credible to human mind but still religion has deep roots in human life due to the groundings that it covers for a number of phenomena still to be uncovered by science. These two fields have never found going in harmony (Brooke ppn 8-12).

Thomas Kuhn

In 1962 Thomas Kuhn, in his book, the structure of scientific revolutions, projected a radical model of scientific progress throughout ages. He mainly addressed the question of presence of science as a source of finding the truth about nature. He tried to explain that there is also another possibility of scientific development, which can be the drive to solve the puzzles put forward by nature when every time one untangled piece leads to more bewildered labyrinth. Progress of science takes place after refuting once convincingly held proposition and replacing it another brand new idea which is open to be challenged anytime in future. According to Kuhn's model new knowledge swap places with incompatible knowledge (Kuhn pp 215).

Why some People accept changes late

Change occur all the time, but it can at times be intricate to accept. Since most individuals feel easier with familiar people, spaces, thoughts and situations than we do with new ones, likewise change can appear foreign. However change itself is a procedure, so is the steady progress towards accepting it. It has been found out by researchers that if we want someone to acknowledge change, we must first recognize why they may refuse to accept. By anticipating their probable response to the plan or proposal, we can formulate smart decisions regarding how to instigate the change. There are four elements to understand: emotions are unavoidable, change equals loss, approval requires scheduling and certain aspects increase resistance. The initial response to change is often negative. People seem to automatically scan a new situation for anything that is not to their benefit. Then they complain about it. This negative focus often blocks their awareness of positive aspects.

On the other hand, some changes are eagerly anticipated and welcomed. However, these too are frequently followed by a period of disappointment and regret -- for example, the well-known phenomenon of "buyer's remorse" upon purchasing a home. The main reason for negative reactions to change is that people always lose something. To get others to accept change, the first step is to understand what, from their perspective; they feel that they are losing. If you can first empathize with their feelings, then begin to compensate for their loss, you have taken a giant first step towards acceptance.