Talk:Galileo Galilei

Template:WP1.0

Not entirely original?

The article currently reads "However, in neither case were these discoveries entirely original. The time-squared law for uniformly accelerated change was already known to Nicole Oresme in the 14th century". This is unwarranted. Firstly, in the Wiki article about Oresme I find no mention of any time-squared law, which makes me wonder if Oresme did actually know about such a law. Secondly, whereas mathematically it can be shown that uniformly accelerated motion leads to a time-squared law (especially if you know integral calculus which was developed hundreds of years after Oresme), that does not imply that we should actually observe it in nature. A mathematical proof does not imply uniform acceleration exists in nature, only that if there was indeed uniform acceleration we should also observe a time-squared law. Hence Galileo's experimental observation is entirely original. I suggest that we delete the entire text about the discoveries not being "entirely original" (which is weasel wording anyway).

JS (talk) 20:01, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Reading the Oresme article again, I withdraw my first objection. The article reads "He shows that his method of figuring the latitude of forms is applicable to the movement of a point, on condition that the time is taken as longitude and the speed as latitude; quantity is, then, the space covered in a given time." This is says that if you plot speed and time, then the distance traveled is the area under the graph, which is indeed integral calculus. Kudos to Oresme, he anticipated integral calculus. However I reiterate, the discovery of a mathematical relation is not what made Galileo great, it is that he set out to learn about how nature works by conducting experiments with numerical measurements. That makes his work "entirely original" and much more. JS (talk) 20:09, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

The phrase "This is says ..." seems to be a mistake, possibly for "This says...". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.65.2.139 (talk) 11:44, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I object to the removal of the note that Nicole Oresme had already derived the time-squared law for uniform acceleration in the 14th-century. Without that note, readers of the article are likely to end up with the erroneous but widely-held belief that Galileo was the first to discover this law. As far as I can see, all the objections raised in the above comments are fully met by the removal of the text characterising these discoveries on Galileo's part as "not entirely original". I have therefore restored a reworded version of the note about Oresme's prior discovery of the times-squared law.

David Wilson (talk · cont) 12:52, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

== Edit Request ==

I object to the summary that states how he was treated by the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church did not treat him so bad. He was told to treat his work as theory; because teaching the way he was insinuated that the Catholic Church was teaching that. The Church did not want to be caught up in a science that was under much scrutiny. He was permitted to go home, but he continued to teach his views as fact. He was investigated and arrested, but because of his poor health he was allowed to stay at his home, under house arrest.

I feel that what is on this page currently is insulting and untrue; and further is misleading since the text shows the Catholic Church as unjust and unscientific.

-Ethan Rabideau 173.12.211.110 (talk) 16:47, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Bruno

I've restored mention of Bruno in the text. There's a lot written about his relationship to Galileo, most of which doesn't need to be here; nevertheless more than we have presently would certainly improve this article and help give readers some context for Galileo's heliocentrism. -Darouet (talk) 20:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

More on Patronage

I think this article could explain more about the importance of patronage in Galileo's life. Mainly to help explain his falling out with the Catholic church after insulting and burning bridges with the new pope. Kevinolson1 (talk) 00:50, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Galileo galilei ( English do Galileo is the first scientist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.3.45.213 (talk) 11:09, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps User:Kevinolson1 and 173.3.45.213 could speak more clearly and in greater detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.109.117 (talk) 09:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

50 years earlier, Leonardo Da Vinci noticed...

Leonardo Da Vinci noticed that the mathematical proportions of faces can be three dimensionally mapped with graphic, pyramidal structures that always converged into a central point - the pupil of the observer's eye...[1]

This is how Leonardo Da Vinci was able to create perspective on complex biological structures (faces, for example).

This leads me to imagine that Galileo had spotted Leonardo's observation...

Ref:

[1] Inside The Mind of Leonardo (24 Mar 2013) - Sky Arts

The idea of the visual pyramid is not original with Leonardo, it can be seen as far back as Euclid's optical writings and was a commonplace in the Middle Ages, found in the writings of Alhacen, Roger Bacon, John Pecham, and Witelo. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 19:45, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Cool! That's very interesting and shall study how these men approached and perceived their experiences, too. I suspect that adopting many of the approaches these men took to analyzing their personal experiences will far more accurate information in y own life than I ever got from school (at least after I learned to read and write). Thank you Steve. You've given me something new to get my mind into.

Typos

I'm sorry this really isn't the place to do it, but I can't edit the page directly.

The phrase "...the Earth's surface speeded up and slowed down..." should be "...the Earth's surface sped up and slowed down..." Can someone please remedy this? Muttonsandwich (talk) 05:33, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. This is actually the perfect place to do it; talk pages are meant for discussing improvements to articles. You should also add {{Edit semi-protected}} if you want to request an edit for a semi protected page. — Reatlas (talk) 07:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Both past tenses can be used.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.149.30.34 (talk • contribs) 12:58, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Mutton should not treat his own usage as the only correct one.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.10.165 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

For the record "speeded up" sounds terrible. Also please sign your posts on talk pages in the future by typing four tildes (~~~~).Polyamorph (talk) 18:13, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

User:Mahusha

Remarks by Mahusha are often repeats of existing passages and not in good English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.98.243.24 (talk) 15:45, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 January 2014

149.254.49.208 (talk) 11:15, 19 January 2014 (UTC) Please let me edit i need to add a few bits of important information that is vital for this page Thank you Yours Sincerely Hannnah Bolta