Relevant bibliographies by topics / Copernicanismo

Contents

  1. Journal articles
  2. Dissertations / Theses
  3. Books
  4. Book chapters

Academic literature on the topic 'Copernicanismo'

Author: Grafiati
Published: 4 June 2021
Last updated: 1 February 2022

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Copernicanismo.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Journal articles on the topic "Copernicanismo"

1

Granada, Miguel Ángel. "Thomas Digges, Giordano Bruno y el desarrollo del copernicanismo en Inglaterra." ENDOXA 1, no. 4 (January 1, 1994): 7. http://dx.doi.org/10.5944/endoxa.4.1994.4817.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Lino, Alex. "As modificações na carta de Galileu destinada a Benedetto Castelli de dezembro 1613: uma tentativa de amenizar as acusações realizadas pela Igreja." Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física 37, no. 1 (April 6, 2020): 219–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/2175-7941.2020v37n1p219.

Full text
Abstract:
Este artigo tem o objetivo principal de discorrer sobre a carta de Galileu destinada a Benedetto Castelli, encontrada na biblioteca da Royal Society, em agosto do ano de 2018, pelo pesquisador Salvatore Ricciardo, da Universidade de Bergamo. Iremos discutir, principalmente, as modificações que Galileu realizou no texto da carta datada de 21 de dezembro de 1613. Esta carta já era muito conhecida pelos pesquisadores da área, no entanto, a descoberta de Ricciardo trouxe novas informações acerca da história do enfrentamento de Galileu com a Inquisição, na sua luta árdua em defesa ao copernicanismo e da autonomia da ciência em relação aos dogmas religiosos. A descoberta mostra que Galileu modificou o texto tentando amenizar suas duras críticas aos teólogos da época, que eram contra a ideia do heliocentrismo. A principal justificativa que os adversários do copernicanismo davam, centrava-se na subversão de algumas passagens da Sagrada Escritura, em especial na passagem de Josué. Até a descoberta de Ricciardo, a ideia mais aceita era a de que alguns clérigos rivais haviam modificado a carta para que Galileu fosse acusado mais facilmente de heresia pelo Tribunal da Inquisição e seus textos fossem proibidos pelo Index. No entanto, podemos verificar, a partir da descoberta, que, de fato, modificações na carta foram feitas, mas pelo próprio Galileu, como uma provável tentativa de se livrar de algumas acusações que a ele vinham sendo realizadas. Por fim, apresentaremos uma tradução da carta encontrada por Ricciardo, comentando as modificações realizadas por Galileu em relação à versão antiga.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Levinas, Marcelo Leonardo, and Silvina Paula Vidal. "La cosmografía de Waldseemüller, la conceptualización de “América” y su relación con el copernicanismo." Scientiae Studia 14, no. 2 (December 30, 2016): 281. http://dx.doi.org/10.11606/s1678-31662016000200002.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Powell, Russell. "Copernicanism and Its Biological Discontents." Quarterly Review of Biology 95, no. 1 (March 2020): 59–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/707955.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Ćirković, Milan M., and Amedeo Balbi. "Copernicanism and the typicality in time." International Journal of Astrobiology 19, no. 2 (August 13, 2019): 101–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1473550419000223.

Full text
Abstract:
AbstractHow special (or not) is the epoch we are living in? What is the appropriate reference class for embedding the observations made at the present time? How probable – or else – is anything we observe in the fulness of time? Contemporary cosmology and astrobiology bring those seemingly old-fashioned philosophical issues back into focus. There are several examples of contemporary research which use the assumption of typicality in time (or temporal Copernicanism) explicitly or implicitly, while not truly elaborating upon the meaning of this assumption. The present paper brings attention to the underlying and often uncritically accepted assumptions in these cases. It also aims to defend a more radical position that typicality in time is not – and cannot ever be – well-defined, in contrast to the typicality in space, and the typicality in various specific parameter spaces. This, of course, does not mean that we are atypical in time; instead, the notion of typicality in time is necessarily somewhat vague and restricted. In principle, it could be strengthened by further defining the relevant context, e.g. by referring to typicality within the Solar lifetime, or some similar restricting clause.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Weber, Alan S. "What Did Shakespeare Know About Copernicanism?" Romanian Journal of English Studies 9, no. 1 (December 1, 2012): 351–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/v10319-012-0031-x.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract This contribution examines Shakespeare’s knowledge of the cosmological theories of Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543) as well as recent claims that Shakespeare possessed specialized knowledge of technical astronomy.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Cirkovic, M. M. "Fermi's paradox: The last challenge for copernicanism?" Serbian Astronomical Journal, no. 178 (2009): 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.2298/saj0978001c.

Full text
Abstract:
We review Fermi's paradox (or the 'Great Silence' problem), not only arguably the oldest and crucial problem for the Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence (SETI), but also a conundrum of profound scientific, philosophical and cultural importance. By a simple analysis of observation selection effects, the correct resolution of Fermi's paradox is certain to tell us something about the future of humanity. Already more than three quarters of century old puzzle and a quarter of century since the last major review paper in the field by G. David Brin has generated many ingenious discussions and hypotheses. We analyze the often tacit methodological assumptions built in various answers to this puzzle and attempt a new classification of the numerous solutions proposed in an already huge literature on the subject. Finally, we consider the ramifications of various classes of hypotheses for the practical SETI projects. Somewhat paradoxically, it seems that the class of (neo)catastrophic hypotheses gives, on the balance, the strongest justification to optimism regarding our current and near-future SETI efforts.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Hatch, Robert Alan. "Between Astrology and Copernicanism: Morin – Gassendi – Boulliau." Early Science and Medicine 22, no. 5-6 (January 18, 2017): 487–516. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15733823-02256p05.

Full text
Abstract:
Jean-Baptiste Morin, arguably Europe’s most noted astrologer and anti-Copernican, was a key figure in a bitter controversy involving Pierre Gassendi, Ismaël Boulliau, and a dozen other notable savants. News of the dispute captivated Learned Europe for two decades (1630-1650). It was not a backwater affair. After a humiliating quarrel on longitude, Morin expressed his anger by publicly pitting astrology against Copernicanism, by counterpointing the Copernican Question and the Astrology Question in matters of theology and cosmology. His strategy failed. Capitalizing on Morin’s challenge, the New Science not only turned a bitter personal dispute into a fruitful public debate, it firmly established its autonomy and authority. In the end, astrology was not simply marginalized – it did not die from collateral damage – and it did not die a natural death. The death of astrology was by public execution.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Danielson, Dennis. "Achilles Gasser and the Birth of Copernicanism." Journal for the History of Astronomy 35, no. 4 (November 2004): 457–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002182860403500406.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Drake, Stillman. "Galileo's steps to full Copernicanism, and back." Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 18, no. 1 (March 1987): 93–105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0039-3681(87)90013-6.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
More sources

Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Copernicanismo"

1

Soares, Jerry Luiz. "A defesa do copernicanismo por Galileu Galilei." Universidade Federal do Amazonas, 2013. http://tede.ufam.edu.br/handle/tede/3721.

Full text
Abstract:
Made available in DSpace on 2015-04-22T22:18:27Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Jerry Luiz Soares.pdf: 672406 bytes, checksum: e88bbef6ba318d131d840409b6860292 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-07-18
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
Galileo Galilei supported Nicolaus Copernicus astronomic theory, from which the former has attracted philosophical as well theological consequences. The celestial discoveries made possible with the usage of spyglasses allowed Galileo to challenge some of the aristotelic principles of cosmology and to break up the limits imposed to astronomy as hypothetical discipline which would aim just to "save the phenomena".
Galileu Galilei defendeu a teoria astronômica de Nicolau Copérnico, e dela extraiu consequências filosóficas e teológicas. As descobertas celestes com a utilização da luneta permitiram a Galileu questionar alguns princípios da cosmologia aristotélica, e romper os limites impostos à Astronomia, enquanto disciplina hipotética que teria como objetivo tão somente "salvar os fenômenos".
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Brandt, Luiz Antonio. "A superação da dicotomia céu-terra: um estudo da crítica galileana à física e à cosmologia aristotélicas." Universidade Estadual do Oeste do Parana, 2011. http://tede.unioeste.br:8080/tede/handle/tede/2125.

Full text
Abstract:
Made available in DSpace on 2017-07-10T18:26:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Luiz Antonio Brandt.pdf: 1067816 bytes, checksum: 69a6a677b5382a0454f7bbd9551ddd1f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-12-08
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
In this thesis, we aim to conduct a study and reconstruction of the criticism that Galileo undertakes to physics and cosmology of Aristotle, and works as an anchor Sidereus Nuncius and First Day of Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. The arguments developed by Italian physicist these works, consolidating the Copernican theory and revolutionize the way we study nature. For centuries, the Western conception of the universe was supported by the assumptions of cosmology of Aristotle. Aristotelian cosmology had as fundamental points the idea of the incorruptibility of the heavens, the earth and the immobility of a hierarchy of elements. For the peripatetic, the cosmos was finite and heterogeneous, and was divided into two distinct regions: the sublunary (terrestrial) and above the Moon (heavenly). The telescopic observations made by Galileo in 1609, showing craters and mountains on the moon and Jupiter's satellites, were in evidence against the heaven-earth dichotomy proposed by Aristotle. For it revealed "imperfections" in the heavenly bodies, and showed that not all the stars had their revolutions as the center of the Earth, the idea of asking the same centrality in the cosmos. Moreover, the break with Aristotelian cosmology destabilizing the very physics of Aristotle, whose explanation of the movements of bodies depended on the cosmological structure, since there were three types of moves, straight toward the center, straight away from the center and circular around the center, which required a motionless earth occupying the center of the cosmos. The idea of centrality and immobility of the Earth is therefore fundamental point of Aristotelian physics and cosmology. Most of the work of Galileo Galilei seems to think about a central objective: the defense of the Copernican theory. Since his public adhesion to the Copernicanism in 1610, in Sidereus Nuncius, until Dialogue published in 1632, the Pisan Phisycist sought to break with the assumptions of the Aristotle s natural philosophy which supported the geocentric conception. As a result, it is in First Day of Dialogue that, certainly, we could find a more systematic and focused effort against the Aristotelic conception of world and its main characteristic: the dissociation of the cosmos into two distinct regions, the celestial and sublunary.
Nesta dissertação, temos como objetivo realizar um estudo e reconstrução das críticas que Galileu empreende à física e à cosmologia de Aristóteles, tendo como âncora as obras Sidereus Nuncius e Primeira Jornada do Diálogo sobre os dois máximos sistemas do mundo. Os argumentos desenvolvidos pelo físico pisano nestas obras, consolidam a teoria copernicana e revolucionam a maneira de se estudar a natureza. Durante séculos, a concepção ocidental de universo esteve apoiada nos pressupostos da cosmologia de Aristóteles. A cosmologia aristotélica tinha como pontos fundamentais a ideia de incorruptibilidade do céu, de imobilidade da Terra e de uma hierarquia dos elementos. Para o peripatético, o cosmos era finito e heterogêneo, e se encontrava dividido em duas regiões distintas: a sublunar (terrestre) e a supralunar (celeste). As observações telescópicas realizadas por Galileu em 1609, ao mostrar crateras e montanhas na Lua, e satélites em Júpiter, constituíram-se em evidências contrárias à dicotomia céu-Terra proposta por Aristóteles. Pois revelavam imperfeições nos corpos celestes, e mostravam que nem todos os astros tinham como centro de suas revoluções a Terra, questionando a ideia de centralidade da mesma no cosmos. Além disso, a ruptura com a cosmologia aristotélica desestabilizava a própria física de Aristóteles, cuja explicação dos movimentos dos corpos dependia da estrutura cosmológica, uma vez que existiam três tipos de movimentos: retilíneo em direção ao centro, retilíneo se afastando do centro e circular em torno do centro, o que requeria uma Terra imóvel ocupando o centro do cosmos. A ideia de centralidade e imobilidade da Terra é, portanto, ponto fundamental da física e da cosmologia aristotélicas. Grande parte da obra de Galileu parece girar em torno de um objetivo central: a defesa da teoria copernicana. Desde a sua adesão pública ao copernicanismo em 1610, no Sidereus Nuncius, até o Diálogo publicado em 1632, o físico pisano buscou romper com os pressupostos da filosofia natural de Aristóteles que sustentavam a concepção geocêntrica. Com efeito, é na Primeira Jornada do Diálogo que poderemos encontrar um esforço mais sistemático e concentrado contra a concepção aristotélica de mundo e sua principal característica: a dualidade do cosmos.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Howell, Kenneth James. "Copernicanism and biblical interpretation in early modern Protestant Europe." Thesis, Lancaster University, 1995. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.309018.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Galle, Karl Luther. "Monumental arts : Albrect Dürer, early Copernicanism, and the commemoration of mathematical practices in Renaissance art and astronomy." Thesis, Imperial College London, 2003. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.401202.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Boulier, Philippe. "Cosmologie et science de la nature chez Francis Bacon et Galilée." Thesis, Paris 4, 2010. http://www.theses.fr/2010PA040152.

Full text
Abstract:
Aux XVIIIe et XIXe siècles, les historiens des sciences associaient généralement Francis Bacon et Galilée pour leur rôle dans l’émergence de la science moderne, mais, à la fin du XIXe et au début du XXe siècle, la Révolution scientifique fut identifiée de manière stricte à la construction de la physique mathématique, ce qui eut souvent pour conséquence de rejeter Bacon hors de l’histoire des sciences. Nous reprenons l’étude conjointe de ces deux auteurs pour mesurer quelle est exactement la nature de leur divergence. Dans la première partie de notre travail, nous abordons les questions cosmologiques. Sur quels arguments Galilée fonde-t-il sa défense publique du copernicianisme entre 1610 et 1616, jusqu’à la première condamnation de l’opinion copernicienne par l’Eglise Catholique ? Pour quelles raisons Bacon, qui suit cette campagne copernicienne, rejette-t-il la plupart des découvertes astronomiques de Galilée ? Pourquoi Bacon, tout en réussissant à percevoir le caractère (trop peu) systématique du géocentrisme, refuse-t-il l’héliocentrisme ? Dans la deuxième partie de notre travail, nous abordons les questions relatives à la méthode, ainsi que les théories de la matière et du mouvement. Quel est le rôle de la perception sensible et la fonction des mathématiques dans les théories de Bacon ? Quelle est la signification de sa théorie du mouvement, qui multiplie les objets d’étude en proposant une typologie des différents mouvements concrets, alors que la physique mathématique tend à réduire tout déplacement au seul mouvement linéaire inertiel ? Quelle est la fonction de l’atomisme mathématique de Galilée ? Dans quelle mesure sa science du mouvement se distingue-t-elle de l’approche baconienne ? La différence fondamentale entre la science galiléenne et la démarche de Bacon consiste, selon nous, dans la nature des expériences et des observations qui sont convoquées, ainsi que dans le type d’abstraction que ces deux auteurs veulent conférer à la philosophie naturelle
During the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, historians of science usually considered that Francis Bacon and Galileo had respectively played their role in the merging of modern science, but, at the end of the nineteenth and the beginning of the twentieth century, Scientific Revolution has been strictly reduced to the elaboration of mathematical physics, which had for consequence to exclude Bacon from the history of science. Our aim is to underline the exact nature of the difference between those two authors. In the first part, we deal with the cosmological problems. What arguments did Galileo produce to sustain his public commitment for the Copernican system, from 1610 to 1616, until the first condemnation of copernicanism by the Roman Church ? For what reasons did Bacon reject most of Galileo’s astronomical discoveries ? Why Bacon, who clearly perceived the fact that the geocentric theory lacked systematic character, refused heliocentrism ? In the second part, we deal with the methodological questions, we analyse matter theories and the science of motion. What is the role of sense perception and what is the fonction of mathematics in Bacon’s theories ? What is the significance of his theory of motion, which multiplies the objects of study, proposing a typology of concrete movements, while mathematical physics aims at reducing any motion to the rectilinear inertial movement ? What is the fonction of the mathematical atomism proposed by Galileo ? In what measure does his science of motion distinguish from the baconian approach ? We think that the fondamental difference between the science of Galileo and the theories of Bacon consists in the nature of the experiments and observations used, and in the type of abstraction they are looking for in natural philosophy
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Weinert, Friedel. "Leibniz’s Defence of Heliocentrism." 2017. http://hdl.handle.net/10454/11760.

Full text
Abstract:
yes
This paper discusses Leibniz’s view and defence of heliocentrism, which was one of the main achievements of the Scientific Revolution (1543-1687). As Leibniz was a defender of a strictly mechanistic worldview, it seems natural to assume that he accepted Copernican heliocentrism and its completion by figures like Kepler, Descartes and Newton without reservation. However, the fact that Leibniz speaks of the Copernican theory as a hypothesis (or plausible assumption) suggests that he had several reservations regarding heliocentrism. On a first approach Leibniz employed two of his most cherished principles to defend the Copernican hypothesis against the proponents of geocentrism: these were the principle of the relativity of motion and the principle of the equivalence of hypotheses. A closer analysis reveals, however, that Leibniz also appeals to dynamic causes of planetary motions, and these constitute a much stronger support for heliocentrism than his two philosophical principles alone.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Books on the topic "Copernicanismo"

1

Galileo, for Copernicanism and for the church. 3rd ed. Città del Vaticana: Vatican Observatory Publications, 2003.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Fantoli, Annibale. Galileo, for Copernicanism and for the church. 2nd ed. [Vatican City]: Vatican Observatory Publications, 1996.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Sytsma, David S. A Commotion over Motion. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190274870.003.0005.

Full text
Abstract:
This chapter addresses Baxter’s response to Copernicanism, substantial forms, Descartes’s laws of motion, and Henry More’s variant of mechanical philosophy. Baxter was far more concerned about changing notions of substance and causality than he was about Copernicanism. His objections to mechanical philosophy stemmed from a desire to affirm secondary causes as intrinsic sources of motion, which he regarded as important to a correct understanding of God and creation. He defended a concept of substantial form and objected to the theological foundation of Descartes’s first law of motion. Baxter also argued for the plausibility of various kinds of nonliving principles of motion against Henry More’s restriction of motion to spiritual beings.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Fantoli, Annibale. Galileo: For Copernicanism and for the Church (Studi Galileiani, Vol 3). University of Notre Dame Press, 1994.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Fantoli, Annibale. Galileo: For Copernicanism and for the Church, Third Edition (Revised and Extended) (ND From Vatican Observatory Found). 3rd ed. Vatican Observatory FND NDUP, 2003.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Barrett, Steve. Planetary Delusion ... the Falling Away: The Biblical Description of Earth and the Eschatological Connection to the Falsehood of Copernicanism. Dorrance Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2020.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Schuster, John A. Cartesian Physics. Edited by Jed Z. Buchwald and Robert Fox. Oxford University Press, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199696253.013.4.

Full text
Abstract:
This article examines the physics of René Descartes. Descartes’ natural philosophy marks a significant moment in the larger history of physics. His system of natural philosophy was a novel, daring, and intricate construction in that field, with two main sets of historical significances for later physics. Before discussing these two significant consequences of Descartes’ natural philosophy for physics, the article provides an overview of the developmental anatomy of Cartesian physics during the period 1618–1644. In particular, it considers the successes, failures, and fate of Descartes’ early physico-mathematics programme, his work on physico-mathematical optics and corpuscular dynamics, and his career inflection between 1628 and 1633. It also explores Descartes’ ideas on vortex celestial mechanics, the explanatory style of mature Cartesian physics, and his work on classical mechanics. Finally, it looks at Descartes’ concerns with realist Copernicanism.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Book chapters on the topic "Copernicanismo"

1

Omodeo, Pietro Daniel. "Copernicanism." In Encyclopedia of Renaissance Philosophy, 1–7. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02848-4_55-1.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Balbi, Amedeo, and Milan M. Ćirković. "SETI and Temporal Copernicanism." In Springer Proceedings in Physics, 7–11. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63806-1_2.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Oster, Malcolm. "The Spread of Copernicanism in Northern Europe." In Science in Europe, 1500–1800, 45–65. London: Macmillan Education UK, 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-21457-6_3.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Oster, Malcolm. "The Spread of Copernicanism in Northern Europe." In Science in Europe, 1500–1800, 34–59. London: Macmillan Education UK, 2002. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-21461-3_3.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Finocchiaro, Maurice A. "Galileo’s Copernicanism and the Acceptability of Guiding Assumptions." In Scrutinizing Science, 49–67. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 1988. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-2855-8_2.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Brundell, Barry. "Bellarmine to Foscarini on Copernicanism: A Theologian’s Response." In Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 375–93. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2000. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9478-3_11.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Schuster, John. "Cosmography, Realist Copernicanism and Systematising Strategy in the Principia Philosophiae." In Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 543–88. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4746-3_12.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Shea, William. "Galileo's Copernicanism." In The Cambridge Companion to Galileo, 211–43. Cambridge University Press, 1998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ccol0521581788.007.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

"Relaunching Copernicanism." In The Lynx and the Telescope, 243–99. BRILL, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/9789004342323_009.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Vanden Broecke, Steven. "How to Be a Catholic Copernican in the Spanish Netherlands." In Making Truth in Early Modern Catholicism. Nieuwe Prinsengracht 89 1018 VR Amsterdam Nederland: Amsterdam University Press, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/9789463720526_ch03.

Full text
Abstract:
The notion of Catholic Copernicanism in the aftermath of the Galileo affair remains something of an apparent oxymoron. It has been suggested that after the Galileo affair of 1633, cosmological truth went underground in the Catholic world for many decades, thus creating an asymmetry in the role played by Catholic and Protestant Europe in the so-called Scientific Revolution. Focusing on the case of the Spanish Netherlands, this chapter unearths a considerably different situation, where Roman directives were appropriated under local criteria for adequate cosmological truth-telling, and where the notion of public Catholic Copernicanism continued to be a tangible reality.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
You might also be interested in the extended bibliographies on the topic 'Copernicanismo' for particular source types:
Journal articles
We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!

To the bibliography