Michal J A Paszkiewicz
@michalyoudoing.bsky.social
History of Science, Astronomy, Cartography, Transport, Software, AI
Translating 17th century Astronomy texts
Author:
-The Perfect Transport: and the science of why you can't have it
-Almagestum Novum: History of Astronomy
Translating 17th century Astronomy texts
Author:
-The Perfect Transport: and the science of why you can't have it
-Almagestum Novum: History of Astronomy
I'm not talking about our context, I'm talking about his context.
The book was a straw man attack.
It was written in the vernacular, so the general public could read it, and misrepresented the dispute happening at the time.
The book was a straw man attack.
It was written in the vernacular, so the general public could read it, and misrepresented the dispute happening at the time.
November 22, 2025 at 11:17 PM
I'm not talking about our context, I'm talking about his context.
The book was a straw man attack.
It was written in the vernacular, so the general public could read it, and misrepresented the dispute happening at the time.
The book was a straw man attack.
It was written in the vernacular, so the general public could read it, and misrepresented the dispute happening at the time.
Actually, that's not true. Publishing took a long time, and he didn't know he would suddenly die of a stroke when he started publishing.
He had circulated his Commentariolus in 1514. Church leaders urged him to publish - if he was worried about punishment, he would have published sooner.
He had circulated his Commentariolus in 1514. Church leaders urged him to publish - if he was worried about punishment, he would have published sooner.
November 22, 2025 at 9:11 PM
Actually, that's not true. Publishing took a long time, and he didn't know he would suddenly die of a stroke when he started publishing.
He had circulated his Commentariolus in 1514. Church leaders urged him to publish - if he was worried about punishment, he would have published sooner.
He had circulated his Commentariolus in 1514. Church leaders urged him to publish - if he was worried about punishment, he would have published sooner.
It was an easy read, but not a good book.
He was supposed to discuss the two leading astronomical models, and neither discussed the scientific consensus model of the time, nor the objectively best model of the time.
He was supposed to discuss the two leading astronomical models, and neither discussed the scientific consensus model of the time, nor the objectively best model of the time.
November 22, 2025 at 9:09 PM
It was an easy read, but not a good book.
He was supposed to discuss the two leading astronomical models, and neither discussed the scientific consensus model of the time, nor the objectively best model of the time.
He was supposed to discuss the two leading astronomical models, and neither discussed the scientific consensus model of the time, nor the objectively best model of the time.
1. Galileo was never at risk of death. The punishment he received was already considered excessive by everyone, even by the Roman Inquisition, who commuted it before even enacting it.
2. Galileo was never exonerated.
2. Galileo was never exonerated.
November 22, 2025 at 9:07 PM
1. Galileo was never at risk of death. The punishment he received was already considered excessive by everyone, even by the Roman Inquisition, who commuted it before even enacting it.
2. Galileo was never exonerated.
2. Galileo was never exonerated.
Is he descended from one of those convicts we sent over?
November 16, 2025 at 12:03 AM
Is he descended from one of those convicts we sent over?
No, definitely scientists.
Have you not read the scientific texts against Galileo? Did you just read one side's accounts when you studied the period?
Graney's work is a good primer - "Mathematical Disquisitions" and "Setting aside all authority", if you don't know where to start.
Have you not read the scientific texts against Galileo? Did you just read one side's accounts when you studied the period?
Graney's work is a good primer - "Mathematical Disquisitions" and "Setting aside all authority", if you don't know where to start.
November 15, 2025 at 8:17 PM
No, definitely scientists.
Have you not read the scientific texts against Galileo? Did you just read one side's accounts when you studied the period?
Graney's work is a good primer - "Mathematical Disquisitions" and "Setting aside all authority", if you don't know where to start.
Have you not read the scientific texts against Galileo? Did you just read one side's accounts when you studied the period?
Graney's work is a good primer - "Mathematical Disquisitions" and "Setting aside all authority", if you don't know where to start.
Err, Galileo was very much arguing with other scientists.
It was his academic rivals - the Pigeon league - who took him to the court of the Roman Inquisition, which tried to resolve the dispute, and made a mess of it.
It was his academic rivals - the Pigeon league - who took him to the court of the Roman Inquisition, which tried to resolve the dispute, and made a mess of it.
November 15, 2025 at 1:32 PM
Err, Galileo was very much arguing with other scientists.
It was his academic rivals - the Pigeon league - who took him to the court of the Roman Inquisition, which tried to resolve the dispute, and made a mess of it.
It was his academic rivals - the Pigeon league - who took him to the court of the Roman Inquisition, which tried to resolve the dispute, and made a mess of it.
That isn't what happened though.
"Science and progress" continued in the Papal States and Tuscany, with the best funded observatories still built there for almost two centuries.
There were however many other scientific societies being built at the time, and there was growing patronage from rulers.
"Science and progress" continued in the Papal States and Tuscany, with the best funded observatories still built there for almost two centuries.
There were however many other scientific societies being built at the time, and there was growing patronage from rulers.
November 15, 2025 at 1:30 PM
That isn't what happened though.
"Science and progress" continued in the Papal States and Tuscany, with the best funded observatories still built there for almost two centuries.
There were however many other scientific societies being built at the time, and there was growing patronage from rulers.
"Science and progress" continued in the Papal States and Tuscany, with the best funded observatories still built there for almost two centuries.
There were however many other scientific societies being built at the time, and there was growing patronage from rulers.
Galileo was threatened with torture at the start of the trial deposition.
This was a formulaic statement made at the start of *every* deposition.
This was a formulaic statement made at the start of *every* deposition.
November 14, 2025 at 1:11 PM
Galileo was threatened with torture at the start of the trial deposition.
This was a formulaic statement made at the start of *every* deposition.
This was a formulaic statement made at the start of *every* deposition.
No, Galileo had no empirical evidence of heliocentrism. All his observations were compatible with the Tychonic model, the scientific consensus of the time.
The 1st empirical evidence of Earth's motion was Bradley aberration, published 1728.
bsky.app/profile/mich...
The 1st empirical evidence of Earth's motion was Bradley aberration, published 1728.
bsky.app/profile/mich...
A 🧵of Galileo's arguments for Heliocentrism,& why he couldn't prove heliocentrism in his time:
1. Tides
Galileo was convinced of Heliocentrism by his tide model. Galileo's Dialogo was in fact a modification and extension of his 1616 Dialogue on the Ebb and Flow of the Tides.
🧵1
🧪🏛️⌛🔭📜
1. Tides
Galileo was convinced of Heliocentrism by his tide model. Galileo's Dialogo was in fact a modification and extension of his 1616 Dialogue on the Ebb and Flow of the Tides.
🧵1
🧪🏛️⌛🔭📜
November 13, 2025 at 10:56 AM
No, Galileo had no empirical evidence of heliocentrism. All his observations were compatible with the Tychonic model, the scientific consensus of the time.
The 1st empirical evidence of Earth's motion was Bradley aberration, published 1728.
bsky.app/profile/mich...
The 1st empirical evidence of Earth's motion was Bradley aberration, published 1728.
bsky.app/profile/mich...
Galileo truly started the great tradition of scientists writing error-ridden pop sci books that fill the general population with awe and wonder.
November 11, 2025 at 8:19 AM
Galileo truly started the great tradition of scientists writing error-ridden pop sci books that fill the general population with awe and wonder.
You were all great sports, this isn't how it usually goes on X!
November 9, 2025 at 12:00 PM
You were all great sports, this isn't how it usually goes on X!
...when as far as they cared, it had been shown that ideas were, in fact, dangerous, as seen by the widespread warfare and destruction that had happened in Europe over the various Christian schisms.
November 8, 2025 at 7:45 PM
...when as far as they cared, it had been shown that ideas were, in fact, dangerous, as seen by the widespread warfare and destruction that had happened in Europe over the various Christian schisms.
Yes, they were driven by the idea that anything printed should be 100% correct... ultimately an impossible task.
The Venetians cared less about this, and were printing everything and anything, completely ignoring any Inquisitors sent over, this was seen highly problematic in an era...
The Venetians cared less about this, and were printing everything and anything, completely ignoring any Inquisitors sent over, this was seen highly problematic in an era...
November 8, 2025 at 7:45 PM
Yes, they were driven by the idea that anything printed should be 100% correct... ultimately an impossible task.
The Venetians cared less about this, and were printing everything and anything, completely ignoring any Inquisitors sent over, this was seen highly problematic in an era...
The Venetians cared less about this, and were printing everything and anything, completely ignoring any Inquisitors sent over, this was seen highly problematic in an era...
... he probably would have gone to jail.
November 8, 2025 at 7:30 PM
... he probably would have gone to jail.
He was charged with "vehement suspicion of heresy" - a lesser charge, usually given to those who gave gifts to or housed heretics.
He was not tortured, although he was threatened with torture at the start of the deposition, a formulaic part of every trial at the time.
If he hadn't recanted...
He was not tortured, although he was threatened with torture at the start of the deposition, a formulaic part of every trial at the time.
If he hadn't recanted...
November 8, 2025 at 7:30 PM
He was charged with "vehement suspicion of heresy" - a lesser charge, usually given to those who gave gifts to or housed heretics.
He was not tortured, although he was threatened with torture at the start of the deposition, a formulaic part of every trial at the time.
If he hadn't recanted...
He was not tortured, although he was threatened with torture at the start of the deposition, a formulaic part of every trial at the time.
If he hadn't recanted...
Nothing to do with offense, more to do with historical accuracy.
Perhaps it is the admission that *should* count, but wasn't what was implied in the post I initially replied to.
Historians still consider the situation kind of unresolved, since 1992 stopped short of an actual apology.
Perhaps it is the admission that *should* count, but wasn't what was implied in the post I initially replied to.
Historians still consider the situation kind of unresolved, since 1992 stopped short of an actual apology.
November 8, 2025 at 7:28 PM
Nothing to do with offense, more to do with historical accuracy.
Perhaps it is the admission that *should* count, but wasn't what was implied in the post I initially replied to.
Historians still consider the situation kind of unresolved, since 1992 stopped short of an actual apology.
Perhaps it is the admission that *should* count, but wasn't what was implied in the post I initially replied to.
Historians still consider the situation kind of unresolved, since 1992 stopped short of an actual apology.
The 1992 speech was only novel in being the first time that a Pope publicly stated that Galileo had been mistreated.
It was, unfortunately, pretty poorly covered by the media, which tried to sensationalise something that was pretty much a non-event that didn't achieve what the Pope set out to do.
It was, unfortunately, pretty poorly covered by the media, which tried to sensationalise something that was pretty much a non-event that didn't achieve what the Pope set out to do.
November 8, 2025 at 6:43 PM
The 1992 speech was only novel in being the first time that a Pope publicly stated that Galileo had been mistreated.
It was, unfortunately, pretty poorly covered by the media, which tried to sensationalise something that was pretty much a non-event that didn't achieve what the Pope set out to do.
It was, unfortunately, pretty poorly covered by the media, which tried to sensationalise something that was pretty much a non-event that didn't achieve what the Pope set out to do.
The Roman Inquisition formally acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758, when they dropped the generic entry from the index.
Some people are catching up with history in 2025, a considerably longer delay.
Some people are catching up with history in 2025, a considerably longer delay.
November 8, 2025 at 6:21 PM
The Roman Inquisition formally acknowledged heliocentrism in 1758, when they dropped the generic entry from the index.
Some people are catching up with history in 2025, a considerably longer delay.
Some people are catching up with history in 2025, a considerably longer delay.
Galileo wasn't threatened with death.
November 8, 2025 at 6:20 PM
Galileo wasn't threatened with death.
The Church had no issues with Sidereus Nuncius.
The issues started with the Letter to Castelli.
The issues started with the Letter to Castelli.
November 7, 2025 at 7:48 PM
The Church had no issues with Sidereus Nuncius.
The issues started with the Letter to Castelli.
The issues started with the Letter to Castelli.
oh, and in the source materials that I work on translating
November 1, 2025 at 11:50 AM
oh, and in the source materials that I work on translating
What I wrote here I read in secular journals and history books.
November 1, 2025 at 11:49 AM
What I wrote here I read in secular journals and history books.
It's rather sad that you like something that is historically illiterate.
Natural science was taught from Greek, Roman, and later Arabic sources, such as: Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy, Discorides, Galen, and later Avicenna, Averroes, Alhazen.
Natural science was taught from Greek, Roman, and later Arabic sources, such as: Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy, Discorides, Galen, and later Avicenna, Averroes, Alhazen.
October 31, 2025 at 11:28 PM
It's rather sad that you like something that is historically illiterate.
Natural science was taught from Greek, Roman, and later Arabic sources, such as: Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy, Discorides, Galen, and later Avicenna, Averroes, Alhazen.
Natural science was taught from Greek, Roman, and later Arabic sources, such as: Aristotle, Plato, Ptolemy, Discorides, Galen, and later Avicenna, Averroes, Alhazen.
And you miss the point entirely.
Any serf could join, or aid a monastery as a lay helper, just as well as any noble, and receive exactly the same quarters and an education.
There were of course later issues with corruption, paid positions, and state interference.
Any serf could join, or aid a monastery as a lay helper, just as well as any noble, and receive exactly the same quarters and an education.
There were of course later issues with corruption, paid positions, and state interference.
October 31, 2025 at 8:52 PM
And you miss the point entirely.
Any serf could join, or aid a monastery as a lay helper, just as well as any noble, and receive exactly the same quarters and an education.
There were of course later issues with corruption, paid positions, and state interference.
Any serf could join, or aid a monastery as a lay helper, just as well as any noble, and receive exactly the same quarters and an education.
There were of course later issues with corruption, paid positions, and state interference.