Exam 3: The Science of Astronomy
When we see Venus in its full phase, what phase would Earth be in as seen by a hypothetical Venetian?
A
Observational Tests: Observations are the ultimate test of physical models and their predictions. Both Tycho Brahe and Galileo Galilei made decisive observations that helped distinguish between the geocentric and heliocentric models for the solar system. Compare and contrast the types of observations that Tycho and Galileo gathered. Which do you think was more persuasive to astronomers at the time?
How about to educated members of the public?
Tycho Brahe and Galileo Galilei both made significant observations that contributed to the understanding of the solar system and the debate between the geocentric and heliocentric models.
Tycho Brahe, a Danish astronomer, made precise and detailed observations of the positions of the planets and stars. He built large instruments and made extensive measurements of the positions of celestial bodies, which allowed him to create accurate and detailed star charts. His observations were crucial in providing evidence against the geocentric model and in support of the heliocentric model proposed by Copernicus.
On the other hand, Galileo Galilei, an Italian astronomer, made groundbreaking observations using a telescope. He observed the phases of Venus, the moons of Jupiter, and the mountains and craters on the Moon, all of which provided strong evidence for the heliocentric model. Galileo's observations were more revolutionary and directly challenged the traditional geocentric view of the solar system.
In terms of persuasiveness, Galileo's observations were likely more convincing to astronomers at the time due to the revolutionary nature of his discoveries and the direct evidence they provided for the heliocentric model. His observations were also more accessible to the educated public, as they could be demonstrated through the use of a telescope. Tycho's observations, while precise and detailed, may have been more technical and less accessible to the general public.
Overall, both Tycho Brahe and Galileo Galilei made crucial observations that helped to distinguish between the geocentric and heliocentric models for the solar system. While Galileo's observations may have been more persuasive to astronomers and the educated public at the time, both astronomers made significant contributions to the advancement of our understanding of the solar system.
Suppose a comet orbits the Sun on a highly eccentric orbit with an average (semimajor axis) distance of 1 AU. How long does it take to complete each orbit, and how do we know?
A
Which of the following is not consistent with the major hallmarks of science?
At the Sun Dagger in New Mexico, a dagger-shaped beam of sunlight pierces a spiral
You want to test how the mass of a ball affects its rate of fall. Which of the following ball drop trials (matched mass and drop heights) would best test this question?
Which of the following statements are not falsifiable? Being falsifiable means that, in principle, it can be shown to be false by observations or experiments.
Which of the following best describes a set of conditions under which archaeoastronomers would conclude that an ancient structure was used for astronomical purposes?
Which pair of ball-drop experiments will best test whether mass affects the acceleration of gravity? Exp 1. Mass 0.5 kilograms, height 20 meters
Exp 2. Mass 5.0 kilograms, height 20 meters
Exp 3. Mass 0.5 kilograms, height 30 meters
From Kepler's third law, an asteroid with an orbital period of 8 years lies at an average distance from the Sun equal to
The Nature of Astronomical Models: Consider the Aztec structure Templo Mayor described in the text. In what sense can such structures be considered a model of our solar system? How does such a model differ from the models that astronomers use today? Given your answers, to what extent do you think the builders of such ancient structures engaged in a scientific process?
What practical value did astronomy offer to ancient civilizations?
Rival Theories: The idea that Newtonian gravitation might be incorrect was only taken seriously by the scientific community when a powerful rival theory, Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, became available in the early part of the 20th century. Consider the role of rival theories with regard to the pseudoscience of astrology. Astrology purports to "explain" human behavior by celestial influences, such as the position of the Sun and stars in the sky. Consider the social science of psychology. Is it more or less successful in explaining human behavior? Give specific examples if you can. Does your answer play any role in regarding astrology as a pseudoscience?
Which of the following statements about scientific models is true?
Filters
- Essay(0)
- Multiple Choice(0)
- Short Answer(0)
- True False(0)
- Matching(0)