Timeline for How did Kepler infer three-dimensional positions from Tycho Brahe's data?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Feb 28, 2021 at 8:10 | history | suggested | Rodrigo de Azevedo |
Added tags.
|
|
| Feb 27, 2021 at 23:54 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 28, 2021 at 8:10 | |||||
| Jul 28, 2019 at 16:26 | comment | added | Emilio Pisanty | @userLTK Are you suggesting that Kepler had access to views of this "flat 2 dimensional surface" from above? If you insist on disregarding the inclination of orbits (with which, frankly, I have no problem), Kepler effectively had one-dimensional data to work with. Frankly, it sounds like you're intentionally missing the point, but I won't defend this further - you're not obliged to understand every question you see on this site. | |
| Jul 28, 2019 at 2:42 | comment | added | userLTK | @EmilioPisanty Relative distance is still primarily 2 dimensional as the solar system is mostly along an orbital plane. Kepler's 3 laws work on a flat 2 dimensional surface. Think of a map of the surface of the Earth, longitude and latitude - you can still get varying distances even though the map is 2 dimensional. You can demonstrate an elliptical orbit on a flat sheet of paper. | |
| Jul 27, 2019 at 15:54 | comment | added | Emilio Pisanty | @userLTK From the question: "Tycho Brahe's data on planetary observations, presumably, consisted of the direction in which a planet was observed at a given date and time, but not the distance to the planet". Kepler's model goes beyond that to talk about the relative distances between the planets and the Sun, and from there to the Earth. Which part is unclear? | |
| Jul 27, 2019 at 15:52 | comment | added | userLTK | I'm a little confused by this question, because Kepler's laws are fundamentally two dimensional equations because they operate based on a two body orbital model. Distance doesn't imply 3 dimensions. Kepler did recognize that Mars' orbit was slightly off the ecliptic but he did that based on Copernicus' measurements (if memory serves). His 3 laws are two dimensional mathematics based on an orbital plane. Maybe I'm not understanding what the question is asking. | |
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:40 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://physics.stackexchange.com/ with https://physics.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Jan 18, 2016 at 15:35 | answer | added | user466 | timeline score: 1 | |
| Nov 19, 2015 at 23:10 | comment | added | Danu♦ | @Conifold The question was too old on PSE to be migrated. | |
| Nov 17, 2015 at 22:37 | comment | added | Conifold | Isn't cross-posting discouraged on SE? meta.stackexchange.com/questions/64068/… | |
| Nov 17, 2015 at 17:54 | answer | added | Alexandre Eremenko | timeline score: 3 | |
| Nov 17, 2015 at 10:32 | comment | added | Danu♦ | Closely related question. | |
| Nov 17, 2015 at 10:32 | history | edited | Danu♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Nov 17, 2015 at 10:24 | history | asked | Emilio Pisanty | CC BY-SA 3.0 |