156k views
5 votes
What's is the difference between the way Aristotle and Galileo studied nature?

User Paul Carey
by
5.8k points

2 Answers

5 votes

Galileo Galilei's mind opens to physics, and nature controls laws that can be mathematically formulated and written in Sagiatori in 1623:

"There is a philosophy in this great book, the book of the universe, which is always open to us, but we can not understand the book if we do not know the language in which it was written and we do not try to learn the letters ... One can not understand even one word of nature and the universe, Human in a large dark lobby ".

2 - Aristotle believed that the nature of the "first engine" eternal is the source of the infinite movement, and that it is valid and exist outside the universe.

Aristotle is one of the ancient Greek scientists who worked on the interpretation of nature based on their competence in observation, reasoning and reasoning, starting with what they considered truthful facts and analyzing them carefully, believing that this would lead them to the correct conclusions.

By following this philosophy, they undoubtedly reached a number of sound conclusions, including that the universe was governed by a particular system, but there was a fundamental weakness in their philosophy, and their ability to observe was limited because they relied only on their abstract senses. . Many scientists, including Aristotle, for example, thought that planets and stars revolve around Earth, an idea that was then self-evident, and Charles Freeman, in his book "Closing Western Thought." Earth is the center of the universe. "

User Cliffordwh
by
6.1k points
6 votes

Thus, Aristotle believed that the laws governing the motion of the heavens were a different set of laws than those that governed motion on the earth. As we have seen, Galileo's concept of inertia was quite contrary to Aristotle's ideas of motion: in Galileo's dynamics the arrow (with very small frictional forces) continued to fly through the air because of the law of inertia, while a block of wood on a table stopped sliding once the applied force was removed because of frictional forces that Aristotle had failed to analyze correctly.Thus, Aristotle believed that the laws governing the motion of the heavens were a different set of laws than those that governed motion on the earth. As we have seen, Galileo's concept of inertia was quite contrary to Aristotle's ideas of motion: in Galileo's dynamics the arrow (with very small frictional forces) continued to fly through the air because of the law of inertia, while a block of wood on a table stopped sliding once the applied force was removed because of frictional forces that Aristotle had failed to analyze correctly.Thus, Aristotle believed that the laws governing the motion of the heavens were a different set of laws than those that governed motion on the earth. As we have seen, Galileo's concept of inertia was quite contrary to Aristotle's ideas of motion: in Galileo's dynamics the arrow (with very small frictional forces) continued to fly through the air because of the law of inertia, while a block of wood on a table stopped sliding once the applied force was removed because of frictional forces that Aristotle had failed to analyze correctly.Thus, Aristotle believed that the laws governing the motion of the heavens were a different set of laws than those that governed motion on the earth. As we have seen, Galileo's concept of inertia was quite contrary to Aristotle's ideas of motion: in Galileo's dynamics the arrow (with very small frictional forces) continued to fly through the air because of the law of inertia, while a block of wood on a table stopped sliding once the applied force was removed because of frictional forces that Aristotle had failed to analyze correctly.Thus, Aristotle believed that the laws governing the motion of the heavens were a different set of laws than those that governed motion on the earth. As we have seen, Galileo's concept of inertia was quite contrary to Aristotle's ideas of motion: in Galileo's dynamics the arrow (with very small frictional forces) continued to fly through the air because of the law of inertia, while a block of wood on a table stopped sliding once the applied force was removed because of frictional forces that Aristotle had failed to analyze correctly.Thus, Aristotle believed that the laws governing the motion of the heavens were a different set of laws than those that governed motion on the earth. As we have seen, Galileo's concept of inertia was quite contrary to Aristotle's ideas of motion: in Galileo's dynamics the arrow (with very small frictional forces) continued to fly through the air because of the law of inertia, while a block of wood on a table stopped sliding once the applied force was removed because of frictional forces that Aristotle had failed to analyze correctly.Thus, Aristotle believed that the laws governing the motion of the heavens were a different set of laws than those that governed motion on the earth. As we have seen, Galileo's concept of inertia was quite contrary to Aristotle's ideas of motion: in Galileo's dynamics the arrow (with very small frictional forces) continued to fly through the air because of the law of inertia, while a block of wood on a table stopped sliding once the applied force was removed because of frictional forces that Aristotle had failed to analyze correctly.Thus, Aristotle believed that the laws governing the motion of the heavens were a different set of laws than those that governed motion on the earth. As we have seen, Galileo's concept of inertia was quite contrary to Aristotle's ideas of motion: in Galileo's dynamics the arrow (with very small frictional forces) continued to fly through the air because of the law of inertia, while a block of wood on a table stopped sliding once the applied force was removed because of frictional forces that Aristotle had failed to analyze correctly.

User June
by
5.4k points