LSU Researcher Solves Ancient Astronomy Mystery (Farnese Atlas)

:') The more or less spherical nature of the Earth has been known since, well, a long time ago. There's a kinda weird myth that Columbus, alone among everyone in Europe, figured out that the world wasn't flat, and that one wouldn't sail off the edge. Apparently that tidbit was made up a couple of hundred years ago and spoon fed to kids ever since. :'D

Herodotus may have been an ancient exception. He states flatly that the Erythrean Sea (the Red Sea, really, including the gulfs of Aqaba and Suez; plus the Persian Gulf; basically, the Indian Ocean) is part of the same worldwide body that includes the Atlantic. Good so far. But then he tells about the then-contemporary Phoenician circumnavigation of Africa, and that the Sun was (to the sailors) to the north, a detail H faithfully reports while expressing disbelief.

He also gives a howler of an explanation for the "out of season" flooding of the Nile, after giving the three that he'd heard, the third of which was the correct one. That explanation has the Sun being blown around by the winds, and states that the correct explanation is the least likely of all, because everyone knows it gets hotter the farther south one goes, so how could snow accumulate in the first place? Herodotus, despite his often detailed reporting, isn't considered a classical-era scientist. ;')

I was about to ask the same question.

As I understand it Ptolomy believed the earth was flat. It was his view of the world 1400 years later that informed Portuguse opinion against Columbus about the wisdom of sailing west.

I have heard that the greeks after 500-600 BC or so concluded that the earth was round. Their ships sailed over the horizon. And their scientists took measurements of the distance to the moon. However, its been a while since I've seen the writings and it would seem odd that Ptolomy could simply throw out 500 years of work.

So I'd love to hear some clarification on this question too--if you guys run across it.

I know it is name dropping, but I knew Brad quite a few years ago when he worked on the HEASRC team on the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in MD. He once told me that as far as Gamma Ray Bursters were concerned, for every scientist, there were at least two theories.

He is a lead, follow or get out my way type of guy. At that time, he had a hobby of trying to prove that, for all intents and purposes, Admiral Byrd had reached the North Pole (many of his friends disagreed).

Both of your references sound extraordinarily interesting.

It is always amazing to me the attitudes that seem to prevail. One of my heros is Wegener who, sadly, died cold and alone on an expedition to Greenland.

Despite the antagonism to his theory early on, these days they don't even want to credit him, replacing his description of "continental drift" with the name "plate tectonics".

I understand how somebody who has spent years learning something is hesitant to challenge it, but it seems to me that the people who are supposed to have the most open minds, the most imaginative views, are in fact the most narrow minded and bigoted about new ideas.

There is little doubt that when a conclusive, definitive, and comprehensive Cosmological/quantum theory emerges, that phd's will be jumping out of highrises like bankers in the great depression.

And there is also little doubt that the theory will not come from the standard ranks, but from an outsider.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.