Remove this ad

Galileo Returns to the Vatican

by Nancy Atkinson on March 14, 2008

Want to stay on top of all the space news? Follow @universetoday on Twitter

Galileo. Image Credit: Astronomy Picture of the Day website
Four centuries after Galileo Galilei was ordered by the Catholic Church to come to Rome and stand trial on suspicion of heresy, a statue of the Italian astronomer will be erected at the Vatican. 2009 is the International Year of Astronomy, which celebrates 400 years since Galileo first used a telescope to study the heavens, and the Vatican plans to join in commemorating the anniversary. Galileo was condemned to house arrest by the Catholic Church in 1633 because his belief that the sun was at the center of the solar system, and not the Earth, contradicted the bible.

The statue was commissioned by the Pontifical Academy of Sciences and was paid for with private donations. The president of the Academy, Nicola Cabibbo, said the statue shows Galileo standing and gesturing as if he were teaching. Cabibbo, a particle scientist, said honoring Galileo in this way is important because the Academy considers Galileo to be one of the oldest members of their group. Galileo was a member of the National Academy of Lincei, from which the Pontifical Academy began.

At his trial, Galileo argued that his heliocentric beliefs and writings did not oppose the church’s teachings, and stated that the bible was not meant to provide scientific explanations. He once wrote that scripture does not reveal what is in the heavens, but rather how to get to heaven.

Remove this ad

In 1992, Pope John Paul II acknowledged that that the church made a mistake when it condemned Galileo for maintaining that the Earth revolved around the sun. At that time the church officially conceded that the Earth was not stationary. The pope also said that theologians should keep informed on scientific advances to determine if there would be cause for “introducing changes in their teaching.”

The exact location for the statue has not yet been determined, but Cabibbo was confident that the details would be worked out in time for the start of the anniversary celebrations in early 2009.

Original News Source: The Catholic Times

Remove this ad

About

Nancy Atkinson is Universe Today's Senior Editor. She also is the host of the NASA Lunar Science Institute podcast and works with the Astronomy Cast and 365 Days of Astronomy podcasts. Nancy is also a NASA/JPL Solar System Ambassador.

← Older Comments
  • http://catholicsensibility.wordpress.com Todd

    “I find it ironic that people who don’t attend the Catholic Church will speak with authority on it’s teachings …”

    Indeed.

    The Galileo statue is an appropriate honor. Good for the Pontifical Academy of the Sciences.

  • alphonso richardson

    I can’t say I can match the intellectual highs (or lows) of these comments, all I can say is ‘It’s about bloody time!!’

  • redmond ohanlon

    I am a practicing Catholic. Indeed in a moment i am off to Tridentine Mass and lenten retreat. All the more reason why I do not want my church to sink ant further into apostasy.

  • Bob

    Relativity has nothing to do with morals or anti-morals or some of the misinterpretations represented above. Understanding relativity begins with understanding what constitutes motion; what constitutes “rest”; what constitutes changes in motion; what constitutes shared motions and how experiments have changed our views of motion over the years.

    Galileo laid some of the groundwork with his ball and trough experiments. A ball that goes uphill must slow down. A ball that goes downhill must speed up and, if one side of the trough is straightened out and the ball is let go from the highest part of the trough it will continue on forever in a straight line in the absence of friction or any head wind or collisions. He then concluded there is an equivalence principle between “rest” and uniform motion. The pendulum experiment in a previous post above has nothing to do with relativity. Galileon relativity simply states that the laws of motion are the same in all uniform motions. Einstein’s special relativity states that the laws of physics (which includes the laws of electromagnetism which limit the speed of light) are the same in all uniform motions (also referred to as inertial reference frames). General Relativity states that the laws of physics are the same in all accelerating reference frames.

    Go to the following for the math introduction:
    http://www.black-holes.org/numrel1.html

    As for another apology to Galileo from the church? It is after the fact. Was an apology to Giardano Bruno set forth? Would Bruno care? Nobody explores science because they want a statue of oneself erected anywhere.

    Science is based upon seeking falsification to realize ideas that are less false. Science is dynamic. It does not seek a truth. Religion does. Truths are dead ends to its upholders who do not wish that so-called truths can be questioned.

  • http://saqfeboland.blogfa.com Amir Mohammad Gamini

    it is really intresting for me that in muslim world nobody attacked to heliocentric model. It is true that all of the muslim sientists in islamic golden period believed in geocentric but not because of religious reasons!
    even you see in a book al-Biruni says it is possible to belive in heliocentric model but it seem there is no good reasons.
    nobody in islamic period condemned because of scientific ideas against Quran.
    even you see a philosopher and chemist -Al-Razi- just bekieved in God and no in the Prophet, but he didn’t been “arrested” !!
    I am a Muslim but believe in any new discovery and theory in science, even Darwinism! We have some scriptures from the Propher and his Sons which state about people before the Adem and Eve!! Adem’s sons married with them!! and there is no problem.
    But I am sorry that all of the world is against us! because there are a tissue of big lies
    about Islam…

  • Emil

    Bob,
    Good writing and I totally agree with what you said. My explanation must be unsatisfactory if people of your view can misinterpret what I was trying to say through a number of my posts above.

    I was not brining pendulum up to confuse with relativity, but to refute an opinion that since Einstein’s concepts, science itself cannot determine the issue and thus allows to favor “Earth in the center of Universe” system supported by Torah/Bible. Also, it might be hard to imagine, but there are people who do not except that Earth is rotating (24 hr period.) That is why my 3/15 post mentioned Foucault and Coriolis. For the benefit of the readers, Foucault’s experiment was different from what Galileo observed with pendulum period (and allowed to make pendulum clocks.) I hoped that in the totality of my posts I made the point that conservation of momentum by pendulum and unequal banks of rivers tells us that Earth is not stationary, regardless what people wish to believe in. With science (as well as a religion) it is inconsistent to pick and chose as with dinner a la carte. What I mean is that other laws cannot be ignored to one’s favor when one considers implications of Einstein work.

  • Emil

    Redmond O,
    I was not trying to bring up Galileo’s achievements in physics or otherwise. People who think he was not a great man in science go against “According to Stephen Hawking, Galileo probably bears more of the responsibility for the birth of modern science than anybody else, and Albert Einstein called him the father of modern science.” (Wikipedia) I hope his achievements more important to people than his personal family issues. I am also glad that he, unlike Bruno, saved his life and did more science work for the benefit of us all.

    I shall never try to prove a point to a person who tells me he believes in his position. Facts, logic, inference, and scientific achievements cannot overcome a belief system by the definition. Thus, I’ll not try to prove anything where I think your positions contradicts what I would consider is no longer questionable in science. (I am already having an exchange with a faithful person that flares up for about a dozen years, and our list of issues is simpler than claims you made against science in a paragraph.) Just few comments, please, above merely mentioning a general disagreement.

  • Emil

    Over 20 years ago, I was staying in front of Michelson-Morley experiment display at the place it was first conducted, now Case Western Reserve University. It did not occur to me it proved Earth is stationary and it is not what it did for science at all. Would it succeed instead of failing, perhaps Einstein would not be known for relativity and E=mc^2. However, he would be in human history of science, for as long as it will be maintained, for two other 1905 papers (Brownian motion and photoelectric effect.) One ended up the debate on existence of atoms, another started quantum mechanics as a physics’ discipline. I got it you do not take the QM seriously. Ironically, if not for it tremendous achievements, I would not be able to get your disaproval via email, as transistor, integrated circuits, and computer would not be invented. I recall designing tunnel diode oscillators over 30 years ago. Today they are cheap, and it is a component that works by utilizing quantum mechanical effects. Leo Esaki in 1973 received the Nobel Prize in Physics for discovering the electron tunneling effect used in these diodes.

    On a different note, I enjoyed reading your post and am sure we would have wonderful intellectual discussions, if met. Keep helping people who are in need; that is an honorable life to have.

  • redmond ohanlon

    Adam,
    Galileo did not found the Lincean Academy. He was one of its first members yes. The linceans helped Galileo in every way in his defiance of the church’s position. In other words it was in effect ANTI-CATHOLIC run by a group whose reputations were exposed by one of the founding member’s father.
    What you must know is that everything you know or have learned about this academy and the Galileo case was written to comply with the great betrayal, Pope Benedict XIV’s and Pope Pius VII’s U-turn on the geocentric interpretation of the Bible.
    Your second myth is that Galileo was correct with regard to heliocentricism. The fact is that there is no human way to determine whether the earth moves relative to the sun nor whether the sun moves relative to the earth. Galileo knew this as he admitted in his Dialogue. Now if there is no way of proving this, only a fool would waste his time trying and an even bigger fool thinking he has proved one system or the other. Geocentricism is revealed in the Bible, the Church confirmed this in 1616. Geocentricism is therefore a faith confirmed reality.
    Heliocentricism is an ANTI-faith preference. Theories as to how it might work were thought up by the Royal Society of London and given to Newton who worked out a maths that suited their purpose. He made everything fit but couldn’t explain or show how his universal gravitational theories actually work.
    Next they used every ‘consequent’ as a PROOF for heliocentricism when in fact each consequent had a geocentric explanation. Foucault and Coriolis are two of these so-called proofs. Foucault in particular is the greatest hoax in history. Nearly every pendulum is RIGGED to do what it is supposed to do naturally. The few that do work only turn a little, caused of course by the same effect as the Coriolis. This effect could be a turning earth or a turning universe around an immobile earth. Now these are SCIENTIFIC realities. Heliocentricists then are the ones that disregard SCIENTIFIC realities.
    Trouble is, the heliocentric hoax is so good that the mind of a heliocentricist is closed to the very possibility that it might not be a proven science. It is like a drug.
    Finally Quantum. My brother achieved his PhD in quantum Maths. He was hired as a professor in two universities, one in Canada, one in Ireland. He gave it up after two years as “The most useless career ever invented by man’. Watch any TV programme on quantum and they ALWAYS explain that quantum is not REALITY.
    Now watch as the Copernicans completely ignore the facts and try to contradict the facts, unless anyone thinks he can prove to me that Galileo went ONE INCH to prove heliocentrism.

  • Emil

    Redmond Ohan,

    Again, I respect your faith and dedication. I suspect we would share the love of Irish music and many art and science achievements of men inspired by love to God. As humans, we would share a great deal. However, in my research I learned to separate my feelings from conclusions I can draw based of facts and inference.

    Your faith is infallible, but your statements on physics, frankly, would be refutable by what I knew when I was back in high school. Fortunately, I do not compel to respond in details. I’m sure your brother can explain to you conservation of energy and momentum, gyroscope, the meaning behind photoelectric effect and Plank’s discovery that energy is not “analog”, and much more. In return, with your conviction, you can master to enlighten him on conspiracy (behind of quantum theory) and ACTUAL working of a tunneling diode.

    Personally, I would be interested to learn how “a turning universe around an immobile earth” etches opposite river banks in Northern and Southern hemispheres. Please do not hesitate to give a detailed explanation or a serious reference on the subject (should include explanations of geostrophic wind, why cyclones cannot form on the equator, why a mass flow meter based on Coriolis effect works, and why Germans adjusted the Paris gun for the Coriolis effect in WWI to correct the trajectory calculations.)

    Thanks.

  • redmond ohanlon

    Hi Emil,

    It seems we have two different interpretations of the word ‘SCIENCE and PHYSICS’. For me, I accept empirical science and physics as conducted on earth. I have learned however, that heliocentricism is built upon theoretical invention, from Galileo’s idea of a motion independent of divine concursis, through Isaac Newton’s ‘laws’ and on to the physical inventions conjured up by the Earthmovers to worm their way out of the empirical results of the Airy and Mitchelson & Morley experiments, that is relativity theories. I also know that the atom is so small that they cannot be seen, let alone what they consist of. Experiments devised to test theories if successful do not prove theories, as something else could be the cause of these same results. Let me give one of the great examples. A total eclipse of the sun produces dark streets, yes? Does this mean that dark streets prove there is an eclipse of the Sun? I therefore see no purpose in debating the pros and cons of these theories as though they were facts that could prove something. Now it is not I who first stated that the universe rotating around the earth could produce the Coriolis effect and all other effects now used by the heliocentricists as ‘proof’ for their belief system. It was Einstein himself and a host of other ‘relativists’. I can get you chapter and verse but I refuse to do so for the following reason.

    Geocentricism is the only useful model for man. All our calculations, from predicting eclipses to space flight are conducted GEOCENTRICALLY. The universe is viewed geocentrically by every astronomer that ever lived. Heliocentricism is USELESS for science but necessary for propaganda. It is a religion first and foremost going back to the first pagan Mysteries. It was it that SPAWNED THEORETICAL SCIENCE under the pretence it was empirical science. geocentricism does not need theories to prove its reality. It is, and every man that lives will experience nothing else. The same sky that the first men saw is what we see, minus a few stars that have exploded out of existence. Cosmology exists in book and theories, but have no real use or purpose except to take man further away from God Who is its Creator and Sustainer. Cosmology is atheistic, with a few crumbs put God’s way now and again by theists.

    The suspected heretic Galileo was the first to try your ploy Emil, PLACE THE ONUS ON THE GEOCENTRICISTS TO PROVE GEOCENTRISM. The Church of 1616 did not fall for his tactics, tried again by the Papal Commission of 1981-92. The cosmos is geocentric to man. It is therefore up to the heliocentricists to PROVE what we see is not what is the reality.

    You see Emil this debate is really about concepts, reason and religion. I sincerely hope you and others will take time to see my position. As such you must see how frustrated I get when I see the great BETRAYERS – the Churchmen who now profess belief in what their predecessors defined and declared to be FORMAL HERESY – sanction a statue of Galileo to be erected in the Vatican while the greatest astronomer of all time Domenico Cassini is ignored by all. Perhaps it is because he too was a geocentricism, faithful to the Scriptures, the Church’s definition and to the doctrine of geocentricism composed by the Fathers of the Church and completed by St Thomas Aquinas.

    Our Lady at La Salette forecast that ROME WOULD BECOME THE SEAT OF THE ANTICHRIST. Now they will have TWO such symbols, the phallic obelisk in St Peter’s ellipse and now the perjurer Galileo.

    For you and 99.999% of the human race,

  • Emil

    Hello Redmond Ohanlon,

    Thanks for taking time and so eloquently presenting your view here. I for one, take time to understand. I also hear your frustration, as within your system, you your position is sound.

    I agree that we perceive world in a conceptually different way, and agree with your view of limitation of science to prove its findings in an infallible way. As you know well, I presume, scientists view that limitation as its advantage.

    As it is just two of us left on this thread, bit of personal trivia: As a teen, I once dodged a bullet from a gun fired at my head from about two meters away. I was in a plane that had emergency landing after its single engine quitted. I felt asleep behind a wheel in a rainy night on autobahn, going about 130 mph. (BTW, when I woke up going straight still, I said, “Thanks God for saving my life.”) I also once smashed a vertebra and broke my hip in three places in an accident. My whole body was black/dark blue, and internal bleeding was serious. Unconscious for 45 minutes, I saw my body from above. (Yet I cannot ignore that I broke headrest off, of the seat in the car, with the back of my head, and that where visual info is processed. So, a little hematoma might shift the perception.) Again, a fraction of a second difference, and I could be completely smashed. I went on, and my pursuits were rewarded in a way that I was a bit instrumental to improve human condition. Millions of people are having my invention implanted in their bodies to help their hearts so they can be live lives that are more active.

    Some say, it was planned that way so I would do good later. Not me. I am just another follower of the scientific method, and am trying to live my life as a decent man the best I can. We have a natural tendency to see patterns; that is a well-researched feature of our brain.

    Personally, I take scientific conclusions seriously, regardless is it from ice cores, cell’s DNA, space probes, or particle accelerators. It was no use for radioactivity and X-ray discoveries at first, but then medicine benefited from both. Helping needed is (not uniquely) but a Christian concept as well. So, I’m sure a religious man like you appreciates a reason behind humans having inquisitive brains. A human has a brain that needs to explore, and I disagree that cosmology “but have no real use or purpose except to take man further away from God Who is its Creator and Sustainer.” One day it might become fruitful too. As was said, “God works in mysterious ways.”

    Sorry if my email is not specific enough for you – I cannot offer much on this level. As you said, “You see Emil this debate is really about concepts”. You are obviously a smart man, and I truly enjoyed the discussion.

    Best wishes,
    Emil

  • redmond ohanlon

    And thank you Emil, it has been a pleasure. I will take my leave of this site now and never return to such a forum. Before i go i will tell you a little secret not yet published.

    i am fortunate to have as a friend a man of great intellect. Among his studies he has investigated the work of Domenico Cassini, God’s astronomer as I call him. did you know that Cassini falsified the ellipse of Kepler and produced the true curve of orbits. This of course in turn falsifies the theories of Newton as they are based on the maths of ellipses. Now further investigation of Cassini’s discovery (Cassinian ovals) open up a science untouched by man. this is where objective science should have been investigating for the last 300 years. All science has gone down the heretical path of darkness whereas true science should have been investigating ALL POSSIBILITIES.

    Now here is our secret, not yet published. We have established a direct link between the orbits of the sun and planets to electromagnetic effects.

    I go now to be with our Christ in His passion and death on the Cross. Slan leat Emil.

  • Emil

    Dear Redmond Ohanlon,

    Just in case you return one more time – big thanks. I’ll have to (slowly) learn about the challenge of your previous post. I started to post only recently and too have to tune it down – I am guilty – as I have to use all my time on the (medical device) project that I set to be my goal.

    What said in confidence, stays in confidence. I am looking forward to the news; science will be excited to have a revolution with such publication.

    I am truly wish you the very best,

    Emil

  • Anne Danielson

    Regarding heliocentric vs.geocentric- Science “appears” to be changing as we discover more about the Truth of the conditions of the God created Universe. The Earth’s position is indeed relative. The Earth, simply because it has the ability to sustain Life, has the obvious PREFFERED position in the Universe, which is what God intended.

    Regarding Evolution- This theory is still in the process of evolving and changing as we discover more about the Truths of the God created universe. ” All THINGS are passing, only GOD remains. Time, is relative. Time is evolving. Only God, who is separate from both Time and Space remains.

    Regarding relative creation- Everything that exists, exists in relationship to God. The purpose of everything is what God intended. We are all called to Love one another in relationship and Communion with Him, God, The Blessed Trinity. These are the Truths of the Catholic Church as revealed by the Word Made Flesh.

  • http://www.sbstars.com James B.

    I have read through all this mail here and not one has come up with any suggestions or ideas of how to celebrate IYA 2009.

    Why can’t we just leave religion out of all this for once huh? Let’s concentrate on how to expose the universe more to the public rather than sit here grandstanding on who did what and said what.

    What has happened is history. Let’s just move on and come up with ideas of what YOU would like to see happen around the world during the IYA.

    If you were an owner of a public observatory what do you think would be a good PR move without loosing money? This IYA 2009 is a one-off situation. Like a bright (not Halley’s) comet: It only comes around once.

    One suggestion is to put pressure on govts. to perhaps have a night of reducing Light Pollution. Like Earth Watch when govts.asked everyone to turn off lights to save the planet from carbon and greenhouse emissions.

    There are thousands of amateur astronomy clubs on this planet and I am sure they too, will be wanting to do their bit. What are YOU going to do?

    So let’s band together and come up with ideas and suggestions to make 2009 a year of understanding and appreciating a star-studded night sky. To stand under a this blanket of starlight is an experience one never forgets which akin to sipping the best wine or the best coffee ever made.

    Astronomy is the only science that does not recognise age, creed or colour. So why try to change it? Enjoy what you have around you because you can not take it away, only the memories of what you saw and experienced..

  • James B.

    My last posting here was sent to wrong department. Sorry about that. Perhaps Fraser Cain can swap this into the IYA blog?

  • Bott

    Redmond O’Hanlon, read a book or two have you? Idiot.

  • Joël COL

    Condamnation of Galileo.

    In 1633, Galileo was condemned by the Church for biblical and scientific reasons. Subsequently, science gradually proved that Galileo’s theory was correct.
     
    I reconsidered the ultimate phase of the trial of the astronomer: the contradiction of his new thesis with regard to the biblical verses sustained by the Church.
     
    In my French book “Entre Galilée et l’Église : la Bible” (Between Galileo and the Church, the Bible…) I analyse the conflicting verses. And I demonstrate, through a comprehensive semantic study, that in the Hebrew and Greek Texts, the sun does not turn around the Earth, contrary to what the versions assert. I conclude that if the translations of the Bible had been faithful to the original Texts, Galileo would not have been condemned for “having held and believed a doctrine which is false and contrary to the divine and Holy Scripture.”
     
    As a result of his study, I clarify the many debates held through the centuries and endeavour to align the translations of the Bible with their original Texts and to officially rehabilitate Galileo.

    Joël Col

← Older Comments

Previous post:

Next post: