The Galileo Affair

" ... It is often claimed that in 1616, a "first condemnation" of Galileo Galilei took place by the Holy Inquisition. That is true, without being true. In reality, the Inquisition only issued a "decree". The name Galileo Galilei does not appear at all in this "decree". While no person is condemned as "heretical" or "foolish", two statements are condemned: "1. The sun is the center of the world and therefore motionless" and "2. The earth is not the center of the world and not motionless." Only Copernicus is mentioned. However, Copernicus is not condemned either, his "revolutiones" are only "suspended" 73 years after their publication, until they are "improved." ..."

Complete article: http://www.welt.de/kultur/history/article1564612/Warum-die-Inquisition-im-Fall-Galilei-Recht-hatte.html

"Brandmüller: The (condemnation of Galileo) was well-founded. The formal legal reason was that he obtained permission to publish his "Dialogue" in an unfair manner. As a result, the Roman authorities felt deceived. And then there was the demand from the Holy Office that Galileo should present his theory of heliocentrism as an astronomical, physical hypothesis and not as an exact description of cosmic reality. Yet, the Holy Inquisition at that time had already anticipated the scientific-theoretical standpoint that modern theoretical physics takes today - not Galileo. That was the core of the dispute. It was really a joke: In terms of natural science, the Inquisition was right - and Galileo with his biblical interpretation! ..."

Complete article: http://www.zenit.org/article-17958?l=german

Statement:

The reason for Galileo's condemnation was not his physical discoveries, but rather the fact that he presented his hypothesis as proof, thus going against the scientific guideline for legitimate publication. He violated the 'Imprimatur' code for printing. His claims in the 'Sidereus Nuntius' in 1610 did not have sufficient evidence at that time, although Galileo was right in denying the geocentric model. However, what many do not know is that Galileo had long pretended that Copernicus' discoveries were his own, while the forgotten Copernicus, who had his time 100 years before Galileo, greatly benefited from Ptolemy. It was on the basis of these precise measurements that he was able to correct towards the heliocentric model. Galileo adopted this standpoint. However, Galileo's assertion that the sun is not movable was incorrect.

For the reckoning of time (calendar, determination of holidays), the setting of the center mathematically does not matter, but astronomically it does. This is the merit of Copernicus, who worked less accurately than Ptolemy did in his time. However, all of this (Copernicus) was already known by Archimedes. He created a planetary model at that time, and it was significantly more precise.

Philosopher Paul Feyerabend concludes in his publication 'Against Method: Outline of an Anarchist Theory of Knowledge', 1975 ('Wider den Methodenzwang', deutsch 1976) on the Galileo affair: "The Church at the time of Galileo adhered much more closely to reason than Galileo himself did, and it also took into account the ethical and social consequences of Galileo's teachings. Its judgment against Galileo was rational and just, and its revision can only be justified politically opportunistically."

The church, however, took measures to promote their interpretation of Galileo's scientific beliefs.

What was particularly unusual about the proceedings was that the verdict was ordered to be widely disseminated within scientific communities, Kelly explained. The cardinals emphasized that Galileo had always adhered to orthodox beliefs regarding the cosmos and had never endorsed or affirmed the heresy of heliocentrism. (Jessica Wolf, in: The truth about Galileo and his conflict with the Catholic Church, 2016.) https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/the-truth-about-galileo-and-his-conflict-with-the-catholic-church ©️E.S. 30.09.2023