Events
| « | October 2009 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
User Login
Josh Olson
On page 160 of the Copernican Revolution, Kuhn states, "Copernicus' argument permits an orbital motion of the earth in a vastly expanded universe but the point is academic unless the orbital motion can be shown to be compatible with the observed motions of the sun and other planets." While Kuhn's argument is founded well within logical reason pertaining to the vastness of our universe, it somewhat contradicts itself through it's emphasis on the small part of the solar system we see. Is his reasoning justified in this big picture, little picture assumption?
