Giordan Bruno is still today a controversial philosopher. In this book he exposes his philosophical/cosmological ideas and, in doing so, he uses the new Copernican theory as the basis for a new, daring vision of the universe.
Anybody who would like to familiarize him/herself with the work of Bruno, or is interested in the development of Western ideas will find this book extremely challenging. However I would like to say a few words on the interpretation that the translators give of Bruno's ideas. The translators appear to follow completely an interpretation of Bruno based on the theory of the english scolar Frances Yates. According to this theory Bruno was an exponent of the (then popular) Hermetic movement.
It is imperative to underscore that Yates theory is not universally accepted. While it is known that Hermetic influences can be traced in Bruno, to reduce his whole cosmology and his understanding of Copernican theory to a "hieroglyphic" is misleading if not plainly wrong.
Bruno was not a scientist, but he was the first to intuitively realize the revolutionary consequences of Copernican theory (not only for science) and to bring that theory to its logical conclusions: an infinite universe with infinite earth-like worlds. This vision can not be reconciled with the world of the hermetic "Magus". The whole purpose of the hermetic Magus was to ascend the material world to the world of the perfect spheres. In Bruno's universe there is nothing to ascend to. The universe is composed of a thin air where an infinity of worlds and stars are suspended and move following universal (animistic) principles. The other worlds are corruptible as much as the earth and may be inhabited by earth-like people. The very base of the hermetic doctrine is missing. I would therefore encourage the interested reader not to stop the investigation of Bruno's ideas to the hermetic interpretation, but to also read different points of view (for example Yates interpretation of Bruno's use of images has recently been challenged with very solid arguments by the finding of italian scholars). In particular I found the book of Hillary Gatti "Giordano Bruno and the renaissance science" extremely interesting and complete.

Giordano Bruno stands at the cusp between the Renaissance and the modern world. His unique attempts to extract philosophical and theological meaning from Copernicus's forward-looking work provide us with striking insights into the Weltanschauung of his troubled times. Gosselin and Lerner have brilliantly translated Bruno's elegant but involuted Renaissance Italian into clear modern English that nevertheless preserves the spirit of the original. Their thoughtful notes bring comprehensibility to previously misunderstood passages, and the linkage they establish between Bruno's travails and Galileo's later troubles is highly convincing. A must-read for the scientist as well as the philosopher

I would hate to discourage anyone from reading this book. I loved this book, but it is challenging. An undergraduate degree in a technical field and a fair amateur's knowledge of spherical astronomy is probably a minimum requirement for fully appreciating this book. This is not to say that Professor Gingerich is obscure, rather he writes with remarkable clarity but he aims at his peers, who are mostly Oxford dons. I would recommend borrowing it from your local library before investing in it.

I am sure there are thousands of high school freshman who will digest this book without any problem, I wasn't one of them and I never met any such.

This book is essential for anybody who wants to understand what Ptolemy, Copernicus and Kepler really did. It's a bit more technical than "The Great Copernicus Chase", but if you're serious, you'll appreciate it.

And if you're really serious, you'll get a copy of the paper by James Evans in Am. J. Phys 56 (Nov, 1988) 1009-1024. It answered tons of technical questions for me. Just do it, you'll thank me (and Jim Evans!).

Though some of his ideas or "philosophys" are extreemly out of date, it is a marvel to read the book that first experessed the "crazy" ideas that are now common knowledge for a 3rd Grader. I feel that anyone intent on studying philosophy, astronomy, mathamatics, or is just very intrested in the greatest works of all time should deffinitly read this book. Although sometimes hard to understand (Nicolaus is not the greatest writer) because of it's crypticness, it is a "must read."

The only brief account, using understandable modern terminology, of what Ptolemy and Copernicus really did. Epicycles are just data anaylsis (Fourier series), they don't imply any underlying theory of mechanics (Mainzer got this wrong!). Copernicus did not prove that the earth moves, he made the equivalent of a coordinate transformation and showed that an earth-centered system and a sun-centered system describe the data with about the same number of epicycles. For the reader who wants to understand the history of ideas of motion, this is the only book aside from Barbour's far more exhaustive treatment.

Never before did I know a man could explain the heliocentric universe as well in this book. Of Course, Copernicus explained it centuries before my birth. But, it seems so foolish to believe the geocentric view, and I'm Catholic. Read "Dialogues" by Galileo to get the full picture of what these two men said, it it truly fascinating.

This book is an excellent and entertaining book for a scientific reader and/or for a general reader who doesn't mind being challenged a bit by logical arguments. Don't let this discourage you, though, since the logical arguments are not too difficult and really need to be discussed for completeness sake. The historical background adds to the book in a way comparable to Carl Sagan's 'COSMOS' series or to 'The Mechanical Universe' series. This book should be required reading for all enlightened westerners. It's THAT good.

I just want to focus on one aspect of this book. The first chapter and the appendix forms a very nice introduction to basic astronomy. If you want to read a book like "The Sun in the Church, Cathedrals as Solar Observatories" by Heilbron, but get shell shocked by the astronomy, then Kuhn's book is a good place to start. It's not easy reading, but Kuhn has a lot of very good pictures.

Unlike 'the Structure of Scientific Revolutions', this book is well-written and informative, if you want to know about the development of ancient astronomy. Belongs with serious, entertaining and informative books on the history of science like those by Hoyle (who explains what Copernicus really did) and Barbour (who pointed me to Hoyle in the first place).

This is a not so easy understandable popular scientific work about the theory of relativity.
It is a little bit out of date, but it should be read for his examples.

4 dimensions
"Three numbers are needed to determine a point in space. Suppose a lamp hangs in the room. How can we determine its place? We measure its distance from the floor, from the back-wall and from the side-wall; these three figures determine its position in space. ... If we want to determine not a point in space but an event, we require another figure, namely, the statement of time. Suppose we switch on the light for a second and produce a flash of light; this is an event. It is completely determined if we know the three numbers defining the position of the lamp and, in addition, the fourth number defining the time of the light flash. Insofar as there are four figures, space and time together are called a four-dimensional manifoldness. This is the whole secret."

The author stresses also the importance of Riemann and the influence of Michelson on Einstein.
Bur, as an introduction I prefer Bertrand Russell's 'ABC of Relativity'.

I was very much impressed by this little book. From it I first learned about Mach's Principle, and how it followed right from the concept that motion is relative. The analysis of Newton's pail experiment is astonishing. It is just a combination of powerful ideas, with no equations. Nowadays, when I happen to teach General Relativity, I begin with this analysis by Reichenbach, also because it is one of its conclusions that Newton's gravity theory is inconsistent with motion being relative. At least you have to accept that a moving mass attracts differently than one at rest. This is already extra-Newtonian. Reichenbach, a member of the famous Vienna Circle was a very sharp-minded fellow, and a very clear one too. This book is a must.

I find it amazing that a writer with so little understanding or respect (let alone appreciation) for science and religion should choose Nicolas Copernicus as a suitable subject for a novel. We are only given the briefest glimpse of Copernicus's scientific endeavours, and even less of his faith. Excuse me, but without these crucial elements, one cannot pretend to say anything at all about this man's life.

My mistake! The author has no intention of actually _saying anything_. Rather, Banville wants to use a pathetic caricature of Nicolas Copernicus as a foil for his own semi-coherent philosophical agenda. By dismissing the search for the "thing in itself" (correctly identified by the author as one of the motivations of modern science), Banville has no pressing need to do justice to the "things" that characterize good historical literature. History? Who needs it? It is what I say about it that matters. Human nature? Just an illusion! I, the omnipotent author, can recreate man in my own image.

Because he can, that is precisely what John Banville does. And it isn't pretty. By using the loathesome Andreas as his true voice, John Banville gives the game away: "Yes! Yes! I will be revenged!" The reader is only left to guess for what pathetic grudges Andreas (and Banville) requires his revenge. If only he had not taken that revenge out on the readers of his pompous creation.

Perhaps, the most salient quality of Mr. Baneville's novel is the medieval context in which it placed. This is a world where syphilis is a terminal and disfiguring disease, where bandits and brigands roam the countryside raping and looting at will. It is a world still lost in the dark caves of superstition and ignorance humanity retreats into when the lights of science and reason have been lost. Baneville's focus and adroit recreation of the perilous setting of late medieval Europe highlights the ultimate importance of Copernicus's astronomical theories and why they were so much more than some abstract academic exercise.

This is the second work by Mr. John Banville I have read. The first was said by critics to be "the finest" introduction to this Author's work. I have now completed, "Doctor Copernicus", and can state it is immeasurably better. I have also started his work, "Kepler" and it shows all the same talent that Copernicus held.

Mr. Banville has at his command a wide scope of knowledge together with the talent to know when to put it to use. He places the thoughts of other noted thinkers within his story, so that they are seamless, as opposed to sound bite flourishes. The thoughts of Soren Kierkegaard, Albert Einstein, and Max Planck all join the writings of Dr. Copernicus, all assembled by Mr. Banville, as needed, appropriate, and without pretense.

Science is too often presented in a manner that the layperson is discouraged from pursuing the information. Historical fiction certainly should not be the only source for fact-finding, but when handled as well as this Author presents the material; it's accessible for anyone that is inquisitive. Copernicus's idea of Heliocentricity, the Elliptical Orbits of the Planets, which is dealt with humorously, and all the trials of defining new science are both readable and enjoyable. Particularly well presented was the whole concept of how theories, and published material was viewed by the Scientists in the 16th Century. Did Copernicus believe that his explanation was in fact a picture of reality, or that what he documented merely agreed with what he observed? Sounds a bit dry, but the writing is brilliant.

The last 19 pages entitled, "Magnum Miraculum", are some of the best writing I have had the privilege to read. Life, death, redemption, and a dozen other concepts are presented in a totally original manner, and with an irony that is painful and beautiful as well.

Somewhere else I read that this was the Writer that would bring back the Nobel Prize For Literature to Ireland. The Isle has already brought forth writers who have won the award that has Ireland in the top 10 Countries for the first 100 years of the prize. If the balance of his work is this good, the prediction will become fact.

Dance of the Planets is a biography written by Nancy Veglahn about Nicolaus Copernicus, the scientist known as the founder of modern astronomy. During the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, he questioned the theories that the Church accepted and formed hypotheses of his own. These ¡§correct¡¨ ideas were based on the observations of the second-century Egyptian astronomer Ptolemy, who claimed that the Earth was in the center of the universe and that the sun and other planets traveled around it in circles. Copernicus, on the other hand, wrote that the sun was in the center and that all of the planets, including the Earth, made circular paths around the sun. He also questioned the accuracy of the Almagest, the book that Ptolemy had written, which was considered to contain the entire truth of the heavens. Such courage in challenging the Church laid the foundation for the field of astronomy that exists today.
This book is worth reading because the author uses subtle yet powerful techniques to make the story enjoyable. For one thing, she incorporates dialogue, which makes this book unusual because most biographies¡Xbeing nonfiction¡Xdo not include elements that would make them seem fictionalized. In addition, the author describes world events, like the voyage of Christopher Columbus, to help the reader fully understand what was going on during the time in which Copernicus lived. Also, the illustrator of this book, George Ulrich, draws helpful visual aids to enable readers to visualize the story¡¦s text more clearly, especially when certain portions can seem confusing. These include a map that shows how Ptolemy viewed the universe as well the heavens from Copernicus¡¦s perspective. The dialogue, information, and illustrations in this book make it unique.
This was an excellent book overall, yet perhaps my favorite part is after the close of this story. Scientists in the United States launched a satellite on August 23, 1972 containing a thirty-two-inch reflecting telescope. This was the largest instrument ever sent into space, and it was used to gain valuable information about the universe. The satellite carrying it was named Copernicus. I found the fact that a satellite was named after Copernicus was very significant because this showed the importance of Copernicus to modern-day astronomy. During his lifetime, Copernicus was not recognized for his achievement in astronomy, but he is now credited for his theories.

Fantoli has written a remarkably well-balanced account of Galileo's "affair" with the church. The book does not take sides; it is seen that the church and Galileo both made numerous errors (some of ego, some of philosophy). Furthermore, Fantoli asserts that one cannot divorce the scientific argument from the political and social situations, a premise that helps understand some of the pope's actions. Meticulously documented with many footnotes and translations of primary sources this book is the most thorough treatment of the affair I've seen.