Research Paper on:
Copernicus and Astronomical Theories

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
and methods used for centuries were proving to be inaccurate. To do this astronomers, like Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler, promoting the heliocentric theory had to refute the generally accepted physics  of Aristotle which promoted the natural place of bodies resulted in their natural motion and the astronomy of Ptolemy which advocated the geocentric system of planetary motion in which the  Earth was the center of the universe. Both theories were accepted by the powerful Catholic Church which believed that the geocentric system was also written in the Scriptures.  Generally, the physics of Aristotle and the original system proposed by Ptolemy were the major considerations astronomers had to face when supporting the heliocentric theory  published by Copernicus in the 16th century. Many historians point out that "Aristotle was fired by ambition to unify all the separate branches of natural philosophy" and in the processed  devised the notion of "natural motion" and general relativity which were well ahead of their time in a scientific sense (Toulmin and Goodfield, 1961, 92; The Aristotelian Universe and Space).  When Ptolemy from the 2nd century BC presented a more complete account of the observed motion of the heavenly bodies, this furthered Aristotles theories of motion. Ptolemy used three basic  constructions called the eccentric, the epicycle and the equant. In the eccentric, the Earth is placed just outside of the center of the geometric construction. The Earth was placed just  off center and was only considered a slight violation of the geocentric rule. In the epicycle the planets moved in a little circle at the center of which was rotated  the large circle centered on the Earth. These two configurations however could not account for many of the observations of the planets so Ptolemy added a third construction called the