THE SIXTEENTH-CENTURY EMPIRICAL DISPROOF OF PTOLEMAIC GEOCENTRISM: PAPER III

Two of the publications of Thomas Digges on astronomy contain the contradiction that small planetary parallax angles can be measured with a new kind of instrument, but three years later he asserts observational proof of the heliocentric planetary model of Nicholas Copernicus without identifying the new instrument. This assertion rests on the capacity of an instrument to measure angles so small that current instruments like cross-staffs are not equal to the task. We have posited that the only instrument with the necessary optical resolution is the telescope. This paper posits further that Digges uses trigonometry and measurements of elongation and phase angles to evaluate the relative positions through time of superior planets seen from Earth. If Digges observed the planets telescopically, he could have established the relative distances of the superior planets in units of the Sun–Earth distance. We argue that Thomas Digges disproved Ptolemaic geocentrism and that his assertion to have proved Copernican heliocentrism empirically is reasonable.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage
Published
2025-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3724/sp.j.1440-2807.2026.01.04
Primary Topic
Historical Astronomy and Related Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

THE SIXTEENTH-CENTURY EMPIRICAL DISPROOF OF PTOLEMAIC GEOCENTRISM: PAPER III

P. D. Usher, E. Massaro
Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage
Historical Astronomy and Related Studies
article

THE SIXTEENTH-CENTURY EMPIRICAL DISPROOF OF PTOLEMAIC GEOCENTRISM: PAPER III

P. D. Usher, E. Massaro
article en

Abstract

Two of the publications of Thomas Digges on astronomy contain the contradiction that small planetary parallax angles can be measured with a new kind of instrument, but three years later he asserts observational proof of the heliocentric planetary model of Nicholas Copernicus without identifying the new instrument. This assertion rests on the capacity of an instrument to measure angles so small that current instruments like cross-staffs are not equal to the task. We have posited that the only instrument with the necessary optical resolution is the telescope. This paper posits further that Digges uses trigonometry and measurements of elongation and phase angles to evaluate the relative positions through time of superior planets seen from Earth. If Digges observed the planets telescopically, he could have established the relative distances of the superior planets in units of the Sun–Earth distance. We argue that Thomas Digges disproved Ptolemaic geocentrism and that his assertion to have proved Copernican heliocentrism empirically is reasonable.

Journal of Astronomical History and HeritageVol. 28(4)
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Historical Astronomy and Related Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.