php require("/home/jeffery/public_html/astro/eclipse/solar_eclipse_2021_2040.html");?>
The
planets move relative to the
stars in regular way.
So they are different from
stars.
Note
inferior planets
stay close to the Sun
in astronomical phase angle,
but superior planets
can have any
in astronomical phase angle
from the Sun.
This should have been a clue.
apparent retrograde motion
was another clue.
The lack of observed
stellar parallax
was an argument against
a moving Earth, but this
only an argument among
the ancient Greek astronomers
and NOT their main argument.
But the main argument
as that the Earth seems to
be at rest
and rest and motion were thought of absolutely different
NOT relative states.
You knew when you were moving and when
at rest---or so it seemed
the ancient Greek astronomers
and everyone else way back.
For
Aristarchos of Samos (c. 310--c. 230 BCE),
see the figure below
(local link /
general link: aristarchos.html).
It's reasonable to guess, that
Aristarchos
was led to heliocentrism
by the same reasons that led Copernicus.
We'll discuss those reasons below in the section
Nicolaus Copernicus (1473--1543) and Heliocentrism.
php require("/home/jeffery/public_html/astro/ancient_astronomy/aristarchos.html");?>