Galileo discovered planet Neptune?

[Galileo]

Galileo discovered planet Neptune?

Press Trust Of India

Melbourne, July 07, 2009

Astronomer Galileo Galilei may have discovered Neptune in 1613 - 234 years before the planet was officially found, according to a new theory.

Prof David Jamieson of the University of Melbourne has claimed in his theory that the notebooks of Galileo from some 400 years ago contain concrete evidence that he had discovered a new planet in 1613, which is now known as Neptune.

And, according to him, if correct, the discovery would probably be the first new planet, identified by humanity since deep antiquity.

Galileo was observing the moons of Jupiter in 1612 and 1613 and recorded his observations in his notebooks. Over many nights he had also recorded the position of a nearby star that does not appear in any modern star catalogue.

"It has been known for several decades this unknown star was actually planet Neptune. Computer simulations show the precision of his observations revealing that Neptune would have looked just like a faint star almost exactly where Galileo observed it.

"Galileo may indeed have formed the hypothesis that he had seen a new planet which had moved right across the field of view during his observations of Jupiter over the month of January 1613. If this is correct Galileo observed Neptune 234 years before its official discovery," Prof Jamieson said.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Story...9&Headline=Galileo+discovered+planet+Neptune?

 

[MG1962]

No chance..... there is no way he could have resolved Neptunes movement against the background stars in only one month of observation

 

[Galileo]

No chance..... there is no way he could have resolved Neptunes movement against the background stars in only one month of observation

He did. He observed and wrote down that the "fixed star" had moved.

Please, never underestimate the powers of Galileo!

 

[bobdroege7]

But did he ever say, "eureka, that's a new planet"

no I guess not

that is the difference between observation and perception

 

[Galileo]

But did he ever say, "eureka, that's a new planet"

no I guess not

that is the difference between observation and perception

No, Eureka is not an Italian word. Galileo did observe the wandering star Neptune. A paper on this was published about 30 years ago that claimed Galileo observed, but did not "discover" Neptune.

This new paper seems to claim that Galileo did more than just observe, but he also perceived.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

A paper on this was published about 30 years ago that claimed Galileo observed, but did not "discover" Neptune.

Operative word has been bolded ..

 

[elgarak]

No chance..... there is no way he could have resolved Neptunes movement against the background stars in only one month of observation

Neptune has a orbital period of ~60,200 days (~165 years), which means it moves about 0.18 degrees during one month (very rough estimate, since I assume observing from the Sun, not Earth). Galileo's telescope had a field-of-view of about 0.25 degrees. Easily observable, if one has a fixed star as reference (and one could see the not very bright Neptune).

Galileo had already found blemishes on the Sun, and that Earth was not the center of the universe, and it got him enough trouble already. Finding a new planet? Foggedit!

 

[Galileo]

Operative word has been bolded ..

Presumably, the claim is documented in the paper.

I know that it has already been documented that Galileo noticed the shift in position of Neptune, without claiming it to be a new planet. It has been reported that Galileo was puzzled by it's change in position.

It has also been reported that Galileo never followed up on this, with speculation that he was busy with something else, or that Neptune was just hard to find with his telescope.

Since a new paper has been published, I would presume that some new evidence has been uncovered, possibly some more writings by Galileo, that support the claim that Galileo realized more that had been assumed.

If so, then this would be a very interesting paper.

It is also possible that the paper merely analyzes and projects backward Neptune's orbit with more certainty than was done 30 years ago.

Since Neptune was discovered in the 1800s, it has not yet completed a complete orbit of the sun. I know Galileo's drawings have been used to compute a better orbit.

There was also a mark made of Neptune in 1795 as well, in France, on another star chart, before Neptune was discovered.

Please don't be anal.

 

[MG1962]

He did. He observed and wrote down that the "fixed star" had moved.

Please, never underestimate the powers of Galileo!

Now complete the quote - He observed the star 27th and 28th of Jan - in that time Neptune would have moved a total of 20 arc seconds across the sky - To detect this means he had to have eyesight three times better than 20/20

To put this into normal perspective - hold your pinky at arms length - that is 1 degree in the sky - the movement he saw was 1/18 of that....I dont think so

If he had commented on the 27th Jan about the disparity from his observations on 26 Dec you would have a case, he doesn't however...nor do you.

He like a number of very famous observers after him, looked straight through the planet and never figured out a thing

 

[MG1962]

Neptune has a orbital period of ~60,200 days (~165 years), which means it moves about 0.18 degrees during one month (very rough estimate, since I assume observing from the Sun, not Earth). Galileo's telescope had a field-of-view of about 0.25 degrees. Easily observable, if one has a fixed star as reference (and one could see the not very bright Neptune).

Galileo had already found blemishes on the Sun, and that Earth was not the center of the universe, and it got him enough trouble already. Finding a new planet? Foggedit!

See my above post - his diary entry is across two days, not a month. Which is why I argue he would not have detected the movement

 

[Galileo]

Now complete the quote - He observed the star 27th and 28th of Jan - in that time Neptune would have moved a total of 20 arc seconds across the sky - To detect this means he had to have eyesight three times better than 20/20

To put this into normal perspective - hold your pinky at arms length - that is 1 degree in the sky - the movement he saw was 1/18 of that....I dont think so

If he had commented on the 27th Jan about the disparity from his observations on 26 Dec you would have a case, he doesn't however...nor do you.

He like a number of very famous observers after him, looked straight through the planet and never figured out a thing

From what I have read, he observed Neptune three times, two of them one day apart, and the third time about a month apart from the other two.

The fact is, he did see Neptune, and did write down on paper that he noticed that it moved relative to another fixed star.

Galileo also stated that "Neptune" had a different appearance than the other fixed stars.

The real question is why he did not follow this up. I hope this new paper sheds some light on that.

 

[MG1962]

From what I have read, he observed Neptune three times, two of them one day apart, and the third time about a month apart from the other two.

The fact is, he did see Neptune, and did write down on paper that he noticed that it moved relative to another fixed star.

Galileo also stated that "Neptune" had a different appearance than the other fixed stars.

The real question is why he did not follow this up. I hope this new paper sheds some light on that.

According to this article - the theory is based on a possible ammendment he made to an earlier entry in his journal

http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/200928/4009/New-theory-claims-Galileo-discovered-Neptune

Unfortunately the doctors homepage reveals no information at all

 

[Galileo]

According to this article - the theory is based on a possible ammendment he made to an earlier entry in his journal

http://www.thetechherald.com/article.php/200928/4009/New-theory-claims-Galileo-discovered-Neptune

Unfortunately the doctors homepage reveals no information at all

more details:

But a planet is different than a star because planets orbit the Sun and move through the sky relative to the stars. It is remarkable that on the night of Jan 28 in 1613 Galileo noted that the “star” we now know is the planet Neptune appeared to have moved relative to an actual nearby star.

There is also a mysterious unlabelled black dot in his earlier observations of Jan 6, 1613, which is in the right position to be Neptune.

“I believe this dot could reveal he went back in his notes to record where he saw Neptune earlier when it was even closer to Jupiter but had not previously attracted his attention because of its unremarkable star-like appearance.”

If the mysterious black dot on Jan 6 was actually recorded on Jan 28, Jamieson proposes this would prove that Galileo believed he may have discovered a new planet.

By using the expertise of trace element analysts from the University of Florence, which have previously analysed inks in Galileo's manuscripts, dating the unlabelled dot in his notebook may be possible. This analysis may be conducted in October this year.

“Galileo was in the habit of sending a scrambled sentence, an anagram, to his colleagues to establish his priority for the sensational discoveries he made with his new telescope," Jamieson said, according to a MU release.

These findings have been published in Australian Physics and was presented at MU.

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/008200907071040.htm

 

[Galileo]

oops! I just noiced that this was NOT published in the peer-reviewed Bentham Scientific Journal. I doubt it is legit. They should get Galileo to peer review articles about Galileo.

 

[Humanzee]

If I recall correctly Galileo's drawings of were pretty crude. Do you have a link were you read they were used to improve on the orbit calculations Galileo?

 

[Galileo]

If I recall correctly Galileo's drawings of were pretty crude. Do you have a link were you read they were used to improve on the orbit calculations Galileo?

No, they are in a book I have at home, I think by Stillman Drake.

 

[Humanzee]

Thx

 

[Humanzee]

Hmm...not exactly unbiased but I'll check him out. Thank Galileo. Always looking for a new read.

 

[BenBurch]

There were quite a number of pre-discovery observations of Neptune if I recall correctly.

 

[BenBurch]

Here is the paper referred to in the OP; http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v287/n5780/abs/287311a0.html