The philosopher Kant used the expression “Copernican revolution” to describe the effect that his critical method would have on contemporary epistemological thinking. The conditions and qualities he ascribed to the subject of knowledge placed man at the centre of all conceptual and empirical experience, and overcame the rationalism-empiricism impasse, characteristic of the 17th and 18th centuries.
The Copernican principle is applied in cosmology, as the acknowledgement that the Universe is generally homogeneous and isotropic over large scales. These principles are accepted not merely as a philosophical statement but as an acknowledgement that a significant, large-scale deviation from homogeneity and isotropy would be statistically unlikely, and that this acknowledgement has been found to be correct in different contexts in prior observations.
In practice, astronomers observe that the Universe has heterogeneous structures up to the scale of galactic superclusters, filaments and great voids, but that the Universe is essentially homogeneous when considered on scales of at least about 200 million parsecs. However, while this is true of space, the Universe is not homogeneous or isotropic over large scales of time, since it has been progressing from extremely different conditions since the Big Bang, and will continue to progress toward extremely different conditions, particularly under the rising influence of dark energy, apparently toward the Big Freeze or the Big Rip. The Universe is homogeneous over time on non-cosmological time scales, but is not isotropic over time beyond the time scales of elementary particle reactions. The emergence of non-isotropic time on larger scales is one of the most fundamental mysteries in contemporary physics.
-
Contact
-
Pages
Categories
- asides (8)
- Editors (1)
- Journal (34)
- Language (9)
- Literature (13)
- Music (25)
- OS X (7)
- Photography (1)
- Quotation (19)
- Typography (4)
- Web (5)
-
Links of Interest
My Dear Friends
Archives
- July 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
- December 2005
- October 2005
- September 2005
- August 2005
- June 2005
- May 2005
- April 2005
- March 2005
-
Meta
-

2 Comments
What Kant meant by “Copernican” isn’t necessarily what scienitsts today call by the same name. As far as Kant was concerned, the “Copernican revolution” in astronomy consisted in recognizing that a more elegant heliocentric model of the universe is defensible if we recognize that we will tend to ignore our own movement around the sun. Everything seems to revolve around us because we are always occupying the vantage of an observer within the system; we have to be able to see apparent deviations in the motion of the heavens as being affects of a third body ON US, rather than on the observed body. In Kant’s analogy, philosophy can enjoy a like revolution if it recognizes the categorical structures of the universe as being the result of human cognitive operations, rather than being invested there by God.
– Your friendly neighborhood Phil grad
While I’m thinking about it Phil grad ( I too, bear the mark, utexas, class of 2000 ), I’d like to add that, as far as I can tell, “Copernican Revolution” as used to be a large change in perspective is also wrong-headed.
Post a Comment