Search for Copernicus Over

blamanj writes "Nikolaus Kopernik, aka Copernicus, father of modern heliocentric theory, was buried in Frombork Cathedral (Poland) after he died in 1543. However, the cathedral's tombs were a mess, and it was unclear exactly where he was. Archaeologists now believe they've found his remains, and are planning to do DNA testing to verify. The search began in 2004."

Comments

Hmmm

[Anonymous Coward]

"Nothing for you to see here, please move along."

Somehow that error seems very appropriate for this article.

will they dig up the bones?

[Anonymous Coward]

and auction them off on Ebay?

Re:will they dig up the bones?

[Phroggy]

and auction them off on Ebay?

That's actually against eBay's policy.

check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you get the impression that old Kopernick was the sort of chap that would run down the street screaming pretty much anything, and maybe he got the heliocentric theory thing right just by coincidence?

"Apples will set your house on fire!"

"Birds and dogs mate and give birth to lizards!"

"By rubbing together two sticks, I created cheese!"

"The Earth revolves around the sun!"

"Bannanas are SATAN!!! SATAN!!!"

"Abolish underwear!!!"

Re:check out that portrait

[Vo0k]

Nope. He did a lot of research in order to present the theory. Being a priest, he wasn't in such deep shit as Galileo or Giordano Bruno, but still he was smart enough to have his finding published after he died :)

Re:check out that portrait

[cbv]

He did a lot of research in order to present the theory.

That is only half of the truth. He actually was kind of a copy cat, citing from Sphaera mundi (among others) written by Johannes de Sacrobosco, and presenting the ideas as his own.

One of the effects of his theft-of-thoughts is the unfortunately still common opinion that people during the so-called Dark Ages believed that Earth was flat -- they did not (the notable exception being Kosmas Indikopleustes, Laktantius and Severianus of Gabala).

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm. Not quite.

You should not apply current views of knowledge to earlier times when the entire paradigm wa different. Nowadays we prize independent and inovative thinking - as the Greeks did around 500 BC. During the Middle Ages and up to the Renaissance, however, this was not the case. All human knowledge was believed to have already been revealed, either in the Bible or the 'wisdom of ancients', and the job of an intellectual was to extract this knowledge.

So prior authority was not only important - it was critical. You HAD to cite such authority for your ideas, otherwise they could not be accepted. Producing your own ideas with no authoritative backing was seen as a sin similar to fabricating your base data nowadays. Intellectual giants like Roger Bacon fought against this approach in favour of the experimental method, but it was not really overcome until the 1700s. This is why all writings of this period cite earlier authority.

School histories of Galileo and others are always done in complete ignorance of the mediaeval mindset, and end up portraying all his opponents as a set of unthinking morons - they were most decidedly not. However, I suppose simple ideas make better television!

Re:check out that portrait

[cbv]

Yes, but there IS a difference between citing (and indicating that you DO cite) and selling the idea (of someone else) as your own. Kopernikus did the latter.

Re:check out that portrait

[Digz]

Actually, Copernicus was encouraged by the Church. Galileo's fault was that he insisted on calling those people who didn't accept his theory (purported to be fact, even though he could not prove it) morons - including the Pope. During his trial, it was repeatedly stated that the charges would be dropped if he could provide proof for his theory - but he could not. The Church also offered a middle ground - accepting heliocentrism as a hypothesis - even superior to the geocentric one - until more proof was forthcoming.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apologet ics/ap0138.html
http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Issues/Gal ileoAffair.html

Can we let this myth die?

Re:check out that portrait

[m0nstr42]

Not that I want to be skeptical, or claim to know the real story, but do you have any non-catholic sources for that information?

Re:check out that portrait

[dylan_-]

Not that I want to be skeptical, or claim to know the real story, but do you have any non-catholic sources for that information?

There's one here though I think it's a bit harsh on Galileo....the Catholic ones are kinder! It's a much more interesting story than the simplistic myth, I think. With all the factions that had a stake in the matter, it would make a fascinating documentary.

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

No. Rewriting history and falsifying facts to make the church's past positions somehow seem more tenable is par for the course a la Vatican (and they sure ain't the only ones). This is not a myth. What you are stating as fact is the myth. Pretending that Galileo was at fault for his punishment by the Church is about the biggest fraud you can perpetrate. Getting rated up on Slashdot for perpetrating this fraud demonstrates that too many would like to falsely believe in the infallibility of a higher authority made up only of men. Stop it.

Re:check out that portrait

[scheming daemons]

Bravo... Give this man some moderator points..

My signature says it all..

Re:check out that portrait

[yukk]

Hmm, interesting that in this catholic's "impartial view" supported by catholic papers there's even a quote:
Does this remind anyone else of the current problem in the U.S. with religious fanatics turning the
intelligent design theory to their own purposes and trying to oust evolution from schools ?

"It is not an accident that such complicating factors as this are never discussed in popular scientific accounts. Clearly those who tell this story have strong ideological interests which make the maligning of the Christian Church attractive. A big part of this seems to be the belief shared by such storytellers that the scientific way of life would operate best in a world untroubled by religious belief. In fact one of the main themes of the Galileo legend seems to be the idea that Christianity is an anti-scientific monster, now safely caged, that sought to devour science at the moment of its birth."

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

No. Rewriting history and falsifying facts to make the church's past positions somehow seem more tenable is par for the course a la Vatican (and they sure ain't the only ones). This is not a myth. What you are stating as fact is the myth. Pretending that Galileo was at fault for his punishment by the Church is about the biggest fraud you can perpetrate. Getting rated up on Slashdot for perpetrating this fraud demonstrates that too many would like to falsely believe in the infallibility of a higher authority made up only of men. Stop it. Pretending that Galileo was at fault for his punishment by the Church is about the biggest fraud you can perpetrate.

Check the links provided in response to the other comment to the parent. There are non-catholic sources that support the parent's posters posistion. Based only on your comments, I think you have some very uniformed opinions about the way the Catholic Church operates. They do not rewrite their history, any documentation that was ever produced by the Church is painstakingly archived and kept for posterity.

Barring destructive events like fires, floods, and warfare; any documents that were made during Galileo's persecution still exist. Also, the Church would allow any qualified historian (qualified in the sense handling ancient documents correctly) to examine them. Now, if someone off the street asked to see them, they probably wouldn't be able to. However, that is not do to some sort of cover-up, just concern about untrained people unitentionally damaging irreplacable documents.

All that said, obviously the Church can and does reinterprets historical events. This is not neccessarily a bad thing though. Witness the apologies given by the late Pope John Paul the II for both the Inquisition and for not taking a more active role in defying the geocidal policies of Nazi Germany in the 30's and 40's. However, whether done for good or ill, reinterperting history is not the samething as rewriting it.

However, let's remember that even intelligent and great men can make mistakes. And often great men have great egos to go along with their greatness. While ultimately what Galileo went through is unjustifed, certianly by the standards of our time, it is possible that he poured oil on troubled waters and set them ablaze. I'm not saying he deserved what he got, just they he probably didn't help himself by being as belligerent in his claims as he was.

Re:check out that portrait

[operagost]

Bravo-- you jumped on the bandwagon without even reading the three citations (one totally unbiased) of the correct historical record.

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep. He copied all the works that claimed Earth is round. Then he removed the "and other planets and the Sun circle around it" and replaced it with "and it, together with other planets circle around the Sun."
"still common opinion that people during the so-called Dark Ages believed that Earth was flat" is obviously false. They believed Earth is round and is the centre of the Universe.

Re:check out that portrait

[anonymo]

What you wrote is utterly BS:

"Copernicus finished his work De Orbium colestium Revolutionibus in 1530, and dedicated it to the pope; but it was not published till 1543, by Osiander of Nürnberg, to whom he had given the manuscript, and who announced the discovery in the preface as a mere hypothesis. He received a copy on his death-bed at Frauenburg on the borders of Prussia and Poland.
Source: http://www.calvarydeltona.org/modules/phpbible/tex ts/schaff-hcc8.xml?meid=20&POSTNUKESID=bbba760b5a6 8cca7df02e7322e1431f8

So it was Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) who accepted Copernian view - and by echancing and using a brand new (not patented) optical device (a telescope) he saw that another object in the sky (Jupiter) has moons.
And not the other way around
It is a pity that no-one checks the facts, just accepting your falsfified utterly garbage!

Plz, moderate down this liar!

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF!? Aside from the issue that an old man was tortured and imprisoned for spreading IDEAS, the second supporting article you cite ends with this quote:

"So far as the teaching authority of the Church is concerned, it is striking how modern physics is playing catch-up with Catholic dogma."

Physics playing catch-up with Catholic dogma?! WTF? Are preists capable of fusion? Does Rome have all the secrets of QED? What in God's name does "striking how modern physics playing catch-up with Catholic dogma" mean?

Aside from the rest of the nonsense on that page, there's a lot of idiocy in the parent post. The argument seems to be "Galileo was unpleasant, therefore the Church was justified." It is deeply disturbing to hear this line of reasoning and the unquestioning acceptance of the Church's propaganda.

There is no excuse for the Church's behavior in what it calls the "Galileo Affair". No excuse. There was no excuse for Galileo's torture and imprisonment. Period. No excuse. And the Church has no monopoly on Truth.

The "Galileo Affair" was about submission to an authoritarian regime. It was a trial about the Papal power. It was not about physics, astronomy or the accuracy of Galileo's description of the heavens.

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

Galileo is the poster boy for the Superiority of Science(TM) over the superstition of religion. Problem is, Galileo also stated categorically that:

- the universe was infinite in size.
- the moon circled the sun.
- the orbits of planets were circular, even after Copernicus wrote to him to say that the orbits were probably elliptical.

Re:check out that portrait

[anonymo]

Strange that no-one stands up against with name against these religious liars!
In 9th of July 1595 Johannes Kepler inscribed a geometric solid construction of universe.
Within a few months of the publication of Kepler's discovery, grounded on Copernicus work published on his death-bed, Galileo turned his telescope to the heavens, discovering 4 moons of Jupiter and the phases of Venus similar to the Moons. This was the very first optical evidence of the rightess of the heliocentric view.
Copernicus, Kepler and Galilei were banned on different levels by the Holy See.
1. Copernicus published his work when ready to die - he know well that publishing earlier would be a death penalty. (Like Bruno Giardano got it, burned alive on the Flower Market in Rome a bit later)
2. Kepler published the physical solution to Copernicus theory. He was excommunicated even if he was a high priest.
3 Galilei was forced by the Inquisition to house arrest.

All these works were on the Catholic Church's "Index of banned books" (Index Librorum Prohibitorum) - valid in revised editions until 1966.

Stating it did not happened is just a simple lie.
Even Vatican addmitted indirectly their fault sometimes between 1994-7 by lifting the Latæ Sententiæ (excommunication) of Kepler.

A short resume of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo et.al:
http://www.dartfordgrammar.kent.sch.uk/Faculties/S cience/Phys/astronomers.htm

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

School histories of Galileo and others are always done in complete ignorance of the mediaeval mindset, and end up portraying all his opponents as a set of unthinking morons - they were most decidedly not.

So if someone asserts something as unthinkingly moronic like all learning has already been revealed, they are not an unthinking moron because they only believed that because they were also doing something as unthinkingly moronic as refusing to accept possible questions on accepting thinking of the time?

Two unthinkingly moronic acts do not cancel each other out! They just make Galileo and Copernicus smarter and their enemies more moronic.

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

Galileo is the poster boy for the Superiority of Science(TM) over the superstition of religion.

Great. He's just one of several poster people who belong in this category.

Problem is, Galileo also stated categorically that:

Problem? What problem? He forcefully made some conjectures, some of which weren't accurate descriptions of reality. Most famously, he was wrong about the tides. But these were NOT dogma, just conjectures. he based his assertions on reasoning and evidence.

As for the specifics of what he was right or wrong on (most famously, explaining tides), his assertions were not dogma. Those assertions are now being investigated (infinite universe) or have been refuted (moon, tides, and elliptical orbits).

Citing his mistakes is a miserable tactic for determining the value of his positive contribution to science and the widespread adoption of the scientific method.

Re:check out that portrait

[anonymo]

To start with:
http://www.hps.cam.ac.uk/starry/sacrobosco.html
http://www.hps.cam.ac.uk/starry/sacrobooks.html
"The most famous of his works, De Sphaera, a basic account of the spherical geometry underpinning the mathematical astronomy of Ptolemy and his Arabic commentators, was composed c. 1230"
For you: it was a manual for the geocentric view in latin, nothing new, just a repetition of Ptolemios.
Stop spreading FUD!

For the second, it is just in the 20th century the "importance" of being the original idea that counts. Earlier it was an honour to develope and enchance ideas.
Copernicus almost sure had avatars, folowed by Kepler, Galilei, Newton and many others before, after and in-between. Scientific work is a cooperation - something that starts to be rare suppply :-( As Isaac Newton sade:If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standing_on_the_shoul ders_of_giants

I suggest you do some simple google on the subject before spewing words.

Re:check out that portrait

[Clod9]

> Stating it did not happen is just a simple lie.
Did you read the linked article? They aren't saying it didn't happen. They're saying that the modern interpretation of its significance is wrong. They say that, far from resisting scientific inquiry, the church provided unprecedented support for scientific study in Europe across hundreds of years, and that the issue with Galileo was one of a few isolated incidents that arose due to politics and academic squabbles, not because of some intrinsic opposition to scientific discovery by the religious establishment.

Lissl claims that "Copernicus' De Revolutionibus Orbium had been in print for nearly seventy years before the Church placed any restrictions on its teachings" and notes "how easy it had been for Galileo to obtain the Church's permission to publish his Dialogue Concerning the Two World Systems, the book which got him into so much trouble". True? False? Seems important.

The interesting point here isn't whether Galileo had trouble with the Inquisition (he did), but whether modern accounts (the "myth") are accurrate. Was he tortured? No. Was the Church opposed to scientific study? No. Were they afraid that science might prove their worldview to be false? No. Were they afraid of where re-interpretation of Church positions by Catholic scientists during the Protestant reformation would lead? This is the interesting question. Lissl says, "Galileo was asserting, in effect, that where scientific findings conflicted with the literal sense of the Scriptures, scientists should have the right to independently determine what the Bible means. For a scientist to assert this was tantamount to sanctioning the private interpretation of the Bible, a Protestant view expressly forbidden by the Council of Trent. Galileo had unwittingly embroiled the Copernican question in a much larger and more complex controversy."

This point is most interesting here and now because of the whole controversy between evolutionists and creationists. All the evolutionists I know (well, except maybe one) think that a religious person must automatically oppose scientific study, deny funding for it, what have you. That there's some kind of philosophical denial of the worth of science. But this is totally incorrect. Part of the reason people think like this is that they learned how the Catholic church opposed Galileo's findings. But what if the truth of the matter is more complicated? What if what Lissl says is true?

American funding mechanisms in the scientific establishment are very much like the Catholic church all those years ago. You want to study HIV? Cancer? Great, we have hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for you. Money everywhere. Want to study the evolution of organisms? Fantastic, great, let us write a check. You want to study the possibility that evolution is wrong, and that another explanation makes more sense? BZZZT, wrong answer. No dice. No funding. And if you try to publish any of your ideas, you are ostracized, a laughingstock, labelled "not a scientist". The only difference is that you can't legally shut people up in America, and politics and the courts hold power, not the Catholic church. Neither has anything to do with science, except that the money has to come from somewhere.

Re:check out that portrait

[Sique]

There are enough facts to support this story:

- Galileo Galilei got the right for research into planetary motion from the Pope himself in 1623 and was allowed to publish his results even if they contradicted with the geocentric world view, provided he called his theses theories and not fact (anyone familiar with that phrase? ;) )

- The trial papers together with the invitation to the court were sent to Galileo Galilei in October 1641, but he didn't come to the court until May 1642. During that time no one attempted to subpoena him to Rome even though it was just a two days ride from Florence to Rome.

- Galileo Galilei never was in prison. In fact he stayed in the Villa Medici in Rome during his trial, being court teacher to the Medici family of Florence at that time.

- After he withdraw all his papers during the trial (which was never requested according to the transcripts of the trial), he lost on formal grounds and had to be convicted of misteaching because of court rules and was thus forbidden to teach any further. To help with this hardship he got a monthly rent from the Vatican for the rest of his life (10 years!).

- He was indeed convicted and punished and had to stay in his home just outside of Florence, but when his health went worse he was allowed to move into Florence to be near his doctor. A quite comfortable punishment for someone convicted of deeds commanding death penalty.

Re:check out that portrait

[technoextreme]

Nope. He did a lot of research in order to present the theory. Being a priest, he wasn't in such deep shit as Galileo or Giordano Bruno, but still he was smart enough to have his finding published after he died :) Actually, Galileo was very popular with the church too.

Re:check out that portrait

[johansalk]

It's a computerized portrait by the Police, what do you expect; they turned the father of the enlightenment into a bum.

Re:check out that portrait

[Peristarkawan]

Did you even read cbv's post before responding? The claim wasn't that Copernicus borrowed from Galileo, but rather from Johannes de Sacrobosco, whose Tractatus de Sphaera was published in 1230. If you're going to denounce the post, at least try to say something relevant.

Re:check out that portrait

[Peristarkawan]

I think that's a bit of a stretch. De Sphaera Mundi was one of the most influential astronomical textbooks of the middle ages. Anyone in the intended audience for Copernicus' work would be likely to have read it and would already know exactly where the ideas came from.

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

the church provided unprecedented support for scientific study in Europe across hundreds of years

yes, the dark ages were in fact a flourishing time of unprecidented discovery. all this wonderous achievement occurred under the watchful hand of the Church. Read your history.

  Was he tortured? No.

Torture is the inducement of agony of body or of mind . Galileo was under the threat of death. (see Giordano Bruno) He was imprisoned. Asking if he was "comfortable at home" or not is irrelevant - he was under threat of violence if he strayed from the Church.

The interesting point here isn't whether Galileo had trouble with the Inquisition (he did),

It's odd that the motivations of the Inquisition aren't questioned in your post. That Galileo had trouble with the Church is at the heart of the problem - the Church had no business telling Galileo what he could or couldn't do. It was true then, it is true now - keep the Church and all churches out of the business of ordering people around.

American funding mechanisms in the scientific establishment are very much like the Catholic church all those years ago. You want to study HIV? Cancer? Great, we have hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for you. Money everywhere. Want to study the evolution of organisms? Fantastic, great, let us write a check. You want to study the possibility that evolution is wrong, and that another explanation makes more sense? BZZZT, wrong answer. No dice. No funding.

That's right. Because Cancer, HIV, etc. are all real problems that science can tackle using the scientific method - the same method Galileo advocated. One doesn't set out to question any theory. Science does not work that way. And to think it does is to woefully misunderstand science and the scientific method. Before a theory is put on the gallows, so to speak, there must be observed and uncontested evidence that directly contradicts the theory. Until that happens, any questions about the theory are rightly called mysticism.

And if you try to publish any of your ideas, you are ostracized, a laughingstock, labelled "not a scientist".

You've tried this? You've tried publishing something about evolution and you've been rejected? Or you know some biologist who has tried this? Once something emerges from the anti-evolution community which contributes to the discussion and knowledge of evolution - and if this can be tested, conjectured about and possibly refuted via some test (all good scientific theories are refutable via testing), then - and only then - will there be a "debate" about evolution. Until then, it's just a well-orchestrated propaganda campaign.

Re:check out that portrait

[anonymo]

"They aren't saying it didn't happen. They're saying that the modern interpretation of its significance is wrong. The he church provided unprecedented support for scientific study"
Well, burnig Giordano Bruno alive on the Flower Market in Rome on February 17 1600 was quite a signal just shut up when the inquisition want to chat with you. Of course, Galileo Galilei just shut up because he preferred to live. In secret he still continued his work under the surveilance of the Inquisition. Next statement will be that no-one was killed or tortured by the Inquisition. The Catholic (and the growing Protestantic movement too) was terrorizing people like the Gestapo or KGB in modern times.
So stating that the Church supported science is just a lie, without any substance! Just look at the list of Index librorum prohibitorum latest and last revision.
What I see now is a religious movement similar to the Stalinistic period falsifiyng or denying facts that do not fit the dominating powers.

"Galileo was one of a few isolated incidents"
C'mon you must be kidding! It's like saying that the Gestapo or KGB did not murdered millions of people because there's so few evidence of it!
Magellan has showed that the world is a globe in 1519 by taking a trip around the word so the Church kept a bit lesser agressive attitude. But calling it science-friendly is just falsifying the truth.

"Lissl claims that "Copernicus' De Revolutionibus Orbium had been in print for nearly seventy years before the Church placed any restrictions on its teachings" and notes "how easy it had been for Galileo to obtain the Church's permission"
Well Magellan has proved that the Earth is a globe in 1951 so it made a slightly difficult to withhold that the Earth is flat.
And I actually red the transcriptions of Galilei's private letters and it was not easy at all to get published even if he made some efforts so avoid the Inquisition's radar. Lissl just denies the actual documents from that era like some others denying the holocaust.

"This point is most interesting here and now because of the whole controversy between evolutionists and creationists. All the evolutionists I know (well, except maybe one) think that a religious person must automatically oppose scientific study,"
Well, I worked very close to a Catholic geophysician, and we talked a lot privately too. He used the Bible as a human filter of God's words, literally and not word-by-word. He was very clever, and a very nice person. But with this abstraction of the Bible he had no problem to accept any scientific observations, and I'm rather sure that many religious scientists works the same way.
Just as creationists (theists) are not the same kind neither are evolutionists (mostly but not all ateists). The problem is that the religious fanatics are growing in numbers and getting louder and stating the Bible has to be red word-by-word which is absurd.

"American funding mechanisms in the scientific establishment are very much like the Catholic church all those years ago. "
Well, I'm rather confident that if the Soviet did not sent rockets into space starting back in the 50's, space travells (by man or with robots) would be prohibited just like research on "ethical grounds" like in some biological fields (stem-cell research). http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/07/31/cloning. bush/
YES, I suppose, you will reply that it's on ethical not scientific grounds, but it's just BS: there are a lot of experiments done in blind or double blind tests were people suffer and probably dies for the results.

Actually, I'm European, but I visited the USA several times and talked to yankee scientists and found that there's just as much pressure to avoid "delicate" areas as in the Soviet were about human rights. I have'nt been in the Soviet but met several Soviet researchers too.
As a rather famous European immigrant scientist lived in the USA sade to me "say that you're Jewish, or Mu

Re:check out that portrait

[anonymo]

Citing the Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sphaera_Mundi
"Tractatus de sphaera, or simply De sphaera) is a medieval astronomy textbook written by Johannes de Sacrobosco c. 1230. Based heavily on Ptolemy's Almagest"
Of course this work was important: it was the manual to track the celestial objects for astrological junk. But that work was no way the origin of Copernicus ideas! He did not stole anything from it, in opposite, he was have to think in new ways than the Ptolemy way.

Just as Einstein found a better description in his relativity theori for the Newtownian physics and he had other works he used it do not mean that he made a very unique work.

Stating that Copernicus stole his ideas from a geocentric work is just absurd! He circulated the manuscript of his work in 1514. Five years later Magellan had proved that the Earth is a globe and that fact must have been something to think about! http://www.phy.hr/~dpaar/fizicari/xcopern.html
Denying his archievement is falsifying history!

Re:check out that portrait

[SirPavlova]

The "Galileo Affair" was about submission to an authoritarian regime. It was a trial about the Papal power. It was not about physics, astronomy or the accuracy of Galileo's description of the heavens.

Precisely. & that just so happens to be what your parent was saying.

It wasn't about science, it was about control; Galileo was defying the Vatican. Whether they had a problem with the science is another matter, but what he said implied that truth wasn't the sole domain of the Vatican, which in turn implied that heretics & dissidents could be right, which obviously didn't do much good for the Vatican's control of Christendom. Thus Galileo had to be quashed.

Re:check out that portrait

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with what you intended to say, and almost everything you did in fact say (and I agreed with the "insightful" mod that I just metamodded, that led me here).

However, "...it is possible that he poured oil on troubled waters and set them ablaze" is almost too funny for words :-) It ranks up there with "water under the bridgework", "that's the last camel", and other delightfully mangled cliches.

Since antiquity, sailors have dribbled oil overboard in bad storms because for some reason even a faint slick of oil smooths dangerous waves. Sacrificing a couple of pints of olive oil while riding out a Mediterranian squall in an ancient greek vessel seemed like a good idea back then-- much better than being capsized. I expect experienced modern sailors in small boats still do the same thing when the situation warrants-- old sailors tend to keep using what works, which is part of why they end up getting old rather than dead.

So the phrase "pouring oil on troubled waters" is used to describe someone who uses persuassion to soothe tempers and smooth out an argument. He does not resolve the underlying strife, but he reduces the risk of violence in a confrontational situation.

The image of someone doing this, then setting the "oil" on fire, is probably not the image you wanted to evoke. But I have enjoyed it. I think probably the image you wanted was that of "pouring gasoline on the fire".

Re:check out that portrait

[gfim]

One of the effects of his theft-of-thoughts is the

Don't you know anything.. it's piracy-of-thoughts.. hang on, no, no it's fair use of thoughts. Oops, sorry, wrong rant.
--
Graham

First Prime Factorization Post

[2*2*3*75011]

1543 is prime.

Re:First Prime Factorization Post

[stud9920]

Yeah but the search started in 2*2*3*167

Re:First Prime Factorization Post

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, it's off-topic, but 867-5309 is prime.

Somehow I doubt Tommy Tutone knew that.

Re:First Prime Factorization Post

[Tolkien]

How the hell did the FPFP post get modded "5, Interesting" ?!

He looks a bit like....

[teewurstmann]

... James Cromwell, the actor from the movie "Babe", you know, the one with the talking pig... I bet Copernicus couldn't understand or train pigs, but he sure understood that the earth isn't the center of the universe.

Re:He looks a bit like....

[titla1k]

Training pigs, understanding the universe isn't the centre of the universe. It was all the same back in those days...

Re:He looks a bit like....

[micpp]

I think you might have to give up your geek credentials for describing James Cromwell as the actor from Babe rather than as Zefram Cochrane from Star Trek: First Contact.

Re:He looks a bit like....

[Mikkeles]

... or even from "Revenge of the Nerds"

Re:He looks a bit like....

[lotus_out_law]

Good. Now they know where to search for the relatives...

Why should we care?

[gowen]

The world doesn't revolve around Copernicus, you know...

Re:Why should we care?

[ehiris]

Because he had the balls to stand by what he believed in! It might seem like nothing for you now but it is people like him that got us to this point.

Re:Why should we care?

[dascandy]

If the world did revolve around him, would he get dizzy?

Re:Why should we care?

[kyrre]

Insightful? I think parent was going for funny.

Re:Why should we care?

[Anonymous Coward]

We care about his contributions to the world, but why should we care which remains are his?

Re:Why should we care?

[Deanalator]

Well, if we want to make an all-star physicist basketball team, we don't want to clone the wrong guy now do we?

Re:Why should we care?

[Anonymous Coward]

  Joke >>>>>>>>>>>>

        O
       \|/   <<<< You
       /\

Re:Why should we care?

[Gibberx]

"Unbeknownst to most historians, Einstein started down the road of professional basketball before an ankle injury diverted him to science"

Gotta love The Far Side.

Re:Why should we care?

[Anonymous Coward]

So to honor him we dig him up and drag his remains around the world?

Re:Why should we care?

[tinpan]

but the whole world revolves around someone...
Copernicus Was Wrong

Re:Why should we care?

[JesterXXV]

There should be a "-1 (Didn't get the joke)" moderation for comments like this.

Re:Why should we care?

[Jsprat23]

Because he had the balls to stand by what he believed in!

Actually, not so much. Copernicus' work on heliocentricity was published after his death. He was a smart man given the treatment Galileo received for advancing the same view point.

Re:Why should we care?

[UTPinky]

Hi ehiris, I'm humor... nice to meet you.

Re:Why should we care?

[Anonymous Coward]

One more time when you wish there were a "+1 ASCII Art"

Re:Why should we care?

[tyroneking]

Congrats on the funniest comment I've read on /. for months!

DNA Testing...

[MrFlannel]

Yes, well, we've got these bones. And we're going to test them to make sure they match with the known DNA sequence of Copernicus.

Alright, so, they track down known relatives... problem is, 500 years? Thats what... 25 generations?
"Yes, this man is Copernicus's Great-great-great-....-great-grandson. We can see they both have green eyes. This woman is his great-great-...-great-granddaughter, twice removed. We can see by this DNA that they're both left handed. So, of course, these must be is bones!"

Not to mention he didn't have any kids of his own. Which just quarters the probabiliy of similarities.

Or did I miss something? Anyone know how accurate this will actually be?

Re:DNA Testing...

[gxv]

They want to compare Copernicus DNA with the DNA of his uncle Lukasz Watzenrode, bishop of Warmia. But first they have to find his grave. There is a catch though. They dont know where is his grave yet...

Re:DNA Testing...

[MichaelSmith]

Anyone know how accurate this will actually be?

Seeing that they claim to be able to extract DNA from these bones, I imagine they could raid the burial sites of his known relatives of the day, and their descendants, right up to the present day.

That way you would get a trail of DNA from the past to the present, which would make matching easier.

Re:DNA Testing...

[Oxen]

I haven't read the article, nor am I at all informed as to the specifics of this case. However, they may be able to find a relative with the same mitochondrial DNA or the same Y-chromosome as Copernicus. Both of these pass unchanged from generation to generation.

A person only inherits mitochondrial DNA from his mother. Using this principle, if we know someone who has descended entirely maternally from a common female ancestor of both him and Copernicus, we can check to see if it is Copernicus.

The same thing goes for Y-chromosomes and men. This is done surprisingly frequently with historical figures. It was done with the Thomas Jefferson/Slave thing and also with Anastasia Romanov. There is a caveat, however. You cannot distinguish between relatives, so even if it tests positive, it could be Copernicus's brother or another relative in the same genetic umbrella.

-Mark

Re:DNA Testing...

[Max Nugget]

>> Yes, well, we've got these bones. And we're going to test them to make sure they match with the known DNA sequence of Copernicus.

From TFA:

"The grave was in bad condition and not all remains were found, Gassowski said, adding that his team will try to find relatives of Copernicus to do more accurate DNA identification."

I imagine they're talking about finding the graves of his dead relatives, not living descendants. If you find a skeleton that you have independent reasons to believe is some particular relative of his, and the DNA from that skeleton happens to corroborate that relationship when compared to the "Copernicus" DNA, you've increased the accuracy of the Copernicus skull substantially, because the chances of the relative being misidentified AND happening to have the correct DNA relationship with the suspected Copernicus DNA is miniscule, so long as the evidence leading you to the relative's remains was unrelated to the evidence that pointed you to Copernicus' remains, and provided the remains aren't buried, for example, right next to his (if they are then you've got nothing because any group of people buried together are likely to be related).

And, not from TFA (from me):

They may also be able to examine the DNA for certain genetic features that match up with aesthetic and non-aesthetic traits that are historically known about him.

I was about to say they could also compare the DNA attributes with the aesthetic attributes of the skull, but then I slapped myself in the head for not realizing it would be self-referential since that's where the DNA came from. =)

Re:DNA Testing...

[drewxhawaii]

i was also wondering how this was going to be accomplished

Re:DNA Testing...

[Vo0k]

Not to mention he didn't have any kids of his own.

At least ones anyone else than their mother and -possibly- him would know of.
He was a catholic priest. Celibacy, that kind of stuff.

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

And, when all is said and done, they'll have raided a bunch of grave sites for basically no fucking reason.

Huzzah? Profit!

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

choir boys can't have babies

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Anastasia Romanov had Y-chromosome ?!?

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Its been proven recently in a study that being left handed is more training than genetic. Nerve centers can be retrained so that you can write with the opposite hand, 10 minutes a day for a month and you can write fluently with the other hand.

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Scientists can't determine physical attributes from DNA yet. There are a few trivial things they can figure out, but complex physical attributes require such a complex interaction that we haven't made any headway yet.

Re:DNA Testing...

[Nyh]

"Yes, this man is Copernicus's Great-great-great-....-great-grandson. We can see they both have green eyes. This woman is his great-great-...-great-granddaughter, twice removed. We can see by this DNA that they're both left handed. So, of course, these must be is bones!"

This will be very hard. Being a priest, Copernicus didn't have any childern of his own.

Nyh

Re:DNA Testing...

[LaughingCoder]

Of course this only works if it *ISN'T* the OJ Simpson Trial jury doing the analysis. A perfect match - odds are one in a zillion - nope, I still don't believe it's him. What else ya got?

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is that he was a friar and he shouldn't has any relatives.

Re:DNA Testing...

[NewKimAll]

What if there is no living relative? I can't have children, so if I ever did something famous (highly doubtful, but you never know) and 500 years later they wanted to prove some DNA strand was really me, it would be almost impossible. Unless it's possible to do it through the decendants of my siblings, which would trace us all back to our parents. But even then, who is to say that those children won't be wiped out in some accident (heaven forbid), but you never know.

A family tree can die out and ours seems to be doing exactly that. Oh well, no big loss. I say good riddance to bad genetics.

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

Anastasia Romanov might have had Y-chromosomes. :)
Anastasia Romanova OTOH, did not.
(Russian women have feminine surnames.)

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

They may also be able to examine the DNA for certain genetic features that match up with aesthetic and non-aesthetic traits that are historically known about him.

Unless he was known to have some genetic disease, I don't think this is possible. They haven't discovered the genes for "prominent cheek bones" or "5 ft., 6 in. tall" or "pouty lips" yet. Besides, wouldn't it be easier to just examine the bones to see if they match with discriptions or paintings that have survived.

Re:DNA Testing...

[terrymr]

Did you actually watch the OJ trial

The PCR tests yeilded a 1 in 5200 probabilty ... while a single blood drop was tested using the more accurate RFLP test yeilding a 1 in 170,000,000 probability. However the DNA analyst for the LAPD could have contaminated the blood drops found at the scene while preparing them for DNA analysis , after getting blood from Simpson's sample on his gloves.

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

I call bullshit on that one. I tried that a few years ago, only I did 30 minutes a day. Didn't work, though my handwriting did improve. In order to write "fluently", I imagine you'd need a lot more time.

Re:DNA Testing...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is actually what they want to do. There is a historical figure, Copernicus' uncle, whose DNA could provide proof. Problem is that, as with Coprenicus grave, the exact location of remains is not clear.

Re:DNA Testing...

[kalidasa]

They can match the Y chromosome of a brother (by the same father), or the son of his brother (by the same father). As long as you follow the male line, it works. Likewise, if Copernicus had a sister with daughters, they could follow the female line for the mitochondrial DNA. The point is that they are not looking for phenotype, but for particular parts of the genome (and for the mitochondrial genome) that do not change (beyond point mutation and other forms of genetic drift) so long as they can see a same-sex line of descent.

Comments and Documentation

[GodOfCode]

This shows us how important it is to properly comment and document the code we write!

how they found him...

[Anonymous Coward]

did they use copernic search?

He must still be alive!

[stirz]

I've seen two photos of the reconstructed head over at German "Spiegel online" and I the first thing that came to my mind was: "That's James Cromwell". Just compare some photos on your own. The similarity is really amazing:-)

Regards,
Stirz

Re:He must still be alive!

[Anonymous Coward]

Dunno about looking like James Cromwell but in the reconstructions, he sure looks pissed about something.

Re:He must still be alive!

[clockmaker]

Maybe they got James Cromwell's DNA by mistake.

Re:He must still be alive!

[stirz]

Clockmaker, you must be watching too much sci-fi series... :-)

Read carefully: they did not clone Copernic, but only reconstructed his face like by forensic means. If you are interested in a quite similar case (and dare to open another German website :-) ), you might be interested in the reconstruction of a pirate's face, which could be the famous German pirate "Klaus Störtebeker". They used a nearly 600 year old skull and quite similar procedures. However, DNA-analysises are still an option to clearify ancestory aspects.


Regards,
Stirz

Re:He must still be alive!

[clem]

That'll do, pig. That'll do.

Finally!

[nihilogos]

I'm sure we'll all sleep better tonight.

I didn't even know he was missing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't even know he was missing?

Re:I didn't even know he was missing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I keep him in a pit under my house... it must rub the lotion on before it gets the telescope...

Wrong - Mikolaj Kopernik

[Anonymous Coward]

It should say Mikolaj Kopernik aka Nicolaus Copernicus aka Nikolaus Kopernik

This just in...

[aussie_a]

the search for people who care has now begun.

Re:This just in...

[Auckerman]

"the search for people who care has now begun."

I really don't see a reason for digging this guy up. I wonder how many graves were desecrated to fullfill someones desire to look at his bones and say "yup, that's him". They are going to need DNA of close relatives, they're gonna get dug up too.

Death is a very private experience, one that is between a person and their god(s) (or lack thereof for that matter), and in my humble opinion, there really should be a compelling reason to go digging up someones grave. I don't think seeking conformation of where his bones are centuries after the fact qualifies.

Maybe I'm just a radical, one of those people who think Indian burial sites are sacred ground (someones known religious views override a valid scientific interest). It's a shame someone was so intent on finding his body, they showed no respect for their death.

Re:This just in...

[Anonymous Coward]

What exactly do Indian burial grounds have to do with a Polish priest?

Re:This just in...

[saskboy]

Death is anything but private. Some people in our culture may percieve funeral rites to be private, but death itself is public. What happens when you croak in your car, or on a path? In the woods or in the bath? Your smell alone gives your location away. All sorts of people will gather to cart you away. Your picture or story goes into the paper. And if you're lucky, in a thousand years, you'll teach kids looking at your bones what it was like to live with MP3 players, and mortality. Death is reintroducing your private body into the public domain. If there's one thing you won't care about when you're dead, it's your privacy.

DNA testing?

[the bluebrain]

... so maybe they can clone him. And set him up ... in orbit around something.

But seriously - how do they test his DNA? "Yup. It's DNA alright!". Do they compare it to a vial of authentic Copernican spit they acquired on 5th avenue? Do they round up his offspring and run a poll? (or should I just RTFA and shuddup?)

Wanted Dead or Alive

[Anonymous Coward]

This man has been accused of corrupting the youth by claiming the Sun is at the centre of the Universe and by instigating revolutions. Considered extremely dangerous. If you've seen this man, please call your local law enforcement or scientist.

Re:Wanted Dead or Alive

[IshmaelSquared]

Look out, he's comin' right for us! *bang!*

Damned smartass historians.

[Vo0k]

I'm Pole, and obviously we had more focus on Copernicus in our schools than the US kids (not to mention our schools serve about thrice the amount of knowledge...)
So we were taught the life and findings of Copernicus, and as for his death, we were informed that his corpse lies in the Frombork Cathedral.
Now I wonder if any kid on a visit to Frombork asked the teacher to see Copernicus' tomb, what would they do? "ups... well, we KNOW he is in the cathedral... somewhere..."

Re:Damned smartass historians.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a New Zealander, we were taught Copernicus at school on this this lunar lander game for the Amiga 500. It was arcade and quiz, and the game must have only had about 10 questions because Copernicus came up dozens of times. And, at the age of 9 or something, Copper-nickers was pretty damn funny. -- stupid story guy

Re:Damned smartass historians.

[pstils]

I'm english and we were taught that pythagoras had already devised his heliocentric theory and copernicus just copied it and got the credit. does anyone care where pythagoras is buried?

Re:Damned smartass historians.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Thrice"... is that like ice, but different? I wish they wood hav taught me that at skool.

Re:Damned smartass historians.

[Anonymous Coward]

Why, are all Poles Mac users or something?

Re:Damned smartass historians.

[AvantLegion]

I'm Pole

Ten foot?

Re:Damned smartass historians.

[SharpFang]

Sorry, but that was GEOcentric theory. Generally, the idea that Earth is round (and planets circle it). Revolutionary for its times, when people believed Earth is flat. He even managed to calculate the radius of Earth.

Re:Damned smartass historians.

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry, but that was GEOcentric theory. Generally, the idea that Earth is round (and planets circle it). Revolutionary for its times, when people believed Earth is flat. He even managed to calculate the radius of Earth.

Sorry, but that was Ptolemy

Re:Damned smartass historians.

[SnarfQuest]

Sounds like my desk. I know the d**n thing is here somewhere...

Re:Damned smartass historians.

[Anonymous Coward]

thrice - adv.

      1. Three times.
      2. In a threefold quantity or degree.

[Middle English thries, adverbial genitive of thrie, from Old English thrga. See trei- in Indo-European Roots.]
Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition

adv : three times; "I called you thrice last night"

Source: WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University

parent not troll

[janek78]

Come on people, the parent is one of the funniest posts in this discussion and you moderate it TROLL?? Bananas are SATAN!!!

It is now official - Astronomy is Dying

[bugg]

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered astronomy community when slashdot confirmed that Copernicus, in fact, is dead.

You don't have to be a Galileo to predict astronomy's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Astronomy faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for astronomy because Astronomy is Dying.

Astronomers are the most endangered of them all, with over 90% of all great astronomers dead. There can no longer be any doubt: Astronomy is Dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

Re:It is now official - Astronomy is Dying

[micpp]

Netcraft confirms it!

Re:It is now official - Astronomy is Dying

[Cervantes]

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered astronomy community when slashdot confirmed that Copernicus, in fact, is dead.

You don't have to be a Galileo to predict astronomy's future. The hand writing is on the wall: Astronomy faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for astronomy because Astronomy is Dying.

Astronomers are the most endangered of them all, with over 90% of all great astronomers dead. There can no longer be any doubt: Astronomy is Dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

He's right folks. Netcraft confirms Astronomy is dying.

Who is this guy?

[Anonymous Coward]

He seems to have no importance what so ever...

As the old verse says

[Flying pig]

(Apologies for spelling errors this is from memory)

Der Himmel nicht die Erde umgeht
Wie die Gelehrten meynen

Muss jeden Mann sein Wurm gewiss
Kopernikus des seinen

(roughly The heavens do not go round the Earth as the learned held. Every man will get eaten by worms, even Copernicus)

Re:As the old verse says

[slavemowgli]

That should be:

Der Himmel nicht die Erd' umgeht
Wie die Gelehrten meynen

Ein jeder ist seines Wurms gewiss
Copernicus des seinen.

Your translation's correct, though.

I'm an American conservative christian...

[Anonymous Coward]

and, dammit, now we can get him to answer for all this heliocentricity gobbledygook.

Can someone explain

[hapoo]

Can someone explain how a DNA test is going to prove he's Copernicus? What are they going to compare it to? Do they have a sample of Copernicuses DNA from the 1500s on hand?

Burn Heretic Burn

[chiok]

Father of modern heliocentric theory? BLASPHEMER!!! BURN HIM!! (Cremation will do)

I for one..

[Anonymous Coward]

I for one welcome the ebay auctions =)

Coulda been worse

[Albinoman]

He couldve described him as the dead guy from I, Robot.

I happen to live in Via Copernico, in Milan Italy.

[spamhog]

...and Leopold von Sacher-Masoch
grew up on Copernicus Street in Lvov,
which I think was part of Austria-Hungary at the time.

We have a 6-m wide paraboloid for space comms right atop the condo here.

Time to plan a street party.

Who do I write to if I want to borrow a relic for the occasion?

A phalanx or a pair of teeth would do fine.

Was search perhaps founded by...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.copernic.com/ ?

Re:If his dead body doesn't contain the cure for .

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, let's invade Iran, it's more cheaper and will get a cure for cancer!

Copernic

[Anonymous Coward]

How many freaks out here use the software Copernic Agent as a search tool?

Again /. is late!

[Anonymous Coward]

It was discovered a long time ago. No wonder.. it's rather big!

Re:A Cynical Response...

[Anonymous Coward]

Copernicus' brother/decendants wouldn't be buried in this cathedral's crypts.

trekkie quote:

[toQDuj]

He's dead jim, but not as we know it. not as we know it. not as we know it. He's dead jim, but not as we know it. not as we know it, cap'n.

(cue refrain)

Plus ca change

[FishandChips]

These days they mess up old bones in old cathedrals in order to put somewhere on the map and provide an attraction for thousands of credulous visitors from all over the world.

In the Middle Ages they messed up old bones in old cathedrals in order to put somewhere on the map and provide an attraction for thousands of credulous vistors from all over the world.

Let the old guy rest in peace. Why should he want a thousand cheap busts and other trinkets knocked out in his name in the local tourist shops? Modern scientists: the religious relic traders of yesterday had nothing on them.

Intelligent Falling

[stud9920]

If you agree with heliocentrism, you have to agree to Kepler's law, and to explain them you have to approve the THEORY of gravitation, which is bullshit. Everyone knows the one true model is Intelligent Falling.

State of the tombs

[base_chakra]

... the cathedral's tombs were a mess

I can vouch for this. Dirt everywhere! It was appalling.

Re:State of the tombs

[tarsi210]

Johnny! Go clean your tomb!

Never once did I say my mother, "Mother? I'm going up to my filthy tomb, to sit in it, in the name of God" and yet my mother would come up and say, "How in the name of God can you sit in this filthy tomb?"
(apologies to Bill Cosby)

Copernicus, dead at 532

[Ph33r th3 g(O)at]

I just heard some sad news on talk radio today. Famed astronomer and scientist Copernicus was found dead in his cathedral tomb today. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an heliocentric icon.

search is over ?!?

[GreekPimpSlap]

i love how the Title states that the search is over but TFA says that it could possibly be the remains. sounds like the author of the story purchased the following:

Tom Smykowski: "It's a 'Jump to Conclusions Matt'. You see, you have this Matt, with different CONCLUSIONS written on it that you could JUMP TO."

Michael Bolton: "That is the worst idea I've ever heard."

Samir: "Yes, this is horrible, this idea."

heliocentric theory

[RoverDaddy]

Gee, if it's just a theory it could be wrong! Our schools should be open-minded and teach the geocentric theory as well!

Re:heliocentric theory

[Anonymous Coward]

SHHHH! You want them to hear you?

Re:heliocentric theory

[dsci]

Gee, if it's just a theory it could be wrong! Our schools should be open-minded and teach the geocentric theory as well!

Well, we do. Or at least I did when I taught freshman science classes. I started with the Greeks, went through Copernicus, Tyco Brahe, Galileo and Keppler. The whole story is important, including it's beginning: that geocentric theory you mention.

I think the progression illustrates the process of science beautifully.

Mod parent up

[Darkman, Walkin Dude]

Fucking hell, would you PLEASE log in and collect your karma... this is one seriously good comment.

Re:Mod parent up

[anonymo]

"Fucking hell, would you PLEASE log in and collect your karma... this is one seriously good comment."

Well, what a pity that it's just not true - but facts usually don't bite on fanatics. >:->

If you cannot find my reply to parent: Kopernicus has died BEFORE Galilei was born!

We're not in Kansas anymore

[totallygeek]

This man has been accused of corrupting the youth by claiming the Sun is at the centre of the Universe and by instigating revolutions. Considered extremely dangerous. If you've seen this man, please call your local law enforcement or scientist.

I thought they would have disconnected Internet access to Kansas by now!

Bah!

[Anonymous Coward]

You could at least try to get his name right!
If you want the Polish, it's Mikolaj Kopernik.
Or if you prefer German, Nikolaus Kopernikus.
You've got a mixture of the two.
Bah!
AND Bah! for not letting me put in a Polish striped l too!!!
BAH!

coincidence? conspiracy?

[TreeHead]

Copernicus ...looks strikingly similar to... Dr. Zefram Cochrane.

Uncanny resemblance!

[parasonic]

Wow, does anyone else find Copernicus's reconstruction to look a lot like Zefram Cochrane?

Copernicus looks a little too much like Dr. Cochrane...

Scar

[flatass]

Gassowski said police forensic experts used the skull to reconstruct a face that closely resembled the features -- including a broken nose and scar above the left eye
 
In the computer generated image, the scar is actually above his right eye.

Re:Scar

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, don't be picky.
The laboratory assistant swapped the negative while exposing the photographic paper ;-) .

Re:Scar

[Porchroof]

So tell me: How can they determine from a skull that there was a scar above any eye?

James Cromwell in Copernicus - The Movie

[digitaldc]

http://www.nndb.com/people/144/000024072/james-cro mwell.jpg
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40982000/jpg /_40982156_portrait_afp203.jpg
Separated at birth? You decide....
In any case it is interesting that Copernicus or Kopernik continued his studies of astronomy as a hobby and not as a profession.
Good Copernicus quotes:

For I am not so enamoured of my own opinions that I disregard what others may think of them.
I shall now recall to mind that the motion of the heavenly bodies is circular, since the motion appropriate to a sphere is rotation in a circle.
Moreover, since the sun remains stationary, whatever appears as a motion of the sun is really due rather to the motion of the earth.
The earth also is spherical, since it presses upon its center from every direction.
The massive bulk of the earth does indeed shrink to insignificance in comparison with the size of the heavens.
We regard it as a certainty that the earth, enclosed between poles, is bounded by a spherical surface.
and finally....
To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge.

BRILLIANT!

Re:James Cromwell in Copernicus - The Movie

[UOZaphod]

"To know that we know what we know, and to know that we do not know what we do not know, that is true knowledge."

Does that make Rumsfeld brilliant too? :)

A good thing

[Starker_Kull]

There are an awful lot of important (meaning, we wouldn't have computers, satellites, electric power, engines, medicines, etc. without them) scientists whose graves are lost and whose names are fast fading from common memory, whilst we have untold roads, bridges, cathedrals, buildings, etc. named after fairly useless politicans, generals and actors. So, if this gives us an excuse to call attention to the man who inaugurated modern astronomy by creating a viable, heliocentric calculational system to compete with and ultimately displace the old Ptolemaic system, all the better.

science emerges from numerology

[peter303]

The sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were the transition from the pre-scientific concept that "nature fits mathematic patterns" to "mathematics describes nature". The difference is crucial. People back to Pythogarous and Plato (and further back to Babylonians and Egyptians) ascribed to the concept that there perfect mathematical patterns that nature must fit. This sometimes forced people to force observation to fit a preconceived model (e.g. circular orbits) rather than choose the best mathematics to fit the data. This stunted both science and mathematics. Galileo was clearly in the science camp. Perhaps Kepler and even Newton were in both camps. Newton was obsessed with pattern over experiement. A good portion of hs writings concern alchemy and Biblical chronology which people now ignore.

I still have an uneasiness with modern physics- that relatively simple equations explain most of nature's patterns and forces. And new mathematics had lead to ever deeper understanding of the cosmos. There is no a-priori reason this should be so unless one ascribes to the I.D. camp.

Future Such Searches Will Be Much Easier!

[MrNiceguy_KS]

...Thanks to the announcement of Google Graveyard Search (beta)

403 Forbidden

[FST777]

Forbidden
You don't have permission to access /rp/6137_cromwell_james_15.jpg on this server.

Apache/1.3.29 Server at images.absolutenow.com Port 80

Breaking news...

[geobeck]

This just in from Frombork, Poland...

Nicholas Copernicus is still dead. Officials report his condition as "unchanged".

Re:If his dead body doesn't contain the cure for .

[Geekbot]

And if some people weren't willing to pay and do all this work to find his body, they would instead be finding the cure for cancer? You don't do anything except spend your time and money researching cures for disease? I'll take a guess and say you probably put time and money towards buying coffee, playing games, having a better computer than you absolutely need for work, eating twinkies, watching TV, or other non-cure-for-cancer activities. And until you give all that up I am completely uninterested in hearing any hypocritical dictates to how others spend their money and time. People who are free can spend their money and time in ways that are useful and interesting to themselves. People who are not free to spend their time or money how they wish are called slaves. And most slaves don't have much money.

Centrist

[drwho]

Let me guess...did they look in the exact center of the Cathedral for is remains?

Re:If his dead body doesn't contain the cure for .

[k0de]

Cancer, HIV, science, medicine, fusion, fuel cells, efficiency issues - you name it - we got problems that can be solved. I don't see how marking Copernicus' grave is going to help one whit.

It's not like the people who found him are virus experts who optimize fuel cell efficiency on the weekends. There are billions of people on the planet last I checked and people have a tendancy to do what they are good at, in this case archeology. If we all thought like you, I could accuse you of wasting time posting to /. instead of curing HIV.

Re:If his dead body doesn't contain the cure for .

[whitehatlurker]

you probably put time and money towards buying coffee, playing games, having a better computer than you absolutely need for work, eating twinkies, watching TV,

Now that you have revealed my research program for the ultimate cancer cure, I will have to sue you. My lawyers will be contacting yours.

Fortunately he didn't say anything about the beer part ...

DNA huh

[GmAz]

So exactly where are they getting the original DNA to match with?

Nice Try...but I don't think so...

[Striver]

"I still hold as most true and indisputable the stability of the earth and the motion of the sun." -- Galileo Galilei, June 22, 1633 after being tortured by the Inquisition.

Re:Nice Try...but I don't think so...

[japhmi]

Galileo Galilei, June 22, 1633 after being tortured by the Inquisition.

Galileo was never tortured. It would be against the policies of the Inquisition, and it would have been recorded.

What got Galileo in trouble was saying that the Earth's rotation was what caused tides to work, and that God could have made them work any other way.

Re:Nice Try...but I don't think so...

[Anonymous Coward]

If it was against the policies, then it wouldn't exist to be recorded. Can't you even be honest for a single sentence?

Re:Nice Try...but I don't think so...

[japhmi]

It was against policies in his instance. Old Roman Law (dating back from the Roman Republic), on which all law codes of that time were based (religious and secular), allowed torture in a few specific instances.

Finally!

[yumyum]

That cat owes me five dollars!!!

Is there something about Copernicus's work...

[Darius Jedburgh]

...that requires us to use his bones or something? Some kind of voodoo that allows us to predict the locations of planets? Otherwise I really can't see why anyone would be interested in identifying his old bones.

Why the fuss?

[weeboo0104]

Why was everyone so intent on finding this guy after so long.

It's not like he was the center of the universe. ;-)

Why?

[kidcharles]

What good is it to find the decayed, dessicated remains of Copernicus? Maybe the people searching for his bones should be looking for things of more historical importance, like manuscripts or the like. Writings by Archimedes were found recently that are a fascinating glimpse into his method. PBS did a NOVA special on it recently: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/archimedes/. Much more interesting than if they had found his empty, dusty skull.

Re:Why?

[silverbax]

Father: What are you going to do with your life?
Son: Find the corpse of Copernicus, or die trying.

They should have known...

[Anonymous Coward]

He was right here circling the sun with the rest of us the whole time. Duh.

Suggestion...

[Enrico Pulatzo]

If they already have his DNA, why not just clone him and kill the clone? That way, they'd know they have the body of the man in question.

Seriously people, stop overcomplicating the issue here :)

Actually, Yep

[Zevon 2000]

Having read both Ptolemy's Almagest (the name given to his work by future Arabic scholars, meaning "The Greatest" IIRC) and Copernicus's work, I have a LOT more respect for Ptolemy. Ptolemy built up a system of practical geometry that explained the data available. His system got very complex, but it was consistent, and he addressed far more than Coperincus did. Everything from the shape of the Earth (Sphere? Ellipsoid? Cylinder?) to the movements of the planets, to how far Alexandria was from Rome.

Copernicus, on the other hand, just kind of said "No, the planets revolve around the sun because it's easier that way". Which is true--only he didn't even show WHY it was easier, because he didn't grok the advanced geometry and trig that goes into figuring stuff like this out. Copernicus wasn't even the first to posit that the Earth revolved around the sun (the idea is briefly addressed in Almagest), and he certainly didn't offer any convincing models--those would come with Brahe and especially Kepler. But he was connected reasonably and for some reason is celebrated by history. Sort of the Columbus of math and science.

Two final points: 1) At the time of Copernicus, if you were actually going to use a celestial model to navigate, Ptolemy's system worked much better, because it explained what we observe. Copernicus just drew some circles and cribbed it to roughly match up with real results--he didn't do the work, didn't understand that the data showed elliptical orbits in a heliocentric model, and if you'd used a heliocentric model to navigate you'd have been lost at sea. Which is one of the main reasons the heliocentric model wasn't adopted earlier.

2) You can construct a fully robust mathematical model of the motion of the solar system that puts Mercury at the center, or yourself, or some asteroid. It's just very complex. Think about it long enough, maybe draw some figures, and blow your mind.

Anyway, Ptolemy should be taught after Euclid in high school geometry.

Commonwealth was quite tolerant

[Anonymous Coward]

In those times Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth
was one of the most tolerant states in Europe - just check
Warsaw Confederation-
tolerance act. So Copernicus was much safer than Galileo or Bruno.
Yet he did not take the risk ... Smart guy ...

The real question is...

[Anonymous Coward]

...Did Indy get a rubbing of the Shield?

Why? I'll tell you.

[Eli Gottlieb]

To all those commenters who've asked why we need to find Copernicus's bones, here's an answer.

This is plain old idol worship, digging up the bones of a past cultural hero so that we can be even more reverant of him. Now if those stupid scientists would get back to science, ie: experiments we might make some kind of progress on humanity's problems.

Re:If his dead body doesn't contain the cure for .

[kidcharles]

They ARE archaeologists. There are questions to be answered about the human race that they could be addressing that cannot be answered by Copernicus' mold-ridden left femur. By the way, I do research in plasma science, when I'm not wasting valuable time posting to /. Man, I need to get back to work...

Re:If his dead body doesn't contain the cure for .

[Anonymous Coward]

IT IS kind of from a Fark joke - why scientists waste time on trivial things like this. So generally, people with a sense of humor (which is what this was intended to be), say, "Scientists " and then one snarkily replied with: "In other new, cancer still has no cure..."

The idea wasn't to convey superiority, just that "scientists" should try to find useful things to do with their time

That is all.

Nice to see /. still populated with indignant persons who seem to have no sense of humor or grasp of irony.

Re:If his dead body doesn't contain the cure for .

[Anonymous Coward]

IT IS kind of from a Fark joke - why scientists waste time on trivial things like this. So generally, people with a sense of humor (and humorous is what this was intended to be), say, "Scientists " and then one snarkily replies with: "In other news, cancer still has no cure..."

The idea wasn't to convey superiority, just that "scientists" should try to find useful things to do with their time or as an alternative those who report things should choose to report things that scientists do that are actually interesting.

That is all.

Nice to see /. still populated with indignant persons who seem to have no sense of humor or grasp of irony.

Copernicus's Body

[Astronomypete]

Is that the dead centre of the universe?

Pete takes another karmic hit.

inspirational bumper-sticker from Fromborg:

[Muhammar]

"I found Copernicus - He Was Behind That Stone the Whole Time!"

Nikolaus Kopernik?

[zobier]

Nikolaus Kopernik?

It's Nicolaus Copernicus or Mikolaj Kopernik! Where did that misspelling come from?

Czesc

Michal