Galileos Muse

Galileos Muse Mark Peterson Makes An Extraordinary Claim In This Fascinating Book Focused Around The Life And Thought Of Galileo It Was The Mathematics Of Renaissance Arts, Not Renaissance Sciences, That Became Modern Science Galileo S Muse Argues That Painters, Poets, Musicians, And Architects Brought About A Scientific Revolution That Eluded The Philosopher Scientists Of The Day, Steeped As They Were In A Medieval Cosmos And Its Underlying PhilosophyAccording To Peterson, The Recovery Of Classical Science Owes Much To The Renaissance Artists Who First Turned To Greek Sources For Inspiration And Instruction Chapters Devoted To Their Insights Into Mathematics, Ranging From Perspective In Painting To Tuning In Music, Are Interspersed With Chapters About Galileo S Own Life And Work Himself An Artist Turned Scientist And An Avid Student Of Hellenistic Culture, Galileo Pulled Together The Many Threads Of His Artistic And Classical Education In Designing Unprecedented Experiments To Unlock The Secrets Of NatureIn The Last Chapter, Peterson Draws Our Attention To The Oratio De Mathematicae Laudibus Of , Delivered By One Of Galileo S Students This Document, Peterson Argues, Was Penned In Part By Galileo Himself, As An Expression Of His Understanding Of The Universality Of Mathematics In Art And Nature It Is Entirely Galilean In So Many Details That Even If It Is Derivative, It Must Represent His Thought, Peterson Writes An Intellectual Adventure, Galileo S Muse Offers Surprising Ideas That Will Capture The Imagination Of Anyone Scientist, Mathematician, History Buff, Lover Of Literature, Or Artist Who Cares About The Humanistic Roots Of Modern Science

Is a well-known author, some of his books are a fascination for readers like in the Galileos Muse book, this is one of the most wanted Mark A. Peterson author readers around the world.

❴BOOKS❵ ⚣ Galileos Muse  Author Mark A. Peterson –
  • Hardcover
  • 336 pages
  • Galileos Muse
  • Mark A. Peterson
  • English
  • 02 March 2017
  • 9780674059726

10 thoughts on “Galileos Muse

  1. says:

    I m really curious to hear what other people think of this I thought it was a great book, somehow simultaneously readable and full of scholarly detail, with unexpected twists and surprising connections between the mathematics of the late renaissance and the art, architecture, music, and poetry of the period I don t know much at all about the time he is writing about, and I was surprised to see a compelling case made that Dante in his Paradiso describes in poetry, the most precise tool available to him a particular mathematical object that is not rediscovered until the modern development of topology This would mean he was thinking deeply about mathematical structures that don t resurface for nearly 500 years This book is full of surprises like that, and arguments in favor of possible historical connections between seemingly unrelated disciplines.

  2. says:

    Fascinating and engaging I felt that it took some random things I knew a little about and put them together in a way that made sense to me It was also fun to feel that I was having a conversation with Mr Peterson about math and the Renaissance.

  3. says:

    This is a rich, complex book Peterson tries to show that Galileo s familiarity with the arts was important in his realization that mathematics could be used in scientific investigation I find it hard to think about mathematics as unrelated to science, so appreciating how different Galileo s way of thinking was from that of his contemporaries is difficult Peterson s book, while not an easy read, has helped me with this.

  4. says:

    Peterson is an excellent writer and this is probably the best flowing popular history of science book I have read, full of intuitive, well explained examples of Renaissance mathematics applied mainly to the arts I learned a lot about Dante, even though I m not at all convinced that Dante s clever conception of the border between the heavens and Empyrean really required much understanding of Euclid or had than a coincidental relationship to modern topology or the 3 sphere I also learned a lot about the development of linear perspective, about Renaissance architecture, and even a little bit I didn t know about Galileo himself.As always, though, with this kind of book, the problems come in when the author gets down to the topic that motivated him How Galileo Invented Modern Science, a basically bullshit theme that will seemingly never die Peterson accomplishes this in the usual way, by ignoring virtually all of Galileo s contemporaries, denigrating his predecessors, and generally pretending that no science besides astronomy took place outside of Italy Three especially irritating examples 1 Peterson dismisses Santbech and Tartaglia for treating mathematics merely as an appendage of philosophy because they tried to provide a quantitative analysis of cannon shot specifically how to drop a cannon ball onto an enemy s tower under the Aristotelian assumptions about impetus and natural motion Santbech and Tartaglia were obviously applying an incorrect theory, but in essence they were doing the same thing Galileo would later do quantifying a well defined physical theory to solve practical problems 2 In emphasizing Galileo s admiration and emulation of Archimedes, Peterson contrasts him with Kepler, who allegedly ignored Archimedes But Kepler s entire astrophysics was premised on the idea that the sun s moving force was an application of the law of the lever Moreover, Archimedes was extremely fashionable among pretty much all mixed mathematicians at the turn of the 17th century, and Galileo s admiration for him was not at all unique 3 Peterson completely misrepresents Alexandre Koyre s famous skepticism about Galileo s experiments Certainly Koyre overstated his case that Galileo s experiments had no valid empirical component and were best understood as philosophical exercises But his point that Galileo s experimental apparatus was crude and that the experiments served as supports rather than foundations of Galileo s theory of motion is still pretty well accepted among most historians and all of Galileo s recent biographers and certainly doesn t reflect a failure on Koyre s part to understand deep truths about science as Peterson would have it A really nice, sophisticated take on what distinguished Galileo s experimental approach from that of his contemporaries is provided by HF Cohen in his book How Modern Science Came Into the World, a much credible and less hagiographic take than this one Peterson s book is just another variation on the standard theme in popular Galileo writing Galileo s brilliance and his contributions to the development of science in the early 17th century are never enough on their own they must always be made to stand in for something bigger and greater and satisfying to our modern sensibilities, even if that requires presenting a very selective history of Renaissance ideas and ideals, and imposing all sorts of modern conceptions on the past In this case it s really a shame because Peterson is otherwise a really fine writer covering a lot of fascinating, fertile ground in the history of ideas.

  5. says:

    Since I m a singer, I don t regularly think about the history of mathematics or the principles of geometry, and I thought Peterson did a great job leading me through the concepts while keeping with the historical thread that lead me to the book in the first place, which was the relationship between Galileo s ideas and other philosophers abroad, particularly in the late Renaissance and early Baroque understanding of harmonic relationships A fun read for a nerd in the arts.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *