
The astronomer and the witch – how Kepler saved his mother from the stake - benbreen
https://theconversation.com/the-astronomer-and-the-witch-how-kepler-saved-his-mother-from-the-stake-49332
======
antognini
It's interesting to note that even though Kepler is exclusively remembered
today for his three laws, Kepler himself considered them a somewhat minor
result. Most of the book in which he describes his third law, Harmonices
Mundi, is concerned with astrology, music theory, and (for lack of a better
word) mysticism.

An excerpt from the Wikipedia article gives a flavor:

'''

While medieval philosophers spoke metaphorically of the "music of the
spheres", Kepler discovered physical harmonies in planetary motion. He found
that the difference between the maximum and minimum angular speeds of a planet
in its orbit approximates a harmonic proportion. For instance, the maximum
angular speed of the Earth as measured from the Sun varies by a semitone (a
ratio of 16:15), from mi to fa, between aphelion and perihelion. Venus only
varies by a tiny 25:24 interval (called a diesis in musical terms).[6] Kepler
explains the reason for the Earth's small harmonic range:

"The Earth sings Mi, Fa, Mi: you may infer even from the syllables that in
this our home _mi_ sery and _fa_ mine hold sway."[9]

The celestial choir Kepler formed was made up of a tenor (Mars), two bass
(Saturn and Jupiter), a soprano (Mercury), and two altos (Venus and Earth).
Mercury, with its large elliptical orbit, was determined to be able to produce
the greatest number of notes, while Venus was found to be capable of only a
single note because its orbit is nearly a circle.[6]

At very rare intervals all of the planets would sing together in "perfect
concord": Kepler proposed that this may have happened only once in history,
perhaps at the time of creation.[10] Kepler reminds us that harmonic order is
only mimicked by man, but has origin in the alignment of the heavenly bodies:

"Accordingly you won’t wonder any more that a very excellent order of sounds
or pitches in a musical system or scale has been set up by men, since you see
that they are doing nothing else in this business except to play the apes of
God the Creator and to act out, as it were, a certain drama of the ordination
of the celestial movements." (Harmonice Mundi, Book V).[6]

'''

We had a very interesting colloquium in my astronomy department a few years
back by someone from the music department who had studied Kepler's musical
theories in great detail. Evidently his musical theories have inspired a few
modern composers. Here are two such compositions:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neJ9qViszVs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neJ9qViszVs)

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLkmMEEiNBk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLkmMEEiNBk)

------
jorangreef
Kepler became a founding father of the scientific method, with his Christian
conviction that the material universe should necessarily be ordered and not
chaotic and have laws for mankind to discover, if it was indeed created by the
LORD of the Bible.

Interestingly, Kepler was also a student of the brilliant Greek scholar
Melanchthon who was himself a student of Martin Luther.

~~~
michaelsbradley
The intelligibility of the universe has been an important theme in the Western
Christian intellectual tradition from the earliest centuries of Christianity.
You'll find it in the writings of major figures, such as Aquinas and Augustine
of Hippo, and many others besides. That being said, I certainly don't mean to
downplay Kepler's achievements and contributions.

~~~
vixen99
Yes, intelligibility of the universe. People tend to forget that science is
based on faith. A.N. Whitehead (in Science and the Modern World) considered
the contribution of medievalism (to science) was something we take for granted
- the 'inexpugnable belief that every detailed occurrence can be correlated
with its antecedents in a perfectly definite manner'.

------
michaelsbradley
Kepler is a fascinating historical figure. As a non-Catholic, he had
interesting and fruitful relationships with some of the early Jesuit
scientists, at a time of great religious tension between Catholics and
Protestants.

See, for example:
[http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/jmac/sj/scientists/guldin.h...](http://www.faculty.fairfield.edu/jmac/sj/scientists/guldin.htm)

------
MichaelMoser123
i find it fascinating that you could stand the trial against accusation of
witchcraft and win it; this makes the middle ages much more liberal than the
totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century; so progress is not that
progressive - if you look at it in the long run ...

------
nitrogen
While it's disputable that Christianity was necessary for the birth of modern
science (there were ancient Greek, middle eastern, Chinese, etc. students of
the universe as well), it's kind of amusing that, if true, Christianity gave
birth to its own demise.

~~~
nsxwolf
Last I checked Christianity is far from dead.

Christianity's mission statement was never being the means of explaining
natural phenomena. It's telling that people who make that claim usually will
defend it by mentioning Galileo or modern American creationists. They just
don't have a lot of other support for their belief.

~~~
nitrogen
_Last I checked Christianity is far from dead._

In the US, nearly all Christian sects are declining in membership, while the
"None" category grows faster than any other. That's not dead, but it's
certainly dying.

 _It 's telling that people who make that claim usually will defend it by
mentioning Galileo or modern American creationists._

You know, it doesn't matter what theologists say "Christianity" is if tens of
millions of believers all say something different. Even the ancient scholars
disagreed on the amount of literalism in the Bible.

An aside: isn't it blatantly hypocritical for believers to stomp all over
preaching their mutually conflicting beliefs and expect total acceptance,
while they throw a fit if anyone mentions the possibility of nonbelief?

~~~
dang
Please do not conduct religious flamewars on Hacker News.

We detached this subthread from
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10472208](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10472208)
and marked it off topic.

~~~
nitrogen
I apologize for my previously elevated tone, but isn't
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10472208](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10472208)
and the comments that follow already pretty far off topic? Replace "amusing"
with "interesting" in my original comment and I don't see how my first comment
would be any different in subject matter or tone.

~~~
dang
It's sometimes a little arbitrary where we cut the branch, but I would say no:
although that comment does contain religious flamebait (like capitalizing
'lord'), it's saved by substantive historical information.

If we can't talk about religion historically without getting sucked into the
black hole of religious dispute, then we can hardly talk about history at all.
That would not be ok, because history is interesting. So everyone has to
exercise some discipline here.

~~~
nitrogen
Thanks for the clarification, and I agree. If I feel the need to comment on
this topic in the future, I'll work on engaging with the history in a more
constructive way.

