The Copernican Revolution

The Copernican Revolution Introduction Modern science can be said to have its roots from the Copernican theory, though it was received with uncertainty by the Copernicans prior to the seventeenth century (Curd 3). Most of the scientists in the sixteenth century believe Ptolemy’s theory of Earth-centered astronomy, as well as Tycho Brahe’s theory of Geoheliocentric system. The reluctance of early scientists in accepting the Copernican theory makes their later approval raise a few questions about the other theories (Curd 3).Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Copernican Revolution specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More One big question posed by this shift of mind is why and when the Copernican theory gained approval over the Ptolemaic theory. Current reviews of the ideas previously adopted as explanations of the change of beliefs have been found to be unsatisfactory. The Copernican theory had been found to be more precise in its foreca sts and clear-cut than the Ptolemaic, which is not the case today (Curd 3). Reasons for accepting the Copernican theory One of the reasons as to why the Copernican theory was accepted is that it satisfied the â€Å"taste† of people, who disregarded rationale and facts. This harsh conclusion by Thomas Kuhn was challenged by Zahar and Lakatos, who argued that the research undertaken for the Copernican programme was empirically precise (Curd 3). The empirical progression of the Copernican theory was based on its essential geometric configuration, which had adequate projecting capabilities. Lakatos and Zahar later edited the conception of a novel fact, stating that it was not necessary for it to be unfamiliar, but it should not have been acknowledged in the formation of the theory (Curd 3). Glymour was also in support of the Copernican theory, compared to the Ptolemaic one, stating that the latter was objectively inferior. The superiority of the former theory was observed in its capability to validate and be analyzed by the facts of that time based on positional astronomy (Curd 4). Comparing the Heliocentric and Ptolemaic theories Support on the validity of the heliocentric theory has been from various scientists, like Millman and Hall, who found it satisfying before the discoveries by Newton and Galileo (Curd 4). The book on testing and confirmation of theories by Glymour looks at the two theories comparatively; that is the geocentric and the heliocentric theories. Glymour and Zahar believe to have been contributors to the understanding of the heliocentric theory, in terms of its methodical logic, harmony and accord, as expressed by other authors like Rheticus, which is contrary to the belief that the theory was irrational, as put forward by Kuhn (Curd 4). One way to compare the two theories is by using the equation (1), 1/T p = 1/T e -+ 1/S p where T is the heliocentric period of planet P, Te is the heliocentric period of Earth and S is the time interval between successive episodes of retrograde motion as viewed from earth. When the planet is superior, the sign in the equation is used, while + is used for an inferior planet (Curd 5). Inferior planets are Mercury and Venus. The Copernican theory works with an excess of three planets on the superior side, while the Ptolemaic theory works with the superior planets only. The Ptolemaic theory also fails to explain the relationship between the motion of the planets and the solar component.Advertising Looking for essay on astronomy? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The Copernican theory offers various explanations unlike the Ptolemaic theory (Curd 5). One of the things enlightened by the Copernican theory is the progressively diminishing value of S, as the distance of the planet from earth increases, irrespective of the direction (Curd 5). The limits of the Ptolemaic theory do not allow for the determination of the displa cement of planets from earth. Aristotle defended one of the theories in the Ptolemaic theory that states that the period of a planet is proportional to the size of its orbit (Curd 6). In the heliocentric theory, the distances are obtained with reference to the distance between the planets and centre of revolution, which is actually the sun. These displacements that are predetermined are used as a basis for the order assignments, which is an indication of harmony and order, characteristics of Copernican theory, and lacking in the Ptolemaic theory (Curd 6). Bases on the tests conducted between the two theories, the Copernican theory emerges as the better one with greater explanatory power. The tests were based on the same positional data (Curd 6). The Tychonic theory The Copernican revolution was defined as the change of belief from the Ptolemaic theory to the Copernican theory. The revolution was dependent on two decisions namely the denunciation of the Ptolemaic theory as untrue, an d the recognition of the Copernican theory as correct (Curd 6). The prudence of either choice is not explained by the positional data due to the effect of two factors namely the Tychonic theory, a third alternative theory, and the existence of vital drawbacks to the Copernican theory. The Tychonic theory was published towards the end of the sixteenth century by Brahe. This theory suggests a geoheliocentric array whereby the earth is static and at the centre (Curd 6). The sun and the planets are said to revolve around the earth. Therefore, the planets have the orbit of the sun as their deferent, and their major epicycle is the heliocentric orbits. Unlike the Ptolemaic theory, the Tychonic system is comparable to the Copernican theory, both kinematically and geometrically (Curd 6). The Tychonic theory is like the Copernican theory in that in spite of its two centers of revolution, it provides for the derivation of equation 1, and the calculation of the displacement of the planets from the sun (Curd 7). The Copernican theory had two main problems namely the perceptible proof that the earth is static, and the lack of noticeable stellar parallax.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Copernican Revolution specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More These problems were unique to the Copernican theory, since the other two theories were geostatic. The scientists in support of the Copernican theory argued that the two problems were contradicting with the requirements of the theory, which are two terrestrial motions. The writings of Galileo, in the early seventeenth century were sufficient to disregard the Ptolemaic theory, though the issues in the other two theories remained (Curd 7). Semi-Tychonic systems appeared in the 16th and 17th centuries and believed that the earth rotated, but did not revolve around the sun (Curd 7). The semi- Tychonic theory was accepted since it enjoyed similar merits with those of the C opernican theory, as well as its simplicity, which made sure to ignore the independent motion of every celestial body. This was especially beneficial in its acceptance after the discovery of Newton’s first law of motion, which defines the forces that maintain a body in circular motion (Curd 7). Conclusion The acceptance of the Copernican theory was supported by both observation and acceptance on its scale of rationality as was seen in the Tychonic alternatives (Curd 8). One deduction observed in the determination of the validity of the theories is that the scientists who support the law focus a lot of their energy and time to build on it, and therefore defend it from harsh criticism, and non-believers (Curd 8). The justification of any theory is only dependent on scientific analysis, to solve any mysterious questions and doubt in people (Curd 8). Curd, Martin V. The Rationality of the Copernican Revolution. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Scienc e Association (1982): 1, 3-13.

Deciding to Licence or Assign When Selling a Patent

Deciding to Licence or Assign When Selling a Patent After youve brought your new idea to full fruition, youve invented it; and after youve gotten your intellectual property protection, youve patented it. Like most independent inventors, the next task at hand will be commercializing your product, you make money from it. If the following conditions apply to you: You have decided for a variety of reasons that you shouldnt be the one to manufacture, market, and distribute your invention yourself, you invented a better mousetrap but you dont want to go into the mousetrap business.You were/are not an employee and your invention was/is not automatically assigned to your employer as specified in your contract. There are two common ways to profit from your patent: licensing and assignment. Lets take a look at the differences between the two and help you decide which path is better for you. The Licensing Route Licensing involves a legal written contract where you the owner of the patent are the licensor, who grants rights to your patent to a licensee, the person that wants to license your patent. Those rights can include: the right to use your invention, or copy and sell your invention. When licensing you can also write performance obligations into the contract, for example, you dont want your invention to just sit on the shelf so you can include a clause that your invention must be brought to market within a certain amount of time. Licensing can be an exclusive or non-exclusive contract. You can determine how long the licensing contract will be in effect. Licensing is revocable by a breach of contract, by preset time limits, or by a failure to meet performance obligations. The Assignment Route Assignment is the irrevocable and permanent sale and transfer of ownership of a patent by the assignor (thats you) to the assignee. Assignment means that you will no longer ever have any rights to your patent. Typically its a one-time lump sum total sale of your patent. How The Money Rolls In - Royalties, Lump Sum With licensing your contract can stipulate a one-time payment or/and that you receive royalties from the licensee. These royalties usually last up until your patent expires, that could be twenty years that you receive a small percentage of the profits from each product that is sold. The average royalty is about 3% of the wholesale price of the product, and that percentage can commonly range from 2% to 10%, and in very rare cases up to 25%. It really depends on what kind of invention you have made, for example; a brilliant piece of software for an application with a foreseeable market can easily command double-digit royalties. On the other hand, the inventor of the flip-top drink can is one of the richest inventors in the world, whose royalty rate was only a tiny percentage. With assignments you can also receive royalties, however, lump-sum payments are much more common (and bigger) with assignments. It should be pointed out that because licensing is revocable when someone doesnt pay you your royalties thats a breach of contract, and you can cancel the contract and take away their rights to use your invention. You would not have the same weight with assignments because they are irrevocable. So in most cases, it is better to go the licensing route when royalties are involved. So which is better, royalties or a lump sum? Well consider the following: how ​novel is your invention, how much competition does your invention have and how likely is it that a similar product will hit the market? Could there be a technical or regulatory failure? How successful is the licensee? If there are no sales, ten percent of nothing is nothing. All the risks (and benefits) involved with royalties are avoided with a lump sum payment, and with assignments, that lump sum payment you receive, you never have to refund. However, negotiations for a lump sum payment do acknowledge the fact that the buyer is paying more upfront because they are assuming more risks to gain themselves a greater profit in the long run. Deciding Between Assignment or Licensing Royalties should be the main consideration when deciding between licensing or assignment. If you choose to receive royalties, choose licensing. If you want the capital that the best lump sum payment will bring you choose assignment. Are you in debt from your invention project? Would the money advance other projects and erase your debts? Or is your invention ready for commercialization, ready to make and sell, and you have determined that sales would be good and that you want royalties, then licensing is probably the better choice for you.