Chapter I: From Pre-Socratic to Aristotle. About the beginning of all things.

The following is a Cosmology Conference, which in an accessible and popular language, the known popularizer Alejandro Vega, brings the general historycal lineaments of cosmology thought through the centuries. The contents don't intend to be exhaustive, or have scientific full rigorousness. Is just a didactic summary for a non specialized public, and that serves as example for educative activities with planetariums. Was taken live on March 3, 1990, in City of Catamarca, Province of Catamarca, Argentina, during the First Meeting of Keen Astronomers summoned by the Province Government, the Deliberating Council of the City of Catamarca and the Municipal Government.

In the ancient times all people made their own interpretations about the universe that surrounds us. On one hand were those who interpreted mystically its principles, across a multitude of gods and goddesses. At the other side were those who looked for a rational interpretation, like Greeks, who towards 700 b.c., with Thales of Miletus, initiated the Cosmology, which is the rational study of the origin and evolution of Universe.

Miletus was a Greek colony in Asia Minor. Before Thales, Homer and Hesiod (who were two poets) had given an impulse to Greek thought, beginning with a mythological thought.

Thales of Miletus tried to rise over the mythological thought and gave a rational sense to Universe. He said it can't be possible the existence of a "god", an explaining principle for all things; there had to be a last simplicity, an "everything"; the Cosmos. For example, if we analyze a table, we say the table has one table and four columns to sustain, but what is what really exists? Does the table exist by itself? Or are the wood and the nails that made the table what really exist?

If we undo the table, we we'll have just the wood. But, does the wood that makes the table exist? or is the tree from which we have the wood what exists?. If we keep on reasoning, we'll end in questions such as: does really the tree exist or the seed that generated the tree?. The chain of thoughts can continue indefinitely, but Thales affirms: the only thing that really exists is WATER.

Thales concluded: Water is the Beginning of all things and besides has to exist an orderer force which taking the water makes all things of sensible reality, and gives us the sensation of a plurality of existences when actually there is just one.

According to Thales the Water is the element (element means the "beginning of something") because he observes that all things have water. Bodies give humors when they decompose, humors are watery, etc.

Till that moment, Greeks thought that the Universe always existed, and they it existed disordered (state they called "Chaos" which means "disorder"). The principle which put and order were attributed to gods ("Cosmos" means "order"). The Greek thought rounds the phrase "nothing is created, everything transforms. Nothing is created, nor is destroyed. Everything always existed". There were just transformations. There were order.

Against them were the Hebrews, who thought, like most peoples, "The Universe did not always exist; it had been created by a creative act from God".

Indians believed in a creative principle that they called Brahma; when Brahma dreams he creates Universe. The thought of Brahma is the Universe. The souls are like splinters of that god that go and insert on the living creatures and then go back to him at the end of each life. This explains the theory of reincarnation. Anyway, as there is a reincarnation, then the Universe disappears.

Finally, when Brahma wakes up again he creates a new Universe. This way, Indians meet on concept of cyclical universe, that we'll see later.

The scientific thought of the peoples who have a mythological conception of Universe advanced slowly, while the thought of Greek people was fast.

Thales discovered the water clock, he perfected the sun clock, made predictions of eclipses, he calculated the fall of some meteorites and generated the school of pre-Socratic philosophers.

Philosophy divided in two parts: before Socrates and after Socrates, because the pre-Socratic philosophers took care about physics (the origin of universe), and after Socrates they took care about the concepts of being, existence, and ethics (the morality of the individual).

From Thales of Miletus derives who apparently was his disciple Anaximandrus. Anaximandrus deduces that water is not the principle for all things; instead that he proposes the Air, because it's what fulls all things, gives life to all, pushes all, etc. Air is the Principle and the Intellect is the Orderer Force, a force over any creative God.

After Anaximandrus appeared Anaximenes, his disciple. Anaximenes said the Fire is the element or principle of all things. Even wood has fire included (in those times people didn't know how fire is produced. It's knowed after Lavoisier, who discovered that what produces fire is oxygen). Any material or substance has fire in its own, because all of them can burn. So, to Anaximenes, Fire is the Principle of all things.

The school of Miletus disappeared with them, and time goes on to V b.c. century.

Towards V b.c. century there is a cultural explosion in the whole planet, with the appearance of great leaders and thinkers. Between them we find Pericles. Under the government of Pericles that cultural explosion had its place in Greece.

The transformation of Athens in an economic potency, and the spectacular victories over the Persian Empire generated a propitious environment to the rise of the culture and of new thinkers of first magnitude.

Are outlined specially Anaxagoras, Democritus and Leucippus, who thought that the problem kept being the same: where do we come from? where do we go? which is the origin of all things? what does really exist?. Because they thought, like the philosophers of Miletus, that all things are appearances of what really exists.

Appeared Empedocles and was like if he had thought: "let's make an agreement; one says the element is Air, another says is Fire, another says Earth, and other one says Water...why don't we suppose there are four elements (Earth, Fire, Air, Water) and the Intellect is the force?". Besides Empedocles we have Leucippus (it's doesn't knowed if he really existed), Democritus and Pythagoras, all at the same time, in V b.c. century. This century, as we said before, was the cradle of great thinkers in the entire planet: Confucius in China, Buda in India...

As Empedocles took for sure that are four elements and an orderer principle that is the Intellect, against him we have some others. Let's began with Pythagoras.
Pythagoras said that what really exists are numbers. He studied the strings and he realized that the relationship between tones is based in numbers, 1/8. He thought a numerical Universe, the whole Universe working like a machine.

Based in pythagorism took form a strong philosophical and religious tendency, and appeared pythagoric colonies. Pythagoreans began to colonize the Sicily Island, looking for the right place for the creation of a society that lived under their own philosophical principles. They created some cities too; Syracuse was one of them.
This school of thought was called pythagoric or orphican, according to Orpheus, the musician of Greek mythology. This name is logical because pythagorics considered music the most faithful and artistic expression of numbers.

Almost parallel, another thought current, Leucippus´s and Democritus's, that would survive with multiple modifications, would constitute the base of today's Physics and Chemistry.

Leucippus and Democritus disdained all the elements stuff and they affirmed that what really exists is the being and the non-being. But, for the Greeks, the idea of the existence of a "being" and a "non-being" was delirious. For them one thing that exists cannot be two things at the same time...One being occupies a place and cannot be another one in the same place at the same time. Each thing that exists has its place in space-time. Nevertheless, Democritus said that in fact, there is a "non-being" and it is the gap, that is nothing, the absence of all; it mustn't be confused with the current notion of emptiness .

For today's science, emptiness is one thing and to not exist is another. Greeks thought the gap as a non-existence. For Democritus exists a non-being that is the gap, and in that emptiness exist what he called "atoms", that are, no more no less, the elements, the Beginning of all things.
So, for Leucippus and his disciple Democritus, what really exists are the atoms, and these differ between themselves by their shape and size. But...what does "atom" means? Means "impossible to divide". Well now, how did they get to the concept of "atom"? Imagine that I take a little paper and I cut it...I take it again and I cut it again, and so long, and so long. Will become the moment that I'll cannot cut it anymore, or manipulate it...at that moment, I'll arrived to the Greek concept of "atom": "impossible to divide".

Democritus thought atoms with diverse shapes: triangular, round and square. He supposed these geometric figures because he was influenced by pythagorism. The atoms of Democritus had "little hooks" (yes, you read well: "little hooks") with which they united between themselves. He didn't realize, but he had outlined the idea of atomic valency.

Atoms, as we know them today, actually become together because they cross electromagnetic forces between their electrons (current concept of valency), that are like the "little hooks" of Democritus, indelible, ethereal. Democritus's atoms are adrift, at random, moving in space and depending on how they crash, will become together and depending on the concentrations that we have of each shape and size of atom we'll obtain the different things we know. Cool!

According to this theory, the whole atom world rules by random forces, there is no Force or Principle. This have very important consequences: we can imagine now a Universe without the necessity of a God or a creative force, nor orderer force. Besides, the ideas of Democritus are outlining what after 2,500 the quantum mechanics says (which takes care about the atomic world).

This revolutionary idea provoked an immediately reaction from Greeks, between who outlined Aristotle, who is 200 years later than Democritus. And says nature has "horror to emptiness" because emptiness is incomprehensible to Aristotle. Also, in reason of the assertion of Democritus about the atoms that move in space, explodes the controversy: "atoms move in space, so well, what is movement?".

Democritus talks about movement, about atoms moving into emptiness...ok, so how do they move in emptiness? what do they support on?. Greek man is concrete..."I move because I can put one foot here and the other forward... I support over `something´...how can movement exist in emptiness?". Around this we found a tremendous intellectual discussion: we cannot accept that something "is not" and exists, at the same time. As a reaction appeared the school of Parmenides. Parmenides affirmed that actually movement doesn't exist.

From this assertion arose the famous paradoxes of Zenon of Elea. Parmenides is the thinker, Zenon his interpreter. The Paradoxes are contradictory thoughts; for example: the paradox of Achilles and the Turtle. They support (the paradoxes) that movement doesn't exist. Movement is an appearance; what truly exists is the being...and what's the being? The being is spherical (must be spherical to be perfect). Is immobile, because if it was mobile, it would suffer mutations, it'll become older, etc, so it couldn't be perfect.

The being has perfection (a mystic idea, related to divinity in this stubborn about perfection).
For Parmenides, the thought fulls it all. The being it's all and it's spherical, doesn't move, and it's perfect. Zenon of Elea created his paradoxes to refute the idea of movement and his master.
It is so all that "frenzy" of nonexistence fell in hands of Plato. Plato had been disciple of

Parmenides and Anaxagoras (philosophers used to pay to be disciples).
Plato developed his own theory about the nature and beginning of Universe. In his conception we can see strong influences of Parmenides, Pythagoras and others.

Plato established that what exists in fact is an ideal world that descends towards to the material world. The material world is a copy of a universe that comes out ours. For Plato, material things expresses through numbers. Each thing has a number associated.

And now, at last, had come the moment of the apparition of the great Aristotle, who with his work created a "headstone" over the evolution of scientific knowledge, that will last 1,200 years!

Aristotle was disciple of Plato and he arrived to a conclusion: actually, the being, (what truly exists) is the Immobile Engine, a thing that impulses but is static...(????????!!!!)

Now we really arrived to the evolutive top of human delirium!!!

Chapter II: From Aristotle To Big Bang

Aristotle created an extremely complex universe, where, in the center, is the Immobile Engine (the being). The being is totally spherical. Upon is the Earth, that covers it, and above, the successive spheres of planets, and above the sphere of stars.

All of them had to be spheres, or it will not be perfect; everything was moving because the impulse of the immobile engine. This one was composed by the four elements, water, earth, air, and fire, and the orderer force is the intellect.

Aristotle created a formidable "dough" of ideas that is called Aristotelian Physics, completely wrong; but since was a great thinker, the creator of the Logic, the one who began to put an order in science, his ideas imposed through history. A repetitive procedure in the human history: to think that because a person is brilliant in a field of the thought, all his ideas in other fields will be guessed right...

Namely that for this epoch there already existed two tendencies clearly defined with regard to the problem of the Nature: the platonic one and the Aristotelian. Both heiresses of previous multiple currents. Besides, from Socrates, teacher of Plato and, be in turn master of Aristotle, the philosophy finds a new matter of study in the ethics (the study of the balance between the virtues and the shortcomings).

Finally, to stop placing the "headstone" to the incipient evolution of the scientific thought, the Catholic church appears needing a philosophical sustenance which finds in the Greek philosophy.
On the one hand is San Agustin, who takes the Platonism and promotes it using it for the Christian idea, in a book that is called the God's City.

Thousand years after Aristotle, it is the moment of Saint Thomas of Aquino who writes the Theological Sum, in which using the Aristotelian ideas, tries to give a philosophical foundation to the Christianity.

Aristotle had created the Logic, or, how to reason using premises. The Aristotelian Logic is used by Saint Thomas of Aquino as a formidable scaffolding for his Theological Sum. An impressive work from the theological point of view. Direct consequence: the Aristotelian thought is imposed for any attempt of understanding the nature of things.

It is so the (erroneous) Physics of Aristotle survives 14 centuries. It comes near to an absurdity as that the one that is opposed to Aristotle is opposed to the church, which is opposed to the church is opposed to the established power and that is opposed to the established power disappears. Then almost the whole scientific and technological advance stops 14 centuries up to Copernicus and there gets lost the fundamental contribution of all the thinkers as Democritus, Leucippus or Aristarcus.

Democritus found the keys of the Universe: The current system of the quantum physics, with, this one in honeycombs. The achieves to discover that the Microscopic Universe is ruled by random force, in some way submitted to the Suspense.

The Aristotelian physics buries the atomism. There is a later attempt of re-floating the Atomism done for Epicure with the target to support an ethical theory, which remains buried. The Atomism sinks into oblivion again.
In spite of all that, in the interim that the Aristotelian physics lasted there were some attempts of demolishing it for not coinciding with the empirical proofs.

Aristotle was supporting that if an arrow was shot by an arch, it was moving for the impulse that was giving it the shot and when the force was ending the arrow fell down completely. Actually, the arrow moves because there is of for way the Beginning of Inertia that affirms that all the things tend to be in rectilinear uniform movement or statics, until there is a force that modifies them.

Other thinkers realized that many Aristotelian ideas were not coinciding with the empirical things. One of them is the gravity, fundamental for the understanding of the universe.

The gravity is explained by Aristotle as " terror of the nature to the gap ": the bodies tend to fall down for the " fear of the gap ". Aristotle is not affirming that he believes that the bodies have " fear " of the gap, but if there is no a support, it cannot floating in the air, it is impossible.

The idea of Democritus that something could move itself in the gap explains the gravity as a reaction of the nature, the atoms and the bodies in general to the gap. Democritus go to the gravity as a property inherent in the matter. Actually, today it is not even known exactly that it is the gravity.

Descartes takes the topic of the gravity again and almost it succeeds on having formulated practically Newton's equation. Discarding he affirms that the force of attraction of 2 bodies is equal to the product of their masses divided the distance that separates it.

The only thing that he "forgot" was that the force decreases with the square of the distance. It is not that he forgot, it did not manage to achieve it mathematically. Also Keppler, the German astrologer, approached magnificently Newton's formula.

Meanwhile, before the appearance in scene of great Newton, since we had already said, the model of universe of Aristotle had imposed: A Universe constituted by spheres makes everybody satisfied. This way it is, the mystical thing is present across the idea of spheres. The sphere is synonymous of the perfection, of driving the divinity.

What the physicists are interested in is also respected: every planet is a sphere. It is obvious that it is a question of calculating the properties of these spheres to know as every planet will move. Also the stars are spheres, it is a question of calculating the trigonometrical properties, that is to say the triangles that they form between if.

Much earlier, of all these discussions of the Middle Ages and of the Renaissance, Hiparco decides to arrange a bit the things, leaves so many theoretical discussion and tries to make something more rational: he created the first catalogue of stars with the angular positions in the sky of approximately 300 stars. The idea is clear: before theorizing, it is necessary to experiment.

In the interim develops the geometry, Euclides creates it and gives a rational order to the set of figures with a theoretical body to interpret the world... And: wherefrom does the inspiration of Euclides go out? of Pythagoras and Plato. Euclides inspired by them, affirms that there has to be a perfect world in the geometric figures that later one materializes in the real world. As it, for Euclides, the things have the form of the geometric thing, of the perfect and abstract thing. It creates a theory to treat geometric ideal elements, perfect triangles, perfect squares.

Everything has a very deep philosophical base behind. It is the same Greek everlasting concept. The topic of the ideal things that are over the human being. It is a very powerful idea it is giving him a sense to the life: wherefrom do we come? where do we go? Actually we are the material expression of something ideal, perfect, created by someone who is beyond all the things. Euclides tries to interpret the ideal thing and, certainly, the practical thing in the daily life. Euclides continues with the same concept: to look for the base of all the things and to construct a system based on some budgets.

These budgets have no explanation, are called Principles or primitive concepts, do not have explanation, every one accepts them, because if not, we join a vicious circle. For example if I say: what is the matter? I can define it saying it is the quantity of mass; in turn if I say: what is the mass? I define mass it is a quantity of matter.

We are before a concept of primitive indefinably, that is accepted because it is. What is a primitive concept? It is the start concept. For example: there is a basic concept that is the point, To say: what is a point? and answering is a thing lacking in mass, it does not define anything.

For example, from the primitive concept of points we can give the first definitions: " Two points anyone form a straight line ", " three points anyone form a plane " and later to say: " Two planes that are cut form a space ". etc. Since we see from a primitive concept we deduce three definitions. Then we can establish what is called theorems and we can construct this way the most powerful building, which is the building of the geometry.

Of the same way it did with the arithmetic. It split of very basic concepts as it is the notion of number. What is the notion of number? It has no conceptualization, is felt, it is a "assumption" and it splits of the notion of the number one and of a rule of addition " 1+1 gives the following number and this way continuing ". At the same time other numerical fields are discovered as the irrational numbers studied by Pythagoras (they are the numbers that, on having divided them by others, do not give an exact coefficient).

We come this way to Ptolemy who was an astronomer of Alexandria, Greek's city nailed in Egypt on the banks of the Nile. Alexandria was constructed by Alejandro Great, by it his name. The Alexandrine ones were buying all the manuscripts of all the books that could. All the books of papyrus or slats of clay were going to stop in this library, There was more than 1 million papyrus, with works of the whole humanity.

Ship that was coming to the port of Alexandria, ship that was plundered by the authorities who were extracting everything what they could be books or rolled up papyrus, the obligation was to leave the original one or at least a copy in this library. There were copied all the books of all the parts of the world. Cradle of big thinkers like Eratosthenes and Ptolemy. Ptolemy fits under the model of universe Aristotelian that was simplifying with his spheres the cosmological problem.

He calculated for the astronomy and the navigation the stage of the "Almagest". Ptolemy used for his Almagest the stage of Hiparco and of others that they preceded him. We might synthesize his thought hereby: " it does not import To me if the Sun is the center of the planetary system as says Aristarco or the ground as Aristotle says, because from the point of view of the calculation it does not matter that it are one or other one. I will guide in the navigation and will do calculations exactly equally of a way or of other one ".

There does not matter for Ptolemy the one who is the center of the planetary system, who is not even the origin of the things, not as this one constituted the universe, not if the planets turn in orbits, if they are in a sphere, or what it is. Ptolemy wants precise stage of calculation for the astronomy and the navigation. His Stage is so good that they impose and last centuries. More if the above mentioned ptolemaics stage are "promoted" by a philosophical body as the Aristotelian.

It is so we come to the point in which the model of Universe of Aristotle (theoretical support), added to the potency of calculation of the Ptolemaic Stage (empirical support), more the works of San Agustin and Saint Thomas (mystical and spiritual support), they turn into the most powerful gag to the scientific advance during more than 1000 years as we had already said.

But this situation cannot be perpetuated. The ground is not an exact clock. It has a movement that is far from being precise. It moves about an axis. It is not spherical, his form is that of an ellipsoid in rotation (it is called an ellipsoid of Hayford). Besides, the axis of the Earth is not parallel the axis of the Sun, is inclined and the day turned only on if same, but it blends in the shape of cone as if it was a spinning top. This nod is called a pretransfer. But not only the pretransfer is but also the Nutation is.

These movements produce a delay in the calendars after some centuries. The stellar positions, they were changing because in the epoch of Hiparco, the axis of rotation was appearing towards Aries. Later it happened to aim at Pisces and, in the XXht century, it will be pointing at Aquarius (because of it they speak of the age of Aquarius). Then on having changed the stars of position, the calculations will be incorrect.

About the epoch of Copernicus the calculations were already giving big flaws. Copernicus understands that it is necessary to do the stage again; but besides exists the problem of the movement of the planets. Especially Mars' movement. Mars does not behave as if the ground was the center of the planetary system, following the Ptolemaic model. Mercury neither, Saturn neither. It was obvious that to explain these movements it was necessary to have a new model and a lot of observational work.

Ptolemy realized that the planets were describing an observable trajectory to simple sight and throughout many nights of observation in the shape of lock in the sky, these trajectories in the shape of locks are not explicable if one does not accept that the planets turn in circular orbits about the Sun, therefore he invented the whole mathematical infernal device to be able to support that thing about the circular orbits: the epicycles.

The epicycles are trajectories descript for a point that is turning in a small circular orbit about a point that is part of a major circular trajectory. The projections of these trajectories give the famous "locks" in the sky. From the mechanical point of view the theory was working well and the stage also.

Meanwhile they were efficient for the calculation, nobody worried in modifying the things and the Ground continued being the center of the Universe. The stage was used for 1400 years because the Arabs that they conquered came up to Europe where they transmitted the whole Greek culture and translated the explanations of the stage.

Nevertheless, about 1450 the stage already had very rude errors due to the fact of the pretransfer of the equinoxes. For that one then the " point Vernal " or the origin of coordinated was not in Aries, (the point vernal is the place where there takes place the equinox or the passage of the Ground for the plane of the solar Equator).

It is so Copernicus decides to restate everything and to create new stage. Copernicus read the book " The Arenarius " of Arquimedes where the brilliant idea of Aristarcus is mentioned. Aristarco supposed that the Sun was the center of the planetary system. Copernicus thought that with the Sun as center of the planetary system, the calculations of the table would turn out to be much more exact and would be adapted to the observational reality.

He wrote the Revolutions of the Celestial Bodies, where he places the Sun as center of the system and to the planets turning about, the circular orbits do not brighten up to change that thing about, for to avoid to enter shock with the mystical idea of that the circular thing is synonymous of perfection. The divine creation could not be imperfect.

The principal target of Copernicus was not to put the Sun as center of the planetary system, his target was to obtain stage. The stage of Copernicus is a disaster, because he guides with the topic of the circular orbits. It is the moment of that time for Keppler. Between 1520 and 1570 Keppler works. Of very humble origin, for own merits he became an imperial astronomer.

Keppler was a recognized astronomer, who predicted many important things. His wise moves were those that gave him reputation and the charge of imperial astronomer. Keppler devoted himself to study the topic of the orbits. Of young man, it took Tycho Brahe as a teacher. Tycho was a Danish astronomer who, in contrast to Keppler, was a millionaire of the Danish nobility. To paint the personality of Tycho Brahe, it is enough a button: it was beaten to duel with a partner of the faculty for whom he was the best mathematician of Denmark and in this duel to sword it lost his nose. Since then, it used a golden nose for the rest of his life.

Tycho Brahe mounts an observatory (yet the telescope had not been created), with astrolabes and different instruments to measure angles between stars. He recaptures the Greek tradition of observing and of measuring. He was not interested in that it is the sky, wherefrom we come not to where we go, that he wanted to do is the most perfect table of the positions of the stars. It achieved a report of 880 stars with great precision. He is the only one that worries in stop looking at old stage and it worries in measuring the stars: which is his angular position in the sky? The king of Denmark yielded an island where Tycho Brahe founded the first observatory of Europe: the "Uranuerein", which means Urania's place (for the Muse of the Astronomy). But it turns out that

Tycho Brahe committed serious excesses with his servants.
So many people were that the king of Denmark had to intervene and to expel it from Denmark. This interim it joins to his court Keppler, whose fundamental target was to learn. He knew that Tycho Brahe was the most renowned astronomer of Europe. The fundamental idea was to raise with all the information of Tycho. It continued to the exile with Tycho, to Prague, in the current Czech Republic.

The fundamental problem for Keppler was like to obtain of Tycho the precise information of Mars' orbit. Mars is a quite "uncontrollable" planet, he moves rapidly in the sky, does not adjust to any type of orbit, the epicycles were not explaining it perfectly, either the circular orbits of Copernicus. Tycho Brahe was not an easy bone to gnaw: it did not give him the information.
Keppler had to wait to the death of Tycho to obtain them. With the above mentioned information there tried to find which was the real geometric form of the orbits of the planets and, in this task, deduced his three laws of Keppler that include the brilliant conclusion that the orbits of the planets are not circular, but they are almost circular: they are elliptical.

Anyone knows that a circumference is a perfect ellipse which two foci coincide with the center. It established this way the first law of Keppler: THE ORBITS OF THE PLANETS ARE ELLIPTICAL AND THE SUN OCCUPIES ONE OF THE FOCI OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED ELLIPSES.

The second one: THE RADIO VECTOR THAT IS THE RADIO THAT JOINS THE CENTER OF THE PLANET WITH THE CENTER OF THE SUN SWEEPS EQUAL AREAS IN EQUAL TIMES.

And, the third one that is not so obvious says: THE BUCKETS OF THE RADIOES OF THE ORBITS BETWEEN TWO PLANETS ARE BETWEEN IF WHAT THEY ARE THE TIMES TO THE SQUARE OF HIS TIMES OF REVOLUTION ABOUT THE SUN.

To the second law Keppler it comes from coincidence. Keppler was the awful mathematician who did an arithmetical development with 3200 accounts to come to this law. In her number 18 was wrong and hence in more the errors were accumulated him. Keppler came anyway to the result. Namely it was "twisting" all the accounts in order that they were giving him result that he wanted. With his three laws, Keppler places the things in his place.

With the Sun as center of the planetary system, Keppler breaks the concept of circular orbits with the orbits that now are elliptical. East is the new cosmological model. Keppler decides to advance a bit more, giving him a mystical foundation to the system influenced by the Pythagorism that still in this epoch was surviving mixed with hermetic knowledge that were transmitted privately, at level of sects.

He built a model of the Universe where the geometric figures, they include the orbits of the planets and quite framed inside a " gigantic mystical frenzy " that includes even the concept of " music of the planets ". According to Keppler, in his movement, the planets were expressing celestial sounds, had a music, and were vibrating in a celestial harmony. It is really Pythagorean that thing about the music, the numbers, the abstract thing.

Keppler studied the gravitation because he thought that in the gravitation was the key of the celestial music and it was much next to came to Newton's law that of Force of attraction = mass to. mass b/distance quadrate. He even managed to write distance quadrate, but he it corrected and thought that it was "d" it (distances) only.

Contemporary to Keppler arises Galilean. Galilean he proposes: it is necessary to do experimentation. He is the creator of the modern science. With Galilean Galilee we will study the movement.

Influenced by Plato he writes in the same form as this one, across " dialogues ". He writes The Maximum Days, which are very boring dialogues where he is demonstrating his ideas.
Galilean affirmed that the Earth is spherical and that it rotates. To understand to Galilean, it is necessary to put oneself in the epoch where there were big masses of ignoramuses and few illustrated people. Few illustrated people were immersed inside a political system held by the power of the Saint Catholic Church.

The illustrated ecclesiastics knew perfectly that the Earth is spherical and that the Sun was the center of the planetary system. Moreover, the Jesuits who are the scientific arm of the church, had up to astronomers who were devoting themselves to study models of the planetary system.
For his investigations, Galilean copied the telescope that they had invented in Holland. Also the Jesuits. They were always in tuning with the technological advances. The church was always in prudent attitude and it was investigating in secret.

In this frame, Galilean it spread his idea of the spherical Earth. It was not the suitable moment. To the political system it was convenient that nothing was changing, because the church was in full war with half a world. It was the warlike religion, the Popes had to consolidate his power in a western world that was staggering opposite to the Islam and that was subdividing between Protestant and Catholic.

Galilean it collides with a retrograde priest, who was saying that in no chapter of the Bible there exists mention to which the Earth is spherical. Galilean reacted. He was a specialist in dialectics and he wanted to demonstrate that the Bible supports his idea of that the Earth is spherical. He twisted and twisted arguments and leaves in ridiculous the priest in question, that was concerning to the powerful Dominic Order.

In those times, Galilean tapeworm like friend and allied to the Cardinal Belarminus (the one who then comes to Pope with the name of Urbanus VII), the one who even was obtaining funds for his studies. In that one then, the Dominic Order began to press against Galilean, for his memorable clash with one of his members. Uranus VII calls Galilean. The new Pope says to him that it should support his ideas without be implying by the Bible. Moreover, in this moment there was the sufficient "freedom" (if it is that one day it was in the history of the humanity), as to support theories, any time the Bible was not in use as support of the same ones.

Galilean ignore him and besides write a reply to the Pope!. In these times, Giordano Bruno's figure appears. Another parallel history in our way to understand that it is what we know at present on the Universe. One presents Giordano Bruno as a martyr of the science because he ended in the bonfire. Bruno supported that other worlds existed, and that other worlds could be populated by other beings. Nothing worse for the ruling system.

Bruno used that idea to straightly attack the politic-religious system, saying that those worlds were idealistic places where their people were not submitted to the cruel tyranny. As we see, is really different this message: has a politic charge. That's why he was sent to he bonfire. Not for saying that there were other worlds, but for talking about places were the tyranny didn't exist.
Between all this political tidal wave, Galilean kept on discussing with the people. Instead of supporting a discussion of high level with the Jesuits, it discusses with the mass and demonstrates them that they are a few ignoramuses, with the obvious consequence of joining after him more and more enemies.

The popular culture was saying if the Earth is spherical and it turns we would have to fall down (it is a completely logical reasoning) Galilean it did all the demonstrations of for that we do not fall down, but it did not do it with an educational sense, but with a haughty, polemic sense. His interest was to win, not to educate. Galilean it was thrashing all. It even rushed forth at the Jesuits, who it had supported economically several times. It treated them as ignorant, because the Jesuits were supporting the model of Universe of Tycho Brahe who was saying that all the planets turn about the Sun and that the Sun, with all the planets it turns about the Earth).

Galilean was are quarrelsome one. Conclusion, the order of the Jesuits fell down to him above. The quarrel came up to such a point that the Pope ordered him a scolding and said to him that it should from continuing. Nevertheless, Galilean went forward. Already warned by the Pope, tired the last one of Galilean derived the case to the Holy Inquisition.

The Holy Inquisition judged on the fundamental topic of if Galilean it had used or not the Bible to support his theories. To the Inquisition it was not worrying him if the Earth was spherical or not, but if it had used to the Bible, if it had handled the divine texts. Galilean it is pled guilty. Nevertheless they give him the option to avoid the condemnation with only that to affirm publicly and in writing that is not true that the Bible says that the Earth is round and that the Earth turns. He did not have to deny that it is spherical and that it moves. If he was writing, they would give him a house arrest in his hometown.

Galilean not only he writes it but it excels beyond the demanded. It is not true that thing about " pur si muove " It one of his disciples attributed it to him later. Galilean was not a martyr of the science and he remained blind not for the tortures of the Inquisition, but for looking at the Sun with his telescope without any protection.

We all like the personages' heroic stories that face all, the system, in a certain epoch of the history. But this was not Galileo's case.

As example of Galileo's disagreeable personality, let's mention his relation with Keppler. Keppler in this moment was the most famous astronomer of Europe. When The Messenger of the Stars finds out about the book Galilean where it mentions everything what was discovered, he decides to write to him to and offers him to subordinate oneself and to be his disciple (Keppler was the biggest astronomer of Europe and Galilean newly it was beginning). Galilean there happens the pleasure of ignoring it. Keppler writes to him a heap of letters begging him and since response receives the silence.

The years happen and Keppler dies, then Galilean. The same day and year 1642 in which he dies Galilean, Newton is born. Newton with a solid mathematical formation and a mind dedicated to the physical sciences, reaches to obtain a scholarship and finally becomes the real astronomer of England. Newton was quite rare, very unsociable and of difficult character. It was never going out. Two marriages that he had failed and he was very envious of the successes of the others. It even did the impossible life to Robert Hoocke (who studied the law of Hoocke) in England and any that one that was shining was chased by it. They gave him a chief's charge in the house of the currency in England.

From there it devoted itself to chase evaders mercilessly. Also it fought with Leibniz. Leibniz was his mathematical rival in Germany. Almost simultaneously the two discovered the infinitesimal calculation (or the mathematical analysis of the calculation of limits and integrals). Newton used all his power and reputation to denigrate his opponent.

Newton wrote the biggest mathematical work of all the times after the elements of Euclides: " Beginning of Mathematical Philosophy " In this book he writes three Newton's famous laws:

1) Forces = to the mass for the acceleration,

2) that the gravity force is equal to the product of the masses on the distance to the square and

3) the beginning of inertia that had already discovered His Discarding.

Here in Newton's history it return combine the old Greek problem: to look for the causes of the things. To look for the elements and the forces. Definitively what it does Newton is to be the computer of a heap of free ideas that had been demonstrated. Several forces existed, those of the magnetism that was already known by the lodestone (that is a stone that it attracts) and the gravity, the force that it does that the things fall down towards the surface of the Earth and the force that supports ligature to the planets.

Newton achieves the first great unification (the concept of unification of the forces is fundamental) and says: the force that attracts the things towards the Earth and the force that keeps the planets close they are the same thing they are not two different forces. This is the gravity force. Newton constructs a model in which the planets are kept in orbit following the laws of Keppler. In that the Earth is spherical and broken and where the planets are kept about the Sun for the gravity force.

Nevertheless his theory was outlining a serious problem. Newton himself realized that there is no a tie. If it exists a force must exist a tie that allows the transmission of this force ... but, which is the tie that it joins to the planets with the Sun? Since he does not find the solution to the problem, he affirms: what is the gravity force transmitted "instantaneously", which means that there is neither space nor time of average (????!!!)...

And also it realizes that if the things attract between if: how is the Universe kept in balance? If the things attract between if, if the Sun attracts to the planets, the planets would have to fall down inside the Sun, if the stars attract between if all together would have to collapse and the Universe to disappear. Newton "solves" this great problem affirming that the Universe is infinite. If it is infinite there are infinite stars and there will always be many stars beyond. So that the gravity force will not finish of attract them all, therefore the universe will be kept in balance.

This one imposes because it is elegant and besides preserves this " mystical flavor " of a grand Universe and incommensurable. It is so began the "frenzy" of the infinite Universe that, then, in the XXth century was ruined. Newton's work, with the first unification of the forces of the nature, is so solid so forceful that it survives 3 centuries.

About 1700 they start being studied between other things, the behavior of the matter and a series of investigators, each one by his side, work on topics as the magnetism, the electricity, the chemistry, etc. All these investigations come together about 1800.

About 1800 Coulomb establishes the electromagnetic force, the force of the magnetism and of electricity her manages to explain them with equations very similar to that of Newton that he says: that the force of attraction between two electrical loads is proportional to his masses and inversely proportionally to quadrate of the distance between the same ones.

The same law is applied for the magnetism: the force of attraction between two magnetic loads is proportional to the charges put in game and inversely proportional at the distances to the square. About 1800 three forces were known. With Newton two were known: the magnetism and the gravity.

Now there were three forces: the magnetism, the electricity and the gravity. To understand to the electricity and to the magnetism, we must study something of the history of chemistry. One of the big topics was to know for that of the combustion. There was all kinds of theories disheveled as that the matter was containing a substance that was called Phlogistons and that this was what it was producing that the matter was ignited.

Until it managed to have a coherent idea of how the combustion happened, there had been discovered a heap of chemical compounds (substances) and elements, without any theoretical frame that it was realizing of them. It is Dalton's shift, who in 1805 felt: the whole chemical disorder that we have (more than 50.000 substances were known in this moment) must have subjacent a last simplicity...

Dalton returns to the Greek concept: behind the whole enormous diversity that exists, there has to be a last simplicity. Dalton affirmed that the quantity of substances that were observed in chemistry, they were actually, most of them, a complexity, or a miscellany of different things more basic than he backs to calling " elements " (that in Greek it means " the minimal thing ").

Dalton, 2300 years later, re-launch the idea of Democritus and Leucippus: the idea of the atoms. And, as they, Dalton supports: that actually there must exist last indivisible particles, called atoms, which integrate all the substances that we observe. Dalton identifies 20 elements, the oxygen, the iron, etc. The first 20 atoms.

There came this way the moment of Avogadro who modifies the idea and affirms: the last expression of a substance, they are not the elements that form her, but the "molecules". Exemplifying: the minimal portion of water that I can have is the water molecule. The molecule is the last unit of the substance, then if the molecule "breaks", I find the outlying elements.

Avogadro studied also the topic of the forces between molecules. The forces between molecules it establishes them in this century, Van Der Walls and know each other at present as forces of Van Der Walls. They are electromagnetic charges between the molecules. We have so the Universe in the epoch of Dalton had diminished to three forces and approximately 20 elements, which were combined between themselves to generate molecules.

There appears Faraday, who studied the electricity and created the concept of " field of action of a force ". Then there arose Maxwell, who studied the electromagnetic waves which study Newton was coming from the epoch. Contemporary of this one was the astronomer Huyghens. He studied the characteristics of the light as Newton.

Newton when he was studying the solar light with the prism was wondering of that nature is the light and he reached to the conclusion that the light is composed by a few corpuscles that collide with our eyes and that do that we see. Huygens, on the other hand, supported that the light is not done of corpuscles, but it is a wave that moves for the space and throbs with our eyes.

This wave takes a charge, this charge is the one that it does that we see the colors... Or that there were two ways of interpreting the light: one as bullets that were moving and other one as a wave of energy that moves in the space. Maxwell investigated the different types of energy. For the epoch of Maxwell already the spectroscope was used in chemistry that had advanced very much and the study of the electricity also.

Maxwell comes to the brilliant conclusion that all the forms of energy are waves and that the magnetism and the electricity are " two faces of the same currency ": the electromagnetism.
In the XIXth century, the different sources of energy were studied and one concluded that all the forms of the energy are basically a wave that moves in the space. The shorter is the wavelength, the more it loads of energy has and longer, minor load. It was known that the sound, the light, the beams gamma and the beams the XXth, etc., they all are waves, electromagnetic waves.

The branches of the science diversify increasingly and, it enters action now the Effect Doppler. If, the sound is an electromagnetic wave of that time it suffers the effect Doppler that he says that if a sound source this one in movement, will change his tonality so much if it moves away as if it approaches an observer. If it approaches towards us, the tones would sharpen. If one removes from us the tones they will worsen. (Example the whistle of a train).

Since the light is an electromagnetic wave it has to suffer the effect Doppler. At low speeds it is not observed: if a car approaches we will not see the light more blue and if it moves away will not see her redder. The effect Doppler in the light is observed at spectroscopic level.
The spectroscope, basically it is a prism that separates the wavelengths of the light. The white this light composed by several wavelengths. Every wavelength is a color. All the united colors produce the white color.

In the XIX century they scientific community had the great idea of study the light sources through the spectroscope, burning little quantities of substances like sodium. Sodium produces the effect of the rainbow through the spectroscope, but also it generates a few black little lines that call of " absorption " or of "emission" (as be), these lines always appear at the same distance of a certain rim, for example, the sodium generates a black line in the green color to 4000 Armstrong's of distance of the red one.

In every chemical element, we always find his associate lines and always in the same place. We have a species of "identikit" of every chemical element. Of there to aiming at a telescope provided with a spectroscope towards the Sun and the stars there is an alone step. Obvious way to know which are the chemical components of a star. There were discovered, definitively, the " digital traces " of the different element. Pointing at the Sun they discover piece of new lines corresponding to new element that they were called a Helium (because Helium is the god of Sun).

The lines always have the same position, if the source is stationary. If the this source in movement, has to appear the effect Doppler, the lines have to move along to the blue one or to the red one. If the source moves away from us, the lines appear closer to the red one. If it approaches, they appear closer to the blue one. It is clear that we will know if a star moves away or one brings over us.

About 1920, receives reputation Edmund Hubble, who studies the galaxies taking photography and luminous bogeys. For surprise of all the lines were turning out to be traversed towards the red one a few positions: Galaxy that he observes, galaxy which bogey appears continuous, so Hubble discovers that the universe is expanding! If all the lines turn out to be traversed towards the red one it is because all these luminous sources that are the galaxies that I observe) they are removing, they all move away between if.

It was of that time that there arises the idea of the BIG BANG all the galaxies should have departed from a center. To this idea George Gamow gives him form in the decade of 40. He says: there must have existed a great explosion of which it went out quite.

And if there was an explosion a trace of this explosion has to exist: the "trace" is the " Cosmic Radiation of Fund ".

When there is an electrical load moving there has to be a magnetic associate field and when there is a magnetic field there is an electrical associate load, or that are the same thing. An electrical wave that moves itself in the space this one generating perpendicularly a magnetic field and vice versa.

It comes near this way to an important unification: the second important unification: the magnetism and the electricity are the same thing. With Maxwell it comes near to the conclusion that the light and the sound are electromagnetic waves and an spectacular advance takes place in all the sciences. Bremer in 1870 calculates the speed of the light, Maxwell establishes that the speed of the electromagnetic waves is 300.000 Km per second, the light that is an electromagnetic wave and that moves to 300.000 Km per seconds. The sound also, not the sound to that we listen, the wave of sound, the wave crosses the air layer on the one that moves to 340 meters in second (that it is the speed of the sound), whereas the electromagnetic wave moves itself 300.000.

In those times, other investigators deal with different types of waves. Between them Roetghen, in Germany who discovers the beams the XXth; Becquerel who discovers the radiations of the Uranium.

With the studies of Faraday about 1845 it appears again, a problem if the atom is the constituent only one of the matter, is indivisible, and the atom is electrically neutral: wherefrom do there go out the electrical charges that Faraday was observing? of a pole there were going out charges that were circulating towards another pole: Wherefrom were these electrical charges going out? The deduction is obvious: If the atom is electrically neutral, the charges must be inside the atom. Then the atom is divisible!.

Besides, in order that it is an electrically neutral debit to have charges in that cancel out between themselves. Faraday concluded that a positive charge and a negative would exist inside the atom at least in order that they cancel out between if and the atoms do not transmit electricity.

And that when you submit it to an electric current, they free negatives charges that are the ones which make the current move. Was Thompson the one who discovered the existence of the electron. He discovered that inside the atom there is a negative charge. The "negative" name is an arbitrarian designation. If is a negative particle, but exist a positive one. Is the great moment to design atomic models.

About 1900 Rutherford believes that the atom has to be constituted by positive charges in his nucleus and denials orbiting it around. He supposed besides the fact that there has to be an enormous empty space between both charges, the prints and the denials: wherefrom deduced this? Rutherford took a golden plate and bombarded this plate of gold with atomic particles. If the atom is solid, the atomic particles will bounce, the opposite case: the majority will go on to turn and only someone of them will bounce.

Measuring the angle of rebound, Rutherford managed to establish the size of the nucleus of the atom! Rutherford's atom is conceived towards the beginning of the XXth century as a species of solar system in miniature.

On the other hand Becquerel of coincidence discovers the radioactivity. The tapeworm a few stones of sales uranium which it stopped inside a booth where there was a photographic badge. Who finds on the following day watched. Becquerel realized that the stones were expressing a type of unknown radiation. Time later he deduced that this radiation was coming from particles of atoms of Uranium that were disintegrating. To these particles it was called them him Alfa and, they shape the radiation of the Uranium.

Meanwhile Madame Curie investigated the radio, the whole science was in full heyday. Also Max Plank contributed affirming that the radiation behaves in a very particular way: it's suppose that the radiation moves as if it was the water: the concept up to this moment was that the radiation was moving as a water jet, but it turns out that the spectroscopy demonstrated that the electromagnetic waves were not behaving this way because they were appearing lines in a certain place for every element.

If the waves behave as a water jet, which we would have to see is alone a bogey of colors that is changing tonalities but: wherefrom do these lines appear? then it came to the conclusion that the electromagnetic waves do not behave as a water jet, but they behave as if they were ulnae, as if we were opening a shin and instead of a water jet went out there were going out ulnae of ice, one behind other. The radiations behave as if they were bundles of charges. It uses the Latin word of origin that is Quantum that means bundle and Plank said: the energy actually is transmitted in bundles, the electromagnetic waves take bundles of energy. This spectacular conclusion that Plank does not like, hates his all the... Of here in more we enter the spectacular XXth century with his incredible scientific advances and discoveries.

Einstein with his Theory of the Special and widespread Relativity, raises that the gravity is not a force, but a " curvature of the space " generated by the masses of the bodies and overcoming this way Newton's problem of which it was the "tie", remains overcome. There is no " tie " because the gravity is not a force.

During this XXth century new forces were discovered as the Weak Force and the Strong Force, both inherent in the internal structure of the atom. spectacular advances took place as the unification of the electromagnetic Force with the Weak person in the Theory of Unification that postulates the Force Electro weak and, it was even advanced up to achieving theories that unify the Force Electroweak and the Strong in only one Force.

The great current challenge is to achieve a Theory of Great Unification that could give him a theoretical frame to the Gravity and the remaining forces of the Nature as the expressions of the only Super existing Force in the original universe.

In the XXth century also it managed to establish the existence of particles smaller than the neutron and the proton, the "quarks" that form them ... and, furthermore, the existence was postulated of furthermore small: the "hiperquarks", which form these last ones. Namely, on the verge of the XXth century we continue looking for the old Greek sleep of finding in the complexity of the nature, the last simplicity. One or few particles and an Orderer Force, to realize of the Well-known Universe...

That's all. Thank you very much for your company. Good skies for all!. (End of Conference)