the greatest story ever told!

Johannes Kepler

The seventeenth century was a hot bed of activity for the scientific community. The dam of erroneous philosophy about the nature of the universe that had arrested progress in cosmology for so long was about to burst under the weighty proofs of empirical evidence, and - more importantly - undeniable observations. There were now many contemporaries who were working in tandem to crack open the mysteries of the heavens. Johannes Kepler (27 December 1571-15 November 1630) is a character we have met before - as Tycho Brahe's assistant. Kepler's greatest gifts were his unswerving devotion to the Bible, mathematical acuity and a penchant for accurate scientific data. Compelled by his strong belief that God had created the universe to be both intelligible to and understood by humans, he worked rigorously and tirelessly, to unearth hitherto hidden truths about the patterns that he so firmly believed underlay all reality.

At this time in human history, there was no clear distinction between astronomy and astrology. Everyone who was an astronomer was also considered both by the public and in their own minds to be astrologers. It would not be until 1833 - more than 200 into the future - that the term scientist would even be coined by polymath William Whewell. All who endeavoured to understand the inner workings of nature before then were simple called "Philosophers." The difference between the two approaches could not have been larger. At this time, philosophers had no scientific method through which to carry out their investigations. Whatever appealed to each philosopher as being plausible was what he adopted and postulated, more often than not, without any recourse to evidence. Such philosophies were based entirely on what the philosopher deemed to be logical and reasonable. What was logical and reasonable, was inturn, influenced wholly by the beliefs and mythologies of his time and cultural context. Into this morass, entered the distinctly brilliant Johannes Kepler - and the world would never be the same!

Figure 11 - The inimitable Johannes Kepler

Johannes Kepler - Celestial Physics

There is an interesting fact about the development of Science: it was the men who believed in God who advocated for the founding of Science on empirical evidence. Their deeply held belief that God left a traceable legacy of his creative works, compelled them to look for mathematical laws, through which the Creator set the universe in order. So it was with Johannes Kepler. To show you the madness of his times, astronomy and astrology were thought to have little that separated them from each other, while astronomy, based on mathematics, and physics, the study of the natural world were said to be world's apart. This was not Kepler's view, and in all his research and publications he consistently put forth the unshakable belief that: "God had created the world according to an intelligible plan that is accessible through the natural light of reason." He worked hard to find and empirically prove the existence of such a master plan. It was the genesis behind his model of the universe which was based on Geometric shapes. Though this proved incorrect, Kepler never lost faith that the universe was the product of a Creator, who designed it so that it was intelligible to mankind. Contrary to the pervading opinion of his day, Kepler wanted to marry astronomy with physics, as he had no doubt, that only this approach would unlock the secrets of the universe. Copernicus, before him, and Galileo and Newton after him, were all of this same mind. And for the very same reasons: an unshakable belief that God was the Creator of the universe! They felt that once understood, the universe's underlying design and laws would comport with the Bible. It was for this reason that Kepler classified his new astronomy "Celestial Physics." Newton, similarly married mathematics to the natural world, with the publication of Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Contrary to Neil deGrasse Tyson's claims, it is the believers in God, who insist that evidence, experiment and the power of reason are the keys to understanding the universe! Moreover, it is the believers in God who are the founding fathers of Science and the Scientific Method!

Celestial Physics in Practice

As mentioned above, Kepler spent many years trying to uncover, the pattern which God used to create the universe. At one point in his life he was excited beyond belief at thinking he had found it. The great mathematician that he was, Kepler came to believe that God had used a geometric mathematical scheme to design and structure the universe. Though, this particular scheme was incorrect, Kepler was not daunted and left his three laws of planetary motion as his legacy. They would prove pivotal to Newton, who would use them as a foundation for deriving his laws of gravitation! Both men proved that faith is not incompatible with reason. Indeed, reason is the foundation of faith.

Figure 12 - Kepler's Search for Reason

Unlike the aristocratic Mr. Brahe, Kepler never had a comfortable relationship with money. The financial instability which plagued him throughout his life meant he often produced astrological predictions for clients, though it was an endeavour he looked down upon, seeing it as an unworthy relative to astronomy. A mathematician and astronomer by trade, he found himself often disturbed by religious persecution and often had to move to avoid it, and its hostility to his scientific views. He met Tycho Brahe in 1600, the year Giordano Bruno was burned alive at the stake for his speculations about the nature of the universe. He had published his first major astronomical work Mystery of the Cosmos (Mysterium Cosmographicum) in 1596, and upon reading it, Brahe had been instantly impressed with the radical ideas of it's author, and said as much when he published a detailed critique in its support. In him he saw a possible collaborator that he could use to crack the mysteries of the universe. As exacting as Brahe was in his astronomical measurements, he was not as meticulous in his precision as was Kepler, due to Kepler's superior mathematical skills. Brahe's great advantage lay in this rigorous work ethic, his wealth and mechanical ingenuity. He greatly improved the accuracy of the sextant and quadrant, instruments used for studying the heavens. He always had an observatory to work from and used the opportunity to the full by nightly and religiously observing the positions of stars. This he diligently did for more than 30 years!

Kepler, on the other hand was a man of ill health. He was not only near sighted, but had double vision. You can imagine the difficulties these impairments posed for a man who desired more than anything else to be an astronomer. An occupation he viewed as best fitted to allowing him to live out his "Christian duty of glorifying God" (Wikipedia). The impetus behind all his scientific endeavours was to honour God and give him the rightful acclaim he deserved for designing and creating the universe!

In Brahe, then, Kepler had found the perfect benefactor! Not only could he gain access to over 30 hears of the most accurate tables of celestial data of the day, but in reaching an agreement to work for the noblemen as his assistant, he also simultaneously took care of two other problems: fleeing the religious persecution he faced in Graz due to his refusal to convert to Catholicism, and his difficulty in establishing financial security for his family. For the first time he would have a stable environment, which would in turn, allow him to concentrate on his scientific investigations. This period in his life, from 1600 - 1612 would prove to be the most productive in his life!

Not all would be smooth sailing though. For one, both men were aiming to prove opposing views of the universe! Kepler was an open Copernican, in spite of the life threatening dangers this stand presented, while Brahe was advancing the Tychonic model of the universe - a modified version of Aristotelian and Ptolemaic geocentrism. Secondly, Brahe was extremely protective of his hard earned astronomical data and would not give Kepler free access to it. Instead of open access to his full catalogue of accurate observations, he rather tasked Kepler with the thorniest problem facing all astronomers of the day - understanding the 'eccentric' orbit of Mars. By eccentric, Brahe meant an orbit that was not perfectly circular. Of all the planets reliable data was available for at that time, Mars was the planet with the orbit that least aligned with conventional wisdom. And no one could explain why. Meanwhile, Kepler wanted access to the full catalogue of observations so that he could use the data in establishing empirical proofs for the theories he had advanced in his first published work Mystery of the Cosmos. As it turned out, by Brahe giving Kepler the focused of data of only one planet, and that one being the planet that most deviated from the erroneous expectations of the Aristotelian model, he was inadvertently fast tracking Kepler's progress to a new, fact based understanding of the universe! This Kepler accomplished, with his groundbreaking three laws of planetary motion. Having been tasked with understanding the orbit of Mars he diligently tried to calculate the orbit of Mars from the precise data given to him by Brahe. He tried to come up with a non circular shape that would fit the data! At around his 41st attempt he had it - an ellipse! Brahe's observation data about Mars' orbit fit the shape of an ellipse. Kepler, then immediately reasoned that all planetary orbits were elliptical, which was indeed the case. This discovery was a huge blow to the Aristotelian/Roman Catholic Church worldview, which held that planetary orbits were perfect circles.

When - early in their collaboration - Brahe died unexpectedly on 24 October 1601, Kepler was appointed as his successor, the official imperial astronomer to the Bohemian king and Holy Roman Emperor Rudolph II. As the imperial mathematician, his responsibilities included finishing the task which the king had given to Brahe: compiling the most accurate astronomical dataset of their time. The tables came to be known as the Rudolphine Tables in honour of their commissioner and funder. Armed with Brahe's immaculate records, he managed to formulate Brahe's observations into the most accurate tables of celestial data of his day. "The main [point] of the Rudolphine Tables was to allow the computation of the positions of the then known planets of the solar system," according to Wikipedia. It also references Owen Gingerich and Christopher Linton as saying the finished tables "were some 30 times more accurate than other astronomical tables then available." An historic feat. For his part, Brahe, on his deathbed entrusted his entire catalogue to Kepler, knowing he was the only person he could trust to complete the Rudolphine Tables for the emperor, and make the most, of his life's work of tireless observation and impeccable data collection.

Johannes Kepler, lived a hard but extremely fruitful life. He accomplished what had eluded all previous naked-eye astronomers. For though, he lived in the time of paradigm shift between the eras of naked-eye astronomy and the invention of the telescope, he discovered and published his three planetary laws before that fateful day when Lipperhey applied for his spy glass. This accomplishment was the true beginning of human scientific discovery. Kepler did not use guesswork to develop his laws of planetary motion, he deduced them mathematically through much difficulty and trial and error. His steadfast focus was spurred by his unquenchable desire to discover how and why God created the universe and share this knowledge with his fellow human family. As Stephen Hawking says:

He was the first true scientist for reasons we have already studied, but will come to appreciate even more, later! Upon publication of his Mysteries of the Cosmos, Kepler had written to Galileo to: "believe and step forth." However, unlike Tycho Brahe, who was immediately intrigued, Galileo did not respond favourably, thinking Kepler's ideas about tides were pseudoscience. It was a time when everyone was still trying to distinguish between real science and what did not qualify to be classified as such. By the time Johannes Kepler left the "land of the living" (Ps 27:13), that had all changed. For the first time in man's existence, the general population understood the meaning of Science and how it differed from empty speculation - no matter how unanimous the consensus on the other side was.

What is Science?

Seeing that the divide between philosopher and scientist occurred in this generation, it is a good place for us to study what differentiates one from the other. As outlined above, before Johannes Kepler, there community of intellectuals, who pursued scientific truths were not known as scientists, but as philosophers. 'Philosopher,' was the ancient term that designated a 'lover of knowledge.' As such, the term, was supposed to represent people who would follow the evidence, supplied by nature, no matter where it led. Even if the evidence led to a conclusion that was opposite to their own initial position(s). This, was because, above all else, what philosophers were said to value was truth - itself. That was their defining quest - the search for truth. With the advent of technical tools that allowed mankind to actually gather empirical evidence it was now possible to make a distinction, between mere opinions on subjects, theories or guesses about the nature of the world, and those that were actually backed up by solid evidence and clear logic. While the gathering of empirical evidence was initially haphazard, it quickly became formalized by the brightest minds who gained acclaim through successive discoveries that stunned the medieval world. In this way empirical evidence ushered in the age of the scientific method. The scientific method was a way of not only gathering evidence in a systemic way, but also experimenting, in order to prove or - just as importantly - disprove one's theory. In this new era, bad evidence-free theories found themselves to be a poor match for observed reality.

However, even when new observations seemingly contradicted their bad assumptions, philosophers who had made grand claims without any evidence to back them up, philosophers merely continued to explain away the contradictions through ever more complicate explanations. The wider society being ignorant of the latest advancements in science, continued in their ignorance, allowing said evidence-free theories to continue to be the dominant cultural narrative of how nature works. The diverging paths between evidence-backed Science, and empty, evidence-free philosophies, did not yet pose a threat to the enduring acceptance and hold such philosophies had on false religion, false science, and mankind's beliefs as a whole. You might have learned the mnemonic: "People Are Made Of Cells," in grade school. It was a way of being able to recall the scientific method. Each first letter in a word stood for a factor in said method: the 'p' stood for purpose; 'a' stood for apparatus; 'm' stood for method; 'o' was for observation; and 'c' was for conclusion. This method is the foundation of the progress made in science, for each of those five factors is critical in running experiments: and it is experiments that move science forward, by discovering new knowledge, through the observations and logical conclusions such experimentation lead to. The scientific method can be summarized as:

And ...

Aristotle's Wikipedia profile lists his writings as covering subjects as diverse as, but not limited to: "physics, biology, zoology, metaphysics, logic, ethics, aesthetics, poetry, theatre, music, rhetoric, psychology, linguistics, economics, politics, meteorology, geology and government." Its profile continues, "As a result, his philosophy has exerted a unique influence on almost every form of knowledge in the West and it continues to be a subject of contemporary philosophical discussion." Among many other platitudes, it concludes: "Aristotle has been called the 'father of [the] scientific method.'" While it is true that he had many interests and was prolific in his writings, this assertion is quite clearly not true! What Aristotle practiced, was anything but science! To what do you think his string of theories on the above topics was due? Intensive scientific experimentation? Or pulling guesses out of thin air? "Science" it has been said, "is not curiosity, neither is it expressing of our intuitions." Science is practiced in two ways: 1) Propose a theory and have it falsified through experimentation by observed data and empirical evidence. 2) When new observations are made and empirical evidence gathered but there is no unifying explanatory theory, then a theory must be proposed that, as Naval Ravikant puts it: "make[s] risky predictions, prohibit[s] many outcomes, is testable/falsifiable, and is hard to vary in the face of contradictory data." This criteria is known as 'empirical falsification' and was proposed by Karl Raimund Popper (28 July 1902-17 September 1994), a creative 20th century scientific thinker. So we see that it doesn't matter which of the two types of science we practice, they both incorporate the same elements in no particular order: theory, observational data and empirical evidence. That is science and the first person to practice it was Johannes Kepler! What Kepler started Galileo perfected, formalizing the structure of all true scientific query, and laying the groundwork for Sir Isaac Newton to then "stand on the shoulders of giants and see farther" than everyone previous to him! Aristotle was the opposite of this. That is why he could claim to have impacted so many fields, when in reality, many of his ideas had no footing in reality. Galileo explains the error of biting off more than we can chew:

Wise words indeed! It takes so much effort to truly understand just one aspect of nature, never mind, to research and discover it, or add to it in any meaningful way. Anyone who has ever excelled at one thing to the point of being a true expert on the subject will tell you that it was nothing but empty hubris, for Aristotle to have claimed to know about all the various fields he opined on as listed above. Fortunately for him, he lived at a time when no one could prove him wrong. What people meant by influence, in his day and age, was who was the better story-teller and debater? Who could get his point across more forcefully. The prevailing theories of Aristotle's time did not prevail, because they were backed up by empirical evidence and sound logic, but because they sounded good and appealed to the warped data-free knowledge framework of his listeners. There was never an iota of observational data, or empirical evidence to back Aristotle's claims about the true nature of the universe. What experiment did Aristotle conduct to be able to assert that, there were invisible heavenly spheres? None! Moving from the ridiculous to the sublime: below, in Illustration 5, we get an updated perspective of the then known universe - after Kepler's excellent work.