Begriffsverfälschungen durch vermeintlich modernisierende Übersetzungen: Das Beispiel ‚orbis‘ (Kugel, Sphäre)/‚orbita‘ (Bahn)

Autor/in	Krafft, Fritz
Titel	Begriffsverfälschungen durch vermeintlich modernisierende Übersetzungen: Das Beispiel ‚orbis‘ (Kugel, Sphäre)/‚orbita‘ (Bahn)
Quelle	In: Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, (2016) 1, S.52-78Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext (1); PDF als Volltext (2) Verfügbarkeit
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0170-6233
DOI	10.1002/bewi.201601715
Schlagwörter	Sphaera; Aristotle; Celestial physics of ‘orbes’; Johannes Kepler; Michael Mästlin; Paradigm change; Übersetzen historischer wissenschaftlicher Texte; Orbis; Motion of planets; Himmelsphysik der ,orbes; Ptolemy; Translating historical scientific texts; Michael Maestlin; Klaudios Ptolemaios; Aristoteles; Max Caspar; Nicolaus Copernicus; Planetenbewegung; Paradigmenwechsel; Theoricae planetarum; Nicolaus Copernic
Abstract	Distortion of Scientific Terms by Supposed Modernizing Translations: The Example ‘orbis’ (sphere)/‘orbita’ (orbit) . The use of modern terminology and thinking hinders to understand historic astronomical and physical texts and often misleads the reader, because between celestial physics from Aristotle and Ptolemy to Copernic on the one side and since Kepler and Newton on the other side a fundamental change of paradigm had taken place. The former started from the assumption that planets are indirectly moved by large equally rotating etherical spheres combined with each other to form every kind of unequally apparent planetary motion as a resultant, whereas the later started from Kepler's idea that every motion of a planet is directly caused by two forces moulding his (naturally unequal) ‘orbit’. ‘orbita’ was Kepler's new specific term for the way of the planet coined in late 1604; in contrast, the Latin term of the elder paradigm has been ‘orbis’ (‘sphere’), on the one hand as concentric ‘orbis totalis’ of a planet (or the fixed stars), on the other hand as non‐concentric ‘orbes particulares’ (of the eccenters and epicycles) within the space of an ‘orbis totalis’. These terms were interpreted and translated in accordance with modern dynamic (as the supposed ‘true’) thinking as if they were ‘orbits’ (German: ‘Bahn’). But you cannot bring the two paradigms into line. As a result, the texts of seemingly ‘modern’ translations become incomprehensible, absurd and wrong. The study shows this on thinking (1 st ) about Aristotelian physics of former times using terms and ideas of modern dynamics, and on thinking (2 nd ) about the former explanation of apparent motions of heavenly bodies using these dynamics and ignoring the different special Aristotelian and Ptolemaic physics of ‘orbes’ (spheres).
Erfasst von	OLC
Update	2023/3/07