Michelson and Morley had discovered an ultimate concept of cosmology but had rejected the results as improbable. They just couldn’t grasp the ultimate
THAT A BODY DOES NOT MOVE RELATIVE TO ABSOLUTE SPACE.
Back in the 17th century Galileo began offering observations that supported Copernicus’s revolutionary new “Heliocentric” theory that the planet Earth was revolving around the Sun rather then the Sun revolving around the Earth. For centuries the ancient astronomers took it for granted that the Earth was stationary with the sun and planets revolving around it.
Then Copernicus came along and published his book that stated – the Earth was revolving around the sun. He was so fearful of the consequenses of his revolutionary theory that he waited until he was on his death bed before he published his book. Copernicus’s ideas were too radical to be taken seriously at first – that is until Galileo built his telescope and began discovering moons revolving around Jupiter and the different phases of Venus as it revolved around the sun. The Earth was not stationary after all – the ancient astronomers were wrong. But where they??
The debate is not over yet, there is a very controversial cosmological concept that has to be considered before this debate can be laid to rest for good. I feel that the ancient astronomers and Copernicus were both right to a certain degree. How could that be??
How could they both possibly right?? How could the Earth be both moving and stationary at the same time. We know from obsevation that the Earth is moving – relative to the other solar bodies – so how could it be stationary too.