Misplaced Pages

Talk:The Assayer: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 09:13, 21 June 2015 editTkuvho (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers9,424 editsm Reverted edits by SineBot (talk) to last version by 91.180.201.239← Previous edit Revision as of 09:14, 21 June 2015 edit undoTkuvho (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers9,424 edits removing comment by banned userNext edit →
Line 18: Line 18:
==Grassi's follow-up critique== ==Grassi's follow-up critique==
:Grassi's follow-up critique is certainly relevant to this page in that it was a critique of The Assayer, the book under discussion. What is relevant is not so much indivisibles as atomism. ] (]) 07:48, 16 June 2015 (UTC) :Grassi's follow-up critique is certainly relevant to this page in that it was a critique of The Assayer, the book under discussion. What is relevant is not so much indivisibles as atomism. ] (]) 07:48, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

== Fire ==

In attempts to pull Galileo's chestnuts out of the fire for him, Tkuvho has depicted Galileo as a liar.

Revision as of 09:14, 21 June 2015

Lousy

Your punctuation is lousy. This page is for improving the main article. I refer to 69.159.210.13.


This article relies on Recondi (1983), however in some respects his work on teh Assayer have been found to be "fanciful", "implausible" and have "selective use of the evidence" - from Goodman, D and Russell C.A. (eds.). The Rise of Scientific Europe 1500- 1800 . Milton Keynes : Open University, 2003,

Also I have the spelling of the author of the work to which Galileo repsonds as Horatio Grassi in the above text book and three other associated Open University books, but as a new person at Misplaced Pages I haven't altered it. Should I? WOuld I need to cite source just to correct spelling? The text of the Assayer can be found here: Bigcitydeserter (talk) 01:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)bigcitydeserter

Grassi was right?

The claim in the lede that Grassi was right is apparently misleading since Grassi argued that comets moved around the moon, at variance with current wisdom. Tkuvho (talk) 08:55, 19 May 2015 (UTC) Tkuvho (talk) 17:19, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

I want extensive quotation from Galileo and Grassi on the comets. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.83.0.202 (talk) 10:25, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
User:Tkuvho is contradicting himself, crossing out his own remark in this paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.0.0.172 (talk) 08:48, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Grassi's follow-up critique

Grassi's follow-up critique is certainly relevant to this page in that it was a critique of The Assayer, the book under discussion. What is relevant is not so much indivisibles as atomism. Tkuvho (talk) 07:48, 16 June 2015 (UTC)