What Does S-3D Have In Common With Galileo?

Love it or Lump it - post your feedback to individual blog posts on mtbs3D.com
Post Reply
User avatar
Neil
3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)
Posts: 6882
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Contact:

What Does S-3D Have In Common With Galileo?

Post by Neil »

Do you see the parallel between Galileo's discovery that the earth is not the center of the universe and the growing awareness and advocacy of S-3D technologies?

Post your comments here!

Neil
User avatar
LukePC1
Golden Eyed Wiseman! (or woman!)
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:30 am
Location: Europe
Contact:

Post by LukePC1 »

Hm let me think...
Some special educated people (us) can understand things. They know how S-3D works, how to twak it and what techniques are common to achieve it.
The mayority of the people has no clue of the 'world' outside their little 2D environments. They can't realy emagin that the companys out there tell them about the new graphics and how to make HDR-Photos no monitor can show, but they don't tell them the truth... about S-3D.
About their own nature, their awsome ability to actually see in 3D!

Now our Gallileo has got some supporters all over the world, who fight in the underground against the ignorance of the companies. The underground people have always to fear, to be punished for their treachery against the companys (e.g. No new drivers :shock: ).

Let's spread the word in the underground, until we can't be oppressed anymore. Until we are many enough to change the world.
Let's fight, until the authorities accept the new World. The new world in 3D :)
Play Nations at WAR with this code to get 5.000$ as a Starterbonus:
ayqz1u0s
http://mtbs3d.com/naw/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

AMD x2 4200+ 2gb Dualchannel
GF 7900gs for old CRT with Elsa Revelator SG's
currently 94.24 Forceware and 94.24 Stereo with XP sp2!
User avatar
IN65498
One Eyed Hopeful
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat May 12, 2007 1:09 pm

Post by IN65498 »

We credit Christopher Columbus for proving that the world is round,
Cristoforo Colombo is from my hometown Genoa, so I don't want to say bad things about him, but rest assured, he was just a brave man, not a sage one. He was lucky he found a new continent, otherwise his plan to reach Asia would have ended in a certain death for the entire crew of the ships, stranded in a giant ocean.
The reason people were skeptic about his endeavor was precisely the fact that he was underestimating Earth's circumference, while the skeptics were right. Of course there were people believing the Earth was flat, and I bet there are even more now! But every educated man was taking the spherical Earth as a fact.

Unfortunately we are daily fed with absurd myths about the ignorance of our ancestors, especially if it's instrumental in making us feel oh-so-enlightened and in depicting the Catholic Church and Christian ages in the darkest possible tone.
Nicolaus Copernicus first postulated that the sun is the center of the universe, but he didn?t have the tools to prove it. It was only when Galileo Galilei made a technical innovation of grinding better telescope lenses that he was able to prove without a doubt that the earth revolves around the sun, and not the other way around.
It wasn't a postulate but a theory. Big difference.
Galileo made many important discoveries, but the use of the telescope proved absolutely nothing on the subject of heliocentrism.
Unfortunately, in the early to mid 1600?s, knowledge was a dangerous thing.

Another ugly myth. Many scientific advances have been undermined just because only the "newer" ones were better suited for an anti-religion agenda (ex.: who made the first encyclopedia?)
At the time the ill-famed Jesuits built the Reducciones in South America, giving violent cannibal tribes the means to build a remarkable civilization based on the faith, with principles one would call liberal today, a 5-day work week, cities with remarkably advanced productions of any sort of goods...
Copernicus was a catholic priest, nobody even thought of harassing him (but some protestants were not so happy with his theory).
When Johannes Kepler was facing harsh criticism from the Protestants for his theories, he was offered a teaching opportunity in the Papal University of Bologna, and this in the same period of the Galileo trial.
The Holy See was actively encouraging science discoveries, mecenatism was commonplace, the Specola Vaticana was (is) a group of scientists very active in Astronomy, they already had a quarrel with Galileo about comets, and we now know that it was Galileo that was wrong by insisting that comets weren't real objects in space, and those clergymen were right. This incident showed how biased Galileo was, and how easily he was treating people with contempt while pretending his ideas were scientific facts even when confronted with actual data showing the opposite was true.
I will never forget the play I read about Galileo (?Galileo Galilei?), where the senior Catholic Church clergymen would refuse to look in the telescope because to do so would forever change their beliefs and smash the political fabric that society was based on.
Most clergymen were well educated and accepted the new theories more easily than the Academia establishment. The Pope himself was an admirer of Galileo.
Playwrights should not be allowed to rewrite history to serve their own political agenda (BTW. after the collapse of communism one can hardly hear about Bertolt Brecht anymore). Sadly people believe what they see in fiction and take it for a fact.
The only key point to support Galileo's pretense to
declare heliocentrism proved once and for all, was patently wrong: he tried to convince those scientists that the tides were caused by the Earth shaking, and not by the Moon influence. This was an insult to intelligence.

So, Galileo was trying to impose his view in spite of the absence of factual proves; some of his assertions now appear ludicrous, while he was somewhat right about the Earth-Sun relationship; but scientific demonstrations of the non-inertial nature of Earth's movement came in other centuries.
Had there been a peer-review system like nowadays, Galileo wouldn't have been able to publish his junk; after all, the Copernican theory came out before he was born and was verified long after he was dead, while he added nothing!
(I repeat: he wrote also many important things about other subjects).

The Church was not only the closest thing you could get at the time to a big publisher, a scientific/academic institution with the onus of giving a stamp of approval to sound scientific theories.
There was something else at stake, a problem we are still facing today: scientism, i.e. a minority of scientists dictating what must be considered true because it's in accordance with their vision, even though it's far from being scientifically verified.

In conclusion, without falling into anachronisms, the motives of the trial were commendable, while the form may be questionable, the results included a handful of years where people hostile to new theories prevailed, and exposing the flank to centuries of anti-catholic propaganda.
At the end of the book, as right and as factual that Galileo was, he had no choice but to recant when he was threatened by a brief introduction to his awaiting torture chamber.

Torture has always been commonplace in secular tribunals and jails, in some advanced countries at some time in the twentieth century was banned and it is now practiced only against the law, but it is still relatively common in today's world.
Compare that to the Holy Inquisition, where torture was introduced at a later time and then abandoned, and it was so limited (no permanent harm, no blood, less than 15 minutes, only once...) that they commented only sissies were scared by the menace of torture.
Criminals in some instances cursed against God in the hope to be transferred to the Inquisition, due to the higher standards and guarantees.
As for Galileo, he never went to jail, never actually risked any severe penalty or torture, while, as a formal act, he was "showed the instrument of torture".
He recanted because he had to admit he was wrong, and now we know he was.
He agreed to rewrite his theories, and to have his manuscripts approved by the church before being released.
In the real world the point was not to be forced to change his views, but to stop insisting he had demonstrated something he hadn't demonstrated!
What the church didn?t know was he had secretly written a second version of his manuscripts, and had arranged to smuggle them out for the world to see. I can?t help but wonder if the Catholic Church would have continued to maintain an equally strong influence on society had it embraced and prepared for this information.
This is the apex of anti-catholic propaganda, completely disconnected from reality. Nobody employed 007 tactics, there were just some books which were kept in a special list for some decades, that meant they were just for specialists and not to be read by the general public.

Now, you could argue that this is a 3D advocacy forum and site, hardly a place to discuss history.

True, but as the human mind works, spreading misinformation indirectly and unwillingly is way, way more effective than making the same assertions in a context where the subject is focused on the controversial topic.
And there's a lot more at stake, so pardon me for stepping to the plate on this subject.

Of course what I just showed you is how "received ideas" can skew a man's vision, in a way this is an even better example of what you were trying to say. People don't know about 3D but still believe they know everything.
Only, we should never be overconfident about the completeness of our vision.
User avatar
Neil
3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)
Posts: 6882
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Contact:

Post by Neil »

Well, I guess I will have to do more reading then!

Thank you for your input and clarifications. The blog wasn't about the Catholic church, and be it fictional or otherwise, it was a scenario that ties in with what we are doing here. Maybe the subject matter is too sensitive for our purposes, more so than I realized.

The play was a story taught in college (Vanier College) many years ago, and I was making a link between the two. Perhaps the moral and the method didn't add up.

Again, thank you for your contribution, and no ill will was intended.

Regards,
Neil
User avatar
Freke1
Certif-Eyable!
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 pm
Location: Wake Island

Post by Freke1 »

User avatar
Neil
3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)
Posts: 6882
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Contact:

Post by Neil »

Is someone we know trying to feed the fire? :wink:

Let's stay on topic. Is this movie available in S-3D?

Regards,
Neil
User avatar
Freke1
Certif-Eyable!
Posts: 1060
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 pm
Location: Wake Island

Post by Freke1 »

Honestly I don't know what the "2D" :D gamers or Nvidia driver development section guys or various game coders or Microsoft's DirectX coders do or don't think. So I can't answer the OP (Original Post) question :roll: .
User avatar
Neil
3D Angel Eyes (Moderator)
Posts: 6882
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Contact:

Post by Neil »

Ah! Well, then...I think it's time for a new blog!

I'll try to get something up tomorrow.

Regards,
Neil
Post Reply

Return to “MTBS Editorial User Remarks”