Jed Rothwell wrote: > I wrote: > >> Actually, the results from Galileo's telescope were ambiguous and >> required expert observation, training and patience. > > It may seem a little odd to talk about expert training for a brand > new instrument type, such as the telescope. What I mean is you had to > be an expert astronomer. A naked-eye astronomer, such as Tycho Brahe, > who was the last and greatest of them. It is a shame he never got a > chance to use a telescope. If he had, he would have known instantly > what he was seeing despite the problems with the early instruments. > > Along the same lines, in 1989 and 1990, experts in electrochemistry, > tritium and other related subjects were confident that they knew > what they were saying when they first observed cold fusion, even > though it was the first time in history anyone ever saw it. > > - Jed > >
This is a better historical comparison than the story of "refusing to look through the telescope". Also P&F were hoping to see something that could be called cold fusion before they built a cell. It is likely Galileo was hoping to see satellites orbiting a planet before he had a telescope. Harry
