document_title: Geocentric model

question_text: who was the first person to suggest a geocentric universe

question_tokens: who was the first person to suggest a geocentric universe

text: Geocentric model

text: Ancient Greece[edit]

text: The geocentric model entered Greek astronomy and philosophy at an early point; it can be found in pre-Socratic philosophy. In the 6th century BC, Anaximander proposed a cosmology with Earth shaped like a section of a pillar (a cylinder), held aloft at the center of everything. The Sun, Moon, and planets were holes in invisible wheels surrounding Earth; through the holes, humans could see concealed fire. About the same time, Pythagoras thought that the Earth was a sphere (in accordance with observations of eclipses), but not at the center; they believed that it was in motion around an unseen fire. Later these views were combined, so most educated Greeks from the 4th century BC on thought that the Earth was a sphere at the center of the universe.[12]

text: In the 4th century BC, two influential Greek philosophers, Plato and his student Aristotle, wrote works based on the geocentric model. According to Plato, the Earth was a sphere, stationary at the center of the universe. The stars and planets were carried around the Earth on spheres or circles, arranged in the order (outwards from the center): Moon, Sun, Venus, Mercury, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, fixed stars, with the fixed stars located on the celestial sphere. In his "Myth of Er", a section of the Republic, Plato describes the cosmos as the Spindle of Necessity, attended by the Sirens and turned by the three Fates. Eudoxus of Cnidus, who worked with Plato, developed a less mythical, more mathematical explanation of the planets' motion based on Plato's dictum stating that all phenomena in the heavens can be explained with uniform circular motion. Aristotle elaborated on Eudoxus' system.

text: In the fully developed Aristotelian system, the spherical Earth is at the center of the universe, and all other heavenly bodies are attached to 47–55 transparent, rotating spheres surrounding the Earth, all concentric with it. (The number is so high because several spheres are needed for each planet.) These spheres, known as crystalline spheres, all moved at different uniform speeds to create the revolution of bodies around the Earth. They were composed of an incorruptible substance called aether. Aristotle believed that the moon was in the innermost sphere and therefore touches the realm of Earth, causing the dark spots (macula) and the ability to go through lunar phases. He further described his system by explaining the natural tendencies of the terrestrial elements: Earth, water, fire, air, as well as celestial aether. His system held that Earth was the heaviest element, with the strongest movement towards the center, thus water formed a layer surrounding the sphere of Earth. The tendency of air and fire, on the other hand, was to move upwards, away from the center, with fire being lighter than air. Beyond the layer of fire, were the solid spheres of aether in which the celestial bodies were embedded. They, themselves, were also entirely composed of aether.

text: Adherence to the geocentric model stemmed largely from several important observations. First of all, if the Earth did move, then one ought to be able to observe the shifting of the fixed stars due to stellar parallax. In short, if the Earth was moving, the shapes of the constellations should change considerably over the course of a year. If they did not appear to move, the stars are either much farther away than the Sun and the planets than previously conceived, making their motion undetectable, or in reality they are not moving at all. Because the stars were actually much further away than Greek astronomers postulated (making movement extremely subtle), stellar parallax was not detected until the 19th century. Therefore, the Greeks chose the simpler of the two explanations. Another observation used in favor of the geocentric model at the time was the apparent consistency of Venus' luminosity, which implies that it is usually about the same distance from Earth, which in turn is more consistent with geocentrism than heliocentrism. In reality, that is because the loss of light caused by Venus' phases compensates for the increase in apparent size caused by its varying distance from Earth. Objectors to heliocentrism noted that terrestrial bodies naturally tend to come to rest as near as possible to the center of the Earth. Further barring the opportunity to fall closer the center, terrestrial bodies tend not to move unless forced by an outside object, or transformed to a different element by heat or moisture.

text: Atmospheric explanations for many phenomena were preferred because the Eudoxan–Aristotelian model based on perfectly concentric spheres was not intended to explain changes in the brightness of the planets due to a change in distance.[13] Eventually, perfectly concentric spheres were abandoned as it was impossible to develop a sufficiently accurate model under that ideal. However, while providing for similar explanations, the later deferent and epicycle model was flexible enough to accommodate observations for many centuries.

text: Ptolemaic model[edit]

text: Although the basic tenets of Greek geocentrism were established by the time of Aristotle, the details of his system did not become standard. The Ptolemaic system, developed by the Hellenistic astronomer Claudius Ptolemaeus in the 2nd century AD finally standardised geocentrism. His main astronomical work, the Almagest, was the culmination of centuries of work by Hellenic, Hellenistic and Babylonian astronomers. For over a millennium European and Islamic astronomers assumed it was the correct cosmological model. Because of its influence, people sometimes wrongly think the Ptolemaic system is identical with the geocentric model.

text: Ptolemy argued that the Earth was a sphere in the center of the universe, from the simple observation that half the stars were above the horizon and half were below the horizon at any time (stars on rotating stellar sphere), and the assumption that the stars were all at some modest distance from the center of the universe. If the Earth was substantially displaced from the center, this division into visible and invisible stars would not be equal.[n 9]

text: Ptolemaic system[edit]

text: In the Ptolemaic system, each planet is moved by a system of two spheres: one called its deferent; the other, its epicycle. The deferent is a circle whose center point, called the eccentric and marked in the diagram with an X, is removed from the Earth. The original purpose of the eccentric was to account for the difference in length of the seasons (northern autumn was about five days shorter than spring during this time period) by placing the Earth away from the center of rotation of the rest of the universe. Another sphere, the epicycle, is embedded inside the deferent sphere and is represented by the smaller dotted line to the right. A given planet then moves around the epicycle at the same time the epicycle moves along the path marked by the deferent. These combined movements cause the given planet to move closer to and further away from the Earth at different points in its orbit, and explained the observation that planets slowed down, stopped, and moved backward in retrograde motion, and then again reversed to resume normal, or prograde, motion.

text: The deferent-and-epicycle model had been used by Greek astronomers for centuries along with the idea of the eccentric (a deferent which is slightly off-center from the Earth), which was even older. In the illustration, the center of the deferent is not the Earth but the spot marked X, making it eccentric (from the Greek ἐκ ec- meaning "from," and κέντρον kentron meaning "center"), from which the spot takes its name. Unfortunately, the system that was available in Ptolemy's time did not quite match observations, even though it was considerably improved over Hipparchus' system. Most noticeably the size of a planet's retrograde loop (especially that of Mars) would be smaller, and sometimes larger, than expected, resulting in positional errors of as much as 30 degrees. To alleviate the problem, Ptolemy developed the equant. The equant was a point near the center of a planet's orbit which, if you were to stand there and watch, the center of the planet's epicycle would always appear to move at uniform speed; all other locations would see non-uniform speed, like on the Earth. By using an equant, Ptolemy claimed to keep motion which was uniform and circular, although it departed from the Platonic ideal of uniform circular motion. The resultant system, which eventually came to be widely accepted in the west, seems unwieldy to modern astronomers; each planet required an epicycle revolving on a deferent, offset by an equant which was different for each planet. It predicted various celestial motions, including the beginning and end of retrograde motion, to within a maximum error of 10 degrees, considerably better than without the equant.

text: The model with epicycles is in fact a very good model of an elliptical orbit with low eccentricity. The well known ellipse shape does not appear to a noticeable extent when the eccentricity is less than 5%, but the offset distance of the "center" (in fact the focus occupied by the sun) is very noticeable even with low eccentricities as possessed by the planets.

text: To summarize, Ptolemy devised a system that was compatible with Aristotelian philosophy and managed to track actual observations and predict future movement mostly to within the limits of the next 1000 years of observations. The observed motions and his mechanisms for explaining them include:

text:
The Ptolemaic System

Object(s)
Observation
Modeling mechanism

Stars
Motion of entire sky E to W in ~24 hrs ("first motion")
Stars: Daily motion E to W of sphere of stars, carrying all other spheres with it; normally ignored; other spheres have additional motions

Sun
Motion yearly W to E along ecliptic
Motion of Sun's sphere W to E in year

Sun
Non-uniform rate along ecliptic (uneven seasons)
Eccentric orbit (Sun's deferent center off Earth)

Moon
Monthly motion W to E compared to stars
Monthly W to E motion of Moon's sphere

The 5 planets
General motion W to E through zodiac
Motion of deferents W to E; period set by observation of planet going around the ecliptic

Planets
Retrograde motion
Motion of epicycle in same direction as deferent. Period of epicycle is time between retrograde motions (synodic period).

Planets
Variations in speed through the zodiac
Eccentric per planet

Planets
Variations in retrograde timing
Equants per planet (Copernicus used a pair of epicycles instead)

Planets
Size of deferents, epicycles
Only ratio between radius of deferent and associated epicycle determined; absolute distances not determined in theory

Interior planets
Average greatest elongations of 23° (Mercury) and 46° (Venus)
Size of epicycles set by these angles, proportional to distances

Interior planets
Limited to movement near the Sun
Center their deferent centers along the Sun–Earth line

Exterior planets
Retrograde only at opposition, when brightest
Radii of epicycles aligned to Sun–Earth line

text: The geocentric model was eventually replaced by the heliocentric model. The earliest heliocentric model, Copernican heliocentrism, could remove Ptolemy's epicycles because the retrograde motion could be seen to be the result of the combination of Earth and planet movement and speeds. Copernicus felt strongly that equants were a violation of Aristotelian purity, and proved that replacement of the equant with a pair of new epicycles was entirely equivalent. Astronomers often continued using the equants instead of the epicycles because the former was easier to calculate, and gave the same result.

text: It has been determined, in fact, that the Copernican, Ptolemaic and even the Tychonic models provided identical results to identical inputs. They are computationally equivalent. It wasn't until Kepler demonstrated a physical observation that could show that the physical sun is directly involved in determining an orbit that a new model was required.

text: The Ptolemaic order of spheres from Earth outward is:[15]

text:
Moon
Mercury
Venus
Sun
Mars
Jupiter
Saturn
Fixed Stars
Primum Mobile ("First Moved")

tag: ol

text: Ptolemy did not invent or work out this order, which aligns with the ancient Seven Heavens religious cosmology common to the major Eurasian religious traditions. It also follows the decreasing orbital periods of the moon, sun, planets and stars.

text: Islamic astronomy and geocentrism[edit]

text: Muslim astronomers generally accepted the Ptolemaic system and the geocentric model,[16] but by the 10th century texts appeared regularly whose subject matter was doubts concerning Ptolemy (shukūk).[17] Several Muslim scholars questioned the Earth's apparent immobility[18][19] and centrality within the universe.[20] Some Muslim astronomers believed that the Earth rotates around its axis, such as Abu Sa'id al-Sijzi (d. circa 1020).[21][22] According to al-Biruni, Sijzi invented an astrolabe called al-zūraqī based on a belief held by some of his contemporaries "that the motion we see is due to the Earth's movement and not to that of the sky."[22][23] The prevalence of this view is further confirmed by a reference from the 13th century which states:

text: According to the geometers [or engineers] (muhandisīn), the Earth is in constant circular motion, and what appears to be the motion of the heavens is actually due to the motion of the Earth and not the stars.[22]

text: Early in the 11th century Alhazen wrote a scathing critique of Ptolemy's model in his Doubts on Ptolemy (c. 1028), which some have interpreted to imply he was criticizing Ptolemy's geocentrism,[24] but most agree that he was actually criticizing the details of Ptolemy's model rather than his geocentrism.[25]

text: In the 12th century, Arzachel departed from the ancient Greek idea of uniform circular motions by hypothesizing that the planet Mercury moves in an elliptic orbit,[26][27] while Alpetragius proposed a planetary model that abandoned the equant, epicycle and eccentric mechanisms,[28] though this resulted in a system that was mathematically less accurate.[29] Alpetragius also declared the Ptolemaic system as an imaginary model that was successful at predicting planetary positions but not real or physical. His alternative system spread through most of Europe during the 13th century.[30]

text: Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (1149–1209), in dealing with his conception of physics and the physical world in his Matalib, rejects the Aristotelian and Avicennian notion of the Earth's centrality within the universe, but instead argues that there are "a thousand thousand worlds (alfa alfi 'awalim) beyond this world such that each one of those worlds be bigger and more massive than this world as well as having the like of what this world has." To support his theological argument, he cites the Qur'anic verse, "All praise belongs to God, Lord of the Worlds," emphasizing the term "Worlds."[20]

text: The "Maragha Revolution" refers to the Maragha school's revolution against Ptolemaic astronomy. The "Maragha school" was an astronomical tradition beginning in the Maragha observatory and continuing with astronomers from the Damascus mosque and Samarkand observatory. Like their Andalusian predecessors, the Maragha astronomers attempted to solve the equant problem (the circle around whose circumference a planet or the center of an epicycle was conceived to move uniformly) and produce alternative configurations to the Ptolemaic model without abandoning geocentrism. They were more successful than their Andalusian predecessors in producing non-Ptolemaic configurations which eliminated the equant and eccentrics, were more accurate than the Ptolemaic model in numerically predicting planetary positions, and were in better agreement with empirical observations.[31] The most important of the Maragha astronomers included Mo'ayyeduddin Urdi (d. 1266), Nasīr al-Dīn al-Tūsī (1201–1274), Qutb al-Din al-Shirazi (1236–1311), Ibn al-Shatir (1304–1375), Ali Qushji (c. 1474), Al-Birjandi (d. 1525), and Shams al-Din al-Khafri (d. 1550).[32] Ibn al-Shatir, the Damascene astronomer (1304–1375 AD) working at the Umayyad Mosque, wrote a major book entitled Kitab Nihayat al-Sul fi Tashih al-Usul (A Final Inquiry Concerning the Rectification of Planetary Theory) on a theory which departs largely from the Ptolemaic system known at that time. In his book, Ibn al-Shatir, an Arab astronomer of the fourteenth century, E. S. Kennedy wrote "what is of most interest, however, is that Ibn al-Shatir's lunar theory, except for trivial differences in parameters, is identical with that of Copernicus (1473–1543 AD)." The discovery that the models of Ibn al-Shatir are mathematically identical to those of Copernicus suggests the possible transmission of these models to Europe.[33] At the Maragha and Samarkand observatories, the Earth's rotation was discussed by al-Tusi and Ali Qushji (b. 1403); the arguments and evidence they used resemble those used by Copernicus to support the Earth's motion.[18][19]

text: However, the Maragha school never made the paradigm shift to heliocentrism.[34] The influence of the Maragha school on Copernicus remains speculative, since there is no documentary evidence to prove it. The possibility that Copernicus independently developed the Tusi couple remains open, since no researcher has yet demonstrated that he knew about Tusi's work or that of the Maragha school.[34][35]

text: Geocentrism and rival systems[edit]

text: The examples and perspective in this article may not include all significant viewpoints. Please improve the article or discuss the issue. (June 2015) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

text: Not all Greeks agreed with the geocentric model. The Pythagorean system has already been mentioned; some Pythagoreans believed the Earth to be one of several planets going around a central fire.[36] Hicetas and Ecphantus, two Pythagoreans of the 5th century BC, and Heraclides Ponticus in the 4th century BC, believed that the Earth rotated on its axis but remained at the center of the universe.[37] Such a system still qualifies as geocentric. It was revived in the Middle Ages by Jean Buridan. Heraclides Ponticus was once thought to have proposed that both Venus and Mercury went around the Sun rather than the Earth, but this is no longer accepted.[38] Martianus Capella definitely put Mercury and Venus in orbit around the Sun.[39] Aristarchus of Samos was the most radical. He wrote a work, which has not survived, on heliocentrism, saying that the Sun was at the center of the universe, while the Earth and other planets revolved around it.[40] His theory was not popular, and he had one named follower, Seleucus of Seleucia.[41]

text: Copernican system[edit]

text: In 1543, the geocentric system met its first serious challenge with the publication of Copernicus' De revolutionibus orbium coelestium (On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres), which posited that the Earth and the other planets instead revolved around the Sun. The geocentric system was still held for many years afterwards, as at the time the Copernican system did not offer better predictions than the geocentric system, and it posed problems for both natural philosophy and scripture. The Copernican system was no more accurate than Ptolemy's system, because it still used circular orbits. This was not altered until Johannes Kepler postulated that they were elliptical (Kepler's first law of planetary motion).

text: With the invention of the telescope in 1609, observations made by Galileo Galilei (such as that Jupiter has moons) called into question some of the tenets of geocentrism but did not seriously threaten it. Because he observed dark "spots" on the moon, craters, he remarked that the moon was not a perfect celestial body as had been previously conceived. This was the first time someone could see imperfections on a celestial body that was supposed to be composed of perfect aether. As such, because the moon's imperfections could now be related to those seen on Earth, one could argue that neither was unique: rather, they were both just celestial bodies made from Earth-like material. Galileo could also see the moons of Jupiter, which he dedicated to Cosimo II de' Medici, and stated that they orbited around Jupiter, not Earth.[42] This was a significant claim as it would mean not only that not everything revolved around Earth as stated in the Ptolemaic model, but also showed a secondary celestial body could orbit a moving celestial body, strengthening the heliocentric argument that a moving Earth could retain the Moon.[43] Galileo's observations were verified by other astronomers of the time period who quickly adopted use of the telescope, including Christoph Scheiner, Johannes Kepler, and Giovan Paulo Lembo.[44]

text: In December 1610, Galileo Galilei used his telescope to observe that Venus showed all phases, just like the Moon. He thought that while this observation was incompatible with the Ptolemaic system, it was a natural consequence of the heliocentric system.

text: However, Ptolemy placed Venus' deferent and epicycle entirely inside the sphere of the Sun (between the Sun and Mercury), but this was arbitrary; he could just as easily have swapped Venus and Mercury and put them on the other side of the Sun, or made any other arrangement of Venus and Mercury, as long as they were always near a line running from the Earth through the Sun, such as placing the center of the Venus epicycle near the Sun. In this case, if the Sun is the source of all the light, under the Ptolemaic system:

text: If Venus is between Earth and the Sun, the phase of Venus must always be crescent or all dark.

text: If Venus is beyond the Sun, the phase of Venus must always be gibbous or full.

text: But Galileo saw Venus at first small and full, and later large and crescent.

text: This showed that with a Ptolemaic cosmology, the Venus epicycle can be neither completely inside nor completely outside of the orbit of the Sun. As a result, Ptolemaics abandoned the idea that the epicycle of Venus was completely inside the Sun, and later 17th century competition between astronomical cosmologies focused on variations of Tycho Brahe's Tychonic system (in which the Earth was still at the center of the universe, and around it revolved the Sun, but all other planets revolved around the Sun in one massive set of epicycles), or variations on the Copernican system.

text: Gravitation[edit]

text: Johannes Kepler analysed Tycho Brahe's famously accurate observations and afterwards constructed his three laws in 1609 and 1619, based on a heliocentric view where the planets move in elliptical paths. Using these laws, he was the first astronomer to successfully predict a transit of Venus (for the year 1631). The change from circular orbits to elliptical planetary paths dramatically improved the accuracy of celestial observations and predictions. Because the heliocentric model by Copernicus was no more accurate than Ptolemy's system, new observations were needed to persuade those who still held on to the geocentric model. However, Kepler's laws based on Brahe's data became a problem which geocentrists could not easily overcome.

text: In 1687, Isaac Newton stated the law of universal gravitation, described earlier as a hypothesis by Robert Hooke and others. His main achievement was to mathematically derive Kepler's laws of planetary motion from the law of gravitation, thus helping to prove the latter. This introduced gravitation as the force that both kept the Earth and planets moving through the heavens and also kept the air from flying away. The theory of gravity allowed scientists to construct a plausible heliocentric model for the solar system quickly. In his Principia, Newton explained his system of how gravity, previously thought of as an occult force (that is, an unexplained force), directed the movements of celestial bodies, and kept our solar system in its working order. His descriptions of centripetal force[45] were a breakthrough in scientific thought which used the newly developed differential calculus, and finally replaced the previous schools of scientific thought, i.e. those of Aristotle and Ptolemy. However, the process was gradual.

text: Several empirical tests of Newton's theory, explaining the longer period of oscillation of a pendulum at the equator and the differing size of a degree of latitude, gradually became available over the period 1673–1738. In addition, stellar aberration was observed by Robert Hooke in 1674 and tested in a series of observations by Jean Picard over ten years finishing in 1680. However, it was not explained until 1729 when James Bradley provided an approximate explanation in terms of the Earth's revolution about the sun.

text: In 1838, astronomer Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel measured the parallax of the star 61 Cygni successfully, and disproved Ptolemy's claim that parallax motion did not exist. This finally confirmed the assumptions made by Copernicus, provided accurate, dependable scientific observations, and displayed truly how far away stars were from Earth.

text: A geocentric frame is useful for many everyday activities and most laboratory experiments, but is a less appropriate choice for solar-system mechanics and space travel. While a heliocentric frame is most useful in those cases, galactic and extra-galactic astronomy is easier if the sun is treated as neither stationary nor the center of the universe, but rotating around the center of our galaxy, and in turn our galaxy is also not at rest in the cosmic background.

text: Relativity[edit]

text: Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld wrote in The Evolution of Physics (1938): "Can we formulate physical laws so that they are valid for all CS (=coordinate systems), not only those moving uniformly, but also those moving quite arbitrarily, relative to each other? If this can be done, our difficulties will be over. We shall then be able to apply the laws of nature to any CS. The struggle, so violent in the early days of science, between the views of Ptolemy and Copernicus would then be quite meaningless. Either CS could be used with equal justification. The two sentences, 'the sun is at rest and the Earth moves', or 'the sun moves and the Earth is at rest', would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different CS. Could we build a real relativistic physics valid in all CS; a physics in which there would be no place for absolute, but only for relative, motion? This is indeed possible!"[46]

text: Despite giving more respectability to the geocentric view than Newtonian physics does,[47] relativity is not geocentric. Rather, relativity states that the Sun, the Earth, the Moon, Jupiter, or any other point for that matter could be chosen as a center of the solar system with equal validity.[48] For this reason Robert Sungenis, a modern geocentrist, spent much of Volume I of his book Galileo Was Wrong: The Church Was Right critiquing and trying to unravel the Special and General theories of Relativity.[49]

text: Relativity agrees with Newtonian predictions that regardless of whether the Sun or the Earth are chosen arbitrarily as the center of the coordinate system describing the solar system, the paths of the planets form (roughly) ellipses with respect to the Sun, not the Earth. With respect to the average reference frame of the fixed stars, the planets do indeed move around the Sun, which due to its much larger mass, moves far less than its own diameter and the gravity of which is dominant in determining the orbits of the planets. (In other words, the center of mass of the solar system is near the center of the Sun.) The Earth and Moon are much closer to being a binary planet; the center of mass around which they both rotate is still inside the Earth, but is about 4,624 km (2,873 mi) or 72.6% of the Earth's radius away from the centre of the Earth (thus closer to the surface than the center).[citation needed]

text: What the principle of relativity points out is that correct mathematical calculations can be made regardless of the reference frame chosen, and these will all agree with each other as to the predictions of actual motions of bodies with respect to each other. It is not necessary to choose the object in the solar system with the largest gravitational field as the center of the coordinate system in order to predict the motions of planetary bodies, though doing so may make calculations easier to perform or interpret. A geocentric coordinate system can be more convenient when dealing only with bodies mostly influenced by the gravity of the Earth (such as artificial satellites and the Moon), or when calculating what the sky will look like when viewed from Earth (as opposed to an imaginary observer looking down on the entire solar system, where a different coordinate system might be more convenient).

text: Religious and contemporary adherence to geocentrism[edit]

text: The Ptolemaic model of the solar system held sway into the early modern age; from the late 16th century onward it was gradually replaced as the consensus description by the heliocentric model. Geocentrism as a separate religious belief, however, never completely died out. In the United States between 1870 and 1920, for example, various members of the Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod published articles disparaging Copernican astronomy, and geocentrism was widely taught within the synod during that period.[50] However, in the 1902 Theological Quarterly, A. L. Graebner claimed that the synod had no doctrinal position on geocentrism, heliocentrism, or any scientific model, unless it were to contradict Scripture. He stated that any possible declarations of geocentrists within the synod did not set the position of the church body as a whole.[51]

text: Articles arguing that geocentrism was the biblical perspective appeared in some early creation science newsletters pointing to some passages in the Bible, which, when taken literally, indicate that the daily apparent motions of the Sun and the Moon are due to their actual motions around the Earth rather than due to the rotation of the Earth about its axis. For example, in Joshua 10:12, the Sun and Moon are said to stop in the sky, and in Psalms the world is described as immobile.[52] Psalms 93:1 says in part "the world is established, firm and secure".) Contemporary advocates for such religious beliefs include Robert Sungenis (president of Bellarmine Theological Forum and author of the 2006 book Galileo Was Wrong).[53] These people subscribe to the view that a plain reading of the Bible contains an accurate account of the manner in which the universe was created and requires a geocentric worldview. Most contemporary creationist organizations reject such perspectives.[n 10]

text: After all, Copernicanism was the first major victory of science over religion, so it's inevitable that some folks would think that everything that's wrong with the world began there.

text: Morris Berman quotes a 2006 survey that show currently some 20% of the U.S. population believe that the sun goes around the Earth (geocentricism) rather than the Earth goes around the sun (heliocentricism), while a further 9% claimed not to know.[56] Polls conducted by Gallup in the 1990s found that 16% of Germans, 18% of Americans and 19% of Britons hold that the Sun revolves around the Earth.[57] A study conducted in 2005 by Jon D. Miller of Northwestern University, an expert in the public understanding of science and technology,[58] found that about 20%, or one in five, of American adults believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.[59] According to 2011 VTSIOM poll, 32% of Russians believe that the Sun orbits the Earth.[60]

text: Historical positions of the Roman Catholic hierarchy[edit]

text: The famous Galileo affair pitted the geocentric model against the claims of Galileo. In regards to the theological basis for such an argument, two Popes addressed the question of whether the use of phenomenological language would compel one to admit an error in Scripture. Both taught that it would not. Pope Leo XIII (1878–1903) wrote:

text: we have to contend against those who, making an evil use of physical science, minutely scrutinize the Sacred Book in order to detect the writers in a mistake, and to take occasion to vilify its contents. ... There can never, indeed, be any real discrepancy between the theologian and the physicist, as long as each confines himself within his own lines, and both are careful, as St. Augustine warns us, "not to make rash assertions, or to assert what is not known as known". If dissension should arise between them, here is the rule also laid down by St. Augustine, for the theologian: "Whatever they can really demonstrate to be true of physical nature, we must show to be capable of reconciliation with our Scriptures; and whatever they assert in their treatises which is contrary to these Scriptures of ours, that is to Catholic faith, we must either prove it as well as we can to be entirely false, or at all events we must, without the smallest hesitation, believe it to be so." To understand how just is the rule here formulated we must remember, first, that the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost "Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe), things in no way profitable unto salvation." Hence they did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses; and somewhat in the same way the sacred writers-as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us – "went by what sensibly appeared", or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to.

text: Maurice Finocchiaro, author of a book on the Galileo affair, notes that this is "a view of the relationship between biblical interpretation and scientific investigation that corresponds to the one advanced by Galileo in the "Letter to the Grand Duchess Christina".[61] Pope Pius XII (1939–1958) repeated his predecessor's teaching:

text: The first and greatest care of Leo XIII was to set forth the teaching on the truth of the Sacred Books and to defend it from attack. Hence with grave words did he proclaim that there is no error whatsoever if the sacred writer, speaking of things of the physical order "went by what sensibly appeared" as the Angelic Doctor says, speaking either "in figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even among the most eminent men of science". For "the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately – the words are St. Augustine's – the Holy Spirit, Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things – that is the essential nature of the things of the universe – things in no way profitable to salvation"; which principle "will apply to cognate sciences, and especially to history", that is, by refuting, "in a somewhat similar way the fallacies of the adversaries and defending the historical truth of Sacred Scripture from their attacks".

text: In 1664, Pope Alexander VII republished the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (List of Prohibited Books) and attached the various decrees connected with those books, including those concerned with heliocentrism. He stated in a Papal Bull that his purpose in doing so was that "the succession of things done from the beginning might be made known [quo rei ab initio gestae series innotescat]".[62]

text: The position of the curia evolved slowly over the centuries towards permitting the heliocentric view. In 1757, during the papacy of Benedict XIV, the Congregation of the Index withdrew the decree which prohibited all books teaching the Earth's motion, although the Dialogue and a few other books continued to be explicitly included. In 1820, the Congregation of the Holy Office, with the pope's approval, decreed that Catholic astronomer Giuseppe Settele was allowed to treat the Earth's motion as an established fact and removed any obstacle for Catholics to hold to the motion of the Earth:

text: The Assessor of the Holy Office has referred the request of Giuseppe Settele, Professor of Optics and Astronomy at La Sapienza University, regarding permission to publish his work Elements of Astronomy in which he espouses the common opinion of the astronomers of our time regarding the Earth’s daily and yearly motions, to His Holiness through Divine Providence, Pope Pius VII. Previously, His Holiness had referred this request to the Supreme Sacred Congregation and concurrently to the consideration of the Most Eminent and Most Reverend General Cardinal Inquisitor. His Holiness has decreed that no obstacles exist for those who sustain Copernicus' affirmation regarding the Earth's movement in the manner in which it is affirmed today, even by Catholic authors. He has, moreover, suggested the insertion of several notations into this work, aimed at demonstrating that the above mentioned affirmation [of Copernicus], as it has come to be understood, does not present any difficulties; difficulties that existed in times past, prior to the subsequent astronomical observations that have now occurred. [Pope Pius VII] has also recommended that the implementation [of these decisions] be given to the Cardinal Secretary of the Supreme Sacred Congregation and Master of the Sacred Apostolic Palace. He is now appointed the task of bringing to an end any concerns and criticisms regarding the printing of this book, and, at the same time, ensuring that in the future, regarding the publication of such works, permission is sought from the Cardinal Vicar whose signature will not be given without the authorization of the Superior of his Order.[63]

text: In 1822, the Congregation of the Holy Office removed the prohibition on the publication of books treating of the Earth's motion in accordance with modern astronomy and Pope Pius VII ratified the decision:

text: The most excellent [cardinals] have decreed that there must be no denial, by the present or by future Masters of the Sacred Apostolic Palace, of permission to print and to publish works which treat of the mobility of the Earth and of the immobility of the sun, according to the common opinion of modern astronomers, as long as there are no other contrary indications, on the basis of the decrees of the Sacred Congregation of the Index of 1757 and of this Supreme [Holy Office] of 1820; and that those who would show themselves to be reluctant or would disobey, should be forced under punishments at the choice of [this] Sacred Congregation, with derogation of [their] claimed privileges, where necessary.[64]

text: The 1835 edition of the Catholic Index of Prohibited Books for the first time omits the Dialogue from the list.[61] In his 1921 papal encyclical, In praeclara summorum, Pope Benedict XV stated that, "though this Earth on which we live may not be the center of the universe as at one time was thought, it was the scene of the original happiness of our first ancestors, witness of their unhappy fall, as too of the Redemption of mankind through the Passion and Death of Jesus Christ".[65] In 1965 the Second Vatican Council stated that, "Consequently, we cannot but deplore certain habits of mind, which are sometimes found too among Christians, which do not sufficiently attend to the rightful independence of science and which, from the arguments and controversies they spark, lead many minds to conclude that faith and science are mutually opposed."[66] The footnote on this statement is to Msgr. Pio Paschini's, Vita e opere di Galileo Galilei, 2 volumes, Vatican Press (1964). Pope John Paul II regretted the treatment which Galileo received, in a speech to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in 1992. The Pope declared the incident to be based on a "tragic mutual miscomprehension". He further stated:

text: Cardinal Poupard has also reminded us that the sentence of 1633 was not irreformable, and that the debate which had not ceased to evolve thereafter, was closed in 1820 with the imprimatur given to the work of Canon Settele. ... The error of the theologians of the time, when they maintained the centrality of the Earth, was to think that our understanding of the physical world's structure was, in some way, imposed by the literal sense of Sacred Scripture. Let us recall the celebrated saying attributed to Baronius "Spiritui Sancto mentem fuisse nos docere quomodo ad coelum eatur, non quomodo coelum gradiatur". In fact, the Bible does not concern itself with the details of the physical world, the understanding of which is the competence of human experience and reasoning. There exist two realms of knowledge, one which has its source in Revelation and one which reason can discover by its own power. To the latter belong especially the experimental sciences and philosophy. The distinction between the two realms of knowledge ought not to be understood as opposition.[67]

text: Orthodox Judaism[edit]

text: A few Orthodox Jewish leaders maintain a geocentric model of the universe based on the aforementioned Biblical verses and an interpretation of Maimonides to the effect that he ruled that the Earth is orbited by the sun.[68][69] The Lubavitcher Rebbe also explained that geocentrism is defensible based on the theory of Relativity, which establishes that "when two bodies in space are in motion relative to one another, ... science declares with absolute certainty that from the scientific point of view both possibilities are equally valid, namely that the Earth revolves around the sun, or the sun revolves around the Earth", although he also went on to refer to people who believed in geocentrism as "remaining in the world of Copernicus".[70]

text: The Zohar states: "The entire world and those upon it, spin round in a circle like a ball, both those at the bottom of the ball and those at the top. All God's creatures, wherever they live on the different parts of the ball, look different (in color, in their features) because the air is different in each place, but they stand erect as all other human beings, therefore, there are places in the world where, when some have light, others have darkness; when some have day, others have night."[71]

text: While geocentrism is important in Maimonides' calendar calculations,[72] the great majority of Jewish religious scholars, who accept the divinity of the Bible and accept many of his rulings as legally binding, do not believe that the Bible or Maimonides command a belief in geocentrism.[69][73]

text: Islam[edit]

text: Prominent cases of modern geocentrism in Islam are very isolated. Very few individuals promoted a geocentric view of the universe. One of them was Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi, a Sunni scholar of Indian subcontinent. He rejected the heliocentric model and wrote a book[74] that explains the movement of the sun, moon and other planets around the Earth. The Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia from 1993 to 1999, Ibn Baz also promoted the geocentric view between 1966 and 1985.

text: Planetariums[edit]

text: The geocentric (Ptolemaic) model of the solar system is still of interest to planetarium makers, as, for technical reasons, a Ptolemaic-type motion for the planet light apparatus has some advantages over a Copernican-type motion.[75] The celestial sphere, still used for teaching purposes and sometimes for navigation, is also based on a geocentric system[76] which in effect ignores parallax. However this effect is negligible at the scale of accuracy that applies to a planetarium.


document_title: 10050 Cielo Drive

question_text: what happened to the house on cielo drive

root

text: 10050 Cielo Drive

text:
10050 Cielo Drive

The road to the villa in 1997

General information

Type
House

Architectural style
French Country

Location
Benedict Canyon, Los Angeles

Coordinates
34°05′38″N 118°25′57″W / 34.093895°N 118.432467°W / 34.093895; -118.432467Coordinates: 34°05′38″N 118°25′57″W / 34.093895°N 118.432467°W / 34.093895; -118.432467

Construction started
1942

Completed
1944

Demolished
1994

Technical details

Floor area
4,600 sq ft (430 m2)

Design and construction

Architect
Robert Byrd

tag: table

text: 10050 Cielo Drive is the street address of a former luxury home in Benedict Canyon, a part of Beverly Crest, north of Beverly Hills, California, where the Charles Manson "family" committed the Tate murders in 1969.

tag: p

text: The residence had been occupied by various famous Hollywood and music industry figures. In 1994, the house was demolished, a new house was constructed on the site and the street address was changed to 10066 Cielo Drive.

text: Architecture[edit]

text: The original house was designed by Robert Byrd in 1942 and completed in 1944 for French actress Michèle Morgan.[1] It was extremely similar, but not exactly identical, to the house which sat on its own plateau directly below 10050, 10048 Cielo Drive, which was often called the Twin House. They were originally built on land called[by whom?] The Bedrock Properties and were built at the same time.

text: The French country-style structure was located on 3 acres (1.2 ha) at the end of a cul-de-sac on Cielo Drive in Benedict Canyon, an area west of Hollywood in the Santa Monica Mountains that overlooks Beverly Hills and Bel Air.[1] The hillside structure faced east and featured stone fireplaces, beamed ceilings, paned windows, a loft above the living room, a swimming pool and a guest house, and was surrounded by thick pine and flowering cherry trees.[1]

text: History[edit]

text: Michèle Morgan, French actress for RKO Radio Pictures, had architect Robert Byrd design and J. F. Wadkins build the luxury home resembling an early 19th-century European style farmhouse. The house was completed in 1941, with an address of 10050 Cielo Drive. Beverly Hills, California. By the end of World War II, Morgan had returned to France and in 1946 Lillian Gish moved in with her mother while filming Duel in the Sun (1946).

text: Rudolph Altobelli, a music and film industry talent manager, bought the house for $86,000 in the early 1960s (equivalent to US$700,000 in 2017) and often rented it out.[2] Residents included Cary Grant and Dyan Cannon (it was their honeymoon nest in 1965[3]), Henry Fonda, George Chakiris, Mark Lindsay, Paul Revere & the Raiders, Samantha Eggar, and Olivia Hussey. Charles Manson visited the house in late 1968, when it was occupied by couple Terry Melcher (the son of actress Doris Day) and Candice Bergen with roommate/talent-manager Roger Hart.[4] The couple split in early 1969, with Melcher relocating to Malibu.

text: In February 1969, Roman Polanski and his wife Sharon Tate began renting the home from Altobelli. On August 9, 1969, the home became the scene of the murders of Tate, Wojciech Frykowski, Abigail Folger, Jay Sebring, and Steven Parent at the hands of the Manson "Family".[5] William Garretson, Altobelli's caretaker and an acquaintance of Parent, lived in the guest house behind the main house and was unaware of the murders until the next morning, when he was taken into custody by police officers who had arrived at the scene. He was later cleared of all charges.

text: Altobelli moved into the house just three weeks after the murders and resided there for the next 20 years. During an interview on ABC's show 20/20, he said that while living there, he felt "safe, secure, loved and beauty."[2] He sold the property for $1.6 million in 1989 (equivalent to $3.2 million in 2017).[2][6]

text: The final resident of the original house was the musician Trent Reznor of Nine Inch Nails. Reznor began renting the house in 1992 and set up a recording studio there.[7] This studio, dubbed "Pig" (sometimes called "Le Pig") in a reference to murderer Susan Atkins' writing "Pig" in Tate's blood on the front door of the house, was the site of recording sessions for most of the Nine Inch Nails album The Downward Spiral (1994).[7] Reznor moved out of the house in December 1993, later explaining "there was too much history in that house for me to handle."[8]

text: Reznor made a statement about working in the Tate house during a 1997 interview with Rolling Stone:

text: While I was working on Downward Spiral, I was living in the house where Sharon Tate was killed. Then one day I met her sister. It was a random thing, just a brief encounter. And she said: "Are you exploiting my sister's death by living in her house?" For the first time the whole thing kind of slapped me in the face. I said, "No, it's just sort of my own interest in American folklore. I'm in this place where a weird part of history occurred." I guess it never really struck me before, but it did then. She lost her sister from a senseless, ignorant situation that I don't want to support. When she was talking to me, I realized for the first time, "What if it was my sister?" I thought, "Fuck Charlie Manson." I don't want to be looked at as a guy who supports serial-killer bullshit.[9]

text: Reznor took the front door of the house with him when he moved out, installing it at Nothing Studios, his new recording studio/record label headquarters in New Orleans.[10][11] Nothing Studios was sold and the facade of the building was changed. The front door Reznor moved from 10050 Cielo Drive is currently preserved in the possession of the owner of the building.

text: In 1994, the owner demolished the house and built a replacement home called Villa Bella, with a new street address of 10066 Cielo Drive. The owner of the property as of 2013 is Hollywood producer Jeff Franklin. The new property does not resemble the residence in which the Tate murders occurred.[12]


document_title: Puerto Rican Day Parade

question_text: when did the puerto rican day parade start

text: Puerto Rican Day Parade

text: History[edit]

text: The first Puerto Rican Day Parade was held on Sunday, April 13, 1958, in Manhattan, replacing the former Hispanic Day Parade. This move, part of the mission of the Catholic Archdiocese of New York (esp., Cardinal Spellman and Ivan Illich) represented a shift away from earlier attempts at "Yankeefication" toward culturally specific expressions based on traditional fiestas patronales.[5] In 1995, the parade became incorporated as the National Puerto Rican Day Parade and expanded beyond the parade venue itself. The parade now hosts over seven major events throughout the city.

text: There are dozens of other events that also take place the weekend of the parade that are not sponsored by the National Parade's corporation. One of the longest running is the street fair held one day prior to the parade. Though the size has changed over the years the heart of the parade has always been at 116th Street between Lexington and Second Avenues. In addition to the parade in New York City, there are currently over fifty smaller parades that take place throughout the United States.

text: The parade has attracted many New York politicians including mayor Michael Bloomberg, former mayor Rudy Giuliani, Governor Andrew Cuomo and Senator Charles Schumer, as well as many political candidates running for office and looking for voters in local, state and national elections. In recent years, the parade has honored several Puerto Rican celebrities by naming them "International Grand Marshal" of the parade including singer Marc Anthony, who participated in the parade along with his ex-wife Jennifer Lopez, and Ricky Martin in 2007 and 2010.[6]

text: In 2009, organizers selected internationally recognized telenovela actor Osvaldo Ríos, as the parade's "Special Guest Star".

text: In addition to a National Grand Marshal, a variety of honorees are named for the parade, with titles such as "King", "National Ambassador of La Salsa", and "National Godmother".[7] In June 2004, Puerto Rican rapper Ivy Queen was designated as the "Puerto Rico Youth Godmother" of the parade.[8] Others to be given such titles include Wisin & Yandel and Willie Colón.[6]

text: In popular culture[edit]

text: The parade itself has been featured in an episode of the NBC situation comedy Seinfeld titled "The Puerto Rican Day". In it, Jerry Seinfeld, George Costanza, Elaine Benes, and Cosmo Kramer get stuck in a traffic jam as a result of the parade. Due to controversy relating to a scene in which Kramer accidentally burns and then stomps on a Puerto Rican flag and is chased by a mob of angry Puerto Ricans, NBC refused to air the episode again.[9] The episode was also withheld from syndication as a result, but has been shown sparingly in syndicated repeats since 2002 and has been released on DVD along with all of the sitcom's episodes.

text: The parade was portrayed in a negative aspect following the controversial 2000 parade in a 2001 episode of the long-running NBC crime series Law & Order titled "Sunday in the Park with Jorge". Before the National Puerto Rican Coalition protested the episode, network executives issued an apology. The company also made a pledge to "improve our procedures regarding sensitive programming issues".[10]

text: The 1994, Latin American literary classic Empire of Dreams by Giannina Braschi staged a revolution on the Puerto Rican Day Parade.[11]

text: The parade has been referenced on the Tru TV show Impractical Jokers within multiple episodes, satirically introduced as a joke about castmember Sal Vulcano's heritage, which is Cuban, but often mistaken for Mexican or Puerto Rican.

text: Controversies[edit]

text: During recent years, the presence of gangs such as the Latin Kings, the Bloods and the Crips have been recorded at the event.[12] Following the parade on June 11, 2000, a number of women were harassed, robbed and sexually assaulted by mobs of young men in and about Central Park.[13] The attacks, which were videotaped by onlookers, led to the arrest and prosecution of many of those involved.

text: Manuel Vargas, a Dominican American who was a suspected ringleader, was quoted by the press as saying he "was just having fun."[14]

text: In June 2010, controversy arose after organizers selected telenovela actor Osvaldo Ríos, who served three months in a Puerto Rican prison in 2004 for assaulting his former girlfriend after a domestic-violence incident as the parade's "International Godfather". Many confirmed participants such as U.S. Representative Luis Guiterrez and corporate sponsors such as Verizon withdrew their participation and endorsements due to his controversial past. After mounting pressure from both the media, politicians, public officials, and domestic violence organizations, Rios decided to not attend the parade after discussing the matter with his children and U.S. Congresswoman Nydia Velasquez. He was replaced at the last minute by singer Marc Anthony, who was accompanied by his then wife Jennifer Lopez.[15]

text: In past interviews, actor and comedian John Leguizamo had always claimed Puerto Rican ancestry via his father's side, which was one of the reasons that he was selected as the 2011 Puerto Rican Day Parade Global Ambassador of the Arts. On June 10, 2011, Leguizamo's father, Albert, declared in an interview published in El Diario La Prensa, the largest Spanish-language newspaper in New York, that he was not Puerto Rican - but rather, of Colombian ancestry. This contradicted his son's past claims of Puerto Rican ancestry.[16] In response to his father's allegations, Leguizamo stated in an interview that his grandfather was of Puerto Rican descent.[17]

text: A spokesman for the National Puerto Rican Day Parade stated that despite his shifting ancestry, Leguizamo would not be stripped of his ambassadorship, and would be allowed to participate in the June 2011 parade.[18]

text: Albizu Campos[edit]

text: The theme of the 2015 parade had a strong historical focus. The year 2015 marks the 50th anniversary of the death of Pedro Albizu Campos, who spent 25 years in prison and dedicated his entire life to the independence of Puerto Rico.[19]

text: Oscar López Rivera[edit]

text: 2017 parade organizers chose to honor Oscar López Rivera, who was one of the leaders of the Armed Forces of National Liberation (FALN) which the FBI classified as a terrorist organization,[20] but who others considered a freedom fighter for the Puerto Rican cause for independence.[21][22] As a result of López Rivera being honored, Goya Foods[23] chose not be a parade sponsor, and Jet Blue[24] dropped their sponsorship as well. New York City Police Department's Hispanic Society[25] did not march, as well as NYPD's Gay Officer Action League and NYPD Police Commissioner James O'Neill. Additional sponsors to withdraw from the parade include Coca-Cola,[24] AT&T,[23] and the New York Yankees.[25] Puerto Rican salsa singer Willie Colón criticized the parade organizers as having gone too far,[26] while six-time Grammy Award-winning Puerto Rican salsa singer Gilberto Santa Rosa himself led[27] the parade procession.[24][23]

text: After public and corporate backlash, Mayor de Blasio had announced that López Rivera would not be honored at the 2017 parade[28] as López Rivera wished to keep the focus on Puerto Rico rather than himself.[29]


document_title: List of heads of state of Nigeria

question_text: who is the first president of nigeria after independent

text: List of heads of state of Nigeria

text: Monarch (1960–1963)[edit]

text: The succession to the throne was the same as the succession to the British throne.

text:
Queen

Reign

Royal House

Prime Minister

№

Portrait

Name

Start

End

Duration

1

Elizabeth II(1926–)

1 October 1960

1 October 1963

3 years, 0 days

Windsor

Balewa

text: Governor-General[edit]

text: The Governor-General was the representative of the monarch in Nigeria and exercised most of the powers of the monarch. The Governor-General was appointed for an indefinite term, serving at the pleasure of the monarch. Since Nigeria was granted independence by the Nigeria Independence Act 1960, rather than being first established as a semi-autonomous Dominion and later promoted to independence by the Statute of Westminster 1931, the Governor-General was appointed solely on the advice of the Nigerian cabinet without the involvement of the British government, with the sole of exception of James Robertson, the former colonial governor, who served as Governor-General temporarily until he was replaced by Nnamdi Azikiwe. In the event of a vacancy the Chief Justice would have served as Officer Administering the Government.

text:
Governor-General

Term of office

Monarch

Prime Minister

№

Portrait

Name

Took office

Left office

Duration

1

Sir James Robertson(1899–1983)

1 October 1960

16 November 1960

46 days

Elizabeth II

Balewa

2

Nnamdi Azikiwe(1904–1996)

16 November 1960

1 October 1963

2 years, 319 days

Elizabeth II

Balewa

text: First Republic (1963–1966)[edit]

text: Under the 1963 Constitution, the first constitution of the Republic of Nigeria, the President replaced the monarch as ceremonial head of state. The President was elected by Parliament for a five-year term. In the event of a vacancy the President of the Senate would have served as Acting President.

text:
President

Term of office

Political party(at time of election)

Prime Minister(s)

№

Portrait

Name

Took office

Left office

Duration

1

Nnamdi Azikiwe(1904–1996)

1 October 1963

16 January 1966(deposed.)

2 years, 107 days

National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons

Balewa

text: Military rule (1966–1979)[edit]

text: Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu led a coup d'état in 1966 which overthrown President Azikiwe and his government.

text:
Head of State

Term of Office

Military

№

Portrait

Name

Took office

Left office

Duration

2

Major-General Johnson Aguiyi-Ironsi(1924–1966)

16 January 1966

29 July 1966(assassinated.)

194 days

Federal Military Government

3

General Yakubu Gowon(1934–)

1 August 1966

29 July 1975(deposed.)

8 years, 362 days

Federal Military Government

4

General Murtala Mohammed(1938–1976)

29 July 1975

13 February 1976(assassinated.)

199 days

Federal Military Government

5

Major-General Olusegun Obasanjo(1937–)

13 February 1976

1 October 1979(resigned.)

3 years, 258 days

Federal Military Government

text: Second Republic (1979–1983)[edit]

text: Under the 1979 Constitution, the second constitution of the Republic of Nigeria, the President was head of both state and government. The President was elected by for a four-year term. In the event of a vacancy the Vice President would have served as Acting President.

text:
President

Term of office

Political party(at time of election)

№

Portrait

Name

Took office

Left office

Duration

6

Shehu Shagari(1925–)

1 October 1979

31 December 1983(deposed.)

4 years, 91 days

National Party of Nigeria

text: Military rule (1983–1993)[edit]

text: Major-General Muhammadu Buhari led a coup d'état which overthrew President Shagari and his government.

text:
Head of State

Term of Office

Military

№

Portrait

Name

Took office

Left office

Duration

7

Major-General Muhammadu Buhari(1942–)

31 December 1983

27 August 1985(deposed.)

1 year, 239 days

Supreme Military Council

8

General Ibrahim Babangida(1941–)

27 August 1985

26 August 1993(resigned.)

7 years, 364 days

Armed Forces Ruling Council

text: Third Republic (1993)[edit]

text: The Third Republic was the planned republican government of Nigeria in 1993 which was to be governed by the Third Republican constitution.

text: The constitution of the Third Republic was drafted in 1989, when General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB), the military Head of State, promised to terminate military rule by 1990 – a date which was subsequently pushed back to 1993. IBB lifted the ban on political activity in the spring of 1989, and his government established two political parties: the center-right National Republican Convention (NRC) and the center-left Social Democratic Party (SDP). Gubernatorial and state legislative elections were conducted in December 1991, while the presidential election was postponed till 12 June 1993 – due to political unrest. M. K. O. Abiola, a wealthy Yoruba businessman, won a decisive victory in the presidential elections on the SDP platm.

text:
President

Term of office

Political party(at time of election)

№

Portrait

Name

Took office

Left office

Duration

9

Ernest Shonekan(1936–)

26 August 1993

17 November 1993(deposed.)

83 days

Independent

text: Military rule (1993–1999)[edit]

text: General Sani Abacha led a coup d'état which overthrew President Shonekan and his government.

text:
Head of State

Term of Office

Military

№

Portrait

Name

Took office

Left office

Duration

10

General Sani Abacha(1943–1998)

17 November 1993

8 June 1998(died in office.)

4 years, 203 days

Provisional Ruling Council

11

General Abdulsalami Abubakar(1942–)

8 June 1998

29 May 1999(resigned.)

355 days

Provisional Ruling Council

text: Fourth Nigerian Republic[edit]

text: Under the fourth Constitution of the Republic of Nigeria, the President is head of both state and government. The President is elected by for a four-year term. In the event of a vacancy the Vice President serves as Acting President.

text:
President

Term of office

Political party(at time of election)

№

Portrait

Name

Took office

Left office

Duration

12

Olusegun Obasanjo(1937–)

29 May 1999

29 May 2007

8 years, 0 days

People's Democratic Party

13

Umaru Musa Yar'Adua(1951–2010)

29 May 2007

5 May 2010[2](died in office.)

2 years, 341 days

People's Democratic Party

14

Goodluck Jonathan(1957–)

5 May 2010

29 May 2015

5 years, 25 days

People's Democratic Party

15

Muhammadu Buhari(1942–)

29 May 2015

Incumbent

3 years, 90 days

All Progressives Congress

text: Living former heads of state[edit]

text:
Name

Term/Reign

Office

Date of birth

Elizabeth II

1961–1963

Queen of Nigeria

 (1926-04-21) April 21, 1926 (age 92)

Yakubu Gowon

1966–1975

Military ruler

 (1934-10-19) October 19, 1934 (age 83)

Olusegun Obasanjo

1976–19791999–2007

Military rulerPresident of Nigeria

 (1937-03-05) March 5, 1937 (age 81)

Shehu Shagari

1979–1983

President of Nigeria

 (1925-02-25) February 25, 1925 (age 93)

Ibrahim Babangida

1985–1993

Military ruler

 (1941-08-17) August 17, 1941 (age 77)

Ernest Shonekan

1993

President of Nigeria

 (1936-05-09) May 9, 1936 (age 82)

Abdulsalami Abubakar

1998–1999

Military ruler

 (1942-06-13) June 13, 1942 (age 76)

Goodluck Jonathan

2010–2015

President of Nigeria

 (1957-11-20) November 20, 1957 (age 60)

Muhammadu Buhari

2015-date

President of Nigeria

 (1942-12-17) December 17, 1942 (age 75)


document_title: Focal seizure

question_text: where do partial seizures originate in the brain

text: Focal seizure

text: Types[edit]

text: As of 2017, focal seizures are split into two main categories, focal onset aware, and focal onset impaired awareness.[5][6] What was previously termed a secondary generalised seizure is now termed a focal to bilateral seizure.[6]

text: In focal onset aware seizures, a small part of one of the lobes may be affected and the person remains conscious. This can often be a precursor to a larger focal onset impaired awareness seizure. When this is the case, the focal aware seizure is usually called an aura.

text: A focal impaired awareness seizure affects a larger part of the hemisphere and the person may lose consciousness.

text: If a focal seizure spreads from one hemisphere to the other side of the brain, this will give rise to a focal to bilateral seizure.[5][6] The person will become unconscious and may well have a tonic clonic seizure. When people have multiple focal seizures they generally have a condition known as temporal lobe epilepsy. (A generalized seizure is one that involves both sides of the brain from the onset).[6]

text: Focal aware seizure[edit]

text: Focal aware seizures are seizures which affect only a small region of the brain, often the temporal lobes or structures found there such as the hippocampi. People who have focal aware seizures remain conscious.[7] Focal aware seizures often precede larger focal impaired awareness seizures, where the abnormal electrical activity spreads to a larger area of the brain. This can result in a tonic-clonic seizure.[8]

text: Focal onset aware seizures are a very subjective experience, and the symptoms vary greatly between people. This is due to the varying locations of the brain the seizures originate in e.g.: Rolandic. A focal aware seizure may go unnoticed by others or shrugged off by the sufferer as merely a "funny turn." Focal aware seizures usually start suddenly and are very brief, typically lasting 60 to 120 seconds.[9]

text: Some common symptoms of a focal onset aware seizure, when the person is awake, are:[7]

text:
preserved consciousness
sudden and inexplicable feelings of fear, anger, sadness, happiness or nausea
sensations of falling or movement
experiencing of unusual feelings or sensations
altered sense of hearing, smelling, tasting, seeing, and tactile perception (sensory illusions or hallucinations), or feeling as though the environment is not real (derealization) or dissociation from the environment or self (depersonalization)
a sense of spatial distortion—things close by may appear to be at a distance
déjà vu (familiarity) or jamais vu (unfamiliarity)
laboured speech or inability to speak at all
usually the event is remembered in detail

tag: ul

text: When the seizure occurs during sleep, the person will often become semi-conscious and act out a dream they were having while engaging with the real environment as normal. Objects and people usually appear normal or only slightly distorted to them, and will be able to communicate with them on an otherwise normal level. However, since the person is still acting in the dream-like state from which they woke, they will assimilate any hallucinations or delusions into their communication, often speaking to a hallucinatory person or speaking of events or thoughts normally pertaining to the dream they were having or other hallucination.

text: While asleep symptoms include:

text:
onset usually in REM sleep
dream like state
appearance of full consciousness
hallucinations or delusions
behavior or visions typical in dreams
ability to engage with the environment and other people as in full consciousness, though often behaving abnormally, erratically, or failing to be coherent
complete amnesia or assimilating the memory as though it was a normal dream on regaining full consciousness

text: Although hallucinations may occur during focal aware seizures they are differentiated from psychotic symptoms by the fact that the person is usually aware that the hallucinations are not real.[9]

text: Jacksonian march or Jacksonian seizure is a phenomenon where a focal aware seizure spreads from the distal part of the limb toward the ipsilateral face (on same side of body). They involve a progression of the location of the seizure in the brain, which leads to a "march" of the motor presentation of symptoms.[10][citation needed]

text: Jacksonian seizures are initiated with abnormal electrical activity within the primary motor cortex. They are unique in that they travel through the primary motor cortex in succession, affecting the corresponding muscles, often beginning with the fingers. This is felt as a tingling sensation, or a feeling of waves through the fingers when touched together. It then affects the hand and moves on to more proximal areas on the same side of body. Symptoms often associated with a Jacksonian seizure are sudden head and eye movements, tingling, numbness, smacking of the lips, and sudden muscle contractions. Most of the time any one of these actions can be seen as normal movements, without being associated with the seizure occurring[citation needed]. They occur at no particular moment and last only briefly. They may result in secondary generalized seizure involving both hemispheres. They can also start at the feet, manifesting as tingling or pins and needles, and there are painful cramps in the foot muscles, due to the signals from the brain. Because it is a partial seizure, the postictal state is of normal consciousness[citation needed].

text: Focal impaired awareness seizure[edit]

text: A focal impaired awareness seizure is a seizure that is associated with unilateral cerebral hemisphere involvement and causes impairment of awareness or responsiveness, i.e. alteration of consciousness.[11][6]

text: Focal impaired awareness seizures are often preceded by an aura.[12] The seizure aura is a focal aware seizure.[12] The aura may manifest itself as a feeling of déjà vu, jamais vu, fear, euphoria or depersonalization.[13][better source needed] The aura might also occur as a visual disturbance, such as tunnel vision or a change in the perceived size of objects.[14] Once consciousness is impaired, the person may display automatisms such as lip smacking, chewing or swallowing.[13] There may also be loss of memory (amnesia) surrounding the seizural event.[12] The person may still be able to perform routine tasks such as walking, although such movements are not purposeful or planned. Witnesses may not recognize that anything is wrong.

text: Focal impaired awareness seizures might arise from any lobe of the brain.[12] They most commonly arise from the mesial temporal lobe, particularly the amygdala, hippocampus, and neocortical regions.[15] A common associated brain abnormality is mesial temporal sclerosis.[13] Mesial temporal sclerosis is a specific pattern of hippocampal neuronal loss accompanied by hippocampal gliosis and atrophy.[16] Focal onset impaired awareness seizures occur when excessive and synchronous electrical brain activity causes the impaired awareness and responsiveness.[17] The abnormal electrical activity might spread to the rest of the brain and cause a focal to bilateral seizure or a generalized tonic–clonic seizure.[18] The newer classification of 2017 groups only focal and generalized seizures, and generalised seizures are those that involve both sides of the brain from the onset.[6][5]

text: Eponym[edit]

text: Jacksonian seizures are named after their discoverer, John Hughlings Jackson, an English neurologist, whose studies led to the discovery of the seizures' initiation point (in the primary motor cortex) in 1863.[19]


document_title: Battle royale game

question_text: where did the term battle royale come from

text: Battle royale game

text:
Part of a series on

Action games

Subgenres[show]

Action-adventure game

Action role-playing game
Open world
Stealth game
Survival game
Survival horror
Battle royale

Beat 'em up
Fighting game
Platform game

Platform-adventure game
Metroidvania

Shooter game

First-person shooter
Third-person shooter
Hero shooter
Light gun shooter
Role-playing shooter
Shoot 'em up
Tactical shooter

Rhythm game

Topics[show]

Capture the flag
Cover system
First-person shooter engine
Free look
Quick time event
WASD keys

Lists[show]

List of beat 'em ups
List of fighting game companies
List of fighting games
List of first-person shooters
List of freeware first-person shooters
List of third-person shooters
List of Shoot 'em up game companies
List of survival games
List of gun games
List of maze video games
List of platform games

v
t
e

text: A battle royale game, also spelled battle royal, is a video game genre that blends the survival, exploration and scavenging elements of a survival game with last man standing gameplay. Battle royale games challenge a large number of players, starting with minimal equipment, to search for weapons and armor and eliminate other opponents all while avoiding being trapped outside of a shrinking "safe area", with the winner being the last competitor in the game. The name for the genre is taken from the 2000 Japanese film Battle Royale, which presents a similar theme of a last-man-standing competition in a shrinking play zone.[1][2]

text: The genre's origins arose from mods for large-scale, online, survival games like Minecraft and ARMA 2, before becoming their own standalone games. While the 2017 game PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds was not the first battle royale game, its rapid growth popularized the genre with over 25 million copies sold by the end of 2017. In 2018, the free-to-play Fortnite Battle Royale rapidly became a cultural phenomenon, overtaking Battlegrounds in terms of player numbers and revenue.[3][4][5][6]

text: Concept[edit]

text: Battle royale games are played between a large number of individual players, or a number of small squads (typically up to four or five players). In each match, the goal is to be the last player or last team standing by eliminating all other opponents. A match starts by placing the player-characters into a large map space, which may have random distribution or allow players to have some control of where they start. All players start with minimal equipment, giving no player an implicit advantage at the onset, though games allow players to customize the appearance of their character. Randomly scattered around the map are weapons, armor, vehicles, and other items that are beneficial for combat and survival. Players need to search the map for these items while avoid being killed by other players. Equipment from eliminated players can be looted as well. The "safe area" of the map decreases in size around a randomly selected point throughout the match, forcing surviving players into closer quarters and increasing the chance of player encounters. Those caught outside this safe area take damage and will eventually die if they do not re-enter the so-called "safe area". The match is over when only one player or team remains, and the game typically provides some type of reward (in-game currency for more cosmetic items) to all players based on how long they survived.

text: The random nature of starting point, item placement, and safe area reduction lends the battle royale genre to challenge players to think and react quickly and improve strategies throughout the match as to be the last man/team standing.

text: In addition to standalone games, the battle royale concept may also be present as part of one of many game modes within a larger game, or may be applied as a user-created mod created for another game.[7]

text: There are various modifications that can be implemented atop the fundamentals of the battle royale. For example, Fortnite introduced a temporary mode in an event which is 50-versus-50 player mode in its Fortnite Battle Royale free-to-play game; players are assigned one of the two teams, and work with their teammates to collect resources and weapons towards constructing fortifications as the safe area of the game shrinks down, with the goal to eliminate all the players on the other team.[8]

text: History[edit]

text: Formulative elements of the battle royale genre had existed before 2012: gameplay modes featuring last man standing rules remains a frequent staple of multiplayer online action games though generally with fewer total players, while elements of scavenging and surviving on a large open-world map were popularized through survival games.[9][10]

text: Shortly after the release of the film The Hunger Games in 2012, a battle royale mode named Hunger Games (later changed to Survival Games) was developed for Minecraft.[11][12][13] Survival Games takes inspiration from the film, initially placing players at the center of the map near a set of equipment chests. When the game commences, players can compete over the central resources or spread out to find items stored in chests scattered around the play area. Players killed are eliminated and the last surviving player wins the match.

text: Subsequent appearances of the game mode include mods for the game DayZ, itself initially released as a mod for ARMA 2. Within DayZ, players struggled alongside or against each other to obtain basic necessities to continue living in a persistent sandbox filled with various dangers. These games were designed to include player versus player encounters, but generally these events were infrequent due to the size of the game's map and the persistence of the game world.[14] This led to the development of game mods that sacrificed ARMA 2/DayZ open-endedness in favor of focusing on more frequent hostile interactions between players to determine an eventual winner.

text: One such game was the Battle Royale mod for ARMA 2/DayZ, developed by Brendan Greene, known by his online alias, "PlayerUnknown", and first released in 2013.[10] This mod was directly inspired by the 2000 Japanese film Battle Royale, which told the story of a number of students transported to an island and forced to battle each other to be the sole survivor, lending to the mod's name.[15] In Greene's case, to differ his offering from Hunger Games-inspired mods, he designed the mod to randomly scatter weapons around the map instead of from a central repository. Greene updated this mode for ARMA 3 when the DayZ team opted to release their game as a standalone title. Greene continued to adopt his format as a consultant for H1Z1: King of the Kill before becoming the creative developer at Bluehole of a standalone game representing his vision of the battle royale genre, PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds. While Battlegrounds was not the first battle royale game, its release to early access in March 2017 drew a great deal of attention, selling over twenty million units by the end of the year,[16][17] and is considered the defining game of the genre.[18] In September 2017, the game broke the previous record for highest number of concurrent players, with 1,348,374 players on the game simultaneously.[19] Battlegrounds' explosive growth and how it established the Battle royale genre was considered one of the top trends in the video game industry in 2017.[20][21]

text: Prior and near Battlegrounds's release, games from other developers took inspiration from highly played battle royale-style mods, as well as the popularity of The Hunger Games film series, which first premiered in 2012. Ark: Survival Evolved by Studio Wildcard introduced its "Survival of the Fittest" mode in July 2015, which was geared to be used for eSports tournaments. The mode was temporarily broken off as its own free-to-play game during 2016 before the developers opted to merge it back into the main game for ease of maintenance of the overall game.[22][23] The Culling, by Xaviant Studios, was released in early access in 2016, and was designed to be a streaming-friendly battle royale mode for 16 players.[24] However, following the release of Battlegrounds, The Culling lost much of its player base, and a few months after releasing the full version of the game, Xaviant announced they were ending further development on it to move onto other projects.[25] Battlegrounds's popularity created a new interest in the battle royale genre. Numerous games that copied the fundamental gameplay of Battlegrounds appeared in China, shortly after Battlegrounds's release.[26]

text: Epic Games had released Fortnite, a cooperative survival game, into early access near the release of Battlegrounds. Epic saw the potential to create their own battle royale mode, and by September 2017, released the free-to-play Fortnite Battle Royale which incorporated some of the survival elements from the main Fortnite game.[27][28] The game has seen similar player counts as Battlegrounds, with twenty million unique players reported by Epic Games by November 2017.[29] Bluehole expressed concern at this move, less due to being a clone of Battlegrounds, but more so that they had been working with Epic Games for technical support of the Unreal Engine in Battlegrounds, and thus they were worried that Fortnite may be able to include planned features to their battle royale mode before they could release those in Battlegrounds.[14][30][26] PUBG Corp has sued Epic in South Korea claiming Fortnite Battle Royale infringements on Battlegrounds' copyrights.[31]

text: In 2018, Fortnite Battle Royale surpassed Battlegrounds in revenue,[6] "largely thanks to its free-to-play model" and releasing as a cross-platform game,[5] as well as its accessibility to casual players. [4] Battlegrounds creator Brendan Greene credited it with growing the battle royale genre.[5] Its mainstream publicity further increased following a stream by Tyler "Ninja" Blevins with Drake,[32] which set a Twitch.tv record for concurrent viewership.[33][34] It accumulated a total playerbase of 45 million in January and 3.4 million concurrent players in February. Polygon labeled it "the biggest game of 2018" and "a genuine cultural phenomenon",[3] with "everyone from NFL players to famous actors" playing it,[4] including Red Sox player Xander Bogaerts and Bayern Munich's youth team borrowing celebrations from the game.[35]

text: With the success of Battlegrounds and Fortnite, the battle royale genre expanded greatly. Some other established games added a battle royale-inspired gamemode, such as with Grand Theft Auto Online, Paladins, Dota 2, and Battlerite.[36][37][38][39] Major publishers, including Electronic Arts[40] Activision,[41] and Ubisoft[42] have acknowledged the impact of the growing genre and impact on their future plans. Activision's Call of Duty series will feature a battle royale mode titled "Blackout" in its 2018 installment, Call of Duty: Black Ops 4.[43]

text: The Chinese government, through its Audio and Video and Numeral Publishing Association, stated in October 2017 that it will discourage its citizens from playing battle royale games as they deem them too violent, which "deviates from the values of socialism and is deemed harmful to young consumers", as translated by Bloomberg.[44] Gaming journals in the west thus speculated that this would make it difficult or impossible to publish battle royale within the country.[45] In November 2017, PUBG Corporation announced its partnership with Tencent to publish the game in China, making some changes in the game to "make sure they accord with socialist core values, Chinese traditional culture and moral rules" to satisfy Chinese regulations and censors.[46][47][48] Despite the concern that PUBG Corporation and Tencent were taking with Chinese release, a large number of clones of Battlegrounds has come out in China already, and created a new genre there called "chicken-eating game", named based on the congratulatory line to the last player standing in Battlegrounds, "Winner winner chicken dinner".[49]