copernican

The experiments that lead to the development of Newtonian mechanics (the Copernican laws, for example) are still valid.

When the Copernican heliocentric model became accepted, all the work on epicycles became more or less useless.

As long as it took to demonstrate supporting evidence - more precisely, to verify a prediction made by the Copernican model.

Politics is badly in need of a Copernican revolution which puts the physical world at the centre of politics, not the periphery.

If accuracy of prediction was a concern, Copernican model would never have been accepted.

Some would argue that such models (the Copernican for example) should remain unpublished and under covers till they beat state of the art.

His Structure of Scientific Revolutions is most famous, but I think his really great work was The Copernican Revolution.

There is nothing wrong in principle arguing that there might be something wrong with our general galactic neighborhood, without touching the Copernican principle at all.

He had encyclopedic knowledge of the muds of England, for example, but Watson was shocked to find he had never heard of the Copernican system of cosmology.

One example Kuhn gives is the Copernican Revolution.

An unexplained violation of the Copernican principle?

Newtonian celestial mechanics does not make any new predictions that Copernican mechanics does not (at least before space travel is viable), but it sure is much nicer to work with.

But yes, at the moment the Copernican principle stands in the "consensus" sense, I personally don't believe in it.

Is this due to systematic errors in processing, contamination of results by local effects, or an unexplained violation of the Copernican principle?" Wait what?

E: The important takeaway: "It has been determined, in fact, that the Copernican, Ptolemaic and even the Tychonic models provided identical results to identical inputs.

The Copernican Principle that "we are not special" may have carried us a ways, but it is ultimately only a heuristic, not a scientific law, and it may have limits.

I doubt you could do something like that with the Copernican, Ptolemaic, or even the Keplerian model.

In pre-Copernican astronomy, where the Earth was considered the center of the cosmos, the erratic orbits of the other planets relative to us were explained away as epicycles within perfect circles.