|
|
|
|
|
by sdenton4
1737 days ago
|
|
Yeah, the use of 'prehistory' seems not great in this context; there's a fundamental problem of how we would know which bodies were known prior to the existence of a writing system. But there are a number of things that make these very discoverable: They are visible with the naked eye, all lie in the ecliptic plane, and behave a bit strangely if you watch them over time. Mars is a bit red, and absolutely stands out... And of course Venus can't be ignored. Once you've noticed Venus and Mars, finding the others is a matter of looking a bit harder. Using stars for navigation or for measuring the passage of time involves observing them consistently, which leads one to notice 'odd' things. So I wouldn't at all be surprised if the planets were known in, say, prehistoric Polynesian cultures... The appearance of mathematical astronomy in Babylonia tells us that the movement of celestial bodies is approximately the first scientific knowledge a civilization will bother to write down. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babylonian_astronomy#Old_Babyl... |
|
In fact, we know (from ruins) that the Chinese were practicing astronomy at a time well before our first written records of them.
It is a certainty that the planets were known to all prehistoric cultures; I don't know what adrian_b is thinking.