A world we can question

Supports The 1543 work, heliocentric model, retained circular motion and ancient precedents.

Source relationship Independent historical synthesis drawing on Copernicus and associated records.

Supports The museum catalogue identifies Petreius and the 1543 edition.

Source relationship Object cataloguing checks the edition; it is not a second astronomical observation.

Supports Repeated observations beginning in January 1610 and March publication.

Source relationship NASA’s retrospective depends on the historical observation record.

Supports Observations from 7 January to 2 March, four moons and March publication.

Source relationship Museum analysis of the same work, not a separate observing campaign.

Supports Halley’s role, the 1686 manuscript and the 1687 first edition.

Source relationship The Society checks its manuscript and publication history within the Principia record.

Supports Unified celestial and terrestrial dynamics, gravitational method and limitations.

Source relationship George Smith offers independent scholarly analysis of the work and its history.

Supports Patent dated 5 January 1769, enrolled 29 April, and the separate condenser.

Source relationship Catalogue description of the patent specification, distinct from the surviving model.

Supports The 1765 experimental model and reduced repeated cylinder cooling.

Source relationship A surviving model complements the later patent; cataloguing corrects earlier identification.

Supports Jenner’s 1796 cowpox inoculation, later smallpox challenge and earlier variolation.

Source relationship WHO retrospective sharing editorial context and historical records with its brief history.

Supports Jesty’s 1774 precedent, Jenner’s 1796 experiment and modern ethical limits.

Source relationship A second page in the same WHO history project, not an independent evidence chain.

Supports Publication on 24 November 1859, natural selection and the 1858 Wallace context.

Source relationship A separately edited collection exhibition sharing Darwin’s historical record.

Supports Letters documenting long preparation, the 1858 letter and 1859 publication work.

Source relationship Cambridge’s correspondence evidence complements publication history, not an independent experiment.

Supports Mendeleev’s 1869 ordering by atomic weight and properties, gaps and predecessors.

Source relationship Separately edited RSC synthesis sharing historical tables as underlying evidence.

Supports The 1869 system, multiple contributors and the historical concept of elements.

Source relationship Eric Scerri’s independent historical analysis uses the same nineteenth-century tables and writings.

Supports The 1905 paper, relativity and light postulates, clock synchronisation and simultaneity.

Source relationship English translation of the 1905 text with scholarly annotations, not a second original record.

Supports Observer-dependent simultaneity, time dilation and later experimental context.

Source relationship Modern exposition draws on developed theory and later experiments, unlike the 1905 text.

Supports The 1900 blackbody problem, energy elements hν and evolving interpretation.

Source relationship Institutional retrospective sharing Planck’s original papers with later historiography.

Supports Historiographical debate about 1900 quantisation and later stages in 1905, 1913 and 1925.

Source relationship Named historical analysis challenges commemorative accounts while examining the same original texts.

Supports Tharp and Heezen’s seafloor mapping, the 1957 map and ridge evidence.

Source relationship Institutional biography and mapping history supporting observational inputs, not sole authorship of the theory.

Supports McKenzie and Parker’s December 1967 paper and the preceding collective work.

Source relationship Society retrospective of plate kinematics, distinct from but connected to seafloor maps.

Supports Lithospheric plates, boundary movements and earthquake distribution.

Source relationship Modern geophysical explanation supplies mechanism, not contemporary discovery testimony.