Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 170

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A Conceptual Model Discussed by Galileo and Used Intuitively by Physics Students

·2014·Mental Models

Abstract

Galileo’s works are notable for their use of two interesting techniques: the use of qualitative thought experiments for presenting basic concepts and theories, and the inclusion and consideration of theories Galileo considered to be wrong, as voiced by Simplicio in the Dialogues(Galileo, 1960). One wonders why Galileo did not do as modem physics texts do and simply present mathematical results. Presumably, Galileo recognized that it was going to be difficult to present his views convincingly to his colleagues, since they subscribed to a more Aristo­ telian approach that essentially amounted to a very different “ world view.” It is plausible that he felt it necessary to discuss and counter the preconceptions of his colleagues explicitly, and to use qualitative arguments in presenting his own theory, because he sensed the strong resistance of their world view to change.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4324/9781315802725-18

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 170

Metadata

Venue
Mental Models
Published
2014-01-14
Pages
333-348
OpenAlex
W1554206432
Cited by
170
References
0
FWCI
6.18
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A Conceptual Model Discussed by Galileo and Used Intuitively by Physics Students. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9781315802725-18
The paper
A Conceptual Model Discussed by Galileo and Used Intuitively by Physics Students. (2014). Mental Models. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315802725-18

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.