中西自然知識傳統各有其彗星見解。從《史記．天官書》到萬曆五年彗星與張居正 1525-1582)奪情的政爭，中國側重從地面政治所生的沴氣造成的災異或星變異象來看彗星。亞里斯多德 (Aristotle, 384-322 BC)則認為彗星出現在月亮天以下，是油脂氣升至火際後燃燒的大氣現象。第谷 (Tycho Brahe, 1546-1601)對1577年彗星的觀測，發現它與地球間距離超過月與地，促使他提出一個折衷的宇宙論，彗星在近代科學革命上成為一個關鍵異例。 明萬曆年間利瑪竇 (Matteo Ricci, 1552-1610)傳入另類自然知識，使得中西彗星見解產生遭遇。在此衝激下，徐光啟 (1562-1633)與熊明遇 (1579-1649)從傳統災異的星變異象，轉而接受亞里斯多德對彗星的解說，成為最早兩位在彗星見解上轉變的士人。他們的轉變反映的是對傳統自然知識的考據，而不是科學革命。

Before the 17th century, Chinese and Western scholars had different views about comets. A Chinese exemplar in the Tian quan shu 天官書of the Shi ji 史記explains that comets arise from bad qi 氣moving from the ground to interfere with the planets. The comet of 1577 was considered an anomaly with astrological implications of bad politics for Zhang Juzheng 張 居正. In the ancient Greek period, Aristotle (384-322 BC) regarded comets as meteorological phenomena arising from oily exhalations moving into the upper atmosphere and igniting. This view held currency until Tycho Brahe (1546-1601) challenged it in 1577. He found that the distance between the comet of 1577 and the Earth was much greater than the distance between the moon and the Earth. Thus, the comet of 1577 was in the ether rather than the terrestrial area. In brief, the comet of 1577 was an anomaly of the Scientific Revolution. During the Wanli 萬曆Period ， Jesuits followed Matteo Ricci (1552-1610) in transmitting Western knowledge about nature, effecting the encounter of Chinese and Aristotelian views on the comet. At first, Xu Guangqi 徐光啟 (1562 一1633) and Xiong Mingyu 熊明遇(1579-16是9) continued to believe the Chinese view. Under the impact of Western learning, however, they became the first two Chinese 1iterati to convert to the Aristotelian understanding. In other words, this conversion was the result of their studying Western works rather than a revolution in science.

彗星；自然哲學；耶穌會士；徐光啟；熊明遇；為何中國沒有科學革命

comet of 1577；natural philosophy；Jesuits；Xu Guangqi；Xiong Mingyu；Scientific Revolution