{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021608643457382955, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.415384615384616, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Essay Review: Physical Sciences before the Renaissance: Early Physics and Astronomy

But this shows only that Kepler's involvement with music theory was extensive enough to warrant yet further studies, all of which will be benefited by the monograph under review. Most important is that Dickreiter has written a sound technical study of an aspect of Kepler's work usually given a mysticized and inept treatment unworthy of the seriousness with which Kepler applied the theory of harmonic proportions to the explanation of the structure of the heavens. While the author makes occasional reference to something "pythagoreisch-platonischen", such categories, which are not informative in trying to understand Kepler (or any other serious scientist for that matter), do not intrude into a generally clear, informative, and welcome study.