Since the dawn of telescopic astronomy astronomers have observed and measured the "spurious" telescopic disks of stars, generally reporting that brighter stars have larger disks than fainter stars. Early observers such as Galileo Galilei interpreted these disks as being the physical bodies of stars; later observers such as William Herschel understood them to be spurious; some, such as Christian Huygens, argued that stars show no disks at all. In the early 19th century George B. Airy produced a theoretical explanation of star images sufficient to explain all historical observations, but astronomers were slow to fully recognize this. Even today conventional wisdom concerning stars and telescopes stands at odds to both historical observations and Airy's theory. We give a detailed analysis of both historical observations and Airy's theory, illustrating how Airy's theory explains the historical observations, from Galileo to Huygens to Herschel. We argue that the observations themselves appear in all cases to be valid and worth further study.

A translation of a section from the 1665 Astronomia Reformata of G. B. Riccioli discussing the appearance of the disk of Jupiter during the years 1630-1664; changes in the Jovian cloud belts as recorded by a variety of observers are a major feature of Riccioli's discussion.

Great opportunities arise for teaching physics, astronomy, and their histories when new discoveries are made that involve concepts accessible to students at every level. Such an opportunity currently exists thanks to the fact that notes written by Galileo indicating that he observed the double star Mizar in the "Big Dipper" have recently come to light. His measurements of this star, given the scientific knowledge at the time, strongly supported the theory that the Earth was fixed in space and not moving. Had Galileo published these results, it is likely that widespread acceptance of the heliocentric theory in scientific circles would have been significantly delayed. In light of these notes, his later reference in his Dialogue to using double stars as a means of proving that the Earth was in motion is puzzling. The physics and mathematics behind Galileo's work is easily within reach of students in introductory physics and astronomy courses, so discussion of Galileo's Mizar work and its interesting implications can be used in virtually any class.