Ignoring Newton's Hints Brought Scientific Chaos: Difference between revisions
Imported from text file |
Remove stray backslash-escaped quotes (\' and \") left by an old import escaping bug |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Infobox paper | {{Infobox paper | ||
| title = Ignoring Newton | | title = Ignoring Newton's Hints Brought Scientific Chaos | ||
Revision as of 23:38, 19 July 2026
| Scientific Paper | |
|---|---|
| Title | Ignoring Newton's Hints Brought Scientific Chaos |
| Read in full | Link to paper |
| Author(s) | Paul Schroeder |
| Published | 2011 |
| Journal | Proceedings of the NPA |
| Volume | 8 |
| No. of pages | 4 |
| Pages | 525-529 |
Read the full paper here
Abstract
Newton did not accept nor espouse action at a distance, but he couldn't provide a physical description of gravity. A great divergence of thought stems from the clash between Newton's Theory indicating that gravity, subject to the inverse square law, is what retains orbits as opposed to Descartes view that whirlpools and eddies sweep planets around the sun. Had Newton's view of space not prevailed, our sequence of acquiring understanding of the universe would have been different. It is what mankind hasn't done since Newton's time that forms our perspective of space today. We haven't defined gravity.