Proof that Sir Isaac Newton was co-opted

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:40:07 AM

Quote from: Sir Richard on March 13, 2016, 05:05:59 PM

Funny how the rounders LOVE Newton until the realize that Newton's beliefs and writings clearly contradict their "paradigm." 

That and when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic. And that he was a lying cheating thief whose accomplishments lie not on the shoulders of giants, but because he would actively discredit other scientists to then steal their work later. He was truly an awful human being.

But as said above, it is no longer the person that really matters, but the theory.

I'd say the method used to create a theory has a lot to do with a theory, and thus Newton himself and his actions relating to the creation of said theory all have to do with the theory.

Either that or method is anarchy.

Quote from: palmerito0 on March 14, 2016, 01:35:49 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:40:07 AM

Quote from: Sir Richard on March 13, 2016, 05:05:59 PM

Funny how the rounders LOVE Newton until the realize that Newton's beliefs and writings clearly contradict their "paradigm." 

That and when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic. And that he was a lying cheating thief whose accomplishments lie not on the shoulders of giants, but because he would actively discredit other scientists to then steal their work later. He was truly an awful human being.

But as said above, it is no longer the person that really matters, but the theory.

I'd say the method used to create a theory has a lot to do with a theory, and thus Newton himself and his actions relating to the creation of said theory all have to do with the theory.

Either that or method is anarchy.

True, but that does not mean a theory is wrong.

Quote from: palmerito0 on March 14, 2016, 01:35:49 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:40:07 AM

Quote from: Sir Richard on March 13, 2016, 05:05:59 PM

Funny how the rounders LOVE Newton until the realize that Newton's beliefs and writings clearly contradict their "paradigm." 

That and when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic. And that he was a lying cheating thief whose accomplishments lie not on the shoulders of giants, but because he would actively discredit other scientists to then steal their work later. He was truly an awful human being.

But as said above, it is no longer the person that really matters, but the theory.

I'd say the method used to create a theory has a lot to do with a theory, and thus Newton himself and his actions relating to the creation of said theory all have to do with the theory.

Either that or method is anarchy.

I would like to point out that the laws of the universe effect us whether we understand them or not. Newton did not invent or discover gravity, it had been effecting the Earth for all of time, he just attempted to understand it. If he hadn't gotten as close as he did, someone else would have by now.

Humans have this obsession with the first person to "discover" something when the things had been there the whole time. Every child in America learns about Christopher Columbus discovering America, even though there were clearly humans already there.

That and when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic. And that he was a lying cheating thief whose accomplishments lie not on the shoulders of giants, but because he would actively discredit other scientists to then steal their work later. He was truly an awful human being.

I agree with some of what you say, yes from what I have read Hooke was on the verge coming up with the same "Law of Universal Gravitation". Whether Newton stole it I don't know. The fact the Hooke died 24 years before Newton certainly enabled Newton to claim most of the credit and his dealings with Hooke were certainly not friendly.

But on the matter of "when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic" I do have to wonder if you really are showing a sense of humour.

You think gravitation is magic yet happily accept:
               electromagnetic and nuclear forces?
               universal acceleration propelled by an almost infinite magic energy source?
               sun, moon, planets and "stars" moving around weird paths powerd by magic?
               the sun seeming to set behind the horizon when it is still 3000 miles high (and at an elevation of roughly 20°).
               the sun and moon appear (almost) the same size all day (and night) when their distances vary by a factor of around 4.

I could go on and on about the causes of moon phases and eclipses and the phases and size variations of  say Venus, but you whole "universe" is held together by pure coincidence! just the right (magical) "atmospheric magnification" to make the sun and moon seem to stay the same size.

Also the distance to the moon has been estimated be the early Greeks, calculated using parallax by astromomers centuries ago and finally accurately measured by radar and then by laser - guess what, the answers came out fairly consistent - sure the Greeks figures were a bit rough. And the Flat Earth explanation for the radar figures - how do we know that light does not travel slower when that far away? Sure but one 80th the speed!

How has the height of the moon been measured over the Flat Earth? Well we are TOLD!

The Moon
The moon is a sphere. It has a diameter of 32 miles and is located approximately 3000 miles above the surface of the earth.

Justification - NONE!

Please don't talk about gravitation being magic till you explain about the evidence for things like "lunar bio-luminescence".

Quote from: palmerito0 on March 14, 2016, 01:35:49 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:40:07 AM

Quote from: Sir Richard on March 13, 2016, 05:05:59 PM

Funny how the rounders LOVE Newton until the realize that Newton's beliefs and writings clearly contradict their "paradigm." 

That and when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic. And that he was a lying cheating thief whose accomplishments lie not on the shoulders of giants, but because he would actively discredit other scientists to then steal their work later. He was truly an awful human being.

But as said above, it is no longer the person that really matters, but the theory.

I'd say the method used to create a theory has a lot to do with a theory, and thus Newton himself and his actions relating to the creation of said theory all have to do with the theory.

Either that or method is anarchy.

Are you saying that a bad person can't think of a correct idea?
I see no reason why the method of creating an idea matters, the same idea can be inspired by two different things for two different people, one inspiration is something you like, the other is from a method you don't like, is one persons idea wrong and the other right even though they are the same idea?
The thing that matters is the method for proving the theory is right. Now Newtonian mechanics has Lots of examples of it being right, take all of mechanical engineering. If you have a counter example of Newtonian mechanics not working (other than the obvious case of high speeds), that would be a proof of Newtonian mechanics being wrong.

Note: when I say Newtonian mechanics is correct/right/true, I mean at low speeds.

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 01:37:50 PM

Quote from: palmerito0 on March 14, 2016, 01:35:49 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:40:07 AM

Quote from: Sir Richard on March 13, 2016, 05:05:59 PM

Funny how the rounders LOVE Newton until the realize that Newton's beliefs and writings clearly contradict their "paradigm." 

That and when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic. And that he was a lying cheating thief whose accomplishments lie not on the shoulders of giants, but because he would actively discredit other scientists to then steal their work later. He was truly an awful human being.

But as said above, it is no longer the person that really matters, but the theory.

I'd say the method used to create a theory has a lot to do with a theory, and thus Newton himself and his actions relating to the creation of said theory all have to do with the theory.

Either that or method is anarchy.

True, but that does not mean a theory is wrong.

Very true. One can prove the flat earth using just Newton's 3 Laws of Motion and while at it get all of Relativity as a bonus.

Quote from: palmerito0 on March 14, 2016, 01:35:49 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:40:07 AM

Quote from: Sir Richard on March 13, 2016, 05:05:59 PM

Funny how the rounders LOVE Newton until the realize that Newton's beliefs and writings clearly contradict their "paradigm." 

That and when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic. And that he was a lying cheating thief whose accomplishments lie not on the shoulders of giants, but because he would actively discredit other scientists to then steal their work later. He was truly an awful human being.

But as said above, it is no longer the person that really matters, but the theory.

I'd say the method used to create a theory has a lot to do with a theory,

It has interest for historians, but no bearing whatsoever for engineers and scientists.  An engineer will utilise the laws of motion because they work.  Absolutely no knowledge of Newton's personality, or how he worked, is required to work with the theory.

Newton discovered these truths, he didn't invent them. 

If it didn't have utility then it wouldn't be still in everyday use now, yet it is used all the time.

Quote from: palmerito0 on March 14, 2016, 01:51:17 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 01:37:50 PM

Quote from: palmerito0 on March 14, 2016, 01:35:49 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:40:07 AM

Quote from: Sir Richard on March 13, 2016, 05:05:59 PM

Funny how the rounders LOVE Newton until the realize that Newton's beliefs and writings clearly contradict their "paradigm." 

That and when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic. And that he was a lying cheating thief whose accomplishments lie not on the shoulders of giants, but because he would actively discredit other scientists to then steal their work later. He was truly an awful human being.

But as said above, it is no longer the person that really matters, but the theory.

I'd say the method used to create a theory has a lot to do with a theory, and thus Newton himself and his actions relating to the creation of said theory all have to do with the theory.

Either that or method is anarchy.

True, but that does not mean a theory is wrong.

Very true. One can prove the flat earth using just Newton's 3 Laws of Motion and while at it get all of Relativity as a bonus.

Well said John- you succinctly made a point I un-succinctly tried to make- over a series of posts- that Newton's work has been misconstrued. That his work can be applied to a flat earth. That he posited aether as the mechanism for the movement in the celestial sphere- and that much of his work is buried and probably for good reason.

Very true. One can prove the flat earth using just Newton's 3 Laws of Motion and while at it get all of Relativity as a bonus.

Could you give me an explanation?

Quote from: John Davis on March 15, 2016, 09:52:36 AM

Quote from: palmerito0 on March 14, 2016, 01:51:17 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 01:37:50 PM

Quote from: palmerito0 on March 14, 2016, 01:35:49 PM

Quote from: John Davis on March 14, 2016, 10:40:07 AM

Quote from: Sir Richard on March 13, 2016, 05:05:59 PM

Funny how the rounders LOVE Newton until the realize that Newton's beliefs and writings clearly contradict their "paradigm." 

That and when they realize his whole universe was held together by magic. And that he was a lying cheating thief whose accomplishments lie not on the shoulders of giants, but because he would actively discredit other scientists to then steal their work later. He was truly an awful human being.

But as said above, it is no longer the person that really matters, but the theory.

I'd say the method used to create a theory has a lot to do with a theory, and thus Newton himself and his actions relating to the creation of said theory all have to do with the theory.

Either that or method is anarchy.

True, but that does not mean a theory is wrong.

Very true. One can prove the flat earth using just Newton's 3 Laws of Motion and while at it get all of Relativity as a bonus.

Well said John- you succinctly made a point I un-succinctly tried to make- over a series of posts- that Newton's work has been misconstrued. That his work can be applied to a flat earth. That he posited aether as the mechanism for the movement in the celestial sphere- and that much of his work is buried and probably for good reason.

Is it just me or does it seem like you're obsessed with Isaac Newton...He's long-dead. His work isn't the final word on gravity.  Give it up and move on.