Newton, Isaac (1642–1727)

Author(s):  
William L. Harper ◽  
George E. Smith

Newton is best known for having invented the calculus and formulated the theory of universal gravity – the latter in his Principia, the single most important work in the transformation of natural philosophy into modern physical science. Yet he also made major discoveries in optics, and put no less effort into alchemy and theology than into mathematics and physics. Throughout his career, Newton maintained a sharp distinction between conjectural hypotheses and experimentally established results. This distinction was central to his claim that the method by which conclusions about forces were inferred from phenomena in the Principia made it ’possible to argue more securely concerning the physical species, physical causes, and physical proportions of these forces’. The law of universal gravity that he argued for in this way nevertheless provoked strong opposition, especially from such leading figures on the Continent as Huygens and Leibniz: they protested that Newton was invoking an occult power of action-at-a-distance insofar as he was offering no contact mechanism by means of which forces of gravity could act. This opposition led him to a tighter, more emphatic presentation of his methodology in the second edition of the Principia, published twenty-six years after the first. The opposition to the theory of gravity faded during the fifty to seventy-five years after his death as it fulfilled its promise on such issues as the non-spherical shape of the earth, the precession of the equinoxes, comet trajectories (including the return of ’Halley’s Comet’ in 1758), the vagaries of lunar motion and other deviations from Keplerian motion. During this period the point mass mechanics of the Principia was extended to rigid bodies and fluids by such figures as Euler, forming what we know as ’Newtonian’ mechanics.


Entropy ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (6) ◽  
pp. 620 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Nosonovsky ◽  
Alexander D. Breki

Paradoxes of dry friction were discovered by Painlevé in 1895 and caused a controversy on whether the Coulomb–Amontons laws of dry friction are compatible with the Newtonian mechanics of the rigid bodies. Various resolutions of the paradoxes have been suggested including the abandonment of the model of rigid bodies and modifications of the law of friction. For compliant (elastic) bodies, the Painlevé paradoxes may correspond to the friction-induced instabilities. Here we investigate another possibility to resolve the paradoxes: the introduction of the three-value logic. We interpret the three states of a frictional system as either rest-motion-paradox or as rest-stable motion-unstable motion depending on whether a rigid or compliant system is investigated. We further relate the ternary logic approach with the entropic stability criteria for a frictional system and with the study of ultraslow sliding friction (intermediate between the rest and motion or between stick and slip).



Author(s):  
Michael Esfeld

This chapter outlines a metaphysics of science in the sense of a naturalized metaphysics. It considers in the first place the interplay of physics and metaphysics in Newtonian mechanics, then goes into the issues for the metaphysics of time that relativity physics raises, shows that what one considers as the referent of quantum theory depends on metaphysical considerations, and finally explains how the stance that one takes with respect to objective modality and laws of nature shapes the options that are available for an ontology of quantum physics. In that way, this chapter seeks to make a case for a natural philosophy that treats physics and metaphysics as inseparable in the enquiry into the constitution of the world, there being neither a neo-positivist way of deducing metaphysics from the formalisms of physical theories, nor a neo-rationalist realm of investigation for metaphysics that is independent of physics.



Problemos ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 69 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Čiurlionis

Erdvės ir laiko sampratų istorijoje I. Newtonas yra neabejotinai viena svarbiausių figūrų. Absoliučios erdvės ir laiko idėjos ilgą laiką buvo plačiai pripažintos ir realiai paneigtos tik XX a. pradžioje, atsiradus specialiajai reliatyvumo teorijai. Tačiau niutoniškajai mechanikai įsitvirtinti reikėjo nukonkuruoti R. Descartes’o gamtamokslines pažiūras. Kita vertus, ar gali būti, kad abiejų filosofų pažiūros yra ne tiek prieštaraujančios, kiek panašios? Ar gali būti, kad I. Newtonas pasinaudojo R. Descartes’o idėjomis, konstruodamas savo garsiuosius judėjimo dėsnius, kuriais konstatavo laiko ir erdvės absoliutumą? Šie probleminiai klausimai yra nagrinėjami straipsnyje.Reikšminiai žodžiai: erdvė, laikas, judėjimo dėsniai, reliatyvumas. R. DESCARTES AND I. NEWTON: SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THEIR SYSTEMS OF NATURAL PHILOSOPHYJonas Čiurlionis Summary Throughout the history of undertanding space and time, I. Newton is undoubtedly one of the most important figures. His ideas of absolute space and time were widely accepted and refused only in the beginning of the 20th century with the rise of special theory of reliativity. However, in order to be recognized, Newtonian mechanics had to win the competition against Cartesian natural philosophy. On the other hand, can it be that views of both philosophers are more similar than contradictory? Can it be that I. Newton used the ideas of R. Descartes while constructing his famous laws of motion – the foundation for the absolute space and time? These and similar problematic questions are discussed in the article.Keywords: space, time, laws of motion, relativity.



Author(s):  
Sandro Caparrini ◽  
Craig Fraser

This article focuses on mechanics in the eighteenth century. The publication in 1687 of Isaac Newton’s Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy has long been regarded as the event that ushered in the modern period in mathematical physics. The success and scope of the Principia heralded the arrival of mechanics as the model for the mathematical investigation of nature. This subject would be at the cutting edge of science for the next two centuries. This article first provides an overview of the fundamental principles and theorems of mechanics, including the principles of inertia and relativity, before discussing the dynamics of rigid bodies. It also considers the formulation of mechanics by Jean-Baptiste le Rond d’Alembert and Joseph-Louis Lagrange, the statics and dynamics of elastic bodies, and the mechanics of fluids. Finally, it describes major developments in celestial mechanics.



1953 ◽  
Vol 8 (22) ◽  
pp. 522-528

Very few are left with us now of the men of science who were trained in Victorian days and carried out important scientific investigations before the end of last century. Charles Herbert Lees, who died on 25 September 1952 published at least a dozen papers of some consequence in the Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society and in the Philosophical Magazine before the end of the year 1900. Indeed, the work for which he is best known, and perhaps his most important work, was accomplished in days when such innovations as the elementary quantum of action or any serious generalization of Newtonian mechanics were still undreamt of. Lees was born on 28 July 1864 at ‘Ballarat’ in Glodwick Lane, Oldham, Lancashire. He was the second of the three sons of John and Jane Lees. An elder brother, John Frederick, born on 12 December 1855, became Borough Accountant and Treasurer of Oldham and died on 6 September 1915. The younger brother, Edward Oscar, born 16 March 1867, became General Manager of the Manchester and County Bank and its branches, and retired in December 1931. Indeed, many of Lees’s relatives and forebears appear to have been very prominent, about Oldham and that part of Lancashire, in engineering, mechanical construction, commerce, as well as in local municipal affairs and administration. His father, John Lees, who was born at Lowerfields, near Oldham, on 4 July 1822, was apprenticed to Messrs Garnett, millwrights, in Oldham, and later became ‘job-master’ (sub-contractor) in the works of Messrs Platt Bros, machinists, of Oldham. During 1847 there was an engineering ‘lock out’ and John Lees made use of his enforced leisure to visit Birmingham, Coventry, Hull, York and London. In 1851 it appears that he built several houses and a shop in Glodwick Lane, where later his son, Charles Herbert, was born. In 1852 he sailed to Melbourne, arriving at the end of August, after a voyage of 84 days. He was one of the successful gold diggers of that time, since he (with his three partners) discovered, on 31 January 1853, the famous ‘Leg of mutton’ nugget of gold. It was found at a depth of 65 feet in their claim at Canadian Gully, Ballarat, and weighed 134 lb. 11 oz.! On arrival in England it was shown to Queen Victoria and Prince AlbertV er y few are left with us now of the men of science who were trained in Victorian days and carried out important scientific investigations before the end of last century. C harles H er ber t L ees, who died on 25 September 1952 published at least a dozen papers of some consequence in the Proceedings and Transactions of the Royal Society and in the Philosophical Magazine before the end of the year 1900. Indeed, the work for which he is best known, and perhaps his most important work, was accomplished in days when such innovations as the elementary quantum of action or any serious generalization of Newtonian mechanics were still undreamt of. Lees was born on 28 July 1864 at ‘Ballarat’ in Glodwick Lane, Oldham, Lancashire. He was the second of the three sons of John and Jane Lees. An elder brother, John Frederick, born on 12 December 1855, became Borough Accountant and Treasurer of Oldham and died on 6 September 1915. The younger brother, Edward Oscar, born 16 March 1867, became General Manager of the Manchester and County Bank and its branches, and retired in December 1931. Indeed, many of Lees’s relatives and forebears appear to have been very prominent, about Oldham and that part of Lancashire, in engineering, mechanical construction, commerce, as well as in local municipal affairs and administration. His father, John Lees, who was born at Lowerfields, near Oldham, on 4 July 1822, was apprenticed to Messrs Garnett, millwrights, in Oldham, and later became ‘job-master’ (sub-contractor) in the works of Messrs Platt Bros, machinists, of Oldham. During 1847 there was an engineering ‘lock out’ and John Lees made use of his enforced leisure to visit Birmingham, Coventry, Hull, York and London. In 1851 it appears that he built several houses and a shop in Glodwick Lane, where later his son, Charles Herbert, was born. In 1852 he sailed to Melbourne, arriving at the end of August, after a voyage of 84 days. He was one of the successful gold diggers of that time, since he (with his three partners) discovered, on 31 January 1853, the famous ‘Leg of mutton’ nugget of gold. It was found at a depth of 65 feet in their claim at Canadian Gully, Ballarat, and weighed 134 lb. 11 oz.! On arrival in England it was shown to Queen Victoria and Prince Albert.



Author(s):  
Steven Nadler

Géraud de Cordemoy was, by profession, first a lawyer, then a tutor to the Grand Dauphin, first son of Louis XIV. But he was also one of the more important Cartesian philosophers in seventeenth-century France. In Le discernement du corps et de l’ame, Cordemoy defended a strict dualist and mechanist philosophy. But his Cartesianism was unorthodox, since he introduced indivisible atoms into his natural philosophy and was one of the first to argue for occasionalism, the doctrine that God alone is a true causal agent. He also wrote an important work on the nature and origins of speech and language, Le discours physique de la parole.



Author(s):  
Brian Hepburn

A narrative is proposed for eighteenth-century origins of “Newtonian” mechanics, according to which there are two relevant streams of development. One was the popularization of Newtonian natural philosophy, particularly in France in connection with the philosophe movement and the Enlightenment. This movement was inspired primarily by the example of Newton’s Opticks and embraced induction from observation and experiment. Newton’s Principia (1687), on the other hand, and its mathematical treatment of forces and motion, was exceedingly difficult. Solving novel problems in mechanics not addressed in the Principia required the kind of training possessed by a select group of mathematicians, most of whom were already engaged in a program of mathematical mechanics and did not identify as Newtonians nor took Principia as their starting point. The loudly celebrated, popular Newtonianism was lacking a program in mechanics until the end of the eighteenth century, when it subsumed, ironically, the mechanics of the non-Newtonians.



2020 ◽  
Vol 75 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-269
Author(s):  
Sebastián Molina-Betancur

Abstract This paper presents the development of a Newtonian approach to medicine in the eighteenth century by studying the case of its appropriation in the Viceroyalty of New Granada by the Spanish botanist and savant José Celestino Mutis (1732-1808). First, I briefly depict the academic milieu in which Mutis presented his ideas on modern medicine in his General Plan for the Medical Studies in 1804, claiming that they were greatly influenced by Boerhaave’s appropriation of Newtonian medicine. Next, I explain in detail the emergence of this approach to medicine by considering the works of Archibald Pitcairne, George Cheyne and James Keill. Afterwards, I characterise Boerhaave’s use of Newtonian physical principles for explaining both physiological and chemical phenomena. Lastly, I lay the foundations for explaining that Mutis’s introduction of Newton’s ideas was a complex enterprise, encompassing Newton’s mathematics and physics not only as strict theoretical elements related to natural philosophy but also as they were related to the medical and chemical fields.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document