Scalar Theory of Everything (STOE) unites the big, the small, and the four forces (GUT) by extending Newton’s model

Newton established a major physics advance that was confirmed by predicting the late return of Halley’s comet. Newton identified three characteristics of bodies that have been identified as three characteristics of “mass”. Current standard physical models have become very complex with divergent postulates for cosmology and quantum mechanics. Physics theory restarting from Newton’s speculations and then describing the experiments of the 19th and 20th centuries results in a model of the big, the small, and the four forces (GUT) - the Scalar Theory of Everything (STOE).

Nicole-Reine de la Briere Lepaute (1723–1788)

This chapter talks about Nicole Lepaute, an eighteenth-century French computer that accurately calculated the passage of Halley’s Comet.

THÉORIE DES COMÈTES ET OBSERVATIONS INÉDITES EN OCCIDENT MUSULMAN

In this paper, we present the Aristotelian theory of comets, which is well known in the Muslim West through the commentaries of Ibn Rušd and Ibn Bāǧǧa. This aspect is covered three centuries later in an unknown manuscript attributed to the famous mathematician Ibn Ġāzī al-Miknāsī (1437-1513), and this text is not present in the known list of his works. The author devotes a part of his manuscript to the comet astrology following Ptolemy, and introduces a critical position of Iḫwān al-Ṣafā’, characterized by the rejection of the sidereal comets idea. We are also interested in comet classifications given by Ibn Ġāzī and another author ‘Alī al-Antākī. We found that the content of the De cometis of pseudo-Ptolemy is analogous with the text of Ibn Ġāzī, and almost identical to the text of al-Antākī. Then, we are interested in observations of comets from the 9th to the end of the 19th century in North Africa and in Islamic Spain (Andalusia), recorded in some Arabic manuscripts on astronomy and history, which have never been the subject of an extensive study. The studied observations are: the two comets X/975 P1 and X/998 D1 reported by an anonymous author of the 15th century, the X/1381 V1 comet reported by Ibn al-Qāḍī (1553-1616), the passage of Halley's comet in 1456 reported by Muḥammad al-Zarkašī (1434-1525), the C/1743 X1 comet observed by ‘Abd al-Razzāq ibn Ḥamadūš (1695-1785), which confirm its fan structure, the two observations of Ibn ‘Alī al-Šrīf al-Šalāṭī of the D/1770 L1, and especially the C/1769 P1 comet. The graphic representation of this latter comet is unprecedented in the Muslim West.

Eponyms in science terms (Epistemological aspect)

The paper is devoted to eponyms used in scientific discourse. The concept of the eponym is borrowed from linguistic research. The term is understood from epistemological standpoint. It is stated that eponyms realize two functions in the language of science – cognitive and communicative. It is also stressed that to some extend eponyms connect two worlds – the world of ideas and the world of people, or, more specifically, the world of abstract concepts and the world of scientists, who study these abstract concepts. Historical examples (cases) demonstrating some features of functioning eponyms are given and discussed. The main historical example for the study is the history of discovering Lorentz’s transformations, which had a significant impact on forming the theory of special relativity. In addition, the paper gives the analysis of some other examples, in particular, related to such terms as Halley's comet, L'Hospital rule, Russell's paradox. It is noted that the fact of discovering some scientific object by one or another scientist in general is not the only reason for forming an eponym containing the name of this scientist. The formation of eponyms is influenced by many other factors, including social and political ones.

Newton, Isaac (1642–1727)

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.