Comment on Was Isaac Newton physics jesus?

hendrik@palaver.p3x.de ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I firmly believe Newton would have gotten to relativity before Einstien if he were born at the same time.

  source

  • hendrik@palaver.p3x.de ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Possible. But then we'd need somebody else to develop calculus and write a Principia Mathematica and lay the groundworks for the age of enlightenment.

    source

    • spizzat2@lemm.ee ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Poor, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz…

      source

      • hendrik@palaver.p3x.de ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Heheh, valid objection. Guess Newton wasn't the only smart person in history 😆 And drama has always been part of human history... But we still hear those names over 300 years later. Along with a lot of other names of people whose results are taught in university today. But yeah, that hypothetical situation (Newton's achievements in mathematics being replaced by Leibnitz) would make a good Dr. Who episode.

        source
    • loaExMachina@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      A lot of what Newton used in Principia was already more or less in the air, it was just a matter of someone picking up the pieces and seeing the big pictures. It couldn’t have been more than a few decades at most until someone found out if it hadn’t been Newton.

      source

      • Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Same could be said about Einstein

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • marcos@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Much of the Special Relativity value was on Lorenz mechanics anyway.

    And General Relativity, the Photoelectric Effect explanation, and his explanation for the Brownian movement all needed a great deal of anti-establishment thinking… honestly, I have no idea how much Newton had of that.

    source

    • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      General Relativity needed lots and lots of the math that has been developed after Newton, even shortly before Einstein (and also he himself has developed some of it).

      source
  • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    I firmly believe Newton would have gotten to relativity before Einstien if he were born at the same time.

    But it wasn’t the end results and complex formulas of Einstein’s theory that showed the flaws and gaps in Newton’s mechanics.

    It was the basic questions and thought experiments in Einstein’s first script. About basic geometry, length and width. The flow of time, the speed of a signal. Concurrency.

    It should have been possible to think these thoughts at Newton’s time.

    source

    • loaExMachina@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      No it shouldn’t? Without Mercury’s orbit having been noticed, there was no need yet to question Newton’s theory, they simply worked as far as anyone could see; so why complicate it? And without the Lorentz transformation, the math Einstein used wasn’t there. And without Fizeau’s experiment, the fact that the speed of light is the same in every frame wasn’t known, and that’s a huge part of the theory. And if he had intuited it somehow, the Maxwell’s equations were even there either. Special relativity is at it’s core a way reconcile Maxwell’s equations with the core tenants of Newton’s theory. There was no way special relativity could’ve been found even half a century earlier, let alone over two centuries…

      source

      • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Mercury’s orbit

        I wasn’t talking about Astronomy at all.

        Lorentz transformation

        That was needed only for the end results. Not in the introductory thoughts that I was talking about.

        There was no way special relativity could’ve been found even half a century earlier

        Again you are looking at the end results only, when the theory was complete.

        Have you even read my comment?

        Have you even read Einstein?

        source

        • -> View More Comments