Cannabis Ruderalis

Content deleted Content added
Insulation2 (talk | contribs)
Jumbo T (talk | contribs)
Tag: Reply
Line 109: Line 109:
Newton's most important discovery was that the laws of nature are universal. Up to that time, it had been generally assumed that the laws of motion applicable on Earth were different from the laws of motion applicable to celestial objects. This seems obvious to us now, but it was not obvious in Newton's day (indeed it was "obvious" that they were '''not''' the same).
Newton's most important discovery was that the laws of nature are universal. Up to that time, it had been generally assumed that the laws of motion applicable on Earth were different from the laws of motion applicable to celestial objects. This seems obvious to us now, but it was not obvious in Newton's day (indeed it was "obvious" that they were '''not''' the same).
The details of Newton's laws of motion and of Newton's theory of gravitation have indeed been superseded, but the understanding that it is possible to formulate universal laws of physics has not. On the contrary, it underlies the whole of physics since Newton. The above sentence should be changed to make this distinction clear. Comment below if you disagree, otherwise I'll go ahead and correct this. [[User:Insulation2|Insulation2]] ([[User talk:Insulation2|talk]]) 09:20, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
The details of Newton's laws of motion and of Newton's theory of gravitation have indeed been superseded, but the understanding that it is possible to formulate universal laws of physics has not. On the contrary, it underlies the whole of physics since Newton. The above sentence should be changed to make this distinction clear. Comment below if you disagree, otherwise I'll go ahead and correct this. [[User:Insulation2|Insulation2]] ([[User talk:Insulation2|talk]]) 09:20, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

:I think you are correct to take issue with this sentence. Newton's laws were never really superseded, they were just qualified to apply only in inertial reference frames. That said, to the best of my understanding, universal gravitation ''was'' pretty much superseded by general relativity. And as you say, not even mentioned is the very important postulate that the laws of physics can be assumed to be universal. I would support a change to make this clear (without bringing in too much detail - this is a lead sentence, after all). — [[User:Jumbo T|Jumbo T]] ([[User talk:Jumbo T|talk]]) 11:13, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 11:13, 9 December 2022

Former featured articleIsaac Newton is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Good articleIsaac Newton has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 13, 2005.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 7, 2005Peer reviewReviewed
October 19, 2005Featured article candidatePromoted
March 14, 2009Featured article reviewDemoted
November 21, 2012Peer reviewReviewed
August 18, 2014Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Former featured article, current good article

Semi-protected edit request on 19 April 2022

There's a grammatically incorrect sentence in the fourth paragraph (second sentence). Change: "Unusually for a member of the Cambridge faculty of the day, he refused to take holy orders in the Church of England."

To: "Unusual ..." Aidanjalili03 (talk) 22:12, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Happy Editing--IAmChaos 04:17, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reverted. The existing version is not grammatically incorrect. "Unusually" is an adverb modifying "he refused". To write "Unusual he refused" is grammatically incorrect. GrindtXX (talk) 10:01, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Information About sir lsaac newton

English 110.39.9.134 (talk) 15:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of Arms

Why did Newton have a coat of arms, and what do the crossed bones mean? I though that was something associated with aristocracy? Valgrus Thunderaxe (talk) 16:26, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See Newton baronets#Newton baronets, of Barrs Court (1660). This article has a bunch of speculation about it. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 14:52, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

year of Newton’s death

The OS and NS calendar difference is only about 11 days. The changing of the calendar system should not underlie the ambiguity of the year of Newton’s death as the wiki entry currently implies. 71.198.251.90 (talk) 02:17, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The difference in year is because, before the change to "new style", the new year started on Lady Day (25 March), so in the old style he died on 20 March 1726. This is all explained in the first footnote (a), which is referenced in the opening sentence of the article and in the infobox. Mikenorton (talk) 21:26, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
... and dual dating (such as 1726/27) is a widespread convention specifically adopted to avoid ambiguity. GrindtXX (talk) 23:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Newton's key discovery is not "superseded"

"In the Principia, Newton formulated the laws of motion and universal gravitation that formed the dominant scientific viewpoint for centuries until it was superseded by the theory of relativity."

Newton's most important discovery was that the laws of nature are universal. Up to that time, it had been generally assumed that the laws of motion applicable on Earth were different from the laws of motion applicable to celestial objects. This seems obvious to us now, but it was not obvious in Newton's day (indeed it was "obvious" that they were not the same). The details of Newton's laws of motion and of Newton's theory of gravitation have indeed been superseded, but the understanding that it is possible to formulate universal laws of physics has not. On the contrary, it underlies the whole of physics since Newton. The above sentence should be changed to make this distinction clear. Comment below if you disagree, otherwise I'll go ahead and correct this. Insulation2 (talk) 09:20, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are correct to take issue with this sentence. Newton's laws were never really superseded, they were just qualified to apply only in inertial reference frames. That said, to the best of my understanding, universal gravitation was pretty much superseded by general relativity. And as you say, not even mentioned is the very important postulate that the laws of physics can be assumed to be universal. I would support a change to make this clear (without bringing in too much detail - this is a lead sentence, after all). — Jumbo T (talk) 11:13, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Leave a Reply