Newton's 2nd law is really the 3rd law?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the order and interpretation of Newton's laws of motion, specifically questioning whether Newton may have reversed the order of his laws. Participants explore the implications of this idea on concepts such as force, acceleration, and conservation laws, engaging in both theoretical and conceptual reasoning.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that Newton's 1st law implicitly establishes time and conservation of energy, while the 3rd law relates to conservation of linear momentum.
  • Others argue that there must be an acceleration before a force can exist, proposing that all forces are underpinned by accelerations defined as time rates of change of velocities.
  • A participant posits that if strict definitions are adhered to, the 1st law could be considered the 3rd, and the 2nd could remain unchanged, while the 3rd could be viewed as the 1st.
  • Some contributions emphasize that Newton's introduction of 'force' was crucial, suggesting that it would not have made sense for the 3rd law to precede the 2nd law.
  • Another participant notes that differential calculus did not exist during Newton's time, highlighting that acceleration is not explicitly mentioned in the original statements of the laws.
  • One participant claims that the 3rd law relies on the 2nd law to establish conservation of momentum, indicating a relationship between the two laws.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance of the order of Newton's laws, with some questioning its importance while others engage in deeper theoretical implications. No consensus is reached on whether the order of the laws affects their interpretation or application.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of clarity on definitions and the historical context of Newton's work, as well as the unresolved nature of the mathematical relationships between the laws.

Antonio Lao
Messages
1,436
Reaction score
1
Did Newton accidentally reverse the order of his laws of motion? The 1st law implicitly established the notion of time and conservation of energy. The 3rd law formulated the conservation of linear momentum by

[tex]m_1v_1 + m_2v_2 = constant[/tex]

the time derivative of this expression is

[tex]m_1a_1 + m_2a_2 = 0[/tex]

acceleration is defined 1st before the inertial force as stated in the 2nd law.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What difference does it make?
 
This is similar to the chicken and the egg dilemma of choice. The bottom line is that there has to be an acceleration first before there can be a force. We can even make a generalization that all forces have an underlying acceleration for them to exist. And all of these accelerations can be defined as the time rates of change of velocities which are time rate of change of metrics in multi-dimensional spaces.
 
But if we adhere to strict rule of definition (a concept's existence is based on the moment of its definition), then Newton's 1st law of motion is really the 3rd, and the 2nd can remain where it is, and the 3rd is really the 1st.

The 1st law mentioned force but did not define it. The 2nd law mentioned an acceleration but did not define it. The 3rd, based on the law of conservation of linear momentum, implicitly, defined mass, velocity, acceleration, and the existence of action and reaction, which asserted the existence of opposite forces.
 
In answer to this statement, i would have to say who cares as is does not really matter that much and if it does, i do not actually think that this would change the world of physics (i don't actually know if i am correct in saying this, but it is a safe assuption)
 
Antonio Lao said:
Did Newton accidentally reverse the order of his laws of motion? The 1st law implicitly established the notion of time and conservation of energy. The 3rd law formulated the conservation of linear momentum by

[tex]m_1v_1 + m_2v_2 = constant[/tex]

the time derivative of this expression is

[tex]m_1a_1 + m_2a_2 = 0[/tex]

acceleration is defined 1st before the inertial force as stated in the 2nd law.

One has to remember that when Newton developed his laws of motion, he introduced the concept of 'force' into physics. Mass and acceleration were understood concepts. Force was not. So he first had to define force before he went on to say that forces come in equal and opposite pairs. It would have made no sense to make the third law come before the second.

AM
 
Antonio Lao said:
Did Newton accidentally reverse the order of his laws of motion? The 1st law implicitly established the notion of time and conservation of energy. The 3rd law formulated the conservation of linear momentum by

[tex]m_1v_1 + m_2v_2 = constant[/tex]

the time derivative of this expression is

[tex]m_1a_1 + m_2a_2 = 0[/tex]

acceleration is defined 1st before the inertial force as stated in the 2nd law.

I agree with Integral - what difference does it make? But, since we arguing trivialities, I disagree with your characterization of the the 3rd Law. It is only peripherally associated with conservation of momentum. In fact, I have seen arguments that Newton's Third Law is the only really law in his laws of motion, the other two being merely definitions. :biggrin:
 
Do not forget that differential calculus did not exist before Newton's time. The Principia is not only foundation of Mechanics but also foundation of the underlying Mathematics, calculation with infinitesimally small quantities. See at

http://members.tripod.com/~gravitee/toc.htm.

Acceleration is never mentioned in the three Laws.

"Every body perseveres in its state of rest, or of uniform motion in a right line, unless it is compelled to change that state by forces impressed thereon."

"The alteration of motion is ever proportional to the motive force impressed; and is made in the direction of the right line in which that force is impressed."

"To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction; or the mutual actions of two bodies upon each other are always equal, and directed to contrary parts."


ehild
 
Antonio Lao said:
The 3rd law formulated the conservation of linear momentum by

[tex]m_1v_1 + m_2v_2 = constant[/tex]


The third law uses the second law in establishing this law of conservation of momentum.

Since the second law states that

[tex]\vec {F}= \frac{\vec {dp}}{dt}[/tex]

So, if no external forces act, the momentum is conserved.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
5K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
11K