I'd like to see your point of view

  • Thread starter Thread starter krtica
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Point
AI Thread Summary
During the Modern period, Newton described planetary motion through the concept of force, while Leibniz criticized this approach, suggesting it implied an "occult quality" that lacked full understanding. Leibniz advocated for a mechanical explanation, arguing that movement is due to an "impressed impetus." He countered Newton's ideas with his vortex theory, proposing that vortices are responsible for planetary motion. The discussion raises questions about the intelligibility of Newton's explanation, inviting insights from those more experienced in physics. Engaging with these foundational concepts can enhance understanding of classical mechanics.
krtica
Messages
50
Reaction score
0
During the Modern period, planetary motion was described by Newton through force. Leibniz thought Newton was turning planetary motion to an "occult quality", as something not fully intelligible. Leibniz viewed the proper explanation as being completely mechanical, that only by an "impressed impetus" can an object move. As his antithesis, Leibniz proposed the vortex theory as being responsible for planetary motion.

This is a very brief preface, but do you believe that Newton's explanation of planetary force is intelligible? I am beginning my studies in physics and find its progression fascinating. I am interested to read responses from those who have been in physics much longer than I.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
krtica said:
do you believe that Newton's explanation of planetary force is intelligible?
Yes, which part of it confuses you?
 
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'

Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'

Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
View full post »

Thread 'Do electron density waves accompany EM waves in coaxial cables?'

Maxwell’s equations imply the following wave equation for the electric field $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}}{\partial t^2} = \frac{1}{\varepsilon_0}\nabla\rho+\mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf J}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ I wonder if eqn.##(1)## can be split into the following transverse part $$\nabla^2\mathbf{E}_T-\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial^2\mathbf{E}_T}{\partial t^2} = \mu_0\frac{\partial\mathbf{J}_T}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ and longitudinal part...
View full post »

Similar threads

Gyroscopes-Specific Questions by an interested High Schooler
Replies
1
Views
2K
What are Joe's interests and goals as a new member and citizen scientist?
Replies
2
Views
1K
I Energy conservation in Doppler (NOT cosmological) redshifts?
Replies
13
Views
3K
A PDE: Between Physics and Mathematics
Replies
6
Views
4K
Focus all of your ire on me, if you would
Replies
4
Views
2K
Photon-Foil FTL Drive theory
Replies
8
Views
600
A Is delayed choice remote entanglement of photons derived from TDSE?
2
Replies
58
Views
4K
I New Paper Claims Primordial Black Holes Don't Explain Dark Matter
Replies
20
Views
4K
I Debunking the Myth of the Devil's Racetrack in Death Valley
Replies
9
Views
2K
B The Problem That Riddles Any Radical Thinker: WTH Is Energy
Replies
23
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top