Calculus Wars: Newton vs Leibnitz

  • Thread starter Thread starter DiracPool
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Newton
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the debate over whether Isaac Newton or Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz should be credited with the invention of calculus. Participants argue that Newton's focus on physics and alchemy hindered his development of calculus, while Leibniz's dedication to mathematics allowed him to publish his work first. Some believe both men independently developed calculus, influenced by earlier mathematicians like Cavalieri and Descartes. The conversation also touches on Newton's secretive nature and his reluctance to publish due to personal conflicts, particularly with Robert Hooke. Ultimately, the thread highlights the complexity of attributing the invention of calculus to a single individual, suggesting that it was a cumulative effort influenced by multiple thinkers.
  • #31
I don't give the citation because I forgot book name because I read many on them. but main point is How he say that when he never visited the BEACH.

Good point, although I'm unfamiliar with your reference, Gleick says he never saw the ocean though, we need more opinions and evidence
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
DiracPool said:
In James Gleicks book on Newton, which I highly recommend, he says that not only did Newton not visit any other countries, he never even went to the BEACH in England, and he lived for almost 80 years. I find this hard to believe...you live on an island and never saw the ocean? Do you guys believe this?

I don't see any reason not to believe it. The idea that this was a healthy thing to do was only "invented" in about 1750, and didn't really catch on until the railways improved transportation in the 1800s.

On the parts of the east coast of England nearest to where Newton lived and worked, it would have been pretty hard to tell where the "beach" actually was in the 1600s. Mostly, the tide would have washed in and out over several miles of mud, with no clear dividing line between the land and the sea.
 
  • #33
On the parts of the east coast of England nearest to where Newton lived and worked, it would have been pretty hard to tell where the "beach" actually was in the 1600s. Mostly, the tide would have washed in and out over several miles of mud, with no clear dividing line between the land and the sea.

Hmm..interesting. But, my god, to know that an ocean existed and not make that several mile trek to see it in 80 years?
 
  • #34
Believe it or not! because Isaac Newton and James Gleick both born in different Era. Gleick Biography on Feynman is good or say the best because they are friends, but here the Newton who's date of Birth is not clearly known, If his student Humphrey Newton or Relative write biography then may be true but all the Biography Writers Cohen,Westfall,Whiteside are not from that generation.Also the Apple Incident is not cleared yet, true or false.
 
  • #35
Newton who's date of Birth is not clearly known

I thought we knew Newton was born in 1642, the year Galileo died. Is that contested?
 
  • #36
DiracPool said:
I thought we knew Newton was born in 1642, the year Galileo died. Is that contested?
No date of birth, 25th of December 1642 and 04th of January 1643. Due to Christmas it is officially given DOB of Newton is 25th of December,Year 1642.
 
  • #37
DiracPool said:
I want to state this here in Physics Forums for the record and have this quote petrified in history as what I, DiracPool, personally thinks, and here it is..."if I have seen further, then it is because I have stood taller than others." Thank you everyone.

...by standing on stilts."

and since all this discussion is kept on hard drives somewhere in the world remember:

"On a clear disk, you can seek forever..."
 
  • #38
...by standing on stilts."

Shaky stilts at that.:confused:
 
  • #39
DiracPool said:
Hmm..interesting. But, my god, to know that an ocean existed and not make that several mile trek to see it in 80 years?

You don't seem to understand the culture of Newton's time. "Nature" was generally considered to be something yucky and horrible that you avoided as much as poissible, unless you were a peasant and didn't have any option.

Actually, Newton's father was a "peasant" in that sense. He owned a farm, but he was illiterate. His father died three months before Isaac was born. His mother moved up from being a "peasant" by her second marriage to a clergyman - otherwise Isaac would probably have become another illiterate farmer.

The next stage was considering "nature" as something that you could improve on rather that look at in its natural yucky state, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancelot_"Capability"_Brown was later than Newton.

If you read "Principia" you will find that Newton was well aware of the different behaviours of ocean tides along coastlines all over the planet, but he didn't have to actually go there see for himself.
 
Last edited:
  • #40
otherwise Isaac would probably have become another illiterate farmer.

This could be a whole "nother" thread of itself. Do you really think circumstance dictates destiny. I would argue the counter, people like Newton, Einstein, and Galileo are cursed to see their visions through, these are obligations brought upon great men who are typically reluctant to be great. That is the truth.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
40K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 66 ·
3
Replies
66
Views
9K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K