Galileo and Newton: Close is Good Enough for Discoveries

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter KL7AJ
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Galileo
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the philosophical implications of Galileo's and Newton's discoveries, particularly the independence of a pendulum's period from its excursion, which holds true only for small swings. It emphasizes that while Newton's laws have been proven incomplete, they remain effective for most practical applications. The conversation highlights the importance of accepting approximations in scientific inquiry, suggesting that significant discoveries may lie beyond current focus areas. Eric concludes the thread by noting its philosophical nature, leading to its lock.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic physics concepts, particularly pendulum motion.
  • Familiarity with Newtonian mechanics and its historical context.
  • Knowledge of the philosophical implications of scientific theories.
  • Awareness of the limitations of scientific models and approximations.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mathematical principles behind pendulum motion and non-linear dynamics.
  • Explore the historical development of Newton's laws and their modern interpretations.
  • Study the philosophy of science, focusing on the acceptance of approximations in scientific theories.
  • Investigate current areas of physics that may lead to new fundamental discoveries.
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, philosophers of science, and anyone interested in the historical context and implications of scientific discoveries.

KL7AJ
Messages
78
Reaction score
12
One of the many earth-shattering discoveries Galileo made (after lots of rumination, I've concluded he's a tie with Newton as my favorite all time smart guy)...was the fact that a pendulum's period is independent of its excursion.

Actually, this is true only for small levels of swing, as what Galileo observed with the swinging chandelier in the cathedral. Upon further extrapolation, we find that there are a lot of higher order terms that make this a rather non linear function.

But this demonstrates a principle a lot of us forget. Sometimes CLOSE is more than good enough to make some tremendous discoveries. Likewise, Newton's laws, while recently proven to be incomplete, are still 99% good enough for nearly everything we observe in daily life. They represented a quantum leap in understanding, with only minor refinements in the "modern" era.

We need to be careful to avoid "straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel," to wax Biblical. I think there are still some fundamental discoveries to be made that are just as profound as Newton's laws. But they may not be where we're currently looking.

Eric
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Since this is more philosophy than physics, thread locked.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
10K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 75 ·
3
Replies
75
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K