Did Newton Believe in Absolute Motion? A Closer Look at His Arguments

In summary, the conversation discusses the views of Newton and Descartes on absolute and relative motion. Newton argued for the concept of absolute rest despite understanding the limitations of identifying it, while Descartes believed that relative motion is problematic due to the infinite number of relative motions between particles in the universe. The conversation also cautions against interpreting Newton's ideas with modern biases and emphasizes the need to understand his arguments in their historical context.
  • #1
MikeGomez
344
16
An interesting subject that was getting off topic from another thread… https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...me-dilation-imply-spacetime-curvature.919181/

Note: Newton was not alone in this. Rene Descartes stated that the problem with relative motion is that every particle in the universe would require an infinite number of relative motions to all the other particles in the universe. I don’t know whether or not he viewed velocity as a “quantity of motion” as it is well known that Newton did.

PAllen said:
In fact Newton argued for the notion of absolute rest, even though argued six ways from Sunday that you could never identify this state.

Newton was acutely aware of the inability to identify this state.

"Hitherto I have laid down the definitions of such words as are less known, and explained the sense in which I would have them to be understood in the following discourse. I do not define time, space, place, and motion, as being well known to all. Only I must observe, that the common people conceive those quantities under no other notions but from the relation they bear to sensible objects. And thence arise certain prejudices, for the removing of which it will be convenient to distinguish them into absolute and relative, true and apparent, mathematical and common." -Isaac Newton

Newton says that common people view time, space, place, and motion as relative. His view is that this is incorrect (prejudices to be removed). Newton puts forth his arguments six ways from Sunday here…

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/Newton-stm/scholium.html
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #3
Not sure what you are questioning in my side comment, in that what you post is in complete agreement with it, and the source you quote is also the source from which I became first aware of this fact.
 
Last edited:
  • #4
Dale said:
Did you have a question?

Thanks Dale. You’re the best. I was wondering about that when I started the thread. I’ve seen people here say things like “that is getting off topic, you might want to start a new thread for that” so I did not know whether or not a question was required when doing so. Thank you for clarifying that.

The question I was having was regarding how it could be that Newton says he contradicts Descartes, yet they seem to be in agreement on their views of absolute motion.
 
  • #5
PAllen said:
Not sure what you are questioning in my side comment, in that what you post is in complete agreement with it, and the source you quote is also the source from which I became first aware of this fact.

I see. I didn’t get that, from the way you worded your original post. The way you worded your original statement made it seem like you were kind of mocking Newton for having a dumb idea, or something along those lines. You say “he argued for the notion of absolute rest, even though ,..” The “even though”, sounded like a preponderance of evidence to the contrary , (and “six ways to Sunday” comment) sounded to me like “What a dummy. He thinks one thing, even though the evidence clearly indicates otherwise.”

Thanks for clearing that up.
 
  • #6
MikeGomez said:
I see. I didn’t get that, from the way you worded your original post. The way you worded your original statement made it seem like you were kind of mocking Newton for having a dumb idea, or something along those lines. You say “he argued for the notion of absolute rest, even though ,..” The “even though”, sounded like a preponderance of evidence to the contrary , (and “six ways to Sunday” comment) sounded to me like “What a dummy. He thinks one thing, even though the evidence clearly indicates otherwise.”

Thanks for clearing that up.
Those comments were meant to caution against interpreting Newton with modern biases, trying to underplay what he clearly argued (gravity is a force, free fall is not inertial motion) simply because he understood the facts that led Einstein in a different direction. I offered this as another example - though he thoroughly understood the inability in practice to determine absolute motion he would have argued against the modern consensus view of the principle of relativity - that there is no such thing as absolute motion.
 

What is Newton's theory on absolute motion?

Newton's theory on absolute motion states that there exists an absolute frame of reference in which the laws of physics hold true and are independent of any observer's perspective.

How did Newton's theory on absolute motion differ from previous theories?

Prior to Newton, many scientists believed in the concept of relative motion, where the laws of physics would differ depending on an observer's frame of reference. Newton's theory of absolute motion challenged this idea and proposed that there exists a fixed and unchanging frame of reference.

What evidence did Newton use to support his theory of absolute motion?

Newton's laws of motion and the concept of inertia were key pieces of evidence he used to support his theory of absolute motion. These laws state that objects at rest will remain at rest and objects in motion will continue moving at a constant velocity unless acted upon by an external force. This suggests the existence of an absolute frame of reference in which these laws hold true.

How did Einstein's theory of relativity impact Newton's theory of absolute motion?

Einstein's theory of relativity challenged Newton's theory of absolute motion by proposing that the laws of physics are the same for all observers, regardless of their frame of reference. This means that there is no absolute frame of reference, and instead, all frames of reference are equally valid.

Is Newton's theory of absolute motion still accepted in modern science?

No, Newton's theory of absolute motion has been replaced by the theory of relativity proposed by Einstein. However, some aspects of Newton's theory, such as the laws of motion, are still widely used and accepted in modern science.

Similar threads

  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
830
  • Quantum Physics
2
Replies
69
Views
4K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
75
Views
3K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
47
Views
8K
  • Special and General Relativity
2
Replies
36
Views
6K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
3
Replies
94
Views
11K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
16
Views
5K
Back
Top