Who is More Important for Physics: Newton or Einstein?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Leon W Zhang
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Einstein
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the comparative importance of Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein in the field of physics. Participants explore their contributions, intelligence, and the foundational role each played in the development of scientific thought. The conversation touches on historical context, personal opinions, and humorous asides, with a mix of serious and light-hearted commentary.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Historical
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that Newton is more important because Einstein's theories build upon Newtonian physics.
  • Others express confusion about the necessity of comparing the two figures, suggesting that both contributed significantly to physics.
  • A participant mentions Robert Hooke's influence on Newton, arguing that Newton would not have achieved his insights without Hooke's contributions.
  • There are humorous comparisons made about a hypothetical bar fight between Newton and Einstein, with some participants joking about Newton's physicality versus Einstein's pacifism.
  • Discussion includes a reference to a quote by Newton regarding standing on the shoulders of giants, with some participants speculating about its implications regarding Hooke.
  • Several participants share personal anecdotes and humorous remarks unrelated to the main topic, such as preferences for pie and eye dominance.
  • There is mention of John Bardeen and his contributions to physics, indicating a broader interest in notable physicists beyond Newton and Einstein.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on who is more important, with multiple competing views remaining. Some express a preference for Newton, while others emphasize the significance of both figures or introduce additional historical context with Hooke.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes references to historical relationships and rivalries, particularly between Newton and Hooke, which may influence perceptions of their contributions. There are also humorous and off-topic remarks that could detract from the seriousness of the debate.

Who May Find This Useful

Readers interested in the history of physics, the contributions of key figures in science, and the dynamics of scientific debate may find this discussion engaging.

Leon W Zhang
Messages
17
Reaction score
1
Who is more important for Physics World, Newton or Einstein? And why? Who do you think is more intelligent based on each one's contributions to science and level of difficulty they discovered?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think Newton, since Einstein's physics more or less follows the path that Newton laid down.
 
What do you like better, your left eye or your right eye?
 
Well, my left eye is dominant. Oddly, it also has the worse vision of the two. I guess I like my right eye better because it sees more clearly, but my brain disagrees. I don't even know how you can disagree with your own brain, but there I am.

- Warren
 
Leon W Zhang said:
Who is more important for Physics World, Newton or Einstein? And why? Who do you think is more intelligent based on each one's contributions to science and level of difficulty they discovered?

I don't understand why people keep asking these questions :confused:

"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
~Isaac Newton
 
Odd, I like my right eye best, and it's also my weakest eye. Maybe we should start a poll.
 
I like pie.
 
Pie are not squared. Pie are round!

- Warren
 
This is survey,

ha ha ha.

Sorry, could not resist. So wrong of me. Totally inappropriate.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
I don't know about you guys, but I think if Newton and Einstein got in a bar fight, Newton would totally have won. I mean, it's so easy to pound on a pacifist.

- Warren
 
  • #11
I like Robert Hooke for the insight of universal gravity and putting Newton on the right track with it.
Newton and Einstein would have been lost without it and he doesn’t get proper credit for it, even if he was a bit of a jerk.

edit) & while Newton pounds on the pacifist, Hooke could bite Newton on the ankles.
 
Last edited:
  • #12
chroot said:
Pie are not squared. Pie are round!

- Warren
Not if it's one of those ones that you get at McDonalds...
I don't know about you guys, but I think if Newton and Einstein got in a bar fight, Newton would totally have won. I mean, it's so easy to pound on a pacifist.
People tend to stop being pacifists when people start hitting them. Besides - didn't Newton become a physicist because he was a sickly kid and couldn't do anything physical?
 
  • #13
russ_watters said:
People tend to stop being pacifists when people start hitting them. Besides - didn't Newton become a physicist because he was a sickly kid and couldn't do anything physical?
Aww...c'mon, Newton got beat up by an apple tree, and it wasn't even trying! :biggrin:
 
  • #14
Moonbear said:
Aww...c'mon, Newton got beat up by an apple tree, and it wasn't even trying! :biggrin:
:smile: :smile: :smile: :smile:
 
  • #15
cyrusabdollahi said:
This is survey...
I was SOOOO going to do that! You had the guts to though. LOL!
 
  • #16
I'm making a choice, but:

waznboyd said:
I think Newton, since Einstein's physics more or less follows the path that Newton laid down.

?

Regards,
George
 
  • #17
ranger said:
I don't understand why people keep asking these questions

I agree ... somewhat.

"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
~Isaac Newton

I have become aware recently that this may be a "short" joke, i.e., that this might be a sarcastic reference to Robert Hooke, a short contemporary whom Newton detested.

Anyone know anything about this?

Regards,
George
 
  • #18
George Jones said:
"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants."
~Isaac Newton
I have become aware recently that this may be a "short" joke, i.e., that this might be a sarcastic reference to Robert Hooke, a short contemporary whom Newton detested.

Anyone know anything about this?
I believe the earliest source found on this quote (maybe only one) was in a letter from Newton to Hooke acknowledging some credit for the progress he had made in math and science. Yes, Hooke was what we might describe as a Little Napoleon, both in size and personality (not that Newton was any walk in the park either).

It wasn’t long after that Hooke started publicly complaining that the early drafts of Principia didn’t give him proper credit. Newton then removed Hooke’s name from later parts of the book before publishing, and worked to avoid giving Hooke any credit at all in any area.

In addition, Newton avoided publishing Optics, until the year after Hooke died; an area of science Hooke was considered as an expert.
Newton did not like criticism and he did not like Hooke.
 
  • #19
RandallB said:
I believe the earliest source found on this quote (maybe only one) was in a letter from Newton to Hooke acknowledging some credit for the progress he had made in math and science. Yes, Hooke was what we might describe as a Little Napoleon, both in size and personality (not that Newton was any walk in the park either).

It wasn’t long after that Hooke started publicly complaining that the early drafts of Principia didn’t give him proper credit. Newton then removed Hooke’s name from later parts of the book before publishing, and worked to avoid giving Hooke any credit at all in any area.

In addition, Newton avoided publishing Optics, until the year after Hooke died; an area of science Hooke was considered as an expert.
Newton did not like criticism and he did not like Hooke.
Newton also had any portraits of Hooke removed from the Royal Society for the Improvement of Natural Knowledge after Hooke died. Netwon had a tendency to get in feuds with quite a few people (Hooke, Leibniz, Flamsteed, for example), but he despised Hooke more than anyone else - mainly because Hooke was a very obnoxious person, himself. A lot of people felt Hooke compensated for his dwarfish appearance by making everyone around him feel even smaller than Hooke.

Hence the idea that maybe Newton wasn't exactly complimenting Hooke with that comment.
 
  • #20
BobG said:
Newton also had any portraits of Hooke removed from the Royal Society ...
I hadn't heard that - maybe he even had them destroyed. I know finding a good image of Hooke was historically difficult, the one good portrait of Hooke used in most books was original stored as and thought to be someone else. Maybe putting it under another name back then saved it from a destructive purge.

Can you imagine that happening now! – I wonder - who’s photos would Hawking be tossing out?
 
  • #21
One of my favorites is actually... W.L. Bragg :-p who got Nobel prize at the age of 25. Among others are ofcourse Albert, Newton, Feynman, Heisenberg, etc. But I don't have rankings or something like that.

Oh yeah... and there is this one guy, John Bardeen, who had actually been awarded with 2 nobel prizes in physics (respect!). :smile:
 
  • #22
Igor_S said:
Oh yeah... and there is this one guy, John Bardeen, who had actually been awarded with 2 nobel prizes in physics (respect!). :smile:


was that the dude who helped invent the transistor?
 
  • #23
Jonny_trigonometry said:
was that the dude who helped invent the transistor?

The Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded in 1956 to John Bardeen, Walter H. Brattain, and William Shockley for "investigations on semiconductors and the discovery of the transistor effect," carried on at the Bell Telephone Laboratories.

http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1972/bardeen-bio.html
http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1956/
 
  • #24
George Jones said:
I agree ... somewhat.



I have become aware recently that this may be a "short" joke, i.e., that this might be a sarcastic reference to Robert Hooke, a short contemporary whom Newton detested.

Anyone know anything about this?

Regards,
George
That is the claim made by John Gribbin in his book In Search of Schrödinger's Cat
 
  • #25
Integral said:
That is the claim made by John Gribbin in his book In Search of Schrödinger's Cat

The nice thing about having a bad memory is ... rediscovery.

Years ago, I read this book, but I had forgotten that part.

I think I still have the book, but if I do, my spatial location is about 2000 km from the box in which it is packed. :frown:

Regards,
George
 
  • #26
I heard that whenever Einstein found a portrait of Newton in a book he would scrawl "LOSER!" on it and giggle.
 
  • #27
zoobyshoe said:
I heard that whenever Einstein found a portrait of Newton in a book he would scrawl "LOSER!" on it and giggle.
Not likely, according to Robyn Arianrhod in “Einstein’s Hero’s” his was one of three photos he actually put on his study wall. Although Maxwell got the top spot for unifying two forces.

I’d guess someone was just cracking wise with you. – But I wouldn’t want to guess what he might have been doing to photos of Born and Heisenberg
 
  • #28
ranger said:
http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1972/bardeen-bio.html
http://nobelprize.org/physics/laureates/1956/

cool! that's my old physics teacher's teacher!
 
  • #29
zoobyshoe said:
I heard that whenever Einstein found a portrait of Newton in a book he would scrawl "LOSER!" on it and giggle.

:smile: :smile: that is hilarious!:smile: :smile:
 
  • #30
Jonny_trigonometry said:
:smile: :smile: that is hilarious!:smile: :smile:
(Shhhhh. Randallb thinks I am a gullible person taken in by a wise-cracker.)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 70 ·
3
Replies
70
Views
11K
  • · Replies 57 ·
2
Replies
57
Views
11K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
5K