[geocentrism] Re: Newton's gravity views?
- From: "Gary Shelton" <garylshelton@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 21:09:20 -0600
Mike,
I have read that Newton would not have called himself a "Newtonian" even in
his later lifetime, such was the discord at the time already growing between
some of his earlier beliefs and his later. Have you the same understanding?
Gary Shelton
[another question below, GLS]
>
> > Obviously, it would bear enormously on
> > Phil's slingshot/escape velocity issues, so I'm curious to know if
> > Newton ever took this idea very far.
>
> It has no baering on the issue whatsoever. The slingshot issue can be
> adequately described with Newtonian physics and so doesn't require the
> full GR mechanism (of which Newtonian physics is a first order
> approximation). The philosophical problems of Newtonian physics have
> been delt with by GR however, but even if you don't accept GR and cling
> to Newtonian physics as the "truth", the problem is still only
> philosophical and doesn't have any impact on whether a particular
> application is correct or not. We can use quantum field theory today
> even though we are aware of its as yet unresolved philosophical problems.
I guess what I don't grasp is how a planetary body, say Jupiter, can be used
in this "slingshot" fashion the same way if it has gravity as if it doesn't.
Can you please elaborate a bit again on would this have no bearing? Wasn't
Newton saying he didn't believe planets necessarily had gravity?
Sincerely,
Gary Shelton
>
> Regards,
> Mike.
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.7 - Release Date: 2/10/05
Other related posts:
