[lit-ideas] Re: Understanding Why Newton Contributed To Human Knowledge With A False Theory
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:06:41 EST
McEvoy:
"This lack of good instruments would not explain the indecipherability. The
difficulty in his work _Principia Mathematica_ is that, unlike say Darwin's
'The Origin Of Species', is requires a level of maths that is beyond"
---- C'mon, insult me if that's what you want. Me and my _genos_.
"beyond _you_" -- is that what you meant?
I'm glad God foresaw that and did not allow you to _type_ such an
unchristian thought.
Newton's PM are pretty digestible. It's the easiest part in any course of
physics anybody can undertake at the _primary_ level. I don't believe anything
he wrote is _difficult_ per se.
You should go to explain how Einstein thought the things Newton wrote were
_false_ or _relatively false_, as he would prefer, but then
The difficulty of Einstein's work is that, unlike Newton's Principia
Mathematica, requires a level of maths that is beyond
**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
Other related posts:
