DOCSLIB.ORG

Isaac Newton on Mathematical Certainty and Method

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Isaac Newton on Mathematical Certainty and Method Niccol`oGuicciardini The MIT Press Cambridge, Massachusetts London, England c 2009 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and re- trieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. For information about special quantity discounts, please email special [email protected] This book was set in Computer Modern by Compomat s.r.l., Configni (RI), Italy. Printed and bound in the United States of America. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Guicciardini, Niccol`o. Isaac Newton on mathematical certainty and method / Niccol`o Guicciardini. p. cm. - (Transformations : studies in the history of science and technology) Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 978-0-262-01317-8 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Newton, Isaac, Sir, 1642–1727—Knowledge-Mathematics. 2. Mathematical analy- sis. 3. Mathematics-History. I. Title. QA29.N4 G85 2009 510-dc22 2008053211 10987654321 Index Abbreviations, xxi Andersen, Kirsti, 9, 140 Abel, Niels H., 40–41 Apagogical proofs (in Barrow’s sense), 177 Accountants, 5, 351 Apollonius, xviii, 15, 56, 63, 80, 81, 91, 105, Acerbi, Fabio, xviii, 83, 86, 88, 102 118, 145, 253, 342, 385 Adams, John C., 248, 307, 340, 348 Archimedes, xiii, 65–66, 145, 342 Affected equations, 136, 154, 156, 158, 162, Aristaeus, 81 166, 167, 179, 193, 194, 212, 231, Aristotelian conception of pure and mixed 345, 355, 356, 376 mathematics, 146, 172 Alchemy, 3, 238, 313, 342 Aristotelian inertia, 235 Algebra speciosa, 339 Aristotelian logic, 23 Algebraic curves, 6, 15, 42, 104, 157, 188 Aristotelian substantial forms and occult Algebraic equations qualities, 297 Newton’s method of resolution, 158–164, Aristotelian textbook tradition, 323 179, 355 Aristotle (pseudo) Problemata Mechanica, to be neglected, 256, 266, 289, 311, 344 4 used in common analysis, 5 Arithmetica speciosa, 298 used in the Principia, 259 Arthur, Richard T. W., 171 Algebraic operations (in Descartes), 38 Astronomy, 12, 57, 251, 255, 371, 372 Analogy (in Wallis’s sense), 143, 150, 212, Attraction of extended bodies, 251 308 Analysis Bacon, Francis, 26 and synthesis in natural philosophy, 315– Baconian inductivism, 23, 343 327 Barrow, Isaac, xiv, xv, 3, 5, 12, 14, 19, 21, by means of organic descriptions, 102, 26–29, 59, 66, 81, 82, 146, 154, 169– 309 180, 183, 189, 212, 302, 304, 313, by means of porisms, 79, 81–84, 95, 102 324–325, 340, 342–344, 346, 347, 351, common, xiv, xviii, 5, 11, 29, 117–121, 353, 362, 377–379, 381, 385 164–167 Bartolazzi, Margherita, 62 defined by Descartes, 38–40 Beal, Peter, 349 defined by Newton, 76–78, 309–313 Bennett, Jim, 27 defined by Pappus, 33–35, 38–40 Bentley, Richard, 283 defined in the Aristotelian tradition, 323– Berkeley, George, 230, 313 324 Bernoulli, Jacob, 334, 366 new, xiv, xviii, 5, 130–212, 308 Bernoulli, Johann, 240, 253, 334, 335, 346, of the ancients, xv, 14, 15, 37, 79–81, 308 362, 366, 370, 375 problematic, 33–35 Bernoulli, Nicolaus, 111 theorematic, 33–35 Bertoloni Meli, Domenico, 27, 95, 332 used in the Principia, 255 Bessel, Friedrich Wilhelm, 252 Analysis Veterum. See Analysis (of the an- Biot, Jean-Baptiste, 373 cients) Blay, Michel, 140, 257, 289 Analytic geometry, 32–33 Boas, Mary, 25–26 Analytical parallelogram, 130, 159–163, 356, Bonelli, Maddalena, xviii 357, 376 Borelli, Giovanni Alfonso, 81, 347 414 Index Bos, Henk, xix, 33, 38, 40–41, 44–45, 49, Newton’s letter (August 20, 1672), 94– 65 96, 106 Bottani, Andrea, xviii Newton’s letter (December 10, 1672), 352– Bottazzini, Umberto, xviii 353 Boutroux, Pierre, 32 Newton’s letter (November 8, 1676), 353– Boyle, Robert, xiv, xvii, 23, 25–26, 28–29 354 Brachistochrone problem, 335 Colson, John, 78, 169, 347, 350, 368 Brackenridge, Bruce, 237, 246, 250, 271, Comets, 251 274, 294 Commandino, Federico, 33, 296 Brigaglia, Aldo, 76, 312 Composition. See Synthesis Briggs, Henry, 144 Conchoid, 7–9, 67, 68 Brouncker, William, 12, 25, 347, 352 and neusis, 42–43, 68 Brunschvigc, L´eon, 32 its simplicity according to Newton, 65 Buchwald,JedZ.,xix,3,23 mechanical construction of, 69 tangent, 191 Campbell, Colin, 347 Concrete mathematics, 27–28 Cantor, Moritz, 164 Conic sections, 42–43 Cardano, Girolamo, 40–41 anharmonic property, 87 Carpentry, 372 in Wallis, 139 Cartesian parabola, 112 organic description, 88, 95, 300 Cartographers, 5 Conservation of mechanical energy, 270 Carus, Andr´e, xix Constant of integration, xvii Casey, John, 85 Construction of equations Cauchy, Augustin Louis, xvii, 220 according to Descartes, 41, 51–52 Cavalieri, Bonaventura, 57, 140 according to Newton, 64–78 Central forces Convergence, xvii, 153, 154, 231 direct problem, 244–246 Copernicus, Nicolaus, 37, 297 inverse problem, 246–249, 268–278, 322 Corpuscular models, 22, 25–26 Chandrasekhar, Subrahmanyan, 260, 294 Costabel,Pierre,32 Characteristica Universalis, 329 Cotes, Roger, 20, 246, 254, 268, 283, 317, Chasles, Michel, 82–83 318 Cheyne, George, 366 Newton-Cotes formula, 210 Child, James M., 170, 177 Craig, John, 202, 334, 345–348, 350, 361, Circle 362, 366 arc length, 155–156, 376 Cramer, Gabriel, 116 quadrature of, 143, 150–152 Crooke, John, 342 Cissoid, 7–9 Cross-ratio, 83–85 and two mean proportionals, 42–43 Cubic curves, xvii, 6, 15 equation of, 112 as shadows of divergent parabolas, 112, Newton’s organic description, 75 121–130 quadrature of, 10, 200–202, 214–216 divergent parabolas, 122 Clairaut, Alexis Claude, 123 genus, 110 Clarke, Samuel, 316, 384 Newton’s classification in 72 species, 111 Clavius, Christoph, 48 order, 110 Cohen, Bernard I., xviii, xxii, 98, 237, 249, parabolic hyperbola, 130–132 252, 288, 293, 298, 303, 326 reduction to four canonical forms, 110– Collins, John, 12, 14, 16, 62, 154, 158, 164, 112 166, 332, 334, 336, 337, 339–343, redundant hyperbola, 132 346–348, 350–353, 357, 360, 369, 373, use of series in the study of, 130–136 377 Cuomo, Serafina, 296 Index 415 Curvature in the study of trajectories, 236 Earth’s shape, 251 Cycloid, 6–9, 42, 66–67 Edleston, Joseph, 350 quadrature of, 10, 156–157 Edwards, Charles H., 154 Elegance D’Alembert, Jean Le Rond, 257 according to Fermat, 145 Damiani, Sara, xix according to Newton, 64–80, 231, 311– Dates, old style (O.S.) and new style (N.S), 312 xxi according to Wallis, 146 Davies, Richard, xviii Eratosthenes, 81 De Gandt, Fran¸cois, 140, 219, 235, 294 Erlichson, Herman, 250, 271, 274 De Moivre, Abraham, 254, 366 Ether, 237 De Morgan, Augustus, 373 Euclid, xviii, 4, 15, 23, 33, 37, 80, 103, 144, De Witt, Jan, 94, 112, 140 145, 253, 344, 345, 385 Dear, Peter, 294 Data, 81, 83 Dedekind-Peano Axioms, 142 Elements, 81, 154, 218, 254, 304 Densmore, Dana, 246, 294, 298 Porisms, 15, 81–83 Desargues, G´erard, 83 Euler, Leonhard, 240, 257, 288, 346 theorem of, 86 Exactness Descartes, Ren´e, xiv–xvii, 1, 4–6, 10, 15, according to Descartes, 43–44 21–24, 26, 27, 29, 31–60, 63–70, 73, according to Newton, 297–298, 300–302 74, 76, 79–81, 89, 90, 93, 97, 101, 106, 112, 117, 129, 130, 140, 154, Fatio de Duillier, Nicolas, 335, 345, 346, 156, 165, 167, 235–237, 261, 262, 348, 350, 363–365, 375 265, 266, 294, 299–301, 307, 308, Feingold, Mordechai, xix, 3, 25–26, 153, 311, 315, 316, 329, 344–346, 362, 170 363, 385, 386 Fermat, Pierre de, 41–42, 81, 144–146, 174, Discours de la M´ethode,29 344, 362, 381, 385 G´eom´etrie, xvii, 5, 6, 15, 31–60, 76, 112, Ferrari, Ludovico, 40–41 385 Ferrier, Jean, 97 Meditationes de Prima Philosophia, 15, Figala, Karin, 313 81, 385 Finite equations. See Algebraic equations Principia Philosophiae, xiii, 21–23, 235 First and ultimate ratios, 13, 147, 191, 219– Regulae ad Directionem Ingenii, 310 223, 241–242 Deschales, Milliet, 147 Flamsteed, John, 237, 346, 350 Describing and describend curves, 94–97 Fleckenstein, Joachim O., 336 Di Sieno, Simonetta, 92 Fluents Differential calculus, 253, 329, 332, 360 according to Barrow, 171–173 Differential equations, 57, 194, 247, 255, according to Newton, 180, 226 257, 270, 277, 288, 359, 360, 375 as geneses that exist in rerum natura, Digby, Kenelm, 145 226, 315, 382 Diophantus, 37 definition, 180 DiSalle, Robert, 239 sensible finite magnitudes, 314 Ditton, Humphry, 366, 367 Fluxions Domski, Mary, 294 as finite and real quantities, 226, 382 Ducheyne, Steffen, 323 definition, 180 Duplication of cube, 42–43 visible to the eye, 226 Dupont, Pascal, 206 Folium of Descartes, 112 Dur´an Guarde˜no, Antonio J., 117, 135 Folkes, Martin, 25–26 Fontenelle, Bernard Le Bovier de, 288 Eagles, Christina M., 276, 366 Fortification, 372 416 Index Franci, Raffaella, 62 Heron of Alexandria, 296 Fundamental theorem of calculus, 170, 177, Hiscock, Walter George, xv, 17, 77, 341, 182–185, 205–206, 358, 360 369 Funkenstein, Amos, 325 Hobbes, Thomas, 80, 144–146, 302, 313, 324–325, 342, 344, 385 Gabbey, Alan E., 294 Hoff Kjeldsen, Tinne, xix Galilei, Galileo, 20, 57, 235, 242, 254 Hofmann, Joseph E., 170, 336 Galois, Evariste,´ 41 Hooke, Robert, xiv, xvii, 12, 23–27, 244, Galuzzi, Massimo, xix, 55, 90, 92 342 Garber, Daniel, 23 Micrographia, 26–27 Garrison, James W., 294, 313, 321 and mathematics, 27 Gassendi, Pierre, 313 planetary theory, 242 Gaukroger, Stephen, 23 Horizon line, 125–127 Gauss, Carl Friedrich, xiii, 252 Horrocks, Jeremiah, 342 Genitum, 223 Horsley, Samuel, 347 Geometrical curves, 42, 47 Hudde, Johan van Waveren, 186–188, 190, Geometrically rational and irrational curves, 334, 353 306 Huygens, Christiaan, xiv, 17, 81, 146, 254, Ghetaldi, Marino
Recommended publications
  • A Philosophical and Historical Analysis of Cosmology from Copernicus to Newton

    A Philosophical and Historical Analysis of Cosmology from Copernicus to Newton

    University of Central Florida STARS Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 2017 Scientific transformations: a philosophical and historical analysis of cosmology from Copernicus to Newton Manuel-Albert Castillo University of Central Florida Part of the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons Find similar works at: https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd University of Central Florida Libraries http://library.ucf.edu This Masters Thesis (Open Access) is brought to you for free and open access by STARS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019 by an authorized administrator of STARS. For more information, please contact [email protected]. STARS Citation Castillo, Manuel-Albert, "Scientific transformations: a philosophical and historical analysis of cosmology from Copernicus to Newton" (2017). Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2004-2019. 5694. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd/5694 SCIENTIFIC TRANSFORMATIONS: A PHILOSOPHICAL AND HISTORICAL ANALYSIS OF COSMOLOGY FROM COPERNICUS TO NEWTON by MANUEL-ALBERT F. CASTILLO A.A., Valencia College, 2013 B.A., University of Central Florida, 2015 A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the department of Interdisciplinary Studies in the College of Graduate Studies at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Fall Term 2017 Major Professor: Donald E. Jones ©2017 Manuel-Albert F. Castillo ii ABSTRACT The purpose of this thesis is to show a transformation around the scientific revolution from the sixteenth to seventeenth centuries against a Whig approach in which it still lingers in the history of science. I find the transformations of modern science through the cosmological models of Nicholas Copernicus, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilei and Isaac Newton.
  • Chapter One Concerning Motion in General

    Chapter One Concerning Motion in General

    EULER'S MECHANICA VOL. 1. Chapter one. Translated and annotated by Ian Bruce. page 1 Chapter One Concerning Motion In General. [p. 1] DEFINITION 1. 1. Motion is the translation of a body from the place it occupies to another place. Truly rest is a body remaining at the same place. Corollary 1. 2. Therefore the ideas of the body remaining at rest and of moving to other places cannot be entertained together, except that they occupy a place. Whereby the place or position the body occupies shall be a property of the body, that can be said to be possible only for that body, and that the body is either moving or at rest. Corollary 2. 3. And this idea of moving or of being at rest is a property of a body that relates to all bodies. For no body is able to exist that is neither moving nor at rest. DEFINITION 2. 4. The place [occupied by a body] is a part of the immense or boundless space which constitutes the whole world. In this sense the accepted place is accustomed to be called the absolute place [p. 2], in order that it may be distinguished from a relative place, of which mention will soon be made. Corollary 1. 5. Therefore, when a body occupies successively one part and then another, of this immense space, then it is said to be moving ; but if it continues to be present at the same place always, then it is said to be at rest. Corollary 2. 6. Moreover, it is customery to consider fixed boundaries of this space, to which bodies can be referred.
  • A Rhetorical Analysis of Sir Isaac Newton's Principia A

    A Rhetorical Analysis of Sir Isaac Newton's Principia A

    A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF SIR ISAAC NEWTON’S PRINCIPIA A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE TEXAS WOMAN’S UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH, SPEECH, AND FOREIGN LANGUAGES COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES BY GIRIBALA JOSHI, B.S., M.S. DENTON, TEXAS AUGUST 2018 Copyright © 2018 by Giribala Joshi DEDICATION Nature and Nature’s Laws lay hid in Night: God said, “Let Newton be!” and all was light. ~ Alexander Pope Dedicated to all the wonderful eighteenth-century Enlightenment thinkers and philosophers! ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge the continuous support and encouragement that I received from the Department of English, Speech and Foreign Languages. I especially want to thank my thesis committee member Dr. Ashley Bender, and my committee chair Dr. Brian Fehler, for their guidance and feedback while writing this thesis. iii ABSTRACT GIRIBALA JOSHI A RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF SIR ISAAC NEWTON’S PRINCIPIA AUGUST 2018 In this thesis, I analyze Isaac Newton's Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica in the framework of Aristotle’s theories of rhetoric. Despite the long-held view that science only deals with brute facts and does not require rhetoric, we learn that science has its own special topics. This study highlights the rhetorical situation of the Principia and Newton’s rhetorical strategies, emphasizing the belief that scientific facts and theories are also rhetorical constructions. This analysis shows that the credibility of the author and the text, the emotional debates before and after the publication of the text, the construction of logical arguments, and the presentation style makes the book the epitome of scientific writing.
  • Newton.Indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 14:45 | Pag

    Newton.Indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 14:45 | Pag

    omslag Newton.indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 14:45 | Pag. 1 e Dutch Republic proved ‘A new light on several to be extremely receptive to major gures involved in the groundbreaking ideas of Newton Isaac Newton (–). the reception of Newton’s Dutch scholars such as Willem work.’ and the Netherlands Jacob ’s Gravesande and Petrus Prof. Bert Theunissen, Newton the Netherlands and van Musschenbroek played a Utrecht University crucial role in the adaption and How Isaac Newton was Fashioned dissemination of Newton’s work, ‘is book provides an in the Dutch Republic not only in the Netherlands important contribution to but also in the rest of Europe. EDITED BY ERIC JORINK In the course of the eighteenth the study of the European AND AD MAAS century, Newton’s ideas (in Enlightenment with new dierent guises and interpre- insights in the circulation tations) became a veritable hype in Dutch society. In Newton of knowledge.’ and the Netherlands Newton’s Prof. Frans van Lunteren, sudden success is analyzed in Leiden University great depth and put into a new perspective. Ad Maas is curator at the Museum Boerhaave, Leiden, the Netherlands. Eric Jorink is researcher at the Huygens Institute for Netherlands History (Royal Dutch Academy of Arts and Sciences). / www.lup.nl LUP Newton and the Netherlands.indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 16:47 | Pag. 1 Newton and the Netherlands Newton and the Netherlands.indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 16:47 | Pag. 2 Newton and the Netherlands.indd | Sander Pinkse Boekproductie | 16-11-12 / 16:47 | Pag.
  • The Newton-Leibniz Controversy Over the Invention of the Calculus

    The Newton-Leibniz Controversy Over the Invention of the Calculus

    The Newton-Leibniz controversy over the invention of the calculus S.Subramanya Sastry 1 Introduction Perhaps one the most infamous controversies in the history of science is the one between Newton and Leibniz over the invention of the infinitesimal calculus. During the 17th century, debates between philosophers over priority issues were dime-a-dozen. Inspite of the fact that priority disputes between scientists were ¡ common, many contemporaries of Newton and Leibniz found the quarrel between these two shocking. Probably, what set this particular case apart from the rest was the stature of the men involved, the significance of the work that was in contention, the length of time through which the controversy extended, and the sheer intensity of the dispute. Newton and Leibniz were at war in the later parts of their lives over a number of issues. Though the dispute was sparked off by the issue of priority over the invention of the calculus, the matter was made worse by the fact that they did not see eye to eye on the matter of the natural philosophy of the world. Newton’s action-at-a-distance theory of gravitation was viewed as a reversion to the times of occultism by Leibniz and many other mechanical philosophers of this era. This intermingling of philosophical issues with the priority issues over the invention of the calculus worsened the nature of the dispute. One of the reasons why the dispute assumed such alarming proportions and why both Newton and Leibniz were anxious to be considered the inventors of the calculus was because of the prevailing 17th century conventions about priority and attitude towards plagiarism.
  • Reposs #19: Newtonianism in the Scandinavian Countries, 1690–1790

    Reposs #19: Newtonianism in the Scandinavian Countries, 1690–1790

    RePoSS: Research Publications on Science Studies RePoSS #19: Newtonianism in the Scandinavian Countries, 1690–1790 Helge Kragh August 2012 Centre for Science Studies, University of Aarhus, Denmark Research group: History and philosophy of science Please cite this work as: Helge Kragh (Aug. 2012). Newtonianism in the Scandinavian Countries, 1690–1790. RePoSS: Research Publications on Sci- ence Studies 19. Aarhus: Centre for Science Studies, University of Aarhus. url: http://www.css.au.dk/reposs. Copyright c Helge Kragh, 2012 1 Newtonianism in the Scandinavian Countries, 1690-1790 HELGE KRAGH 1 Introduction In the present context, the Scandinavian countries refer to two national or administrative units, the one being Denmark and the other Sweden. In the period here considered, largely the century from 1690 to 1790, ‘Denmark’ means really Denmark-Norway, for until 1814 Norway was part of the double monarchy ruled by the king and his government in Copenhagen. It should also be kept in mind that parts of what is today Germany, namely Schleswig-Holstein, belonged to the kingdom. However, as far as language and culture were concerned, these parts of southern Denmark were more German than Danish, and they played no important role in the scientific life of the kingdom. Sweden covered a much larger geographical area than it does today. The country had expanded greatly during the seventeenth century, when not only Finland but also parts of the Baltic area and northern Germany came under Swedish rule. About 1720, after the Great Northern War, Sweden lost most of its possessions, but the major part of Finland remained as part of the country until Centre for Science Studies, Department of Physics and Astronomy, Aarhus University, Denmark.
  • Calculation and Controversy

    Calculation and Controversy

    calculation and controversy The young Newton owed his greatest intellectual debt to the French mathematician and natural philosopher, René Descartes. He was influ- enced by both English and Continental commentators on Descartes’ work. Problems derived from the writings of the Oxford mathematician, John Wallis, also featured strongly in Newton’s development as a mathe- matician capable of handling infinite series and the complexities of calcula- tions involving curved lines. The ‘Waste Book’ that Newton used for much of his mathematical working in the 1660s demonstrates how quickly his talents surpassed those of most of his contemporaries. Nevertheless, the evolution of Newton’s thought was only possible through consideration of what his immediate predecessors had already achieved. Once Newton had become a public figure, however, he became increasingly concerned to ensure proper recognition for his own ideas. In the quarrels that resulted with mathematicians like Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646–1716) or Johann Bernoulli (1667–1748), Newton supervised his disciples in the reconstruction of the historical record of his discoveries. One of those followers was William Jones, tutor to the future Earl of Macclesfield, who acquired or copied many letters and papers relating to Newton’s early career. These formed the heart of the Macclesfield Collection, which has recently been purchased by Cambridge University Library. 31 rené descartes, Geometria ed. and trans. frans van schooten 2 parts (Amsterdam, 1659–61) 4o: -2 4, a-3t4, g-3g4; π2, -2 4, a-f4 Trinity* * College, Cambridge,* shelfmark* nq 16/203 Newton acquired this book ‘a little before Christmas’ 1664, having read an earlier edition of Descartes’ Geometry by van Schooten earlier in the year.
  • Some Aspects of Thinking of Jakub Kresa for Development of School Mathematics

    Some Aspects of Thinking of Jakub Kresa for Development of School Mathematics

    Ján GUNČAGA, Katholische Universität in Ružomberok, SK Some aspects of thinking of Jakub Kresa for development of school mathematics This article makes an excursion into the history of mathematics, which is used in school mathematics. We would like to describe some components of mathematical notions developed by Jakub Kresa (1648-1715). We would like to compare his work with another two big mathematicians Isaac Newton (1643 -1727) and René Descartes (1596-1650), because it is pos- sible to see some similarities in topics of their works. Isaac Newton wrote separately arithmetic and algebra in Arithmetica universalis, but in his work Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica he used only geometry. René Descartes integrates the knowledge from algebra, arithmetic and ge- ometry in his work La Geometrie and in a similar way, Jakub Kresa descri- bed the mathematical theory in his work Analysis speciose trigonometriae sphaericae. 1. Introduction Jakub Kresa lived in the time in which arithmetic has geometrical represen- tations. René Descartes wrote in his book La Geometrie that “any problem in geometry can easily be reduced to such terms that a knowledge of the lengths of certain straight lines is sufficient for its construction. Just as arithmetic consisting of only four or five operations, namely, addition, sub- traction, multiplication, division and the extraction of roots.” Now let AB taken as unity (see Figure 1), and let be required to multiply BD by BC. Descartes argues that “I only have to join the points A and C, and draw DE parallel to CA, then BE is the product of BD and BC.
  • General Scholium to Isaac Newton’S Principia (1729)

    General Scholium to Isaac Newton’S Principia (1729)

    Andrew Motte’s translation of the General Scholium to Isaac Newton’s Principia (1729) G E N E R A L S C H O L I U M: The hypothesis of Vortices is press’d with many difficulties. That every Planet by a radius drawn to the Sun may describe areas proportional to the times of description, the periodic times of the several parts of the Vortices should observe the duplicate proportion of their distances from the Sun. But that the periodic times of the Planets may obtain the sesquiplicate proportion of their distances from the Sun, the periodic times of the parts of the Vortex ought to be in sesquiplicate proportion of their distances. That the smaller Vortices may maintain their lesser revolutions about Saturn, Jupiter, and other Planets, and swim quietly and undisturb’d in the greater Vortex of the Sun, the periodic times of the parts of the Sun’s Vortex should be equal. But the rotation of the Sun and Planets about their axes, which ought to correspond with the motions of their Vortices, recede far from all these proportions. The motions of the Comets are exceedingly regular, are govern’d by the same laws with the motions of the Planets, and can by no means be accounted for by the hypotheses of Vortices. For Comets are carry’d with very eccentric motions through all parts of the heavens indifferently, with a freedom that is incompatible with the notion of a Vortex. [388] Bodies, projected in our air, suffer no resistance but from the air.
  • Transreal Newtonian Physics Operates at Singularities A

    Transreal Newtonian Physics Operates at Singularities A

    Synesis, v. 7, n. 2, p. 57-81, jul/dez. 2015, ISSN 1984-6754 © Universidade Católica de Petrópolis, Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil TRANSREAL NEWTONIAN PHYSICS OPERATES AT SINGULARITIES A FÍSICA NEWTONIANA TRANSREAL OPERA EM SINGULARIDADES* JAMES A.D.W. ANDERSON SCHOOL OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AT READING UNIVERSITY, ENGLAND TIAGO SOARES DOS REIS INSTITUTO FEDERAL DE EDUCAÇÃO, CIÊNCIA E TECNOLOGIA DO RIO DE JANEIRO, BRASIL Abstract: Sir Isaac Newton, writing in Latin, defined his celebrated laws of motion verbally. When the laws of motion are read as relating to his arithmetic (the Arithmetica Universalis) and his calculus (the method of fluxions), division by zero is undefined so his physics fails at mathematical singularities. The situation is unchanged in modern real arithmetic and real calculus: division by zero is undefined so both Newtonian Physics and its modern developments fail at mathematical singularities. However, when Newton’s text is read as relating to transreal arithmetic and transreal calculus, division by zero is defined and we show that the resulting Transreal Newtonian Physics does operate at mathematical singularities. We hold out the hope that the whole of modern physics may be similarly extended. We use the new physics to predict a convection current at the singularity in a black hole and suggest experiments in astronomy and high energy physics that might confirm or rebut our predictions. Thus our exegesis of Newton’s text extends mathematical physics and may, in future, extend experimental physics. Keywords: Transreal numbers; Non-finite force; Newton’s laws of motion. Resumo: Sir Isaac Newton, escrevendo em latim, definiu verbalmente suas célebres leis do movimento.
  • Henry Pemberton's Summary of Newton's Theological Ideas in The

    Henry Pemberton's Summary of Newton's Theological Ideas in The

    Henry Pemberton’s summary of Newton’s theological ideas in the General Scholium and the Queries to the Opticks in A view of Newton’s philosophy (1728) C O N C L U S I O N. IR ISAAC NEWTON having concluded each of his philosophical treatises with some general reflections, I shall now take leave of my readers with a short account of what he has there Sdelivered. At the end of his mathematical principles of natural philosophy he has given us his thoughts concerning the Deity. Wherein he first observes, that the similitude found in all parts of universe makes it undoubted, that the whole is governed by one supreme being, to whom the original is owing of the frame of nature, which evidently is the effect of choice and design. He then proceeds briefly to state the best metaphysical notions concerning God. In short, we cannot conceive either of space or time otherwise than as neces[406]sarily existing; this Being therefore, on whom all others depend, must certainly exist by the same necessity of nature. Consequently wherever space and time is found, there God must also be. And as it appears impossible to us, that space should be limited, or that time should have had a beginning, the Deity must be both immense and eternal. 2. AT the end of his treatise of optics he has proposed some thoughts concerning other parts of nature, which he had not distinctly searched into. He begins with some farther reflections concerning light, which he had not fully examined. In particular he declares his sentiments at large concerning the power, whereby bodies and light act on each other.
  • Some Reflections on Newton's 'Principia'

    Some Reflections on Newton's 'Principia'

    Some Reflections on Newton’s ‘Principia’ E B Davies 1 February 2005 Abstract We examine the text of Principia to discover the extent to which New- ton’s claims about his own contribution to it were justified. We argue that the general Scholium, written twenty six years after the first edition, sub- stantially misrepresents the main body of the text for polemical reasons. We discuss papers of Wallis, Wren and Huygens that use the third law of motion, as stated by Newton in Book 1. We also argue that Newton’s use of induc- tion has been misunderstood by many twentieth century commentators, who have confused it with the very different notion due to Hume. 1 Introduction This paper has two related goals. The first is to discuss comments that Newton made in Principia about his own contribution and about the contributions of others. There are not many of these, but they reveal remarkable inconsistencies between the main text, the General Scholium, and what is known on the basis of Newtonian scholarship since 1960. We also discuss a variety of comments about Principia by some later scientists and philosophers, which indicate the degree to which they were reacting to each other rather than to the original text. The relationship between Newton’s comments about his own contribution to Prin- cipia and what is revealed by careful analysis is complicated, and it is best to distinguish between the main text and the General Scholium, composed twenty six years after the first edition had appeared. We consider that for the most part Newton represents his personal contribution to the material in Principia fairly in the main text.