NEWTON a SADDIST?

Question

Although there can be little room for argument about Newton's importance in the development of modern science, his achievements were not purely the product of his abilities. The intellectual climate of his times was a necessary ingredient and was, in part, the product of earlier thinkers - Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler being the most relevant to Newton's work. In this sense he was, indeed, standing on the shoulders of giants.

Once we admit that Newton's theories were ideas whose time had come, it follows that Newton himself was not essential to the formulation of those theories. If, for instance, he had remained in Cambridge during the plague years of 1665 to 1667 instead of returning to the relative safety of his home in Lincolnshire (a period which was, coincidentally, the most creative of his life) and if he had died as result, the underlying principles of motion and gravity would have been discovered by someone else, and probably not very much later than they were by Newton. Rem

Remember that two of Newton's mathematical discoveries - calculus and the inverse square law - were discovered independently by Leibniz and Hooke respectively.

Newton was well aware of the claims of Leibniz and Hooke and the long-running feuds which resulted (during the course of which Newton was to claim with a certain degree of satisfaction that he had broken Leibniz's heart) reveal the vindictive nature of his personality.

newton was the head of royal academy of science and he promised leibnitz a fair trail but all the jurors were his friends from the royay academy of science

Answer 1

Your point hearkens back to the age old question as to whether history is, as Carlyle put it, "the biography of great men," or whether it is the culmination of broad social forces that no one can control.

Some years ago, the historian Arthur Schlesinger put forward a compromise position that I think is the closest we'll ever come to resolving the dispute. His thesis of "Critical Junctures," postulates that most of history indeed represents a movement of broad social forces that no one can control, but that at certain critical junctures in time, social forces converge at singular moments that open up multiple possibilities, like a single stream of water suddenly reaching multiple forks. At these junctures, the fulcrum of time is revealed, and the right person with the right ideas can literally grab hold of the lever of history and move the world.

As he pointed out, the so-called "Great Man" of history argument won't work most of the time. Nobody, regardless of how gifted and visionary he was, could have succeeded in bringing television to ancient Troy. The social, scientifc and technical infrastructure simply wasn't present.

However, as you very rightly point out, the social, and intellectual framework necessary for Newton's work WAS in place in the 17th century (at least in Northern Europe). All it took was the right person to come along to, shall we say, "exploit the possibilities of the age;" and that person was Newton.

But I have no doubt that if Newton hadn't exploited the possibilities, others undoubtedly would have. The intellectual environment was far too rich. The time was right, the race was on, and Newton simply crossed the finish-line first.

Hope this helps.

Answer 2

While other people would have found the things that Newton discovered, it is likely that it would have taken much longer for them to do so. This may well have delayed the development of physics and math by 50-100 years. That alone would have lead to a very different world. Even though Leibnitz had the calculus and others were looking at a theory of gravity, the use of calculus for physics would probably not have occurred for a while. Also, the discoveries about pwer series and the binomial theorem, although they look small today, were major accomplishments for the time. Also, don't forget that relating force to acceleration rather than velocity was a huge break from traditional thoughts.

Answer 3

This is very common in Science, building on work on others people simultaneously and independently come up with new and original theories. In fact, the theory of gravity was being worked on at exactly the same time and it would have been published only a few months later. There are accounts of Newtons underhandedness to ensure he was first past the post. There are hundreds of other examples of this happening. For example, two others were formulating the the theory of evolution at the same time as Darwin. Darwin worked night and day to finish and it's for this reason we all know his name but few know the others.

Answer 4

Standing on the shoulders of giants is what science is all about. Nobody is claiming that modern science is the result of one person.

The scientists are human after all but the fact that Newton acknowledged Leibnitz' work is a testimony to his open mindedness. We all know Leibnitz and Hooke. So what makes you think Newton is a sadist? A healthy competitior is satisfied when he wins.

Answer 5

All ideas of significance are ideas whose time has come. It's no wonder.
Now , who gets the credit for them is the one who comes first and can explain them the best. Certainly, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler laid the groundwork for humankinds greater understand of the world around them and what's wrong with Newtons abilities to help achieve modern science.
What have you got against Newton ... are you Kepler's great grandson or what. Wrong thinking pal ... sorry.

Don't know whats affecting your thinking, but rethink it.

Goodnight and God bless,
Jonnie

PS A sadist ? ( correct spelling ) ... What is that thought but yours ... where else could it come from ... wrong thinking again ... sorry but true ... though you can fix it by looking inside yourself for truth. Confusion is not a sin, just a part of growing up.

Answer 6

it actually discovered before him by the Arab Muslims scientists (Al-Idrisy. AL BAIROUNY. AND EBN SEENA ) they all talked about gravity and even newtons 1st and 2nd law were discovered by them but they wrote there theories and they didn't improve them and they didn't work on them on the way that newtons did.

Answer 7

particular do, extremely I luv em. the in hardship-free words one i'd not like must be the Blueberry, do not particularly take care of blueberries. Dang...Fig Newtons were round continuously & they are good for you too. good question...movie star for you =o }

Answer 8

He had psychological problems. He is said to have suffered two nervous breakdowns. But there can be no doubt that he was one of the greatest geniuses ever.

Answer 9

in what way does that make him a sadist?

Yes, he was not absolutely necessary for science to progress, but what makes you think he was a sadist?

Answer 10

I beleive he was!!