Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

True or false? Ten myths about Isaac Newton
Oxford University Press Blog ^ | 07/12/2014 | Sarah Dry

Posted on 07/12/2014 11:14:54 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Nearly three hundred years since his death, Isaac Newton is as much a myth as a man. The mythical Newton abounds in contradictions; he is a semi-divine genius and a mad alchemist, a somber and solitary thinker and a passionate religious heretic.

Myths usually have an element of truth to them but how many Newtonian varieties are true? Here are ten of the most common, debunked or confirmed by the evidence of his own private papers, kept hidden for centuries and now freely available online.

10. Newton was a heretic who had to keep his religious beliefs secret.

True. While Newton regularly attended chapel, he abstained from taking holy orders at Trinity College. No official excuse survives, but numerous theological treatises he left make perfectly clear why he refused to become an ordained clergyman, as College fellows were normally obliged to do. Newton believed that the doctrine of the Trinity, in which the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost were given equal status, was the result of centuries of corruption of the original Christian message and therefore false. Trinity College’s most famous fellow was, in fact, an anti-Trinitarian.

9. Newton never laughed.

False, but only just. There are only two specific instances that we know of when the great man laughed. One was when a friend to whom he had lent a volume of Euclid’s Elements asked what the point of it was, ‘upon which Sir Isaac was very merry.’ (The point being that if you have to ask what the point of Euclid is, you have already missed it.) So far, so moderately funny. The second time Newton laughed was during a conversation about his theory that comets inevitably crash into the stars around which they orbit.

(Excerpt) Read more at blog.oup.com ...


TOPICS: History; Religion; Science
KEYWORDS: isaacnewton; stringtheory
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

1 posted on 07/12/2014 11:14:54 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Ping.


2 posted on 07/12/2014 11:20:49 AM PDT by Squawk 8888 (Lacrosse- Canada's national sport, like hockey only violent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I heard this one and hope it's true:

When he was head of the mint, Newton invented the use of notched edges on the rim of coins, to keep people from shaving off the gold and silver, making it easily detectable.

3 posted on 07/12/2014 11:23:32 AM PDT by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MUDDOG

Well, Newton was also a Creationist.

3. Newton believed the earth was created in seven days.

True. Newton believed that the Earth was created in seven days, but he assumed that the duration of one revolution of the planet at the beginning of time was much slower than it is today.


4 posted on 07/12/2014 11:27:16 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That was good too, about the slower rotation.


5 posted on 07/12/2014 11:28:32 AM PDT by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Here’s three more myth’s:
1. He invented gravity.
2. He baked the first fig bar.
3. He was Olivia’s father before she married John.


6 posted on 07/12/2014 11:35:13 AM PDT by TaMoDee (Go Pack Go! The Pack will be back in 2014!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaMoDee

Interestingly though, her maternal grandfather was Nobel Prize-winning atomic physicist Max Born.


7 posted on 07/12/2014 11:39:12 AM PDT by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TaMoDee

He baked the first fig bar....He didn’t?


8 posted on 07/12/2014 11:40:38 AM PDT by Safetgiver ( Islam makes barbarism look genteel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MUDDOG

“That was good too, about the slower rotation.”

Actually, the earths rotation is SLOWING ...


9 posted on 07/12/2014 11:54:06 AM PDT by TexasGator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

That’s actually my own view of Creation. I also believe that evolution, though still not fully understood, was His means of creating life. Both Genesis and the theory of evolution correctly state that man was created out of dirt.


10 posted on 07/12/2014 11:56:52 AM PDT by Squawk 8888 (Lacrosse- Canada's national sport, like hockey only violent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Squawk 8888; 75thOVI; agrace; aimhigh; Alice in Wonderland; AndrewC; aragorn; aristotleman; ...
Thanks Squawk 8888. String Theory list ping.
Sheldon: I understand. You dispute Newton’s claim that he invented calculus and you want to put Gottfried Leibniz on the top.

Leonard: Yeah, you got me. I’m a Leibniz man.


Big Bang Theory

11 posted on 07/12/2014 12:01:47 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
This one could have been written better:
5. Newton found secret numerological codes in the Bible.

True. Like his fellow analysts of scripture, Newton believed there were important meanings attached to the numbers found there. In one theological treatise, Newton argues that the Pope is the anti-Christ based in part on the appearance in Scripture of the number of the name of the beast, 666. In another, he expounds on the meaning of the number 7, which figures prominently in the numbers of trumpets, vials and thunders found in Revelation.

This shows that Newton believed that he had found numerological codes in the Bible, not that he actually did so; the writer poses the latter question and answers the former.
12 posted on 07/12/2014 12:04:00 PM PDT by PlasticMan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGator

So that would go the other way — faster in the past. Hmmm...


13 posted on 07/12/2014 12:05:44 PM PDT by MUDDOG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Squawk 8888

The theory of evolution does not postulate that man “was created out of dirt” - it has nothing to say at all about how life came into existence, and does not agree that man came into being “from dirt”, but states that man developed from the lower animals.


14 posted on 07/12/2014 12:08:24 PM PDT by wideawake
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Safetgiver

The first fig bar was baked by his brother Nabisco, hence the start of the myth about Isaac


15 posted on 07/12/2014 12:11:08 PM PDT by TaMoDee (Go Pack Go! The Pack will be back in 2014!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I like his Three Laws of Robotics.


16 posted on 07/12/2014 12:17:38 PM PDT by ClearCase_guy ("Harvey Dent, can we trust him?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HBsdV--kLoQ)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

IF it’s a myth that he dabbled in alchemy then it’s a pretty enduring myth.


17 posted on 07/12/2014 12:20:00 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I don't know about the 'heretic' accusation. It may be true, as Socinianism (denying the divinity of Christ) was a diseased strain that was around in those days (as it was earlier with the Arianists, and then later with the Russellites and the JWs). And it is true that if Newton was of that ilk, he had good reason to keep his thoughts to himself, since Christ deniers have always been looked down upon in Christian countries (which England was in the 1600s). But I read his manuscript on Daniel's Prophecy, and if my memory serves me correctly he did seem to make statements that would only be consistent with a belief that Jesus Christ was truly God and man. But I agree that it wasn't a black and white statement -- just a vague allusion to the fact.

Anyways, I don't think I've seen any conclusive data that shows he was a heretic -- just oft repeated suspicions.

18 posted on 07/12/2014 12:26:43 PM PDT by El Cid (Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wideawake; SunkenCiv

That was the original hypothesis, which has since been expanded. The model now proposes that life originated in a mix of water and dirt, the “primordial soup”, and everything else followed from the simple organisms that emerged. I was mistaken by using the term “created”; “originated” is more accurate.

The true science makes no mention of whether life originated randomly or by design; that notion was cooked up by “scientists” with a political agenda. Randomness v. Design cannot be resolve by scientific means and anybody who claims otherwise, from either side of the debate, is being disingenuous.

Finally, the theory of evolution is a theory, nothing more and nothing less. It is a model of what could (even likely) have happened based on the available facts. It changes as new facts emerge, just like any other theory. It can point to how things probably occurred and its primary value is the ability to apply its principles to some practical purpose, such as the selective breeding of livestock or the genetic modification of crops.


19 posted on 07/12/2014 12:35:18 PM PDT by Squawk 8888 (Lacrosse- Canada's national sport, like hockey only violent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DManA

IF it’s a myth that he dabbled in alchemy then it’s a pretty enduring myth.


Newton treated alchemy as a science and treated it with the same seriousness he used for mathematics.

At the time, alchemy was a respectable art and pretty much the primitive ancestor of what we call modern day chemistry.

In fact, alchemy slowly evolved into what is now modern day chemistry as we learned the physical science underpinnings of molecular composition and behavior of chemical reactions which allowed us to predict what was and was not possible in the world of alchemy.

In fact, Newton’s invention of calculus did much to advance alchemy into the physical science of chemistry

BTW, with modern knowledge it really is possible to transmute lead into gold, it’s just not very economical.


20 posted on 07/12/2014 12:37:40 PM PDT by rdcbn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson