PinG!......................
“We” who?
Just wait until the woke crowd m*****bates on Newton’s laws.
Their stupidity knows no bounds.
“If we take the prevailing translation, of objects traveling in straight lines until a force compels them otherwise, then it raises the question: why would Newton write a law about bodies free of external forces when there is no such thing in our Universe; when gravity and friction are ever-present?”
The author’s argument makes no sense. Newton was talking about what happened to an object in the absence of external forces. Which makes perfect sense if the rest of your laws of motion then define how forces affect an object.
Of course, relativity turns Newton’s fixed frame of reference all topsy turvy.
“The whole point of the first law is to infer the existence of the force,”
This is what passes for grammar in science these days. People who don’t know the difference between “to infer” and “to imply”. You infer from the first law the existence of force, but the first law implies the existence of force. I think DEI is at work here. It is on the order of the guy who said the Odyssey was not written by Homer, but by a Greek with the same name.
Uh, yeah, we know this already, like forever.
Physics doesn’t change based on, “I don’t like it, so…”.
The hundreds of years of validation of what we currently know are a little bit relevant. Ping me in 4024 for a recap.
A distinction without a difference.
“...It’s a description that works well until you appreciate external forces are constantly at work...”
Uhh, it’s a theoretical starting point for understanding physics and external forces are of course appreciated. Done in lab setting. Like a feather and bowling ball falling in a vacuum.
and the original translation says Priests will celebrate, not celebate...
oh dear.
“External forces” equals frictional losses of momentum. Identifying frictional forces will lead to calculations for slowing momentum.
A man can get pregnant. A man can breastfeed.
We are SO BEYOND Newton and his patriarchy.
World’s getting hotter, 0.0015 degrees celcius per year.
“But according to a philosopher of language and mathematics, we might have been interpreting Newton’s precise wording of his first law of motion slightly wrong all along.”
So what kind of background education does a “philosopher of language and mathematics” require and what degrees/degree does it result in to qualify as an “philosopher of language and mathematics”
The ‘Speed of Light” has been broken- Next time you are filling up at a gas station, watch how fast the dial spins- faster than the speed of light- Ya gotta be quick in order to stop it before it goes over your intended gallon allotment
I agree w those who say that it is semantics — a distinction w/o a deference.
I hope you caught that. In making a name for one’s self via revisionism, due respect for the original version, long held to be the truth, is drained away like bath water.
Think I'll go with Physicist for 100, Alex.
Hoss
So what? They both mean the same thing.
Does this mean that Rudolf Carnap was all wet?
— “Others think that it is so obviously correct that it is barely worth arguing for.”
This. Either way the understanding is correct; the object does not move itself.
.