Go Back   Science Forums Biology Forum Molecular Biology Forum Physics Chemistry Forum > General Science Forums > Physics Forum
Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Physics Forum Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


This about Newton's First Law

This about Newton's First Law - Physics Forum

This about Newton's First Law - Physics Forum. Discuss and ask physics questions, kinematics and other physics problems.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-26-2005, 03:19 PM
TomGee
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law



It has become apparent that what Newton wrote about the first law of
motion has been corrupted in its translation and thus
misinterpretations of what he actually said have resulted in the strong
belief that Newton said that in the absence of any forces acting upon
it, an object will remain motionless or in constant motion in a
straight line. He actually said it will remain so _by its own inertial
force_, and not without there being any force involved at all. He
specifically stated that will happen when there are no _external_
forces acting upon the object.

That means, or should mean to any reasonable thinker, that he claimed
there is an inherent force of inertia in every object which keeps it
moving or still when there is an absence of any external forces acting
upon it. Inertial is defined in physics as resistance to change, thus
the inertial force inherent in an object explains why the absence of
external forces results in uniform motion in a straight line. Everyone
has been taught that an object free of _any_ forces acting upon it
behaves that way, but no one has explained how or why an object should
continue to move in that fashion; it has just been assumed it can
happen. That is the result of the misinterpretation of Newton's First
Law, and that error has led us to another scientific dead end of
senseless controversy.

It is very difficult to change people's minds about what they have been
taught by the highest authorities in a field because the constant
teaching of anything is no less a brainwashing than has been depicted
in fictional works such as "The Manchurian Candidate" and others. It
is analogous to Pavlov's dog experiment where certain stimuli is used
to elicit predicted behavior.

It has been said that Newton challenged Aristotle's claim that there
can be no force without velocity, F=mv, in claiming that there can be
no force without acceleration, F=ma. In view of his First Law where he
claims that the inertial force keeps an object going or still, it seems
ludicrous to think he would have actually said such a thing.
Obviously, there can be a force which causes velocity and another one
which causes acceleration, so it makes no sense to pit one against the
other. Which means, then, that Ari may have been correct also in
identifying his force of velocity just like Newton id'ed his force of
acceleration.

I have posted this same issue previously against the staunch defenders
of the status quo, to no avail. It is clear few understand what was
taught to them, and that is probably better than understanding it and
still believing in it. I think it is time for a correction to be made
in science regarding this issue, and so I humble beg all to take this
post to your mentors and try to find one who is objective enough to at
least try to find a way to overthrow my claims. I don't know how else
to correct such a grave error from the past.

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-26-2005, 03:23 PM
Sam Wormley
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law


Newton's first law is a special case of
the second, when the net force acting on a body is zero.

It's the mathematics that speaks, not the original words!

Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-26-2005, 03:31 PM
Jim Black
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law

TomGee wrote:
[snip]

8/10. Very good, but it could be shorter and more inflammatory.

Fusa.

-- Jim Black

Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-26-2005, 03:41 PM
TomGee
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law


Sam Wormley wrote:
You lemmingly picked that up from one of your websites which says that
but fails to show support for that stupid claim. It cannot be a
special case of a special case, which is what the second law is because
it relates to a situation where there can be forces acting on the body
but which add up to zero net force. The first law relates to a
situation where is only one force acting upon a sole object, and no
external forces at all. The two laws are quite distinct from each
other in subject and in content.

If anything, the second is a special case of the first, although I do
not subscribe to that notion either, because a special case is one
which is drawn from the general case, and there is no general case
given for motion other than that everything visible in our universe is
in motion.
False! Math speaks true only in Theoretical Physics (TP), not in real
physics where empirical research prevails over the fantasies developed
in TP!

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-26-2005, 04:19 PM
Dirk Van de moortel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law


"TomGee" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:1117120763.992495.206850@z14g2000cwz.googlegr oups.com...

Aristoteles also decided that men have more teeth than women.

Dirk Vdm


Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-26-2005, 04:35 PM
Traveler
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law

Idiot Dick Van de merde wrote:


And Einstein decided that Kurt "lunatic" Godel was right when he
announced to the world in 1949 that one can travel backward in time
via closed time-like curves. ....ahahaha....time travel?.....
....ahahaaaaaa...

The blind following the blind. ...ahahaha....And a bunch of other
blind crackpots fell into the same hole: Kip "wormhole" Thorne, Carl
"billions and billions of stars" Sagan, Richard "time-traveling waves"
Feynman, John "absorber theory" Wheeler, Stephen "black hole" Hawking,
David "quantum parallel universes" Deutsch, etc...

ahahaha.... ..HAHAHAHAHAH.... ahahahah.... AHAHAHAHA.... ahahahaha...

Time travel crackpots, all of them. ahahahah.... HAHAHAHA....
ahahaha.... ..HAHAHAHAHAH.... ahahahah.... AHAHAHAHA.... ahahahaha...
ahahaha.... ..HAHAHAHAHAH.... ahahahah.... AHAHAHAHA.... ahahahaha...

Phew! Physics is so much ****ing fun. ...hahahaha...

Louis Savain

The Silver Bullet: Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix it
[Only registered users see links. ]
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-26-2005, 04:51 PM
Dirk Van de moortel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law


"Traveler" <[Only registered users see links. ]> wrote in message news:[Only registered users see links. ]...

Confusing the model with what it models
can turn a person into a barking madman.

Ding, Savain, Ding! - medication time - line up now...

Dirk Vdm


Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-26-2005, 05:18 PM
Traveler
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law

Idiot Dick Van de merde wrote:


Yep. And we all know the names of the barking madmen listed above,
don't we, Van de merde? Heck, they though spacetime was a real model
of nature and they took that seriously. Too bad nothing can move in
spacetime. ahahaha... No time travel... no geodesics.... none of that
crap as predicted by the model, actually exist.

Your problem is, you, Van de merde, have to kiss your master's asses
to get a few crumbs form their tables. Kiss, kiss, kiss....
ahahahah....


Says Van de merde as Sam Wormley and Uncle Dickhead take turn pumping
him in the ass. ...ahahahahaha...

Louis Savain

The Silver Bullet: Why Software Is Bad and What We Can Do to Fix it
[Only registered users see links. ]
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-26-2005, 05:24 PM
Bilge
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law

TomGee:

This is a classic... You should win the KOTM award based on
this post alone.


So, if I put a bolt through a spring to hold it compressed,
how much will it move each time I change the internal forces
of the bolt and spring by tightening the nut? Say that is good news.



But we aren't reasonable thinkers. We're physicists.


In what other fashion could it move? I suppose dancing is one option
I hadn't considered.


No, it's led you into being certifiable.


We're the kabal. Brainwashing is our specialty.


Wow! Does that mean I'm a second generation manchurian candidate if
my parents studied science? Is it a recessive gene? You know, given
the number of generations since the original manchurian candidates
from newton's time, do you realize how many people could carry the
manchurian candidate gene? That could explain the illuminati.


Are you under orders not to divulge who has said ``it?''


Unless you're issac newton, issac newton didn't say that. It's
possible that you _are_ issac newton, since netwon seems to be
under-represented when compared with say, napolean, at the bellvue
white coat club.


You under estimate your ability to convince people you're unhinged.


Those of us lacking membership to the bellvue white coat club just
have to make do with using our indoctrination to predict the outcome
of experiments, build functional devices and persist in the belief
that these successes parallal the real world.


Well, by george, you should take this post and send it directly to
phys rev letters as a rapid communication. The sooner this gets out,
the sooner we'll have a theory of everything - perhaps no later than
24 hours after the first copies arrive on the desks the manchurian
candidates. Meanwhile, say hi to the napolean multiplets for me.


Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-26-2005, 05:27 PM
TomGee
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default This about Newton's First Law



Jim Black wrote:
TROLL ALERT!!

He sends any response to alt.moron from his job.

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
law , newton


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
derive ForceXRadius from Newton's laws [earlier posted in sci.physics] Vishvas Vasuki Physics Forum 0 04-19-2007 04:49 AM
Newton's from Einstein? George Hammond Physics Forum 5 09-17-2005 08:59 PM
Newton's First The Fifth Force? TomGee Physics Forum 1 04-02-2005 05:40 PM
Newton's First The Fifth Force? TomGee Physics Forum 0 04-02-2005 05:05 AM
Flaws in Current Atomic Theory? cinquirer Physics Forum 42 11-25-2003 07:58 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Molecular Station | All Rights Reserved
Page generated in 0.17912 seconds with 16 queries