when Isaac Newton Having inscribed his famous laws of motion on parchment in 1687, he probably hoped we would be discussing them three centuries later.
Writing in Latin, Newton outlined Three universal principles It describes how the movement of objects is governed in our universe, which has been translated, transcribed, discussed and discussed at length.
But according to the philosopher of language and mathematics, we may have misinterpreted the precise wording of Newton’s first law of motion for a while.
Virginia Tech philosopher Daniel Hogue liked After what he discovered, he “set the record straight.” describes As a “clumsy mistranslation” in the original 1729 English translation of Newton’s Latin. Principia.
Based on this translation, countless academics and teachers have interpreted Newton’s first law Inactivity An object is either continuously moving in a straight line or at rest Besides An outside force intervenes.
It’s an explanation that works well as long as you appreciate that external forces are constantly at work, something Newton was considering in his words.
Perusing the archives, Hooke realized that this common denominator had a misinterpretation that flew under the radar until 1999, when two scholars picked up the translation of a Latin word that had been overlooked: quatanus, meaning “at most,” except.
For Hoke, it is Makes all the difference. Instead of describing how an object maintains its momentum if no force is applied, Hogue says that the new reading of Newton states that every change of momentum—every vibration, dip, swerve, and spurt—is caused by external forces.
“Keep a forgotten word [insofar] back in place, [those scholars] restored one of the fundamental principles of physics to its original glory,” Hogue explained In a blog post describing his findings, published academically 2022 Research Paper.
However, that important amendment never caught on. Even now, it may struggle to gain traction against the weight of centuries of repetition.
“Some consider my reading too wild and unconventional,” Hogue Comments. “Others think it’s so obviously correct that it’s not worth arguing about.”
Ordinary people can agree that this sounds like semantics. and Hogue Agrees Reinterpretation does not and will not change physics. But a careful examination of Newton’s own writings makes clear what the pioneering mathematician was thinking at the time.
“A great deal of ink has been spilled over the question of what is the law of recession In fact For that,” Explains Hogue was confused as a student as to what Newton meant.
If we take the prevailing translation, objects will travel in straight lines until a force compels them otherwise, which begs the question: Why would Newton write a law about bodies without external forces when there is no such thing in our universe; When gravity and friction always exist?
“The whole point of the first law is to infer the existence of force,” says George Smith, a philosopher at Tufts University and an expert on Newton’s writings. said Journalist Stephanie Pappas Scientific American.
In fact, Newton gave three concrete examples to illustrate his first law of motion: the most intuitive, According to HoekA rotating top – as we know, drops in a tight vortex due to air friction.
“By giving this example,” Hoag writes“Newton clearly shows how the first law, as he understood it, applies to accelerating bodies subject to forces—that is, to bodies in the real world.”
Hogue says this revised interpretation brings home one of Newton’s most fundamental ideas, which was absolutely revolutionary at the time. That is, planets, stars, and other celestial bodies are all governed by the same physical laws as objects on Earth.
“Every change of speed is every inclination of direction,” Hogue thought – from clusters of atoms to rotating galaxies – “governed by Newton’s first law.”
It makes us all feel connected once again in the farthest reaches of space.
The article has been published in the journal Scientific philosophy.
An earlier version of this article was published in September 2023.
