Re: Any reccomended Physics or Chemistry videos?
- From: "oriel36" <geraldkelleher@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 29 Nov 2005 10:03:14 -0800
Robert wrote:
> Can anyone reccomend videos featuring Copernicus and Kepler and their
> contributions to science? How about videos featuring James Clerk Maxwell,
> Faraday and others who contributed to developments in early electronics,
> magnetism and electromagentic theory?
>
> Can anyone reccomend any videos about the historical development of
> Chemistry? Reccomended NOVA specials, perhaps, or episodes of series from
> the Discovery channel, Biography, History channel, BBC, etc?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Robert
Stay in the group and get a real history lesson that you will not get
anywhere else .Due to my efforts,few people now have a great desire to
associate absolute space with aether as the usual story behind the
acceptance of relativity and presently there is an enormous attempt to
truncate the historical development at Maxwell and ignore Newton.
The usual historical trajectory is Copernicus - Kepler - Newton -
Maxwell - Einstein with an 'aether' and its rejection as relating to a
rejection of Newtonian 'absolute space'.
So,let's here what Newton had to say about an aether -
"The fictitious matter which is imagined as filling the whole of space
is of no use for explaining the phenomena of Nature, since the motions
of the planets and comets are better explained without it, by means of
gravity; and it has never yet been explained how this matter accounts
for gravity. The only thing which matter of this sort could do, would
be to interfere with and slow down the motions of those large
celestial bodies, and weaken the order of Nature; and in the
microscopic pores of bodies, it would put a stop to the vibrations of
their parts which their heat and all their active force consists in.
Further, since matter of this sort is not only completely useless, but
would actually interfere with the operations of Nature, and [314]
weaken them, there is no solid reason why we should believe in any
such matter at all. Consequently, it is to be utterly rejected."
Newton in Optics ( 1704 )
There you go Robert,I think that is explicit enough.
So,how did Albert manage to reject an aether Newton had already done a
way with -
"In order to be able to look upon the rotation of the system, at least
formally, as something real, Newton objectivises space. Since he
classes his absolute space together with real things, for him rotation
relative to an absolute space is also something real. Newton might no
less well have called his absolute space ``Ether''; what is essential
is merely that besides observable objects, another thing, which is not
perceptible, inust be looked upon as real, to enable acceleration or
rotation to be looked upon as something real. "
http://www.mountainman.com.au/aether_0.html
You see Robert,all this goes back to the Earth's rotation to the fixed
stars/inertial space/absolute space in 23 hours 56 min 04 sec.The poor
theorists in the late 19th and early 20th century * did not realise
what Newton did in order to get his ballistic agenda applied to
planetary motion to work and so it remains to this day.
It takes only the acceptance of the core principles which fix the pace
of a clock to axial rotation at 15 degrees per hour and 24 hours/360
degrees intotal to begin to undo most of the damage.,damage caused by
Newton and Flamsteed.
* Mach: on Newton's Absolute Time
"This absolute time can be measured by comparison with no motion; it
has therefore neither a practical nor a scientific value; and no one
is justified in saying that he knows aught about it. It is an idle
metaphysical conception."
Mach, Analyse der Empfindungen, 6th ed.
.
- References:
- Any reccomended Physics or Chemistry videos?
- From: Robert
- Any reccomended Physics or Chemistry videos?
- Prev by Date: Re: How many continents are there???
- Next by Date: Re: How many continents are there???
- Previous by thread: Any reccomended Physics or Chemistry videos?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
