Re: Is Stein against Newtonian physics, too?

In article <1ie4gfv.13t9lisi8l29lN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (J. J. Lodder) wrote:

Alan Morgan <amorgan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <y9jEj.23745$0w.12108@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
John Harshman <jharshman.diespamdie@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Glend wrote:

[Ben Stein is a f*&(ng idiot]
Stein states in that interview that a professor with a Fordham grant
who said that "We don't know how planets stay in their orbits...a
perfectly reasonable hypothesis is that there's an intelligent
designer." The ellipse is where he mentioned some more real mysteries
(nothing to do with evolution, but he's too ignorant to know that),
but I thought it amazing that he'd suggest that we don't know how
planets stay in their orbits, when the basic model for this has
existed since Newton (yes, there are questions regarding gravity. It
would be absurd to give him a pass on those grounds).

No, Stein is perfectly fine with Newtonian physics. What he would reject
is Laplacian physics.

Just for that you get a Chez Watt.

Why?
Newton believed that his theory of the solar system required a god,
(to periodically reset planetary orbits to cancel the perturbations)
in contrast to the 'atheistic' Cartesian theory.
He considered this to be a reason to prefer his theory.
Lagrange (and Laplace after him) showed that his idea was mistaken,
being based on not understanding perturbation theory properly,

Jan

Yes, but do we understand gravity? Newton didn't, and there is now
reason to believe that Einstein has the final word either.

--
What is done in the heat of battle is (normatively) judged
by different standards than what is leisurely planned in
comfortable conference rooms.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: ? heliocentric vs geocentric models ?
    ... and Newton's works, even to the extent of referring to Newton as "that ... outer planets in our common orbit around the central Sun,this being ... the basis for the conclusion by Copernicus that the Earth orbits the ... Because the predecessors got a few things wrong is no reason to discard ...
    (sci.astro.amateur)
  • Re: Is Stein against Newtonian physics, too?
    ... who said that "We don't know how planets stay in their orbits...a ... perfectly reasonable hypothesis is that there's an intelligent ... Newton believed that his theory of the solar system required a god, ... He considered this to be a reason to prefer his theory. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Is Stein against Newtonian physics, too?
    ... grant who said that "We don't know how planets stay in their ... Newton believed that his theory of the solar system required a god, ... being based on not understanding perturbation theory properly, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Is Stein against Newtonian physics, too?
    ... who said that "We don't know how planets stay in their orbits...a ... perfectly reasonable hypothesis is that there's an intelligent ... Newton believed that his theory of the solar system required a god, ... being based on not understanding perturbation theory properly, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Is Stein against Newtonian physics, too?
    ... who said that "We don't know how planets stay in their orbits...a ... perfectly reasonable hypothesis is that there's an intelligent ... Newton believed that his theory of the solar system required a god, ... being based on not understanding perturbation theory properly, ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading