Galileo And Newton Essay Research Paper Galileo free essay sample

Galileo And Newton Essay, Research Paper Galileo and Newton 2/4/97 Galileo believed the physical universe to be bounded. He says that all material things have # 8220 ; this or that form # 8221 ; and are little or big in relation to other things. He besides says that stuff objects are either in gesture or at remainder, touching or non touching some other organic structure, and are either one in figure, or many. The cardinal belongingss of the material universe are mathematical and strengthened through experimentation. Galileo excludes the belongingss of gustatory sensations, olfactory properties, colourss, and so on when depicting the material universe. He states that these belongingss # 8220 ; shack merely in the consciousness. # 8221 ; These latter belongingss would discontinue to be without the life animal so the mathematically defined belongingss are the most accurate in depicting the material universe. Galileo seems to prove his beliefs through experimentation and mathematical logical thinking. He sites illustrations in life that support his hypothesis. His statement is of a scientific nature because he is doing a hypothesis on a typical type of construct. The decisions that Galileo made relate straight to the work in natural philosophies for which he is so good known. His decisions put accent on forms, Numberss, and gesture which are all belongingss that lend themselves to back up through # 8220 ; concluding back and Forth between theory and experiment. # 8221 ; I feel that Galileo # 8217 ; s statement is a valid one because it explains dealingss in nature and the physical universe through mathematical analysis. This allows him to specify a universe outside of human being that can be logically calculated and explained. His position describes the universe in which life animals live and non contrasts it to the universe within life animals. The job with Galileo # 8217 ; s position is that it pioneers a scientific mentality but neer really fulfills it. Newton believes the universe is finally made up of difficult atoms that can retain different belongingss. The cardinal belongingss are solid, massy, impenetrable, and movable atoms. He believes God created affair in the get downing in such a manner to let the atoms to take on mathematical signifiers. His attack is a scientific 1 because he patterns the continual interaction of experiment and theory. It is the difficult atoms that move in such a manner that can be assigned certain mathematical rules that clearly explain the interaction of organic structures. Newton # 8217 ; s decision seems to be a strong one because it trades with the universe being made up of atoms and shows how these atoms act with each other in a manner that can be explained scientifically. I like the thought of organized flow in the universe and God being the Godhead of it all. The mathematical/scientific attack offers account to how the atoms are traveling. Galileo and Newton differ in certain facets of their apprehension of the physical universe. Galileo doesn # 8217 ; t set much accent on the function of creativeness in scientific discipline. Newton believes in the mathematical and experimentation mentality of scientific discipline pioneered by Galileo but he believed that new constructs are the merchandise of originative imaginativeness. He felt that math should explicate the constructs imagined. Newton extended thoughts pioneered by Galileo on issues of forces, multitudes, forms, and signifiers. Newton didn # 8217 ; t experience that the scientific theory needed to reply every inquiry asked about a phenomenon in order to be utile. Galileo and Newton make a strong statement for the deficiency of intents or values in nature. Their scientific heads sought replies on a logical graduated table. They could analyse the stuff universe through computations and in this math was suited account. In the survey of natural philosophies, intents are irrelevant. Physicss looks for the mathematical account of constructs and doesn # 8217 ; t need to analyze the intent behind such. It is concerned merely with what happens and how it is go oning. The doctrine of natural philosophies could widen the constructs to incorporate intent. The universe is the merchandise of the opportunity multitude of atoms. Everything is comprised of atoms and it makes up the known universe to which mathematical rules analyze. If there are no intents in the existence and this fact is supported through scientific survey, so there is purpose in that scientific discipline works to interrupt down the material universe to series of facts that are invariably accommodating to one another. The universe position introduced by 17th century mechanists is scientific discipline. Science became the reply or manner to the reply. Aristotelean position is concerned with the concluding province whereas as the scientists thought the of import information was the full procedure, or efficient causes. It is besides concerned with the intents and values that are at work in nature while mechanists see nature as a mechanism that operates blindly, and the forces of nature are in themselves wholly apathetic to intents or values. Newton, in resistance to Aristotle, didn # 8217 ; t believe in unknown causes. He wanted replies that were or could be proven. I feel that Newton has the stronger position because his trades with discernible facts and non merely constructs. Newton # 8217 ; s thoughts about the universe extend the constructs of Democritus. Newton strengthens the mechanistic position by supplying it with mathematical logical thinking. Aristotle # 8217 ; s statement of Democritus weakens when covering with Newton. He had scientific grounds that backed up his claims. However, Newton still doesn # 8217 ; t concern mechanism with the reply of # 8220 ; why # 8221 ; but instead looked to understand the immediate # 8220 ; how. # 8221 ; Newton would hold that Democritus didn # 8217 ; t back up his statements with fact and that they are largely conceptual positions. Newton would hold to back up Democritus for originating the atomic theory and would likely state that his thoughts are relevant and non over simplified. Form in the universe is the consequence of other causes in a long, scientific concatenation of efficient causes by the interactions of atoms. In a manner Newton # 8217 ; s cosmogonic thoughts are better because he was able to support interactions within the existence with mathematical logical thinking. He finally came to the belief that # 8220 ; there is no scientific account for the form of the planets, # 8221 ; keeping that coplanar orbits with speeds in the same way can non be accounted for by natural causes. This lead him to the reply that God prevents the existence from fall ining. I feel this is better than Timaeus # 8217 ; s position of forms in the universe because he has to fling certain information because he himself can # 8217 ; t happen mathematical cogent evidence for these theories. Subsequently, Laplace will be able to account for the coplanar character of the solar system by demoing insufficiencies in Newton # 8217 ; s scientific discipline. This is a recognition to Newton in that if he couldn # 8217 ; t back a theory with mathematical ground and experiment, he wasn # 8217 ; t merely traveling to presume it to be true. Galileo and Newton along with Plato believed in atoms or atoms as the stuff of which all things are made of. I besides infer that they would slightly hold on how truth can be perceived otherwise in the same mode that sentiment is different from cognition ( this thought was illustrated by Plato in his divided line analogy ) . For the mechanists, sentiment is a perceptual experience of truth but an wrong one because it is non supported with mathematical logical thinking and experimentation, which would so do it cognition.