Isaac Newton vs Robert Hooke sur la loi de la gravitation universelle

Sfetcu, Nicolae Isaac Newton vs Robert Hooke sur la loi de la gravitation universelle., 2019 [Preprint]

[thumbnail of Isaac_Newton_vs_Robert_Hooke_sur_la_loi_de_la_gravitation-Nicolae_Sfetcu-G.pdf]
Preview
Text
Isaac_Newton_vs_Robert_Hooke_sur_la_loi_de_la_gravitation-Nicolae_Sfetcu-G.pdf

Download (555kB) | Preview

English abstract

One of the disputed controversies on the priority of scientific discoveries is that of the law of universal gravitation, between Isaac Newton and Robert Hooke. Hooke accused Newton of plagiarism, of taking up his ideas expressed in earlier works. I'm trying to show, based on previous analysis, that both scientists were wrong: Robert Hooke because his theory was basically just ideas that would never have materialized without Isaac's mathematical support Newton; and the latter was wrong not to recognize the ideas of Hooke in the elaboration of the theory of gravity. Furthermore, after Hooke's death and his accession to the presidency of the Royal Society, Newton removed all traces of former president Robert Hooke from the institution. For this, I detail the accusations and arguments of each of the parties, and how this dispute was perceived by the contemporaries of the two scientists. I end the paper with the conclusions drawn from the content.

French abstract

L'une des controverses les disputées sur la priorité des découvertes scientifiques est celle de la loi de la gravitation universelle, entre Isaac Newton et Robert Hooke. Hooke a accusé Newton de plagiat, de reprendre ses idées exprimées dans des travaux antérieurs. J'essaie de montrer, sur la base d'une analyse précédente, que tous les deux scientifiques avaient tort: Robert Hooke parce que sa théorie n'était fondamentalement que des idées qui ne se seraient jamais matérialisées sans l'appui mathématique d'Isaac Newton; et ce dernier avait tort de ne pas reconnaître les idées de Hooke dans l'élaboration de la théorie de la gravité. En outre, après la mort de Hooke et son accession à la présidence de la Royal Society, Newton a retiré de l'institution toute trace de l'ancien président Robert Hooke. Pour cela, je détaille les accusations et les arguments de chacune des parties, et comment ce différend a été perçu par les contemporains des deux scientifiques. Je termine le papier avec les conclusions tirées du contenu.

Item type: Preprint
Keywords: Isaac Newton, Robert Hooke, loi de la gravitation, controverse, gravitation
Subjects: D. Libraries as physical collections. > DI. Science libraries.
Depositing user: Nicolae Sfetcu
Date deposited: 22 Aug 2023 11:57
Last modified: 22 Aug 2023 11:57
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/44615

References

Bennett, J. A. 1986. The Mechanics’ Philosophy and the Mechanical Philosophy.

Bongaarts, Peter. 2014. Quantum Theory: A Mathematical Approach. https://books.google.com/books?id=Cc6lBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA11

Chandrasekhar, Subrahmanyan. 2003. Newton’s Principia for the Common Reader. Oxford University Press.

Gal. 2002. Meanest Foundations.

Gal. 2005. “The Invention of Celestial Mechanics.” Early Science and Medicine, 529–34.

Guicciardini, Niccolo. 2005. “Reconsidering the Hooke-Newton Debate on Gravitation: Recent Results.” Early Science and Medicine 10: 510–17. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4130420

Gunther, R. T. 1920. Early Science În Oxford.

Herivel, John. 1965. The Background to Newton’s Principia.

Hooke, Robert. 1674. “An Attempt to Prove the Motion of the Earth from Observations.” http://echo.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/ECHOdocuView/ECHOzogiLib?mode=imagepath&url=/mpiwg/online/permanent/library/XXTBUC3U/pageimg.

Hunter, Michael Cyril William, Reader in History Michael Hunter, and Simon Schaffer. 1989. Robert Hooke: New Studies. Boydell Press.

Koyré. 1851. “Gravitația Universală de La Kepler La Newton.” Arhivele Internationale de Istorie a Științelor, 638–53.

Lohne, Johs. 1960. “Hooke versus Newton.” Centaurus, 42–42.

Michaud, M. 1843. Biographie Universelle Ancienne et Moderne : Histoire Par Ordre Alphabétique de La Vie Publique et Privée de Tous Les Hommes.... 34. Pomaré-Quix / Publ. Sous La Dir. de M. Michaud ; Ouvrage Réd. Par Une Société de Gens de Lettres et de Savants. https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k51674f.

Nauenberg, M. 2005. “Hooke’s and Newton’s Contributions to the Early Development of Orbital Mechanics and Universal Gravitation.” Early Science and Medicine, 518–28.

Nauenberg, Michael. 2005a. “Hooke’s and Newton’s Contributions to the Early Development of Orbital Dynamics and the Theory of Universal Gravitation.” Early Science and Medicine 10: 518–28. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4130421.

Nauenberg, Michael. 2005b. “Robert Hooke’s Seminal Contribution to Orbital Dynamics.” Physics in Perspective 7 (1): 4–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00016-004-0226-y.

Newton, Isaac. 1687. “Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica, I Ed.” The British Library. 1687. https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/newtons-principia-mathematica.

Newton, Isaac. 1960. “Correspondence of Isaac Newton, Vol 2” 2: 431–48.

Pugliese, P.J. 1989. Robert Hooke and the Dynamics of Motion in a Curved Path.

Purrington, Robert D. 2009. The First Professional Scientist: Robert Hooke and the Royal Society of London. Springer. https://books.google.com/books?id=tJu97S3BtGIC&pg=PA168.

Schopenhauer. 2013. “Schopenhauer on Newton and Hooke.” The Monist 23: 439–45. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27900444.

Westfall, Richard S. 1967. “Hooke and the Law of Universal Gravitation: A Reappraisal of a Reappraisal.” The British Journal for the History of Science 3: 245¬261-245¬261. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4025050.

Westfall, Richard S. 1983. Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton. Cambridge University Press.

Whiteside, D. T. 1991. “The Pre-History of the ‘Principia’ from 1664 to 1686.” Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, 11–61.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item