Newton's Apple Story Goes Online 114
Hugh Pickens writes "Although many historians are skeptical of the story, Rev. William Stukeley, a physician, cleric, and prominent antiquarian, wrote that he was once enjoying afternoon tea with Sir Isaac Newton amid the Woolsthorpe apple trees when the mathematician reminisced that he was just in the same situation as when the notion of gravitation came into his mind. It was occasioned by the fall of an apple, as he sat in contemplative mood. The original version of the story of Sir Isaac Newton and the falling apple first appeared in Stukeley's 1752 biography, Memoirs of Sir Isaac Newton's Life. Now BBC reports that UK's Royal Society has converted the fragile manuscript into an electronic book, which anybody with internet access will now be able to read and decide for themselves. 'The story of Newton and the apple, which had gradually become debunked over the years. It is now clear, it is based on a conversation between Newton and Stukeley,' says Martin Kemp, emeritus professor of the history of art at Oxford University's Trinity College. 'We needn't believe that the apple hit his head, but sitting in the orchard and seeing the apple fall triggered that work. It was a chance event that got him engaged with something he might have otherwise have shelved.'"
Re:It doesn't matter what the truth is (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It doesn't matter what the truth is (Score:4, Informative)
Re:It doesn't matter what the truth is (Score:3, Informative)
Another hijacker responded, "No. Not yet. When they all come, we finish it off."
The hijackers were in fact aware that the passengers were revolting and trying to get into the cockpit. Read the damned article if you don't believe me.
So yeah, you don't really have a point.
Re:It doesn't matter what the truth is (Score:4, Informative)
Re:It doesn't matter what the truth is (Score:2, Informative)
No, I'm referring to the whole of mathematics, one of the cornerstones of science.
Maths isn't science, but even so, it still doesn't require beliefs. And whilst we're at it, science and maths aren't people - they don't and can't have beliefs.
So come on, what are these "fairy tales like zombie cats in boxes" you allege are asserted by maths or science, or whatever it is you are saying?
Science also has a few tenets of faith, like occam's razor.
That's not a requirement of science, nor a belief - it's a principle that makes science either (by making models not more complex than they need be).
You can run from these basic truths all you want, but when you boil it all down, science is based on a finite number of beliefs, from which every conclusion it can make is derived from.
Conclusions are made from observation and evidence.