Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talkrational: crosspost me again and you'll draw back a stump

Topic: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia) (Read 12779 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)

Quote
""The central purpose of the 'classical' scholia was to support the doctrine of universal gravitation as developed in these Propositions, and to enquire into its nature as a cosmic force. This doctrine is shown by Newton to be identifiable in the writings of the ancients. As will become clear, he is not using this historical evidence in a random fashion, or merely for literary ornamentation. Rather the evidence is used in a serious and systematic fashion, as support for, and justification of, the components of Newton's theory of matter, space and gravitation. The evidence is used to establish four basic theses, which correspond to the matter of Proposition IV to IX. These are, that there was an ancient knowledge of the truth of the following four principles: that matter is atomic in structure and moves by gravity through void space; that gravitational force acts universally; that gravity diminishes in the ratio of the inverse square of the distances between bodies; and that the true cause of gravity is the direct 9 action of God."

"After having written his highly technical and innovative Principia, Newton sought to justify his concept of attraction by showing that the ancients had already discovered the law of universal gravitation."

" [...] the Classical Scholia belong to a particular tradition: rather than consorting with the tradition of the prisca in the broad sense, they belong to a variant properly called 'Copernican' which was used to vindicate the validity - on both the technical and philosophical level - of ancient cosmological models which were alternatives to the geostatic system. Copernicus, Galileo, Kepler and their followers had often understood the progress of astronomy as being also a reversion towards propositions comprehended intuitively by the Ancients. 14 "
https://core.ac.uk/download/files/425/11921629.pdf

  • fredbear
  • Militantly Confused
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #1
Did the 'Ancients' leave any information about dark matter? 'Cause that would be actually useful about now.
"...without considering any evidence at all - that my views are more likely - on average - to be correct.  Because the mainstream is almost always wrong" - Dave Hawkins

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #2
No.  There is probably no such thing as "dark matter" ... just as there turned out to be no such thing as "the planet Vulcan" ... you need to do some reading ... start here ... http://truthmatters.info/dark-matter-and-dark-energy-not-needed-after-all/

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #3
If you want to understand what "dark matter" refers to, I suggest NOT starting with the blawg of some internationally infamous narcissistic Dunning Krugerite who's never cracked an introductory text on any subject relevant to it. (And who thinks all the physicists are off by several orders of magnitude on such basic issues as the age of the solar system.)

Probably better to start with NASA. They seem to know a thing or two about astrophysics.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • fredbear
  • Militantly Confused
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #4
My point was that this amazing 'ancient' knowledge only ever seems to come to light (if you squint and hop on one leg and multiply everything by some magic factor and and ...) AFTER we 're'-discover something.
"...without considering any evidence at all - that my views are more likely - on average - to be correct.  Because the mainstream is almost always wrong" - Dave Hawkins

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #5
My point was that this amazing 'ancient' knowledge only ever seems to come to light (if you squint and hop on one leg and multiply everything by some magic factor and and ...) AFTER we 're'-discover something.
You think that because you are not "in the light" yourself.  For example, if you had been "enlightened" like Newton, you would have known that the ancients knew about the laws of motion BEFORE re-discovering them.

  • JonF
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #6

Quote
""The central purpose of the 'classical' scholia was to support the doctrine of universal gravitation as developed in these Propositions, and to enquire into its nature as a cosmic force. This doctrine is shown by Newton to be identifiable in the writings of the ancients.
Where in he writings of the ancients?

You've presented evidence that Ducheyne thinks that Newton found evidence of his three laws in the writings of some unspecified ancients.

That's evidence that Ducheyne thinks that Newton found evidence of his three laws in the writings of some unspecified ancients. and nothing more.

Got any quotes from the ancients?
"I would never consider my evaluation of his work to be fair minded unless I had actually read his own words." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #7
People who are "in the dark" often don't realize it and think they are "in the light" ... and it's kinda funny to watch them blundering around banging into things.

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #8
If you want to understand what "dark matter" refers to, I suggest NOT starting with the blawg of some internationally infamous narcissistic Dunning Krugerite who's never cracked an introductory text on any subject relevant to it. (And who thinks all the physicists are off by several orders of magnitude on such basic issues as the age of the solar system.)

Probably better to start with NASA. They seem to know a thing or two about astrophysics.
Sure if you prefer.

Then after you get up to speed, read Hartnett, a professional physicist who is one of the few I've read that seems to "get it" WRT this topic.

THEN come back to my blog if you want a nice summary.

I was just trying to save you some time.  But by all means, take the scenic route if you prefer.

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #9
read Hartnett, a professional physicist who is one of the few I've read that seems to "get it" WRT this topic.
Correction:
One of the few you've read whose views can accommodate your pre-conclusion of YECism.
Nothing to do with "getting it".
YOU are in no position to judge "getting it" in the field of astrophysics, or cosmology. Or, for that matter, pretty much any area of science.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #10
I see ... so you prefer to believe in a universe with giant fudge factors?  Called dark matter and dark energy?  You're happy with that?  Would you have also been happy to accept "dark matter" WRT the planet Mercury back when Einstein was doing his thing with that?

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #11
As it was the best explanation for why Mercury was doing what it was doing, there was no alternative explanation, and no other reason to think that Newtonian gravitation was insufficient, and there were several reports of people actually seeing Vulcan, then yes. I might well have accepted the existence of another planet or group of asteroids that was tugging Mercury out of its predicted position. After all Le Verrier and Couch Adams showed that an unseen planet was responsible for similar discrepancies in Uranus' orbit.

(As an aside I'm actually reading this book right now. And that's reading Dave, not skimming for nuggets.)
Why do I bother?

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #12
I see ...
As always: a reliable indication that you don't, as you are about to demonstrate:
Quote
so you prefer to believe in a universe with giant fudge factors?  Called dark matter and dark energy?  You're happy with that?  Would you have also been happy to accept "dark matter" WRT the planet Mercury back when Einstein was doing his thing with that?
Not everything is known, and theory doesn't perfectly match observation.
"Dark matter" and "dark energy" are the names given to two of those discrepancies.
They are place-holders for what we don't know.

Yeah... I'm happy with acknowledging there are things we don't know, rather than shoe-horning every observation into a pre-concluded conclusion.

But it's a science thing...
you wouldn't understand.

"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #13
People who are "in the dark" often don't realize it and think they are "in the light" ... and it's kinda funny to watch them blundering around banging into things.

You are projecting again.


  • Faid
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #14
People who are "in the dark" often don't realize it and think they are "in the light" ... and it's kinda funny to watch them blundering around banging into things.
If you watch them, then either you are both in the light (since you can see them), or you are both in the dark (and you think you can see them).

Oh wait, there's another possibility. You are both in the dark, but the Divine Light of your Brilliant Mind shines through , blinding and confusing them.

THAT's what you think happens, right? Be honest now.
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • Faid
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #15
If you want to understand what "dark matter" refers to, I suggest NOT starting with the blawg of some internationally infamous narcissistic Dunning Krugerite who's never cracked an introductory text on any subject relevant to it. (And who thinks all the physicists are off by several orders of magnitude on such basic issues as the age of the solar system.)

Probably better to start with NASA. They seem to know a thing or two about astrophysics.
Sure if you prefer.

Then after you get up to speed, read Hartnett, a professional physicist who is one of the few I've read that seems to "get it" WRT this topic.
And then read this thread in the old forum (in which Hartnett gets smacked with reality and dave runs away as usual).
Who even made the rule that we cannot group ducks and fish together for the simple reason that they are both aquatic? If I want to group them that way and it serves my purpose then I can jolly well do it however I want to and it is still a nested hierarchy and you can't tell me that it's not.

  • Pingu
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #16
People who are "in the dark" often don't realize it and think they are "in the light" ... and it's kinda funny to watch them blundering around banging into things.

Yes, it is.

But worrying when they start putting lives at actual risk.
I have a Darwin-debased mind.

  • Pingu
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #17
I see ... so you prefer to believe in a universe with giant fudge factors?  Called dark matter and dark energy?  You're happy with that?  Would you have also been happy to accept "dark matter" WRT the planet Mercury back when Einstein was doing his thing with that?

Are electrons a "fudge factor" Dave?
I have a Darwin-debased mind.

  • JonF
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #18
I see ... so you prefer to believe in a universe with giant fudge factors?  Called dark matter and dark energy?  You're happy with that?  Would you have also been happy to accept "dark matter" WRT the planet Mercury back when Einstein was doing his thing with that?
Of course, you can't understand they aren't fudge factors.

Their effects have been measured.  We don't know what they are, or even if "what are they?" is a meaningful question.  They are just labels for something (if "thing" is appropriate) that we don't understand.

Duh.
"I would never consider my evaluation of his work to be fair minded unless I had actually read his own words." - Dave Hawkins

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #19
People who are "in the dark" often don't realize it and think they are "in the light" ... and it's kinda funny to watch them blundering around banging into things.
Yet it's standard science that labeled those two unknown discrepancies between theory and observation DARK matter, and DARK energy.
And it's fundies like you who are sure (despite never cracking an introductory text on any relevant subject) that they don't exist.

So ...
Who is in the dark but thinks he's in the light, and
Who is in the dark, and recognizes we don't have all the answers?

:hmm:

"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #20
"placeholder for things we don't know"

Oh ... You mean like "God"?   Although my fundy friends might disagree with me, I consider the concept of "God" as sort of a placeholder for explaining the biosphere, given that we don't have a better explanation.

Apparently, people like Shapiro prefer a different place holder which they themselves would never explicitly call "God."

But I digress. Back to dark energy and dark matter.  The concept of a "placeholder" is perfectly legitimate. I get it. It's just that a guy named Moishe Carmeli looked into that placeholder and apparently eliminated the need for it.

Harnett gives a nice summary of this. And yes I know that Hartnett  appears to be mistaken about some inferences based on Carmeli's work. I get that too. But that is unrelated to the issue of dark matter and dark energy itself.

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #21
I see ... so you prefer to believe in a universe with giant fudge factors?  Called dark matter and dark energy?  You're happy with that?  Would you have also been happy to accept "dark matter" WRT the planet Mercury back when Einstein was doing his thing with that?

No Dave we prefer looking at the Universe the way it is, not the way it would need to be for your beliefs to be true.

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #22
"placeholder for things we don't know"

Oh ... You mean like "God"?   Although my fundy friends might disagree with me, I consider the concept of "God" as sort of a placeholder for explaining the biosphere, given that we don't have a better explanation.

Apparently, people like Shapiro prefer a different place holder which they themselves would never explicitly call "God."

But I digress. Back to dark energy and dark matter.  The concept of a "placeholder" is perfectly legitimate. I get it. It's just that a guy named Moishe Carmeli looked into that placeholder and apparently eliminated the need for it.

Harnett gives a nice summary of this. And yes I know that Hartnett  appears to be mistaken about some inferences based on Carmeli's work. I get that too. But that is unrelated to the issue of dark matter and dark energy itself.

AKA the God of the Gaps.
And your basis for believing in God, is "we don't know everything".

Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #23
My point was that this amazing 'ancient' knowledge only ever seems to come to light (if you squint and hop on one leg and multiply everything by some magic factor and and ...) AFTER we 're'-discover something.
You think that because you are not "in the light" yourself.  For example, if you had been "enlightened" like Newton, you would have known that the ancients knew about the laws of motion BEFORE re-discovering them.
;olj
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: Newton, Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler were RE-Discovering Ancient Knowledge (Prisca Sapientia)
Reply #24
"placeholder for things we don't know"

Oh ... You mean like "God"?   Although my fundy friends might disagree with me, I consider the concept of "God" as sort of a placeholder for explaining the biosphere, given that we don't have a better explanation.

Apparently, people like Shapiro prefer a different place holder which they themselves would never explicitly call "God."

But I digress. Back to dark energy and dark matter.  The concept of a "placeholder" is perfectly legitimate. I get it. It's just that a guy named Moishe Carmeli looked into that placeholder and apparently eliminated the need for it.
Or so you've been told.
By your YEC puppet masters.
But you'll notice (a) you can't begin to defend Carmeli's argument, and (b) it has not caught on outside of YEC circles.
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins