Skip to main content
Log In | Register

TR Memescape


Topic: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being (Read 2359 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
  • 383

  • 3

Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Quote from: jimmcginn
Isaac Newton was a human being
by James McGinn

In response to:
Understanding air density and its effects
05/17/2005 - Updated 09:46 AM ET
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/weather/wdensity.htm

Was Isaac Newton omniscient?  Or was he a human being, capable of making a mistake?  I think the latter is the case.   But according to the USA Today article quoted herein you might think it the former.

The article addresses the comparative weight of moist air to dry air. It purports to identify a common misconception, that moist air is heavier than dry air. In actuality It turns out they are wrong. As most people generally assume, moist air actually is heavier than dry air. So the misconception, actually, is this notion that moist air is lighter than dry air, a notion that is foisted upon us by academia.  

According to this article, the originator of this falsehood is none other than Isaac Newton.  Apparently, in his 1717 in his book Optics Newton made a statement to this effect. The article then goes on to describe the reasoning, which I present below.  Continuing on, the article describes this erroneous notion as being, "known."  But it actually isn't known and never has been.  For something to be known it has to be tested, measured, or observed.  Or it has to be calculated based on assumptions that themselves are tested, measured, or observed.  And, apparently, that is where Newton, and all of academia hence, made an error:  

     USA Today:
     "To see why humid air is less dense than dry air, we need to turn to one
     of the laws of nature the Italian physicist Amadeo Avogadro discovered
     in the early 1800s. In simple terms, he found that a fixed volume of gas,
     say one cubic meter, at the same temperature and pressure, would
     always have the same number of molecules no matter what gas is in the
     container."

James McGinn:
This is true. There is just one problem. H2O is not a gas at ambient temperatures/pressures.  It is still liquid.  It is an evaporate, a vapor and, therefore, It consists of microdroplets of liquid H2O suspended by electro-static forces between air molecules. Often these microdroplets are very small, so small they are invisible--just as invisible as gaseous H2O (this is what confuses most of us).  All in all, there is zero evidence hat moisture in our atmosphere is mono-molecular (gaseous) and there is a wealth of laboratory evidence that confirms that gaseous H2O can only exist above its boiling point, which is much higher than is available in our ambient environment.

     USA Today:
     "Most beginning chemistry books explain how this works. Imagine a cubic
     foot of perfectly dry air. It contains about 78% nitrogen molecules, which
     each have a molecular weight of 28 (2 atoms with atomic weight 14) .
     Another 21% of the air is oxygen, with each molecule having a molecular
     weight of 32 (2 atoms with atomic weight 16). The final one percent is a
     mixture of other gases, which we won't worry about. Molecules are free
     to move in and out of our cubic foot of air."

James McGinn:
Up to this point everything they are saying here is accurate.  Here is where the problem lies:

     USA Today:
     "What Avogadro discovered leads us to conclude that if we added water vapor
     molecules to our cubic foot of air, some of the nitrogen and oxygen molecules
     would leave -- remember, the total number of molecules in our cubic foot of air
     stays the same. The water molecules, which replace nitrogen or oxygen, have a
     molecular weight of 18. (One oxygen atom with atomic weight of 16, and two
     hydrogen atoms each with atomic weight of 1). This is lighter than both nitrogen
     and oxygen, which average out at 29. In other words, replacing nitrogen and
     oxygen with water vapor decreases the weight of the air in the cubic foot; that
     is, it's density decreases."

James McGinn:
The real number that should be used here is not 18. It is 18 x X, X being the number of H2O molecules in the microdroplets.  What is the correct number for X?   Well, the truth is we don't know.  It is, in my opinion, most likely never smaller than 10, thus the correct number to put into this equation wouldn't be 18 it would be 180 or larger.  It is possible it might be as small as 3 in some particularly dry bodies of air, in which case it would be 54, still making moist air considerably heavier than dry air.  But even if it is only 2 the atomic weight of X, at 36, would still be heavier than that of dry air, at 29.  

So, if somebody tells you that the notion that moist air is heavier than dry air is a myth you can tell them that this myth is actually a myth.  You can also tell them that Isaac Newton was not a deity sent from heaven but a normal human being, prone to the foibles of failing to confirm his assumptions, just like the rest of us.

James McGinn
Solving Tornadoes

Here is a link to the most viewed post in the history of usenet:
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/Cin1MQ4ZyFU/QmNEM9mnDgAJ

  • 3,403

  • 865

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #1
Jim, I must warn you that spamming your book here may lead to deletions and/or restrictions and/or bannings.

If you wish to discuss Alternative Science, we have a subforum for that. Please don't clutter other subforums.

Thank you and welcome to TR.

ETA: I've moved the topic from Science to ASS.

Carry on.
  • Last Edit: March 03, 2017, 02:18:32 PM by borealis

  • 383

  • 3

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #2
Jim, I must warn you that spamming your book here may lead to deletions and/or restrictions and/or bannings.

If you wish to discuss Alternative Science, we have a subforum for that. Please don't clutter other subforums.

Thank you and welcome to TR.

ETA: I've moved the topic from Science to ASS.

Carry on.

Too much stupidity here.  I think everybody here is an engineer, not a scientist.

If I can't advertise my book I have no reason to be here.

Goodbye

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes



  • 3,403

  • 865

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #3
 :awgee:

I see you're a reasonable man.

  • 8,262

  • 1289

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #4
you can but put it in your sig.
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

  • 8,262

  • 1289

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #5
Also, I love this thread title.
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

  • nesb
  • Needs a Life
  • 502

  • 144

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #6
I know I was hoping to find an impashioned argument about what species Newton was.

  • 3,403

  • 865

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #7
Sorry guys, he's flounced without so much as a goodbye kiss.

  • osmanthus
  • Administrator
  • Fingerer of piglets
  • 4,410

  • 917

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #8
Well if we refuse to ok him deleting his account, I'm sure his ego will keep him responding. ;)
Truth is out of style

  • 3,403

  • 865

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #9
it appears someone did ok it. sad!

  • MikeB
  • Full Member
  • 156

  • 28

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #10
Jim, I must warn you that spamming your book here may lead to deletions and/or restrictions and/or bannings.

If you wish to discuss Alternative Science, we have a subforum for that. Please don't clutter other subforums.

Thank you and welcome to TR.

ETA: I've moved the topic from Science to ASS.

Carry on.

Too much stupidity here.  I think everybody here is an engineer, not a scientist.

If I can't advertise my book I have no reason to be here.

Goodbye

James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes



Good riddance.  By the way, most engineers start their education by learning the basics of science.

  • 8,262

  • 1289

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #11
I show his account as active and Jim online
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

  • 3,403

  • 865

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #12
Mystery solved: TR does not delete accounts. :D

Against the Charter.

  • 2,329

  • 828

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #13
it appears someone did ok it. sad!

Nope.  I disapproved the request and sent him a PM explaining we don't do profile deletions.

  • 67

  • 12

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #14
James could make a name for himself by actually weighing dry air and moist air, and thereby demonstrating that his hypothesis is correct. Too much trouble, I guess.

  • Fenrir
  • Needs a Life
  • 588

  • 187

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #15
Jeremiah was a bullfrog.



It's what plants crave.

  • Brother Daniel
  • Global Moderator
  • predisposed to antagonism
  • 632

  • 181

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #16
Did jim really try to use "engineer" as an insult?

I'd love to have some skill in engineering.

  • el jefe
  • Needs a Life
  • asleep till 2020 or 2024
  • 2,924

  • 623

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #17
the reason people don't listen to my breakthrough ideas is that their reasoning is purely based on arguments from authority and I am not (yet!) one of their "Esteemed Authorities".  but the only reason I am not considered an authority is that people won't listen to my breakthrough ideas!  it's a catch-22!

the only way I can break through this barrier is to get you sheeple to wake up.  newton was just a human being, you morons!  stuff wasn't true just because he said it. he was capable of being wrong.  has anyone ever ACTUALLY TESTED the law of gravity?  ANYONE?!  I didn't think so.

see what I mean?  you are all blindly following this newton guy just because "ooh look, he's such an expert!", but you don't realize you are just relying on circular logic.  no one knows whether his theories are actually true.  it could be the inverse cube law, for all we know.

there's your free lesson #1, morons.  arguments from authority are a fallacy.  you're welcome!

  • Doobie Keebler
  • Needs a Life
  • 809

  • 317

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #18
Newton was an unoriginal hack anyway. Everyone knows he was just rediscovering ancient knowledge.
  • Last Edit: March 03, 2017, 07:17:17 PM by Doobie Keebler
"You know what uranium is, right? It's this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things. But nobody talks about that."

  • 704

  • 197

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #19
Well if we refuse to ok him deleting his account, I'm sure his ego will keep him responding. ;)
I hope so. It's been way too long since we've had a fun new crackpot. Frankly I already miss him and fervently hope he hasn't already left us.  :ohdear:

  • fredbear
  • Needs a Life
  • Militantly Confused
  • 688

  • 128

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #20
This got weird as fuck rather quickly.
"...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

  • MikeB
  • Full Member
  • 156

  • 28

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #21
Well that is better than nothing.

  • 298

  • 79

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #22
Well if we refuse to ok him deleting his account, I'm sure his ego will keep him responding. ;)
I hope so. It's been way too long since we've had a fun new crackpot. Frankly I already miss him and fervently hope he hasn't already left us.  :ohdear:

Pleeeeaaasssse can we keep him??

  • 1,735

  • 268

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #23
We did test the laws of gravity. Turns out the predictions they make when it comes to really big things that are very close don't match reality- e.g. Planet Vulcan.

Einstein seems to have got it right. Although now we have the problem of getting that to work with very small things.
Why do I bother?

  • 9,856

  • 61

Re: Isaac Newton Was A Human Being
Reply #24
We did test the laws of gravity. Turns out the predictions they make when it comes to really big things that are very close don't match reality- e.g. Planet Vulcan.

Einstein seems to have got it right. Although now we have the problem of getting that to work with very small things.
Or very large things.  Like with galaxies.  I think that "dark matter" and "dark energy" is "Planet Vulcan" nonsense all over again.