Letteratura scientifica selezionata sul tema "Newton, Isaac (1642-1727) – Religion"

Neste artigo, apresento uma tradução comentada do ensaio “Observações sobre luz e cores”, escrito por Thomas Melvill (1726-1753). Embora atualmente desconhecido nos dias atuais, o texto é um autêntico retrato da óptica nesse século, incorporando temas, controvérsias e novas perspectivas de estudo vigentes decorrentes do legado de Isaac Newton (1642-1727) na Grã-Bretanha. É primeira vez que um texto desse autor é traduzido ao português.

Neste ensaio, pretendo apresentar um Isaac Newton (1642-1727) que revelaum aspecto essencial da sua personalidade intelectual que se encontravaausente em sua imagem tradicional. Após sua morte deixou um volumosoconjunto de manuscritos não publicados, em sua maior parte inacabados,que estão diretamente ligados a religião. Combinou uma mistura muitointeressante de erudição bíblica moderna com uma aplicação à compreensãodo Livro Sagrado (a Bíblia); exegeses dos livros apocalípticos eproféticos, história da Igreja antiga, estudos sobre instituições judaicas,uma cronologia, etc. Esses textos, receberam desde a década de setenta doséc XX, uma crescente atenção científica. Newton escreveu muito sobrea Bíblia como um documento histórico, sobre a precisão da cronologiabíblica e sobre a mensagem da bíblica; com uma firme convicção de que,na leitura apropriada do texto bíblico haveria um plano para a históriahumana e mundial.Suas indagações teológicas giram ao redor de uma interpretação altamenteheterodoxa do Apocalipse de São João e sua relação com as Profeciasde Daniel, adotando uma interpretação protestante que identifica a bestiabicorne (Apo 13, 11) com a Igreja Católica ocidental, indo mais além,ao identificar seu nascimento na Igreja trinitária que se impôs no séc.IV como resultado da chamada controvérsia ariana. Desse modo, IsaacNewton se situava clandestinamente na posição herética tanto para aIgreja Católica como para a Igreja Anglicana (protestante), da qual eraum crente fervoroso, pois considerava o dogma da Santíssima Trindadecomo una corrupção alheia ao cristianismo primitivo. O artigo pretendeoferecer uma explicação, contrariando o sentido das opiniões para essecomportamento de Newton, não o considerando nem convertido ao arianismo,tampouco herético, parecendo mais uma atitude rebelde contra a tradição aceita e influenciado por alguns fatos históricos da época. No entanto continua sendo uma questão em aberto.

In 1784 the visionary French architect Etienne-Louis Boullée (1728– 1799) designed a colossal monument to Isaac Newton (1642–1727) that was both a cenotaph and a planetarium. A tribute to Newton’s contributions to astronomy, the building was conceived as a microcosm in which the night sky would be visible by day and the daytime sky by night. Entering the ‘center of gravity’ of a vast hollow globe set in cylindrical tiers, the viewer would experience the virtual reality of the starry heavens created by natural light sparkling through shafts in the exterior of the masonry sphere. At night, the interior would be transformed into day by a luminous artificial sun suspended from the vault in an armillary sphere. Belonging to the brotherhood of freemasons whose motto was ‘lux ex tenebri’ or ‘light out of darkness’, Boullée believed in the mystical origins of knowledge. His monument was a vindication of Newton whose law of universal gravitation had been attacked as ‘occult’ by Leibniz and others. Boullée’s design can be traced to Archimedes, who was the son of an astronomer and the inventor of the first planetarium c. 250 BCE. Archimedes’ tomb in Syracuse was surmounted with a sphere inside a cylinder representing his discovery of the formulas for finding their volumes and surface areas. The Newton cenotaph was also a development of the Gottorp Globe (1654-1664), a revolving planetarium made of a pierced hollow sphere that held twelve people. Although the enormity of Boullée’s plan was impossible to construct in the eighteenth century, architects treasured his evocative drawings. More than 200 years later, the architect James Stewart Polshek acknowledged the Newton cenotaph as the inspiration for his design for the planetarium of the Rose Center for Earth and Space in New York.

This article examines the “progress” of Scottish metaphysics during the long eighteenth century. The scientific cultivation of natural knowledge drawn from the examples of Sir Francis Bacon (1561–1626), John Locke (1632–1704), and Sir Isaac Newton (1642–1727) was a defining pursuit in the Scottish Enlightenment. The Aberdonian philosopher George Dalgarno (1616–1687); Thomas Reid (1710–1796), a member of the Aberdeen Philosophical Society known as the Wise Club; and the professor of moral philosophy at Edinburgh University Dugald Stewart (1753–1828), contributed to that Scottish pattern of philosophical thinking. The question of the extent to which particular external senses (sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smell) might be improved when others were damaged or absent from birth attracted their particular interest. This article shows the different ways in which Scottish anatomists of the mind resolved Molyneux’s Problem of whether or not an agent could accurately perceive an object from a newly restored external sense.

Dans cet essai, nous étudions le développement de cinq passages méthodologiques importants dans les Queries de l’Opticks d’Isaac Newton (1642-1727) et nous explorons plusieurs raisons pour lesquelles il les a continuellement révisés et reformulés. Les Queries, publiés à la fois en anglais et en latin, ont une histoire éditoriale complexe et fascinante. Ici, nous analysons les manuscrits survivants en relation avec les versions publiées de l’Opticks (1704, 1717, 1721 et 1730) et de l’Optice (1706 et 1719) et, en outre, avec d’autres sources pertinentes telles que ‘ An Account of the Book Called Commercium epistolicum’ de Newton et Cambridge University Library, Add. Ms. 3970, f. 479r-v et f. 480v dans lequel il a abordé un certain nombre de principes philosophiques. Plus précisément, nous analysons cinq passages dans lesquels Newton a clarifié ses points de vue méthodologiques pour ses lecteurs : dans le premier passage, il définissait «the main Business of natural Philosophy » comme argumenter à partir de phénomènes sans feindre d’hypothèses ; dans le deuxième passage, il justifiait son utilisation fréquente du mot «attraction » ; dans le troisième passage, il discutait brièvement des conditions dans lesquelles une propriété, notamment la dureté, peut être considérée comme universelle ; dans le quatrième passage, il défendait sa propre méthode en refusant l’idée que la gravité et les autres principes actifs sont des «occult Qualities » ; et, enfin, dans le cinquième passage, il décrivait sa propre méthode en termes d’analyse et de composition (ou de synthèse). Sur la base de nos analyses de ces passages, nous sommes en mesure de retracer l’évolution des idées méthodologiques de Newton du début des années 1700 à 1717. En outre, nous découvrons comment les débats de l’époque sur la philosophie naturelle ont influencé la rédaction des Queries et quels passages ont servi de précurseurs à ses célèbres regulae philosophandi.

NEWTON THE ALCHEMIST: Science, Enigma, and the Quest for Nature's "Secret Fire" by William R. Newman. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2019. xx + 537 pages, including four appendices and an index. Hardcover; $39.95. ISBN: 9780691174877. *If there is one person associated with developments in the physical sciences, it is Isaac Newton (1642-1727). For many, he represents the culmination of the seventeenth-century Scientific Revolution: its point of convergence and simultaneously the point from which science began to exercise its full influence on society. His work is often considered as thoroughly modern: well-designed experiments; precise and clearly articulated mathematical-physical principles which invite deductions further tested by measurement and experiment; and great discoveries in astronomy (universal law of gravitation), in optics, in mechanics, and in mathematics (the calculus). For many, Newton provided the model for physical theory for the next two hundred years. *And yet, this generally accepted description of Newton fails to capture the tension and diversity in Newton's work. The discovery of Newton's alchemical manuscripts (containing no fewer than one million words) by the economist John Maynard Keynes at an auction at Sotheby's in 1936 partially lifted the veil. In 1947, Keynes offered his rather candid assessment of Newton's alchemical work: he "was not the first of the age of reason" but rather "the last of the magicians." *However, in the last two decades, we have come to understand and appreciate that alchemy was not simply deviant behavior by "magicians" or charlatans, but rather part and parcel of the make-up of the Scientific Revolution. Alchemy, or better, chymistry, was a central part of the early modern study of nature. One of the leaders of this historiographical revolution has been William Newman, distinguished professor in the Department of History and Philosophy of Science and Medicine at Indiana University. [For more on this revolution, see my review of Lawrence Principe's book The Secrets of Alchemy in PSCF 66, no. 4 (2014): 258-59.] Newman has written several seminal books: for example, Atoms and Alchemy: Chymistry and the Experimental Origins of the Scientific Revolution (2006) and Promethean Ambitions: Alchemy and the Quest to Perfect Nature (2004). *Newton the Alchemist displays Newman's fifteen-year dedicated study of Newton's alchemical manuscripts. This is the book for anyone who wishes to understand the background, implementation, and experimentation characteristic of Newton's long and abiding interest in alchemy. Newman introduces us to a Newton who wished to be an adept alchemist (even as a student at the Free Grammar School in Grantham) and kept the alchemical fires burning throughout his life, not only in Trinity College at Cambridge University, but also as warden of the Royal Mint. Newman also shows that alchemy is not inherently unscientific or irrational, nor that Newton was an outlier. Such contemporary luminaries as Robert Boyle, Gottfried Leibniz, and John Locke were also involved in alchemical endeavors. *In the first chapter, "The Enigma of Newton's Alchemy: The Historical Reception," Newman addresses the claims of two of Newton's most illustrious interpreters: Richard Westfall and Betty Jo Teeter Dobbs. For Dobbs, Newton's belief in alchemical transmutation was a religious quest, with the "philosophic mercury" acting as a spirit mediating between the physical and divine realms. For Westfall, Newton's alchemical research, involving invisible forces acting at a distance, allowed him to develop his theory of universal gravitation, published in the Principia of 1687. Newman calls both claims into question based on his close reading of the extant alchemical papers, many of which Dobbs and Westfall were not able to see. Newman wishes to determine the "hidden material meaning of the text" (p. 46), rather than advance any broad metaphysical or soteriological claims on Newton's part. *In chapter 4, "Early Modern Alchemical Theory," Newman reveals how heavily influenced Newton was by European alchemists, above all by the Polish alchemist Michael Sendivogius. Drawing on their experiments, Newton, in the 1670s, developed an all-encompassing geochemical theory of nature, according to which the earth functions as "a 'great animall' or rather an 'inanimate vegetable'" (p. 64). In Newton's view, this process explained gravitation (among many other things), although he would abandon this idea when he came to write the Principia. *In collaboration with others, many at Indiana University, Newman has organized, read, and carefully compared Newton's alchemical manuscripts. [Readers can see the results at www.chymistry.org.] In his analysis, Newman employs an approach which he calls "experimental history." This involves at least two elements: (1) a careful textual linguistic analysis of alchemical manuscripts and their experimental details; and (2) an effort to repeat the experiments in a modern laboratory setting. To understand alchemical manuscripts is indeed a challenging undertaking involving an understanding of "materials, technology, and tacit practices," as well as deciphering "hidden terms or Decknamen" used for chemical substances, and the intricate symbols employed to designate them (see "Symbols and Conventions," pp. xi-xvii). *Newman repeated many of Newton's experiments, revealing many of his laboratory practices for the first time. The results are sometimes spectacular (see, for example, the colored plates 4-10 between pages 314 and 315). They clearly show how dedicated Newton was in his efforts to improve his knowledge of the natural world. Newman's final assessment: "Nowhere in Newton's scientific work can we see the same degree of combined textual scholarship and experiment that we encounter in his alchemy" (p. 498). *What may we learn from reading Newton the Alchemist? One thing for sure: that our contemporary scientific textbooks and enlightened culture celebrating Newton's "positive" results--the astronomical "System of the World" and his three laws of motion in mechanics--are a one-sided picture of Newton's work and life. By blithely neglecting his interests in alchemy, cabbalism (number mysticism), theology, chronology, and biblical prophecy, as well as Newton's deep sense of vocation (calling), they all too frequently divide his work into two predetermined categories: science and pseudo-science. It is certain that Newton's alchemy is not pseudo-science. History, and scientific practice as well, are never, if ever, so tidy. Newton's passionate pursuit of a coherent worldview is a reminder to us of the rich context in which science is embedded. Newman's book underscores the fact that science, our science too, is impelled by deep commitments, social and political factors, and personal ambition and motives. *Reviewed by Arie Leegwater, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Calvin University, Grand Rapids, MI 49546.

The paper focuses on two individuals who have each made a seminal contribution to the debates between theology and the sciences in Oxford - Charles Darwin (in the mid�19th century), and Richard Dawkins (from the 1990s to the present day). It introduces Darwin by way of a more personal and visual view from Worcester College Chapel. The restoration of the chapel took place at about the same time as the debates between Huxley and Wilberforce in the Oxford University Museum over Charles Darwin�s On the Origin of the Species. The first part of the paper then traces these debates back: first to an earlier period of disputation represented by Galileo Galilei (c. 1564�1642), and then to a period of greater accommodation represented by Isaac Newton (1643�1727). Darwin represents a third, more controversial, stage. The paper then looks at a fourth period, from the mid�20th century onwards, which is marked by more eirenical attempts to demarcate science and theology by seeing the former again as asking the �how� questions and the latter, the �why� questions. It then focuses on a fifth, more disputatious stage, which was initiated by Richard Dawkins, professor in the Public Understanding of Science until 2008. Professor Dawkins challenges the idea that theology cannot be studied, because its focus is a non-existent object, �God�.The second part of the paper looks at various Oxford projects and Oxford theologians who have risen to this contemporary challenge. They include the work of the Ian Ramsey Centre; Justin Barret�s and John Trigg�s joint � 2 million project, supported by the John Templeton foundation, which examines scientific ideas about religion and the mind; Richard Harries, Bishop of Oxford from 1987 to 2006, who has conducted a number of media interviews with Richard Dawkins; Keith Ward, who has written several books engaging not only with Dawkins but is also the Cambridge Professor of Mathematics, Stephen Hawking; and Alistair McGrath, who has a doctorate in both science and theology, and who has similarly written and entered into public debates challenging Dawkin�s ideas.The paper ends by referring to John Barton, Professor of the Interpretation of Holy Scripture at Oxford, who argues that provided that theology is a subject which is properly critical, open to alien truth and combines both intellectual and emotional modes of perception, it can set an example for almost any academic discipline, both in the humanities and the sciences. The conclusion is therefore that, far from theology having to become more like another science, the sciences might be challenged to become more like theology.

A. Rupert Hall. Isaac Newton: Adventurer in Thought . Blackwells, Oxford, 1992. Pp. xv + 468, £19.99. ISBN 0631179062 Rupert Hall has been at the centre of Newtonian scholarship for forty years. This elegant volume, the mature product of a near-lifetime of intensive study and reflection, has been well worth waiting for. Throughout his long life (1642-1727) Newton was continually re-writing, amending and discarding his many drafts. His huge manuscript legacy has been extensively explored - and much of it published - during recent years. Hall is completely at home among this mass of material. His numerous cross- references and quotations - many from Newton himself - are meticulously indexed in some 900 separate notes.

'THE FIRST REFLECTING TELESCOPE INUENTED BI S R ISAAC NEWTON AND MADE WITH HIS OWN HANDS IN THE YEAR 1671’ These words are engraved on a brass plate screwed to the base of the little telescope that has been revered by the Royal Society as the handiwork of its greatest Fellow, Isaac Newton (1642-1727), who was President of the Society from 1703 until his death. Newton is normally credited with the invention of the reflecting telescope, an invention widely and enthusiastically publicized by the Royal Society when Newton sent one of his instruments to London to be inspected by the Society’s Council in 1671. In spite of the confident message on this engraved plate (its eccentric orthography suggesting an enhanced antiquity), the original telescope presented by Newton in 1671 did not remain in the Society’s care. The surviving Newton telescope (figure 1) was presented to the Society in 1766 by the antiquary George Scott, F.R.S., on behalf of Heath & Wing, a firm of scientific instrument-makers in the Strand, London. Scott affirmed that it was ‘formerly belonging to Sir Isaac Newton, P.R.S., and made by himself’. But can this instrument properly be associated with Newton? This brief account looks at the history and provenance of Newton’s early reflecting telescopes and argues that at least part of the extant instrument may be Newton’s, making it possibly the world’s oldest surviving reflecting telescope.

Isaac Newton remarqua dans la conclusion de ses fameux Principes mathématiques de la philosophie naturelle (1687) : « Les idolâtres s’imaginaient que le soleil, la lune, les astres, les âmes des hommes et toutes les autres parties du monde étaient des parties du Dieu suprême et que, par conséquent, on devait leur rendre un culte, mais c’était une erreur. » Le mathématicien observait de façon similaire en concluant son Traité d’optique : « A la vérité, si les païens n’eussent pas été aveuglés par le culte des faux dieux, ils auraient poussé leur philosophie morale bien au-delà de ce qu’ils nommaient les quatre vertus cardinales ; et au lieu d’enseigner la transmigration des âmes, le culte du soleil et de la lune, et des héros décédés, ils auraient enseigné la raison suprême pour laquelle notre souverain Bienfaiteur et véritable Auteur doit être adoré. » Une question se pose au lecteur contemporain : comment rendre compte de l’insertion de ces considérations théologiques en conclusion de deux traités de nature essentiellement mathématique ?Des éléments de réponse se trouvent dans un manuscrit inachevé de Newton intitulé « Les origines philosophiques de la théologie païenne » (Theologiæ gentilis origines philosophicæ), un traité d’histoire des religions comportant plus de 130.000 mots répartis sur quelque 200 folios. Newton y soutient notamment que la cosmologie des Anciens était de nature théologique du fait qu’elle procédait en partie de la projection sur les éléments du cosmos des âmes des ancêtres de l’humanité déifiés. C’est ainsi que Newton voit dans la catastérisation des premiers hommes l’origine de l’animisme astral, de l’astrolâtrie et de l’astrologie. A ses yeux, la chute originelle de l’homme dans l’idolâtrie aurait corrompu aussi bien la vraie religion que la connaissance de la philosophie naturelle, l’animisme propre aux cosmologies des anciens peuples orientaux formant le pendant philosophique de l’astrolâtrie païenne. Il importait dès lors de désacraliser les éléments du cosmos afin de rétablir aussi bien le culte pur que la science véritable.Après avoir identifié les sources et décrit les principes exégétiques qui sous-tendent le traité des Origines, nous examinerons l’historiographie newtonienne des origines et de la diffusion de la physico-théologie païenne, depuis la naissance du culte des astres en Egypte ancienne jusqu’aux doctrines émanationnistes enseignées par les scolastiques. Nous montrerons ensuite en quoi le système du monde proposé par Newton se présentait comme une alternative désacralisée aux conceptions cosmologiques animistes des Anciens. Nous nous interrogerons finalement sur la provenance de l’animus iconoclaste qui caractérise les écrits théologiques et philosophiques de Newton. Il s’agira de discerner les sources d’influence qui marquèrent sa formation intellectuelle et religieuse au travers de l’examen des polémiques qui divisèrent le milieu réformé au sein duquel il grandit. Il en ressortira que l’auteur des Principes entendait bien désenchanter le cosmos afin de satisfaire les exigences d’un monothéisme austère et intransigeant
Isaac Newton stated in his conclusion to the Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy (1687) : “Idolaters imagined that the sun, moon, and stars, the souls of men, and other parts of the world were parts of the supreme God, and so were to be worshipped, but they were mistaken.” The famed mathematician correspondingly observed in the conclusion of his treatise on Opticks : “And no doubt, if the worship of false gods had not blinded the heathen, their moral philosophy would have gone farther than to the four cardinal virtues; and instead of teaching the transmigration of souls, and to worship the sun, and moon, and dead heroes, they would have taught us to worship our true Author and Benefactor.” The modern reader may ask : Why conclude two treatises that are fundamentally mathematical in nature with these theological considerations?Part of the answer lays in an uncompleted manuscript by Newton titled “The Philosophical Origins of Pagan Theology” (Theologiæ gentilis origines philosophicæ), a treatise on the history of religions comprising more than 130.000 words on about 200 folios. Newton’s claim therein is that the cosmology of the Ancients was in essence theological since it partly proceeded from the belief that the souls of the deified ancestors of mankind had been projected into elements of the cosmos. This catasterisation of early men was, in Newton’s eyes, the actual origin of stellar animism, star worship, and astrology. Thus, the original fall of man into idolatry corrupted both true religion and the right understanding of natural philosophy, as the intrinsic animism of oriental cosmologies was the philosophical counterpart of pagan astrolatry. Restoring pure worship and true science required, therefore, that elements of the cosmos be first desacralized.In this work, I will first identify the sources and characterize the exegetical principles behind the treatise on Origins. I will then examine the Newtonian historiography of the origins and dissemination of pagan physicotheology, from the beginning of star worship in ancient Egypt to the emanationist doctrines taught by Medieval schoolmen. I will then show how Newton’s own system of the world presented itself as a disenchanted alternative to the animistic cosmological beliefs of the Ancients. I will eventually trace the roots of Newtons’s iconoclastic ethos which characterizes much of his theological and philosophical writings. To this end, I will consider the sources of influence that bore upon Newton’s upbringing in relation to the religious contentions which divided the Reformed milieu he grew up in. I will eventually argue that the author of the Principia meant indeed to desacralize the cosmos to meet the demands of an austere and uncompromising monotheism

La question de la réalité, de la nature et du rôle de la relation science de l'univers - spiritualité dans l'œuvre de connaissance scientifique, plus généralement dans l'histoire de la pensée, motive le présent travail. Afin de traiter ce sujet, nous avons choisi d'étudier la pensée de deux savants spiritualistes : Isaac Newton et Georges Lemaître, qui façonnent deux moments majeurs de l'histoire des sciences, celui de la fondation de la mécanique céleste, creuset de la science moderne, et celui de la fondation de la cosmologie moderne, lieu d'une définition radicalement nouvelle de l'univers et de la place de l'homme en son sein. Ces deux moments, newtonien et lemaîtrîen, s'apparient l'un à l'autre, d'une part en raison de l'objet d'étude commun : le tout, et d'autre part en termes de succession et d'avancées dans l'histoire des sciences, puisqu'ils nous entraînent de la science du ciel en l'absolu newtonien, à la science du commencement et de l'évolution cosmologique en la relativité générale. La relation science de l'univers - spiritualité se révèle, sur la base de notre étude des deux pensées, comme une relation dynamique à double sens, une dimension cruciale de l'histoire conceptuelle et, au-delà, de l'histoire de la pensée. Elle permet de surcroît de procurer des éléments de synthèse et de comparaison de ces pensées, et d'asseoir plus largement, aux plans historique et philosophique, le choix du sujet. Notre idée première en ressort étayée et renforcée. Mais au-delà des termes mêmes de l'histoire de la pensée, notre démarche première, fondatrice, a consisté à comprendre des acteurs éminents de celle-ci, comprendre, à travers leur démarche de pensée, l'être, l'esprit, par la lettre de l'histoire
This research questions the existence, nature and role of the relationship between science and spirituality in the construction of scientific knowledge and, more generally, in the history of thought. To address this topic, we have chosen to examine the work of two spiritualist scholars: Isaac Newton and Georges Lemaître. These two figures set major landmarks in the history of science: the founding of celestial mechanics, the basis of modem science, and the founding of modem cosmology, which provided a radically new definition of the universe and of mankind's place within it. These two landmarks - one Newtonian and the other Lernaîtrian - go hand in hand, for one due to their shared subject: the whole, and also due to the subsequent succession and advancement in the history of science since they take us from the science of the sky, conceived as an absolute, to the science of the beginning and of cosmological evolution frorn general relativity. Our research into the two thinkers' philosophies shows that the relationship between science and spirituality is a dynamic, two-way relationship, a vital aspect of conceptual history, and more broadly of the history of thought. Moreover, it provides elements of synthesis and comparison between both scientists-philosophers and gives historical and philosophical rooting to the choice of subject. Our initial idea is thus supported and reinforced. Beyond the terms of the history of thought, our first approach consisted of understanding eminent actors in this history, understanding, through their ways of thinking, their being, their spirit, by their legacy in history

Trobarà el lector en aquestes planes una anàlisi, que desitgem prou sòlida, al voltant de la gènesi dels Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica de Newton i de les conseqüències teològiques que van derivar-ne. L’objectiu d’aquesta anàlisi no és merament un estudi descriptiu, sinó un intent de resoldre què fou Newton des d’una perspectiva teològica i com hem d’entendre, en última instància, la seva relació amb la lògica interna del discurs científic. Dues tesis aquestes que l’autor ha procurat respondre aportant noves visions tot recolzant-se amb la documentació escaient i l’esforç de les investigacions que n’han brollat. En vista a la resolució d’aquestes tesis, és convenient entendre abans que res, en una primera part de l’obra, l’evolució genètica de les idees que van dur a la formulació gravitatòria. La revisió de les concepcions sobre l’estructura de l’univers anteriors a l’obra de Newton es fa imprescindible per a entendre el context en què va donar-se la seva revolució. A partir d’aquí, la deducció de la llei de l’invers del quadrat de la distància representa el bateig del trajecte excepcional que durà a l’aparició de la física newtoniana. Partint de la famosa trobada de Halley, Hooke i Wren al gener de 1684, la tesi aporta un seguiment de la gènesi de les idees de Newton, cosa que seria impensable sense entretenir-se en una anàlisi acurada del seu opuscle De motu corporum in gyrum de 1684. En aquesta obra apareix el fil conductor de gran part dels continguts posteriors que seran presents als Philosophiae naturalis principia mathematica. La segona part de l’obra haurà de considerar quins efectes va tenir sobre la teologia el descobriment de la llei de gravitació universal per part de Newton. Calen, d’entrada, una anàlisi de les coordenades teològiques del segle XVII i, sobretot, del corpus religiós que dominava la mentalitat de Newton. Quina visió tenia Newton de la divinitat, quina era la seva actitud en relació a l’oficialitat, i com hi relacionava l’exercici científic, són assumptes de cabdal rellevància. El veritable inici de la suma de les distintes conseqüències teològiques a què va dur la publicació dels Principia rau en les possibles respostes a la pregunta de quina hauria de ser la naturalesa de la gravetat mateixa. Haurem de veure, doncs, si rere el Déu que sentia Newton s’hi amagava realment una emmascarada visió deista de la realitat. Una anàlisi d’aquesta qüestió ha de fer veure la vertadera complexitat del Newton religiós: un teista heterodox i fragmentari que fins i tot va acabar flirtejant amb algunes imatges d’un panteisme prou inesperat i inconfessable. Es demostra, a més, que tant les exigències de la nova física de Newton com la presentació tan polièdrica de Déu i del fet religiós que s’enceta amb les seves críptiques concepcions van tenir unes conseqüències metafísiques i teològiques absolutament rellevants dins de certs cercles intel·lectuals propers al newtonianisme. Aquesta herència va constituir el fonament d’un grup de pensadors que es van erigir en «apòstols» del pensament newtonià i que van acabar esdevenint els teòrics de la nova «astroteologia». El lector té doncs a les mans una obra on s’entrecreuen gran part dels distints sabers humans essencials: la matemàtica, la física, la metafísica, la teologia i fins i tot, una reflexió antropològica implícita que no pot menysprear-se. Una cruïlla de sabers que ha de dur, després de realitzat un pregon estudi –o almenys aquesta ha estat la intenció-, a unes conclusions que, si bé estem molt lluny de titllar de sorprenents, aspirem que puguin ser útils tant al teòleg com a l’hermeneuta de la història i de la filosofia de la ciència.
In these pages, the reader will find an analysis, which we conceive sound enough, of the genesis of Newton’s Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy and the theological consequences that arose from it. The main purpose of such an analysis is not a mere descriptive study, but an attempt to solve what Newton was from a theological perspective and how we must understand ultimately his relation to the internal structure of the scientific discourse. The author has tried to enlighten both theses by making new crucial contributions based on the available documentation and many other studies. This work is divided in two parts. The first one tackles the scientific path towards the discovery of the universal law of gravity. After careful consideration to the great part of the prenewtonian physical visions –and from the relevant events that took place in January 1684- the author delves deep and thoroughly into the intricate facts which led Newton first to the publication of his De motu and then to the classic physical comprehension of nature in his Principia. An accurate explanation of some mathematical principles is not only developed therein, but also and most especially the winding way Newton was able to walk in order to overcome the challenges and adversities. The second part of the work focuses on the main theological consequences of such a discovery. The author aims to understand better Newton’s religious soul and how he tried to clarify the deepest intangible nature of gravity with regard to his religious concepts. The scientific requirements emerging from the Principia had an important influence in determining the new religious visions which sought to harmonize the «God’s work» and the »God’s Book». In this context, the author demonstrates that Newton was not a deist nor even strictly an orthodox theist, but he should be rather considered as a «formal panentheist» who laid the foundations of what will be known in the future as «astrotheology».

Resumo: Esta pesquisa apresenta um estudo sobre o conceito de força gravitacional na filosofia da natureza de Isaac Newton. O presente texto foi elaborado a partir dos argumentos desenvolvidos por Newton para defender esse conceito em sua obra mais importante, o Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica (1687). Será visto que, em tais argumentos, Newton restringe o conceito de força gravitacional a partir de um tratamento matemático, que ele próprio elaborou em sua obra. Por outro lado, Newton argumentava, como físico, sobre a necessidade de fornecer uma explicação adequada das leis e conceitos relacionados à experiência. Assim, o programa de Newton deve conter uma explicação de como os princípios matemáticos, dos dois primeiros livros, poderiam ser aplicados ao mundo dos fenômenos, tarefa a qual ele se edicou no Livro III do Principia Mathematica. Por último, é necessário dizer que o conceito de força gravitacional na filosofia da natureza de Newton só pode nos oferecer um resultado significativo quando analisado de um duplo ponto de vista, a saber, o da mecânica racional, isto é, sua “ciência do movimento”, e o da filosofia da natureza, isto é, do “sistema de mundo”.

Une théorie mathématique de la physique puise ses fondements aussi bien dans les mathématiques que dans la nature. N'étant ni une discipline des mathématiques ni une théorie considérant les mathématiques comme un simple outil, elle s'appuie conjointement sur des notions physiques et sur des notions purement mathématiques. Au cœur de sa genèse se situe ainsi la question de la relation entre conceptualisation et mathématisation. En étudiant la genèse de la mécanique rationnelle de Newton entre le premier " De motu " de 1684 et les " Principia " de 1687, nous avons ainsi mis en évidence leur caractère inséparable. Nous avons montré comment les notions physiques déterminent les solutions mathématiques aux problèmes de la mécanique et comment ces solutions à leur tour influencent l'élaboration du cadre conceptuel sur lequel la mécanique newtonienne se fonde. Dans ce cadre, par une étude approfondie et détaillée des manuscrits, nous avons cherché à comprendre comment les notions fondamentales naissent et évoluent dans cette période de gestation. Tout particulièrement, la récente datation du "De gravitatione" (à 1684-85 plutôt qu'à 1662-70) nous a permis de mieux saisir la genèse conceptuelle et de mieux appréhender comment la question de la mathématisation a été traitée par Newton lui-même. Nous avons ainsi pu donner un nouvel éclairage sur la formation de la mécanique newtonienne. Nous avons également démontré que l'idée de la quantité évanouissante sur lequel les démonstrations mathématiques des " Principià " s'appuient, est directement issue d'un problème de fondement de la théorie des fluxions, résolu par Newton en 1671-72. Par là-même, nous pouvons aujourd'hui soutenir que la mathématisation de la mécanique dépend conceptuellement de la méthode des fluxions. Enfin, en étudiant ce problème conjoint de la mathématisation et de la conceptualisation chez Leibniz, nous avons pu montrer la spécificité de l'approche de Newton
A mathematical theory of physics is founded in mathematics as well as in nature. Being neither a discipline of mathematics nor a theory considering mathematics as a plain instrument, it builds jointly upon concepts of physics and of pure mathematics. Regarding its genesis, this implies a question of the relation between conceptualisation and mathematisation. In our study of the genesis of the rational mechanics of Newton between the first "De motu" (1684) and the "Principia" (1687), we show that this relation is of an inseparable kind. Thus, we look at how the concepts of physics determine mathematical solutions of mechanical problems and how these solutions again influence the elaboration of the conceptual framework on which the Newtonian mechanics is founded. In this respect and by a deepened and detailed analysis of the manuscripts, we have sought a better understanding of how the fundamental notions are born and developed during this gestation period. In particular, the recent dating attributed to “De gravitation” (1684-85 instead of 1662-70) has made it possible to better grasp the conceptual genesis and identify how the question of mathematisation was resolved by Newton himself. Thus, we provide new insight, in the development of the Newtonian mechanics. Further, we demonstrate that the idea of vanishing quantities, essential to the mathematical demonstrations in the “Principia”, is a direct consequence of a foundation problem related to the method of fluxions, resolved by Newton in 1671-72. From this, we may claim today that the mathematisation of the mechanics is conceptually depending upon this method of fluxions. Considering at last the joint problem of mathematisation and conceptualisation in Leibniz' thought, we get a better knowledge of the specificity of Newton's approach

Orientador: Fatima Regina Rodrigues Evora
Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Filosofia e Ciencias Humanas
Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-12T17:31:32Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Moreira_EdsonAdriano_M.pdf: 385127 bytes, checksum: c6f2cbad6b427006d20e3899b4d8b120 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009
Resumo: Essa dissertação analisa o chamado "problema de Newton", isto é, o problema de conciliar conceitualmente a inatividade essencial da matéria com a evidente atividade na natureza representada pela força de gravitação universal. Num primeiro momento, temos por objetivo examinar a gênese desse problema e, num segundo momento, os argumentos que Newton desenvolve procurando rebatê-lo
Abstract: This thesis analyses the so-called "Newton's problem", that is, the problem of conceptually conciliating the essential inactivity of matter with the evident activity in nature represented by the universal gravitation force. In a first moment, we are intended to examine the origin of this problem and, in a second moment, the arguments Newton develop in order to solve it
Mestrado
Filosofia
Mestre em Filosofia

Orientador: Laymert Garcia dos Santos
Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Faculdade de Educação
Made available in DSpace on 2018-07-19T22:21:05Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Barreto_Marcio_M.pdf: 7934407 bytes, checksum: 6d6c3f1c0671dbb67b0310e07d4d964b (MD5) Previous issue date: 1995
Resumo: Nesta dissertação de mestrado o leitor encontrará os principais aspectos da obra de Newton,. vistos a partir das relações entre ciência e religião em seus escritos.o foco da análise é a lei da atração gravitacional, aqui utilizada como uma metáfora valiosa para o ensino de Segundo Grau, mais especificamente o ensino de Física. O resgate das origens do conceito de força à distância, baseado em autores como B. Dobbs, R. Westfall, A. Koyré e outros, mostra que no ceme do pensamento científico moderno é possível encontrar respostas para questões essenciais da Educação do nosso tempo
Mestrado
Mestre em Educação

Peut-on épistémologiquement prétendre que concept et image se forment sur deux pôles opposés de l’activité psychique ? En guise de réfutation de cette idée bachelardienne, la Mécanique de Newton est ici soumise à une sorte d’analyse « multivariée » qui évalue le poids respectif des variables philosophique, alchimique, théologique et géométrique dans l’essor du premier modèle de la science moderne. Une rapide ouverture souligne le mode flexible de réception analytique de la théorie de la gravitation universelle et indique combien la démarche newtonienne, où concourent mathématiques et thêmata, est loin d’être singulière : par-delà la notion de champ en relativité, celle d’acausalité – un «concept-symbole » à l’image de l’attraction – rend possible la construction de variables philosophique, socio-esthétique, mathématique et expérimentale dans l’élaboration de la physique quantique. En point d’orgue vient la problématique de la « mort » de Newton – liée à l’étude de phénomènes stochastiques et irréversibles – qui met en regard les implications du « chaos alchimique » et du « chaos mathématiques » pour notre conception de la rationalité, de la créativité et de l’objectivité scientifiques
Can one argue from the standpoint of history and philosophy of science that scientific rationality and imagination are antagonistic ? To refute this conception of Bachelard, the study focuses on Newton’s Mechanics, especially on the contribution of philosophy, alchemy, theology and geometry to the development of modern physical science. Final considerations touch very briefly on the flexible analytic reception of the theory of universal gravitation and the possibility the mathematics as combined with themata does not concern Newton’s science only : beyond the concept to field in relativity, an other one, that is acausality, coined by us “concept-symbol” like that of attraction, makes it possible to account for the rise of quantum mechanics in terms of convergence of philosophical, social, aesthetic, mathematical and experimental elements. Also succinct discussion of question raised by stochasticity and irreversibility tries to compare the implications of “alcheminal chaos” and “mathematical chaos” for our conception of scientific rationality, creativity and objectivity

A partir de l'étude des sources manuscrites (manuscrits théologiques d'Isaac Newton, correspondance de Samuel Clarke et de William Wjiston), ainsi que de sources imprimées rarement étudiées, on montre les failles de l'exploitation qui est faite de la science newtonienne à des fins idéologiques (politiques et religieuses pour l'essentiel). Afin de légitimer l'image que le nouvel ordre religieux et politique issu de 1688 cherche à donner de lui-même, la physique newtonienne est débarrassée par ses commentateurs des éléments qui permettraient une utilisation idéologique par les néo-républicains et les matérialistes. En outre, cette étude révèle les divergences proprement théologiques qui opposent les newtoniens les plus fidèles à l'Église d’Angleterre. Toute la deuxième partie est consacrée à l'étude du contenu des manuscrits théologiques de Newton, de manière à mettre en évidence ses concepts fondamentaux (idolâtrie, enthousiasme, fantaisie, métaphysique), qui décrivent essentiellement ce que la religion ne doit pas être. On insiste sur la dimension rationaliste et protestante de la pensée théologique de l'auteur des "principia", ce qui autorise un rapprochement frappant avec le courant déiste, lui-même étudié de manière à en faire saisir certaines dimensions habituellement négligées. La conclusion isole quelques schémas fondamentaux de la théorie newtonienne des religions et de leur histoire et montre que cette pensée constitue une transition entre Renaissance et Lumières
The study of both printed sources (rarely studied) and of manuscripts (Isaac Newton's theological writings, Samuel Clarke's and William Whiston's letters) shows the discrepancy between the ideological (i. E. Political and religious) exploitation of Newtonian science and the works of newton. In order to legitimate the settlement of 1688, the commentators of Newtonian physics divested it of any element allowing a radical interpretation in neo-republican or materialistic terms. Besides, this study reveals the properly theological discord between the inner circle of the Newtonians and the Church of England. The second part is about the contents of newton's theological manuscripts and reveals its fundamental notions (idolatry, enthusiasm, fantasy, metaphysics), which describe what religion is not about. The rationalist and protestant aspects of Newton's thought are emphasized, thus allowing a parallel with deist thought, here revisited in order to show its lesser-known aspects. The conclusion emphasizes some key concepts of Newton's theory of religion and of its history, thus relating it, ultimately, with the rise of enlightenment thought in England

Informe de Seminario para optar al grado de Licenciado en Filosofía
El presente trabajo plantea como hipótesis que las matemáticas aplicadas a la formulación y desarrollo de los enunciados de ley en la física clásica realizan una contribución pragmática por medio de sus distintos roles metodológicos. Estos últimos son entendidos como aquellos roles que permiten establecer y determinar las relaciones inter- e intra-teóricas entre los distintos enunciados de ley. En este sentido, se plantea como objetivo general analizar críticamente la contribución de las matemáticas aplicadas para la construcción y desarrollo de las estructuras de las leyes fundamentales de la física clásica. Para abordar este objetivo, se plantean los siguientes tres objetivos específicos: (1) analizar la contribución de los roles metodológicos de las matemáticas aplicadas en la formulación de los enunciados de ley; (2) analizar la metodología aplicada en la práctica científica para la formulación de estos enunciados; y (3) analizar los puntos anteriores en un caso de estudio correspondiente a las leyes dinámicas de Newton presentadas en su Philosophiea naturalis principia mathematica (1687). Este trabajo se estructura en tres capítulos. En el primero se analiza la contribución del rol metodológico de las matemáticas aplicadas en la formulación y desarrollo de los enunciados de ley de la física clásica, en términos de su relación con otros roles, el carácter instrumental de las matemáticas, la versatilidad de aplicación de las mismas y la validez de estas por medio de la invariancia. En el segundo capítulo se analiza la metodología utilizada en las matemáticas y cómo se utiliza tal metodología en las ciencias, en particular cómo es utilizada en la práctica científica para la formulación de las leyes. En el tercer capítulo se analiza los resultados de los capítulos precedentes, teniendo a la vista la formulación de las leyes de Newton, en términos de la metodología utilizada, los fundamentos para establecer los conceptos físicos fundamentales y la formulación y desarrollo de las leyes dinámicas. Los resultados arrojan que, (i) dada las herramientas de razonamiento que ofrecen las matemáticas para formular estructuras, que permiten inferir las consecuencias de las leyes y descubrir las conexiones entre distintas estructuras matemáticas; y (ii) dada las herramientas formales de estas, las cuales proporcionan una amplia variedad de conceptos para representar y cuantificar entidades físicas, permiten inferir las conexiones entre leyes y otras estructuras matemáticas; permiten concluir que las matemáticas realizan una contribución de carácter pragmático, tanto en la formulación de los enunciados de ley en la física clásica como en la deducción de otras leyes. En efecto, la variedad de herramientas ofrecidas por las matemáticas se adecúa a diversos contextos de investigación en la práctica científica. Esta misma contribución, a su vez, permite realizar una jerarquización formal de las leyes en términos de la deducción de leyes (generando niveles), por medio de matemáticas complejas, y de la robustez de las mismas. Además, se muestra cómo el método axiomático de las matemáticas contribuye en la formulación de los enunciados de ley, puesto que la axiomatización semi-formal utilizado en la práctica científica permite formular de manera consistente los conceptos y axiomas físicos, establecer las relaciones pertinentes entre estos y deducir las consecuencias de estos axiomas. Esta contribución del método axiomático es pragmática debido a que la caracteriza como una axiomatización débil pragmática. La aplicación de estos resultados se puede apreciar en la formulación y desarrollo de las tres leyes dinámicas que formuló Newton en sus Principia. En efecto, Newton al formular estas leyes se guía por una metodología que le permite precisar sus dos conceptos físicos claves, a saber, la masa y la fuerza, y establecer correlaciones entre estos, y, en base a esto, generar distintas estructuras matemáticas. Además, se aprecia cómo el rol metodológico contribuye a demostrar cómo las tres leyes de Newton se relacionan con la ley de Galileo y las leyes de Kepler. En síntesis, los resultados de este trabajo permiten dar cuenta que las matemáticas aplicadas contribuyen de manera pragmática en la formulación y desarrollo de los enunciados de ley en la física clásica, puesto que el rol metodológico de estas es un rol de carácter pragmático.

Abstract Alexander Pope’s epitaph for the monument erected to the memory of Sir Isaac Newton in Westminster Abbey in 1731 succinctly proclaims the extra ordinary intellectual virtue of the greatest scientific innovator of the age. A Latin inscription witnesses to Newton’s immortality, an immortality triply safeguarded by Time, Nature, and Heaven; a couplet in English, the sublime confidence of which has served to provoke later generations, unequivocally asserts that the systematized vision which he offered was divinely inspired. ‘Nature and Nature’s Laws lay hid in Night, I God said, Let Newton be! and All was Light.’ Pope’s epitaph is more than a personal tribute to a great man; it is a public statement displayed in a much frequented national church which sums up the gratitude of a proud civilization. Newton (1642-1727), ‘the Miracle of the present Age’ as Joseph Addison called him, had given his eighteenth century heirs a carefully reasoned theoretical framework on which a whole range of additional theories could be hung. His Principia of 1687 and his Opticks of 1704 suggested that there were indeed intelligible laws in nature which could be demonstrated by physics and mathematics, and, moreover, that the universe exhibited a magnificent symmetry and a mechanical certainty. This universe, Newton had declared, could not have arisen ‘out of a Chaos by the mere Laws of Nature’; such a ‘wonderful Uniformity in the Planetary System’ had to be the handiwork of an intelligent and benevolent Creator. To the many eighteenth century propagators of Newton’s thought, the great could be related to the less, the cosmic to the terrestrial, and the divine to the human by means of a properly tutored understanding of the natural scheme of things. By inter pretation, Newton’s heavens declared that there was order, law, and indeed design in creation. Largely thanks to the propagandist work of the Royal Society in London and European-wide advances in astronomy, mathematics, mechanics, physics, and optics, natural philosophy had shed the taint of forbidden knowledge. Religious mystery could be enhanced, and sometimes even replaced, by rational wonder. The revolution in scientific thought begun by Copernicus 150 years earlier was to be fulfilled as popular enlightenment.

Abstract Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) attracted many legends. His nature in maturity was sour and ungenerous; he was jealous of contemporaries and ferociously competitive. In his interminable dispute with his Hanoverian contemporary Gottfried Leibniz over who had first hit on the differential calculus, he was ruthless to the point of dishonesty. At the end he exulted that he had finally ‘broken Leibniz’s heart’. John Flamsteed, the first Astronomer Royal (1646-1719), and himself no easy character, was once heard to sigh: ‘I dreamt Newton was dead.’

Abstract It is not hard to imagine that the Knights of the Round Table drank a toast at their high feast. The following problem deals with an unlikely sequel to the toast. Problem 5.1. If each knight touched glasses with every other one of the 150, how many clinks were heard? In this chapter we will find a connection between this problem and the following seemingly disparate matters. In the sixth century B.C., the Pythagoreans discovered how to count the number of objects in triangular arrays of arbitrary size. In his youth, Isaac Newton (1642-1727) discovered the binomial theorem,a method of expanding certain algebraic expressions.

Abstract presentation of Section III of the Principia was completed in Chapter 6. Sections IV and V which follow are of the nature of an intermezzo: in them we are led into the realm of the conic sections that forms the background against which the rest of the play is to be enacted. There is much of interest in these sections. But we shall pass them by since they are not essential to the subsequent developments; and besides there is an excellent account of them by J. J. Milne that is already available (Isaac Newton,1642-1727, a memorial volume, W. J. Greenstreet, London 1927, pp. 96-114).

‘On the nature of stuff’ shows that the ability to control fire and temperature led to the first chemical technologies: the production of pottery from fired clays and tempers, metals, glass, and bitumen products. It goes on to describe the early speculation of matter by Greek philosophers, such as Empedocles and Aristotle, before discussing the history of alchemy in Europe and the Muslim empire. The same synonyms were often used for different substances resulting in confusion and secrecy. It was Isaac Newton (1642–1727) who compiled an index chemicus in an attempt to make sense of alchemical language and allegory. The demise of alchemy, the move from chymistry to chemistry, and the rise of modern chemistry are also considered.