this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2024
965 points (97.2% liked)

Memes

45687 readers
464 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 46 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 149 points 8 months ago (2 children)

To be fair, if you don't know about how gravity works, you would just hold up a rock, drop it, and say obviously things can move without someone moving it.

[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world 72 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

And that objects in motion will stay in motion, but our experience with friction tells us otherwise. Ask any kid and they'll say from intuition that the object will stop

[–] Wanderer@lemm.ee 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No one really understands anything about Physics until you hear Fenyman explain it.

https://youtu.be/Ktt5VVEC8XA

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 2 points 8 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://piped.video/Ktt5VVEC8XA

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 31 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Mystic forces surround us!

[–] DmMacniel@feddit.de 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Clearly it's buoyancy and something something equilibrium.

[–] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 21 points 8 months ago (1 children)

You mean luminiferous aether, right?

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Oh shit you know my guy Robert Hooke? He's got the best shit this side of London.

[–] SexualPolytope@lemmy.sdf.org 78 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I think the more interesting thing is that a moving object will keep moving at constant speed unless a force is applied to it.

[–] LemmyKnowsBest@lemmy.world 33 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Like, um, the friction against the ground that the object is moving on. Isaac Newton observed commonplace phenomena then figured out the scientific reasoning behind the phenomena then put it all into words that we now quote as time-tested & true scientific dogma.

[–] InputZero@lemmy.ml 15 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Then Einstein comes in and says everything is moving at a constant spacetime velocity, and that friction isn't a real force.

[–] Perfide@reddthat.com 15 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Friction is real, it's the "force" of gravity that is an illusion.

[–] InputZero@lemmy.ml 3 points 8 months ago

True, like any good physicist, which I am not, I skipped the explanation of physics world. I was trying to be more funny than clever.

[–] pancakes@sh.itjust.works 14 points 8 months ago

Einstein was a bit of a bad boy

[–] General_Effort@lemmy.world 9 points 8 months ago

Gravity, not friction!

[–] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 58 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

It was his math contributions people liked. Particularly his invention of calculus which could be used to solve a plethora of unsolved math problems. It's not because he said things fell.

[–] TheBat@lemmy.world 23 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Isaac Newton invented meth????

[–] Eiim@lemmy.blahaj.zone 17 points 8 months ago (1 children)

On the other hand, spontaneous generation was very much still a thing at this point, so a lot of the basic rules of the world around us were really not worked out yet

[–] EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

it was not discredited until the work of the French chemist Louis Pasteur and the Irish physicist John Tyndall in the mid-19th century.

There was a post on lemmy the other day about things that get their names from real people. I forgot that "pasteurize" was also one

[–] nonfuinoncuro@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

gerrymander is always a weird one, I dunno if flanderization counts but I'll just leave it here

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

Defini-diddilly does, Lemmarino!

[–] Xtallll@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I love that Newton had to invent calculus twice, because he was trying to teach it to someone else and they weren't getting it, so Isaac got frustrated and threw the only copy of his notes into the lit fireplace.

[–] dutchkimble@lemy.lol 14 points 8 months ago

It turned out in his favour, because he then discovered that if you throw things in a fire, they burn.

[–] original_reader@lemm.ee 49 points 8 months ago (1 children)

TBF, that's actually a pretty profound insight.

Most, if not all, of us take certain concepts for granted until someone points out that it's more complex than we realise. Examples like Dark Energy & Matter, entropy, the placebo effect, the nature of mathematical objects, etc. are proof of this.

[–] niartenyaw@midwest.social 19 points 8 months ago

we also live in a world which has now known that premise and used it for 300 years, which makes it seem much more trivial than it was at the time.

[–] WhereGrapesMayRule@lemmy.world 35 points 8 months ago

It's not unless. It's until, which has more implications.

[–] Faresh@lemmy.ml 26 points 8 months ago

That's not Newton's contribution. Aristotle already said that an object only moves if a force acts upon it.

[–] FriendBesto@lemmy.ml 18 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

In fairness, at the time, many Europeans believed in faries and other creatures, including these guys:

https://www.sciencephoto.com/media/720095/view/mythical-horned-beasts-17th-century

[–] SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml 15 points 8 months ago (2 children)

So, not much has changed then....

[–] ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com 7 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yeah interesting thought there actually. In absolute numbers I wager more people believe in mythical beings of some form today in Europe than the 1700s. But as a share of the total population it's going to be a lot lower, of course.

[–] SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago

Is it going to be a lower percentage of the total population though? There's a lot about ye olde days that kinda gets generalised, and hand-waved. Like people's ability to read in medieval times. Sure it wasn't as prevalent as today, but reading was probably a lot more common than most people think.

As for belief in mythical beings, who knows, religious belief was a lot stronger in the 1700s, but that doesn't necessarily mean everyone believed in the fae.

[–] dudinax@programming.dev 6 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Gibson said "The future is here, it's just not evenly distributed."

The future was there with Newton, but it's still not evenly distributed 400 years later.

[–] SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago
[–] Smokeydope@lemmy.world 16 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Gödel: "Using logic ive shown that there will always be true statements can not be proven/falsifiable within any formal system of logic"

Mathematicians:

[–] WldFyre@lemm.ee 4 points 8 months ago

Is that one as intuitive, though? I haven't ever heard an intuitive explanation for it.

[–] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 14 points 8 months ago (1 children)

"Your Grace, he has sinned against the church!"

[–] splatt9990@lemmy.ml 1 points 8 months ago

If anything was going to get Newton in trouble with the Church, it would have been his lifelong obsession with alchemy, not his three laws.

[–] hperrin@lemmy.world 8 points 8 months ago

This actually wasn’t obvious at all. If I let go of an apple in midair, it falls. Why? Nothing appeared to be acting on it. The “common sense” explanation is that things naturally fall. Their “default” action is to move toward the earth. That’s why there are explanations from ancient myths about the sun and stars being “hung” in the sky. Cause otherwise, they would fall to earth too, right? Everything does.

What Newton did was to show that there is a force acting on the apple, and without that force, it wouldn’t move. He also came up with an equation that could predict what that force would be between any two objects at any distance, and what motion or lack of motion would result from that force.

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 8 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Xenophon of Athens: he who talks shit will therefore get hit.

[–] MeetInPotatoes@lemmy.ml 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I prefer the biblical version:

"Hear ye, hear ye, if he who is not humbled before the Lord shall fucketh around, surely I tell you that he shall findeth out."

-DudeYou'reOntoMe 33:16 (Lebron James version)

[–] jaybone@lemmy.world 6 points 8 months ago

Can someone put this guy next to monkey Jesus?

[–] TurboHarbinger@feddit.cl 6 points 8 months ago

This is so bad.

[–] Jeom@lemmy.world 5 points 8 months ago

its like how the idea of putting one number in front of another for a tens or hundreds figure seems so obvious but took forever to invent

[–] MeetInPotatoes@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 months ago

Yeah, it really feels like every toddler figures this out for themselves. He just said it succinctly.