Hi Lucy-Pevensie
"Rule III.
The qualities of bodies, which admit neither [intensification] nor remission of degrees, and which are found to belong to all bodies within the reach of our experiments, are to be esteemed the universal qualities of all bodies whatsoever." Newton
http://strangebeautiful.com/other-texts/newton-principia-rules-reasoning.pdf
Thanks for those rules.
Newton was very honest with science. He admitted he had no real idea what gravity is, only how to model it. This equation was the first universal law, meaning it seemed to fit all that is seen in the universe. Einstein dove into what gravity is, which makes it perhaps the greatest theory of all science.
What is more relevant is that it introduced the so-called 'scientific method' which asserts that experimental sciences scale up to solar system research and Earth sciences like biology, geology and climate (Rule III).
Right, the scientific method presents a way to address all phenomena that allows measurements. We need philosophy and religion, or both, to help with areas that have little or no means of objective measurements.
It's the scientific method that refutes a flat earth hypothesis with many different lines of evidence, and with zillions of tests. GPS (satellite tracking) uses both special relativity and general relativity to get the accuracy measured in inches, but they offer no hope for a FE idea.
A whole host of other evidence exists (e.g. NASA) that takes the FE model to a region that, IMO, no religious person should be found --- the town of Sillyville. St. Augustine warned about the consequences of views that become laughable. It was Thomas Aquinas that spent about 3 years infusing Aristotle's views into Christianity, which includes a spherical Earth for a center of the universe. The pendulum swung too far, however, and it became dogma as per the Council of Trent, IIRC. The tenets of Christianity should not include science arguments. This is how the Church erred in punishing Galileo to a permanent house arrest. The relative motion of the Earth was held too closely as dogma, but Galileo was a believer and held to what we would consider to be tenets today, I assume.
The idea is that predictable behavior of objects at a human level scale up to astronomical predictions and how Newton tried to merge this approach with the works of Copernicus, Galileo and Kepler and especially the latter.
Yes, his inverse square law, along with his calculus, greatly advanced Kepler's elliptical model.
It is rare that I encounter any person willing to inspect what we inherit as a doctrine and a subculture, but it has a total influence on how people appreciate their terrestrial and celestial surroundings.
We all tend to believe what we want to belief. The scientific method, with honesty and reason (Godly gifts), can make a difference over time. This is true, however, where only objective claims are applicable.
It surfaces here in the awful poll as to whether the Earth is round/flat if you know what I mean.
Here's a larger public poll regarding several issues. It shows that about 11% (5% for men, 14% for women) think a FE may be true.
FDU Poll: 2020 Election Conspiracy Believers More Likely to Embrace Bigfoot, Flat Earth | Fairleigh Dickinson University
