Image via Wikipedia
I was in a debate with cherokee_autumn a couple of weeks back about the difference of scientific theory and scientific law. Many times in order to defend the theory of evolution people point to gravity being a theory. She tweeted the article that I have linked to this post and it does say that Universal Gravity is a theory but then it goes on to say that the law of gravity is shady and has holes. Reading it reminds of bad creationist articles against evolution. I'm embarrassed by those because although I reject macro evolution I think that there should be good reason for rejecting any idea - more than I don't like it or don't understand it. First I must point out that Gravity is not a theory, it's a force. Universal Gravitation is a theory based on observation and I see no reasons why it should be rejected. The article makes a lot of blunders than makes me think the author knows nothing of Physics. I quote the two I find the most offensive here:Even Isaac Newton, said to be the discoverer of gravity, knew there were problems with the theory. He claims to have invented the idea early in his life, but he knew that no mathematician of his day would approve his theory, so he invented a whole new branch of mathematics, called fluxions, just to “prove” his theory. This became calculus, a deeply flawed branch having to do with so-called “infinitesimals” which have never been observed. Then when Einstein invented a new theory of gravity, he, too, used an obscure bit of mathematics called tensors. It seems that every time there is a theory of gravity, it is mixed up with “fringe” mathematics. Newton, by the way, was far from a secular scientist, and the bulk of his writings is actually on theology and Christianity. His dabbling in gravity, alchemy, and calculus was a mere sideline, perhaps an aberration best left forgotten in describing his career and faith in a Creator.
Why is this stupid? Simple. Tensors and Calculus are far from fringe mathematics. This is the basis of what you need to do theoretical Physics. Without them you can't do anything meaningful in Physics.
The theory of gravity violates common sense in many ways. Adherents have a hard time explaining, for instance, why airplanes do not fall. Since anti-gravity is rejected by the scientific establishment, they resort to lots of hand-waving. The theory, if taken seriously, implies that the default position for all airplanes is on the ground. While this is obviously true for Northwest airplanes (relying on “A Wing and a Prayer”), it appears that Jet Blue and Southwest have a superior theory that effectively harnesses forces that overcome so-called gravity.
Those forces are called "lift" and "thrust" combined with gravity and the shape of the wings that keep an airplane in the air. REAL simple Physics I learned in elementary school. I hope that this is a joke article because it really is stupid. Without context and assuming the author is not a moron leads me to the conclusion that the article is attempting to make the point that denying Gravity is like denying evolution. Although I disagree with that conclusion it's either that or the author is completely clueless.
Warning: Gravity is "Only a Theory" by Ellery Schempp
No comments:
Post a Comment