Your message was right in that one must resist the temptation to be a rebel (i.e. question the authority of a subject, and Newton and Einsteins are authorities in their field) until one is well steeped in the subject. I just wanted to point out the mistake in the chronological order.

If you are a math major, then I am sure you understand the difference between having an idea or a hunch and proving it rigorously. I am sure Newton had a good intuition, and knew lots of tricks in solving mathematically tricky problems. But Newtonian calculus (actually, it is yet to be settled whether Leibnitz or Newton invented calculus. The s-like integral sign and d/dx like derivative sign are contribution of Leibnitz, where as dot (.) sign above dependent variable when we calculate derivative with respect to time is due to Newton, but you should borrow a book and go over the history of controversy and how these things settled yourself as Sajha couldn't be the right place for all that) was also anticipated by a lot of people. Ujjain based mathematicians of first millennium were able to predict solar and lunar eclipse (considerable prestige was attached in being able to predict those date, as Hindu Mela, and festivals were organized around them) almost a year in advance (Hindu calendars used to be made around Magh the previous year. Without a good knowledge of ordinary differential calculus, they wouldn't have been able to predict the date of eclipses a year in advance).

The crux is yes, our ancestors were as smart as us given what knowledge they had at their hand, and some of them were supersmart, and may have anticipated things coming in the future. What Laplace and Fourier did was they formalized the Newtonian hunches, (and defined other properties) if Newton 'knew' them as you say you read elsewhere. Anticipating something, whether the fact that robots can perform manual labor or that humanity can cure cancer one day, is different from actually doing it:)

===

Mech, hope you are not trying to justify what you did. What you did, if you did it, is the most dishonorable thing to do. We come from a country which is so poor, and lots of villages in our country don't have basic health services. To lie to cheat government out of some money is a shame. No one should be given a single penny to do weird researches. If you have to lie, lie so that our villagers can have a better life.

The job of a researcher is not to attempt to get money from the government by using his sophistry. Any  one who wants to do research must do so , at first, by using the means that he has. I may have a good hunch that I can make a mechanical vehicle that can take me to an unnamed star, (and to make it attractive, let me claim the star has almost inexhaustible deposit of gold which if I succeed Nepal can monopolize on), does this mean govt should give me money to do such weird research? No.

Last edited: 21-Jul-10 05:04 PM

Last edited: 21-Jul-10 05:06 PM