Newton's Inertial motion hoax

The death of Newton's absurd assumption of inertial motion on a straight line:

To formulate [the principle of inertial motion] required a remarkable detachment from the world of experience, for such a motion is nowhere observed, ever, uniform motion in a straight line without any force acting upon the body.

It requires one to envisage a perfectly empty universe, with one sole object moving through space. It would then perform this inertial motion in a straight line. No-one could tell this because there would be no ruler and clock, and if there were, then the motion would no longer be in a straight line, because gravity would make it curve.

I dedicate this quote to all the Newtonian physics teachers still fanatically teaching this absurd notion of inertial motion on a straight line as a law of nature.

Notes:

--- The quote is from Nick Kollerstrom, Isaac Newton: Science's Greatest Fraud, p.70)

Physics has demoted mass 1

I will be writing a series of short comments about this article by Jim Baggott, Physics has demoted mass: modern physics has taught us that mass is not an intrinsic property.

***

What is the main thesis of this article?

It’s this:

Physicists figured that mass is not an intrinsic property of matter. But more importantly, matter does not exist.

But this article has an important problem. The author does hot define the words “matter” and “mass”. So we don’t know what he means when he uses these words.

When the author uses the word “matter” he may mean the absolute indivisible unit assumed to make up all solids. But he may also use the word “matter” colloquially to mean objects that appear as solids to us.

And indeed he uses “matter” in both senses in the article without making explicit which meaning he means. This is important because his arguments are based on exploiting this confusion.

When he uses “matter” as the absolute indivisible unit, or the indivisible “building blocks” of matter, he assumes the doctrine of atomic materialism, the fundamental and sacred doctrine of physics. This has been so since the founding father of physics, The Newton, defined nature to be made of indivisible particles.

Newton’s disciples the physicists continue to believe blindly this doctrine defined by Newton. The atomic materialism is so ingrained in physics that there are physicists who call themselves “particle” physicists. How can a physicist who calls himself a “particle” physicist question the sacred doctrine of atomic materialism?

But particle physics is not fundamental, the true fundamental research is the one that tries to answer the question “Is nature atomic?”

Is the world made of indivisible particles which make up everything around us? No physicist can ask this question.

If we do not assume atomic materialism, that is, if we do not assume a discontinuous nature, we could easily question everything physicists attributed to the concept of mass to save Newton’s authority.

Just by denying Newtonian atomic materialism and by reasoning outside of official physics tropes we easily arrived at idea that mass is a superfluous concept and it is not an intrinsic property of matter because we did not assume matter to begin with.

The author arrives at the same conclusion but he must present several old and discarded models of matter and mass first and then switch to the chemical notion of matter and mass and then switch finally to the fairy tales of the Standard Model to deny the existence of matter and mass. All this happens because he failed to define clearly what he meant by matter and mass. So he fooled us but more importantly he fooled himself.

The lack of proper definitions is a problem here too. The author and the physicists cannot decide if quarks are indivisible spherical “building blocks” of matter or just a label for “quantum field” since quarks are nothing more than oscillations of the quantum field. And quantum fields are not spherical particles.

The Cult of the Vis and the Soul of Newton

I got into a discussion in Twitter about Newton's force with a Newtonian person. Here's a summary of the exchange.

Sabine Hossenfelder wrote how physicists published 500 papers to explain some noise in the data produced at the LHC, a particle accelerator. I commented that this was charlatanism. Someone called Marcos Garcia Ochoa chimed in and wrote:

According to that criterion, Newton was a charlatan because he didn't know how gravity worked.

What Marcos is alluding to is one of the most fundamental propaganda perpetuated by the Cult of Newton. This propaganda was first told by Newton and it's been repeated by his disciples ever since.

Newton claimed to compute planetary orbits by using a quantity he called "force." The defining characteristic of this force is that it acts from a distance and without time passing. This is known as "instantaneous action-at-a-distance." This force defined by Newton acted from a distance (action-at-a-distance) and it acted without time passing (instantaneous). Every sane person --except physicists who blindly worship Newton-- agree that instantaneous action-at-a-distance does not exist in nature.

If Newton is saying that he computed planetary orbits by using action-at-a-distance he is lying because action-at-a-distance does not exist. An example: the Newtonian force residing in the Sun acts intelligently from a distance and computes instantly the mass of the Earth without reaching to the Earth and sends the right amount of force to pull the Earth so that it can describe its orbit. All these happen without time passing. This is how Newton's force works. This is absurd. Unless you blindly believe Newton's authority and accept this absurd force on Newton's word you will deny that such a force exists in nature and can make orbits happen. But Newton needed this force in his System of the World so he claimed to have computed planetary orbits with this absurd force. Newton's propaganda goes like this:

It's true that I don't know how this force works, but I computed planetary orbits by using this force and I got correct results. Therefore, this force must exist in nature, we just don't know how it works. I leave it to the next generations to find out how this force works.

Newton's disciples swallowed this propaganda and immediately started looking for this force by setting up pendulums near mountains and trying to compute the deflection of the mass of the mountain on the pendulum. Of course, they could not find any trace of this absurd force because it does not exist. But since Newton said that this absurd force existed, Newton's disciples invented all kinds of mathematical gimmick to incorporate this force to physics. To this day, physicists write a force term to uphold Newton's authority but then they cancel it before making real calculations. They do this by writing a force term on both sides of an equation.

Look, here's the force, we compute orbits by using force according to Newton

they say, then they cancel force terms. Any term written on both sides of an equation have no effect and it is cancelled. This is how physicists pray and worship their prophet Newton. For physicists, force is Newton's Soul that permeates the entire universe. Well, if not the universe, it is the Soul that permeates entire physics.

I call Newton's bluff. His disciples the physicists cannot question their prophet but I can. I say that there is no instantaneous action-at-a-distance in nature therefore Newton's force does not exist in nature. It doesn't exist therefore it cannot be used to compute orbits. It's not that we don't know how it works, no, there is nothing to work, because force does not exist. But Newton says that he used this absurd force to compute planetary orbits.

How can that be? Simple. Since this force does not exist in nature Newton could not have used it to compute orbits. And indeed, we open Newton's famous book, we look at his computations of planetary orbits and we see that he is not using a term for force. You can check this for yourself. Newton is lying. He is not using force but he says he does.

Newton's disciples believed Newton and made this absurd force the fundamental interaction in physics and in nature. I realize that discussing force with a physicist is like discussing Christ with the Pope. A physicist will have in his toolbox dozens of sophistical arguments to save this force and Newton's authority and he will dismiss any arguments you throw at him. He will say "force is a field"; he will say "it's not important what Newton did. Now we know better." He will say "forget Newton. Gravity is explained by Einstein." The Cult of the Vis will always win. The way the Pope will always win.

Notlar:

--- Twitter thread mentioned in the article. Sabine Hossenfelder's blog.

--- Newton's original computations in the Principia. You can confirm that he does not use a force term.

Güç: Newton Kültü'nün ruhu

Şöyle bir mantık yürütüyorum:

Newton "çekim gücü" diye bir etki tanımlamış. Fizik ders kitaplarında bu güç F=ma dile tanımlanır. Bu güç, Newton'dan sonra onun müritleri tarafından bu şekilde tanımlanmıştır yoksa Newton'un kendi yazdıkları arasında böyle bir tanımlama yoktur çünkü Newton denklemlerle ve eşitlik işareti ile çalışmamıştır. Newton sadece oranlarla çalışmıştır. Zaten bu çifte bir tanımlamadır. Hem gücü hem de kütleyi tanımlar. Yani Newton kültünün bayraklarından biridir. Semboldür. Gösteriştir. Bir işe yaramaz. Neden?

Çünkü Newton'un tanımladığı ve güç dediği bu etkinin en temel özelliği zaman geçmeden etki etmesidir. Yani Newton gücü fizikte kabul edilmiş olan bütün koruma kanunlarını ihlal eden bir etkidir. Termodinamik kanunlarına aykırıdır.

Fakat en önemlisi, bu Newton gücü zaman geçmeden etki eden bir etki olarak tanımlanmıştır. Doğada zaman geçmeden etki eden bir şey yoktur ve olamaz. Böyle süpernatürel ve nasıl etki ettiği bilinmeyen etkilere okült etkiler diyoruz. Ama Newton gücü okült bile değildir, absürttür. Gizli değil, imkansızdır. İmkansız olduğu için de Newton gücü diye bir şey doğada yoktur diyoruz. 

Mesela, güneşte hazır bulunan Newton gücünün dünyayı yörüngesinde tuttuğu varsayılıyor. Nasıl? Güneşte bulunan Newton gücü, güneşten yola çıkıyor 1 astronomi birimi yol katediyor ama süre zarfında hiç zaman geçmemiş oluyor.

Işık bile güneşten dünyaya 4 dakikada geliyor. Newton gücü sıfır saniyede geliyor.

Sadece bu değil. Newton gücü aynı zamanda akıllı da. Güneşten dünyaya şöyle bir bakıyor dünyanın kütlesini anında hesaplıyor ve dünyayı yörüngede tutacak kadar gücü yolluyor. Dünya da aynı şeyi yapıyor böylece dünya yörüngesinde dolanıp duruyor.

Ve kendilerine fizikçi diyen insanlar bu absürd güce sadece şeyhleri Newton dedi diye inanıyorlar. Bu Newton gücü dediğimiz şey bütün evreni saran Newton'un ruhudur. Ben söylemiyorum bunu. Newton'un çağdaşı Huygens söylemiş.

Peki nasıl oluyor da kendilerine fizikçi diyen ve koruma kanunlarına inanan bu sağduyulu insanlar bütün koruma kanunlarını kıran bu Newton gücünü bir istisna olarak kabul ediyorlar ve doğada böyle absürd bir etkinin olabileceğine inanıyorlar?

Nasıl oluyor da böyle fizik dışı bir ruhu fiziksel bir güç olarak kabul edebiliyorlar?

Nasıl oluyor da bu absürd güce inanmadığımız için bize deli diyorlar ama kendileri deli saçması bu güce inanıyorlar ve üstelik fiziğin en temel değeri yapıyorlar?

 Newton gücü diye bir şey doğada yoktur çünkü doğada zaman geçmeden etki eden bir şey yoktur.

Notlar:

--- Newton Kültü ile ilgili diğer yazılarım.