>Aristotle argues against the indivisibles of Democritus (which differ considerably from the historical and the modern use of the term "atom"). As a place without anything existing at or within it, Aristotle argued against the possibility of a vacuum or void. Because he believed that the speed of an object's motion is proportional to the force being applied (or, in the case of natural motion, the object's weight) and inversely proportional to the viscosity of the medium, he reasoned that objects moving in a void would move indefinitely fast – and thus any and all objects surrounding the void would immediately fill it. The void, therefore, could never form.
>or, in the case of natural motion, the object's weight the object's weight is a force
Mason Wilson
You are in good company friend. People thought everythng aristotle said was correct for almost 2000 years, these dead souls will surely provide you with the discourse you desire.
Josiah Lewis
Maybe he was right? What quantity has a moving object related to one that is still? Velocity and motion yes, but what really is are those?
Luis Miller
Displacement, or change. According to Aristotle, a piece of paper and a crumbled piece of paper should fall at the same velocity, but this is not true!
Carter Campbell
...
Mason Garcia
Is this bait? I remember seeing this a couple of weeks ago, but....are you being serious?
Nathaniel Edwards
Right about what? Everything? I think you have too much faith in the ancient dead, they have just as much an ability to be wrong, often even moreso.
Parker Rivera
What really makes those displacements? Take a still picture of those objects. Why the other moves and other stays still at the next frame?
Nicholas Bell
What is a still picture? Define being still.
Jayden Thompson
Think about photons. They just move constant speed, never stopping. Even when scattered, they don't lose speed. They are like hi describes them, moving fast, filling spaces.
Cameron Taylor
The quantity related to position is actually partly qualitative because it depends on a fixed point in space as a reference. Once this point is established as zero or any other number, metrics are used to measure an objects change of position using mathematics.
Jason Long
Their registered positions r at a known time t, i.e r(t)
Josiah Peterson
But WHY the other particle moves?
Juan Wright
Are you asking why particles would fill the void? I would not know. I don't know if they even do fill the void without an impetus.
Carter Evans
Positions as measured from where? What is time? Does it matter how we measure it?
Thomas Cooper
>ancient greeks
DUDE CIRCLES AND STRAGHT LINES LMAO
Also the guy said that the speed at which objects fall is proportional to their mass which I don't know how anyone ever believed.
Anthony Nguyen
It's a pretty common sense assumption. Heavy shit falls faster than light shit. Children instinctively believe this until they are educated otherwise
Daniel Baker
> What is time? pic related A still picture would be the subspace of the Universe containing simultaneous events
Luis Howard
image fell off
Aaron Jackson
>Children instinctively believe this until they are educated otherwise
I mean sure, and if you never looked closely at it I'm sure it would be the first assumption I'd make as well.
However, there undoubtedly have been clever people and scientists around for a long time, and it's quite clear if you drop something like a pebble and a fist-sized rock from your hand that the times they take to fall down are not different by the same factor that their masses are.
Gabriel Morales
If it really were so clear, it wouldn't have taken over a thousand years, nearly two thousand, for people to finally debunk Aristotle's lamebrained physics. It seems silly in hindsight, but don't you think it's odd that it took so long for people to figure things out? Clearly it wasn't so obvious. I mean, they don't have stopwatches. They didn't have the mindset that leads people to do repeated, controlled experiments anyways, because 'science' as a philosophy wasn't firmly established, and even if they could do experiments, communication was difficult due to lack of printing press.
Brandon Walker
>isn't it strange how ancient powers used to horde and filter information to their benefit?
Cooper Rogers
>Clearly it wasn't so obvious >they don't have stopwatches
But you don't even need stopwatches to see that. You can drop two rocks with a weight ratio of 1:10 (you don't even need to measure this precisely) and their fall times are just not different by a factor anywhere near 10. I wonder if I'm misunderstanding something about Aristotelian physics (quite possible, I never looked much into it) or did they have some way to explain around this?
Even without a mindset for repeated experiment or a developed scientific method, surely such an observation must have been made time and again?
Obviously rocks fall at the same rate because rocks are composed of the same substance. If you compare a rock to a feather, you will notice that they will fall at very different rates, because they are made of dissimilar substances.
Blake Carter
So this is Veeky Forums's version of flat earthers.
Cooper Campbell
>tfw can't inscribe a heptagon in a circle with a compass
Sebastian Brooks
Drop them in vacuum.
Easton Kelly
Vacuums cannot exist because particles rush in to fill voids. If you had a total void (a vacuum), particles would rush in at an infinite speed, thus with an infinity energy.
Adrian James
>formalism >uncertainty
Andrew Sullivan
I know it's a troll pic, but modern science uses rational and empirical methods while ancient greeks did not have any and were simply looking at stuff without touching it.
Dominic Rodriguez
unless you have particles that are bound in place, like say a solid, and evacuate the majority of the air through some method of work like a pump.
