No valid explanation existed for why objects stopped moving over time before newtonian mechanics

>no valid explanation existed for why objects stopped moving over time before newtonian mechanics
>people literally thought that rocks were sentient and got tired over time as they stopped rolling down a hill

jesus christ. if it weren't for this guy would we still be thinking like this? you're telling me the gap between aristotle and newton wasn't touched by ANYONE regarding mechanical motion? humanity really is fucked if we don't properly cultivate geniuses. How did nobody stop to think about how forces could be involved? is the idea that objects stay in motion unless acted upon so odd? that the ground acted upon said rocks via friction?

Why do most people fail to let go of their intuition for a more tangible insight?

Attached: newton+fin+de+los+tiempos[1].jpg (520x290, 18K)

I don't know what it's called but I remember hearing or reading somewhere that our primitive brains have built-in theories to describe how the world works and the idea that inanimate objects were drawn to a location it was destined for is something we were "born with" and this is how we would think if it weren't for some people being curious enough to actually test these preconceived predictions. I think this is probably why statistics and probability seem so counterintuitive as well. As primates we just needed some basic understanding of what was around us so we could interact with the world and make basic predictions of the consequences of our actions. We didn't need to know the actual truth behind these phenomenon because you could get food just as easily with these more basic viewpoints of the world.

because you don't know taht much of history

>never heard of Galileo, Archimedes, etc etc etc

they explained the paths objects took but not why.

there are many assumptions we are making today that will be equally ridiculous in the future

I'm not sure about the "equally".

I think we'll look pretty stupid when we realize all the string theory shit was wrong.

Who says he is right?

>is the idea that objects stay in motion unless acted upon so odd

It's not and Newton didn't even come up with it. It was a much older Scholastic idea.

>people literally thought that rocks were sentient and got tired over time as they stopped rolling down a hill
I really doubt this. Everyone has an intuitive understanding of how falling things behave. It's when natural philosophers tried to introduce an explanation and fit that into a larger scheme that stuff started to get wonky. They just either didn't have a mathematical description of it, or mistaken ones.

>humanity really is fucked if we don't properly cultivate geniuses
Unless superintelligent AI is successfully built

Attached: 961c0d1f3b0a67fcd121f552bdcb9db0.jpg (2250x858, 402K)

Spacetime seems like the much more obvious bullshit-theory.

But we're not heavily invested in string theory currently. It's not the prevailing theory.

They thought force was proportional to velocity, not acceleration, an idea going back to Aristotle. It makes sense if you forget that friction is also a force. Newton's insight was to realise that forces in the cosmos were the same as those on earth, which could only be realised post-kepler once goofiness like epicycles had been removed from the astronomy of Ptolemy, Copernicus etc

Force and momentum are still related to each other, and people to this day still confuse them

Medieval mechanics were pretty sophisticated, and they made some sophisticated mills that functioned on water and animal power. Not to mention siege machines, locks, doors, elevators. So if you count kinematics as mechanical motion, a lot of research was done. They were just lacking the kinetics.

There was a valid explanation, Aristotles just believed there was no real vaccum in physical reality, which is true anyway.

It's ridiculous to see people thinking ancient cities could build ships and cars, and not know about friction and drag.

brainlet detected

Geniuses are usually white cis men, so cultivating geniuses is just a codeword for granting white people more privileges. We should focus on troubled minorities who have hard time finishing school and have to struggle with algebra or geometry (which were proven racist and not inclusive enough), and not some wealthy white pricks doing their elitist inventions

Force is the derivate of momentum.
Momentum changes by a rate of its force, so they're a little more than "related" I would say.

gravity doesn't even exist

What do you call the attractive force between masses?

fat acceptance progressing towards it's logical conclusion.

Aristotle wasn't that dense, it all came to a geocentric model, were the earth was some sort of vacuum that pulled shit to it's core.

>tl;dr inheritance of ideas and thoughts
Oh wow gollee gee it sure is amazing that humans are born with ideas and thoughts about the function of the world before they even experience it.
My goodness if only we inherited language skills

If it wasn't Newton it would have been someone else who discovered these laws.

>what is Galileo's inclined plane
>what is Descartes' principle of conservation of motion
"If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants."

Everyone in the past said the same thing as you

>why were people so dumb hundreds of years ago
>if i was born then, I would have figured all this stuff out easily

there was aristotelic physics i think. If im not mestaken the greek thought that to keep an object in motion it should have some force applied all the time.

rocks are sentient. newton didnt know what gravity is, just the effect

ebony magazine is at a different url

isn't everything we observe just an effect?

People didn't think that rocks intelligently moved around, they knew forces were involved, they just didn't understand them. They were still throwing rocks to hunt and fight.

I don't think so. Medieval engineers used algebra and predict the trajectories of catapults and other siege weapons.

People knew practical physics and understood concepts like gravity, momentum, ect they just didn't have a unified theory.

This. The closest thing to what OP alludes to is varying forms of animism. Which were definitely present thousands of years ago, often alongside polytheism. But this was a matter of worldview, of the essence and meaning of things in the world, they didn't think they were sentient.

Everything that is moving is not really moving

if i wave my hand back and forth and flex my bicep, are they not moving? my muscles move, the blood in my veins move, but for some reason people didn't understand why for thousands of years. was energy not mathematically defined then?

It moves based on your point of reference but the world is in fact frozen and the localized phenomenon you described is void from a cosmic or quantum point of reference

>>people literally thought that rocks were sentient and got tired over time as they stopped rolling down a hill
That's not what they thought, ye brainlet.