Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Gold and Silver Juniors, Mid-tiers and Producers -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (14135)	6/22/2006 10:30:30 AM
From: ralfph	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 78416

Newton was a relative of mine. The guy would lecture to an empty room. Not a soul in it but old Issac would be standing there talking and writing on the blackboard.

To: koan who wrote (14135)	6/22/2006 10:57:50 AM
From: E. Charters	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78416

Newton died they think in part from poisoning by inhaling metal vapour from experiments he did in chemistry. He did not invent calculus, but improved its use and its notation. Elements of calculus were used by previous mathematicians, and also used in parallel by Leibniz, who did much more in the development of that branch of analysis than Newton. There are those who feel that Leibniz's approach was superior to Newton's. The equations of motion can be derived from Algebra as well, although a people feel that his use of differentials is very handy. Newton's contributions to science were very basic and profound in that he, like Einstein, proposed a complete or very nearly complete physical system that models the nature of observed phenomona and developed the mathematical tools that describe it fairly exactly. He anticipated the investigation of the very nature of matter and energy and the way in which they may relate, but the world would have to wait for more investigation into electro-magnetism and energy and the mathematics of these areas to advance science more. Some scientists I believe who have perhaps not received the recognition that they deserve in more modern times, who did similar and in some way equally profound work , are Dalton, Gauss, Fourier, DeBroglie, Mosley, Thompson (Kelvin), Dirac, Maxwell, Faraday, Gibbs, Lorentz, Rutherford, Pauling and Bohr. Of these, I think Fourier, Maxwell and Gibbs may come closest to the basic, and all embracing synthesis that Newton achieved. We are running out of Giants. They are lost it appears in the political world of University funding. EC<:-}