从伽利略到拉普拉斯的第二定律(牛顿的理解)

IF 0.7 2区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Bruce Pourciau
{"title":"从伽利略到拉普拉斯的第二定律(牛顿的理解)","authors":"Bruce Pourciau","doi":"10.1007/s00407-019-00242-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Newton certainly regarded his second law of motion in the <i>Principia </i>as a fundamental axiom of mechanics. Yet the works that came after the <i>Principia,</i> the major treatises on the foundations of mechanics in the eighteenth century—by Varignon, Hermann, Euler, Maclaurin, d’Alembert, Euler (again), Lagrange, and Laplace—do not record, cite, discuss, or even mention the <i>Principia</i>’s statement of the second law. Nevertheless, the present study shows that all of these scientists do in fact assume the principle that the <i>Principia</i>’s second law asserts as a fundamental axiom in their mechanics. (For what that second law asserts, we rely on Newton’s own testimony.) Some, like Varignon and Hermann, assume the axiom implicitly, apparently unaware that any assumption is being made, while others, like Maclaurin and Euler, assume the axiom explicitly, apparently unaware that the assertion assumed is the second law as Newton himself understood it. But in every case these scientists employ the principle asserted by the <i>Principia</i>’s second law <i>fundamentally</i>, unaware that they should be citing <span>Neutonus</span>, <i>Prin., Phil. Nat. Math</i>., Lex II.\n</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50982,"journal":{"name":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00407-019-00242-y","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Principia’s second law (as Newton understood it) from Galileo to Laplace\",\"authors\":\"Bruce Pourciau\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00407-019-00242-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Newton certainly regarded his second law of motion in the <i>Principia </i>as a fundamental axiom of mechanics. Yet the works that came after the <i>Principia,</i> the major treatises on the foundations of mechanics in the eighteenth century—by Varignon, Hermann, Euler, Maclaurin, d’Alembert, Euler (again), Lagrange, and Laplace—do not record, cite, discuss, or even mention the <i>Principia</i>’s statement of the second law. Nevertheless, the present study shows that all of these scientists do in fact assume the principle that the <i>Principia</i>’s second law asserts as a fundamental axiom in their mechanics. (For what that second law asserts, we rely on Newton’s own testimony.) Some, like Varignon and Hermann, assume the axiom implicitly, apparently unaware that any assumption is being made, while others, like Maclaurin and Euler, assume the axiom explicitly, apparently unaware that the assertion assumed is the second law as Newton himself understood it. But in every case these scientists employ the principle asserted by the <i>Principia</i>’s second law <i>fundamentally</i>, unaware that they should be citing <span>Neutonus</span>, <i>Prin., Phil. Nat. Math</i>., Lex II.\\n</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50982,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archive for History of Exact Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s00407-019-00242-y\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archive for History of Exact Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00407-019-00242-y\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archive for History of Exact Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00407-019-00242-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

牛顿当然把《原理》中的第二运动定律视为力学的基本公理。然而,在《原理》之后的著作,即十八世纪关于力学基础的主要论文——瓦里尼翁、赫尔曼、欧拉、麦克劳林、达朗贝尔、欧拉(再次)、拉格朗日和拉普拉斯——并没有记录、引用、讨论甚至提及《原理》对第二定律的陈述。然而,目前的研究表明,所有这些科学家实际上都假设了原理第二定律所断言的原理是他们力学中的一条基本公理。(对于第二定律的断言,我们依赖于牛顿自己的证词。但在每一种情况下,这些科学家都从根本上采用了原理第二定律所断言的原理,没有意识到他们应该引用Neutonus,Prin。,菲尔,自然数学。,Lex II。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Principia’s second law (as Newton understood it) from Galileo to Laplace

Newton certainly regarded his second law of motion in the Principia as a fundamental axiom of mechanics. Yet the works that came after the Principia, the major treatises on the foundations of mechanics in the eighteenth century—by Varignon, Hermann, Euler, Maclaurin, d’Alembert, Euler (again), Lagrange, and Laplace—do not record, cite, discuss, or even mention the Principia’s statement of the second law. Nevertheless, the present study shows that all of these scientists do in fact assume the principle that the Principia’s second law asserts as a fundamental axiom in their mechanics. (For what that second law asserts, we rely on Newton’s own testimony.) Some, like Varignon and Hermann, assume the axiom implicitly, apparently unaware that any assumption is being made, while others, like Maclaurin and Euler, assume the axiom explicitly, apparently unaware that the assertion assumed is the second law as Newton himself understood it. But in every case these scientists employ the principle asserted by the Principia’s second law fundamentally, unaware that they should be citing Neutonus, Prin., Phil. Nat. Math., Lex II.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Archive for History of Exact Sciences
Archive for History of Exact Sciences 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
20.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Archive for History of Exact Sciences casts light upon the conceptual groundwork of the sciences by analyzing the historical course of rigorous quantitative thought and the precise theory of nature in the fields of mathematics, physics, technical chemistry, computer science, astronomy, and the biological sciences, embracing as well their connections to experiment. This journal nourishes historical research meeting the standards of the mathematical sciences. Its aim is to give rapid and full publication to writings of exceptional depth, scope, and permanence.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信