Newton established the foundation of the scientific method used today, the "combination of ideas (hypotheses), observation and experiment" (p.102). Newton's words in response to the letter from Gaston Pardies that plenty of people have already quoted (p. 104) expands this method and its importance. I thought it was fantastic just how Newton came to his conclusion that white light was not 'pure' at all. The experiment that is explained on p.103 stood out to me as a great example of how Newton saw science. Adding that second upside down triangular wedge of glass next to the prism highlighted to me exactly Newton's approach to science.
Where Newton and Maxwell applied mathematics to science as a key element to their methods, Faraday's theory of 'lines of magnetic force' showed a different approach. By believing his theory to be true, he then came up with the idea that 'ether' did not actually exist. Then the combination of both Maxwell's and Faraday's ideas on page 112 connected all three of them more.
I have to agree for now with Dylan that I do think that the work of Newton, Maxwell and Faraday greatly affected the answer to "what is light?". Like many people have said, the experiments and paths that were followed down in search for an answer led to a new scientific method, a new telescope design, removing ether from science, understanding magnetism and electricity more, and to better understand how the universe works. Because according to NEwton, "the behavior of everything in the Universe is predictable" (p.105) when we have a set of 'simple laws' to understand this 'clockwork Universe'. But these laws and models change as new discoveries are made and our idea of science and reality change.
Joined: 18 Feb 2011 Posts: 27 Location: United States of America
Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 7:46 pm Post subject:
To answer Tess and Kate’s question, I think that the reason “what is light” is so important because it changed the ways scientist thought about science. And, the start of the “new science” was from Newton. (Correct me if it’s not true.) Therefore, I think that is the reason that the question has such a big impact to the question that we are answering. And, I totally agree with your point that we are hearing science from a peculiar group, but the scientists before them were also elite and high- educated thinkers, so I think they are comparable. Also, I think for me, the question that we are trying to answer is a big picture of science- how it has changed because of the discovery of light.
(Those are my understanding of the reading. If you disagree please tell me...so we can make a conversation)
Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2011 7:52 pm Post subject: Shari's Reply
The evidence that light is a particle is shown in Newton's study of a beam where he finds out the way light is spread out slightly with different colors spreading out as well. I think Young bridges the gap between Newton's theory and Grimaldi's theory. I was glad to see a conjoining force. The evidence that waves are a particle is definitely shown in experiments.
Faraday and Maxwell were more about magnetism & force while Newton was more about light and waves. Faraday used lectures and physical experiments, due to his lack of mathematical skills and Maxwell's approach to science used more mathematical analogies and equations. Newton used more experiments in order to understand his theory.
The way Newton addressed the question of “what is light?” changed science because it basically changed the way people thought of light. He turned Aristotle’s idea that white light was pure on its side. I honestly had no idea what Faraday and Maxwell were talking about so I couldn’t really come up with any ways that they changed science. I hope someone else has some insight into this.
To answer what Sonya said, I think Faraday and Maxwell changed science in their approach and the way they approached science. They showed that several disciplines are connected to each other and that everything doesn't have to be experimental. I don't know if this helps you.
As Tess and Kate said, Newton and Maxwell significantly dedicated to the progress of science, but that dedication is limited in light and magnetism. I’m having hard time understanding what they changed in the disciples of ‘science,’ not the ‘science of light’. How was science before them? I mean, what are the disciples of science? Surely, Newton came up with the ‘scientific method,’ the way how we write our lab report. Even the writer of our reading praises this as ‘This is what science is all about’ (104). Don’t you think this might narrowed down/ limited what science is?
Speaking of Newton’s method of defining light, he had experimental approach, using two prisms and finding that the white light contains the combination of colors. Faraday also approached to the question experimentally, with the connection with electricity and magnetism. Both Newton and Faraday seem visual-oriented scientist to me. Maxwell, like Faraday, concentrated on electricity and magnetism, mentioning light of its wave velocity, but the difference is that he took mathematical approach without visual experiment.
Newton fundamentally changed the discipline of science. His theories “showed that the Universe obeys precise rules, or laws.” He also “established the first scientific paradigm or model of reality,” that “showed that the Universe obeys precise rules, or laws.” He was also the first to adequately show a scientific method, on that could “establish those properties by experiments and then to proceed more slowly to hypotheses for the explantion of them” He could test and analyze his theories through the use of prisms and manipulating them. He could make science easy for people to follow, in a way that still proved light’s existence and how it works. He said, “the fact that relatively simple laws intelligible to human brains are all that is required to understand what makes the Universe tick.”
Farraday lacked the mathematical skills to prove a lot of his experiments, so he used various alternatives to make his cases. For example, He was able see Science artistically, rather than arithmetically. He could analyze science in common man terms, making it easier for individuals to become closer to the science itself.
Maxwell could prove that, “images conjured up by Faraday did accuraltely discribe the way forces between electrically charged or magnetized objects worked.” Every problem involving electricity and magnetism could be solved by Maxwell’s equations. He used mathematics in connecting electromagnetism to light. what we can see must be true. He also pleaded that the “medium (ether) would transit waves at the speed of light.” This was not included in any of Farraday’s models nor did equations of Maxwell’s kind.
As for the project, we as people, can profoundly change science through visual aids, even if it cannot mathematically explain “what is light?” There is no right and wrong as to what is it, as we have seen in history with Newton, Farraday, and Maxwell. What we can do though, is make it clearer for people to communicate what is known about light.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2
Page 2 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
