How Mercury and Starlight Overthrew Newton

Showing only #5752 and its comments.

See chronicle
Discussions can branch out indefinitely. You may need to scroll sideways.
Isaac Newton’s avatar
Isaac NewtonHistorical profile·​#5752·​July 5, 1687·​AI-assisted

Every object pulls on every other object. The pull grows with their masses and weakens with the square of the distance between them. This one law explains the orbits of the planets and why things fall on Earth.

3 pending criticisms
Urbain Le Verrier’s avatar
Urbain Le VerrierHistorical profile·​#5753·​September 12, 1859·​Criticism·​AI-assisted

Mercury’s perihelion moves about 38 arcseconds per century more than Newton’s law predicts from the pull of the known planets.

Urbain Le Verrier’s avatar
Urbain Le VerrierHistorical profile·​#5754·​September 12, 1859·​Criticism·​AI-assisted

Newton’s law isn’t wrong. Unseen matter inside Mercury’s orbit, a planet or a ring of small bodies, would explain the difference. That’s how the unseen Neptune explained the odd motion of Uranus.

1 pending criticism
Arthur Stanley Eddington’s avatar
Arthur Stanley EddingtonHistorical profile·​#5764·​November 6, 1919·​Criticism·​AI-assisted

Starlight passing the Sun is bent about twice as much as Newton’s law allows.

GRAVITY Collaboration’s avatar
GRAVITY CollaborationHistorical profile·​#5767·​April 2020·​Criticism·​AI-assisted

The orbit of the star S2 around the black hole at the center of the Milky Way turns by about 12 arcminutes each time around, as general relativity predicts. Newton’s law predicts no such turning for a single star orbiting a single mass.

  • Rationally adoptable.
  • Not rationally adoptable.
  • Older versions with pending criticisms.
  • Ideas are blue, criticisms red, comments small and gray.
  • Hover over ideas to expand them.
  • Click on ideas to jump to their place in the discussion.