isaac newton Archives - New Historian

Churchill “With hundreds of thousands of nebulae, each containing thousands of millions of suns, the odds are enormous there must be immense numbers which possess planets whose circumstances would not render life impossible.” wrote Churchill in the essay, entitled ‘Are We Alone In The Universe?’ “I am not so immensely impressed by the success we are making of our civilisation here that I am prepared to think we are the only spot in this immense universe which contains living, thinking creatures.” This is far from the first time Churchill has been associated with extra-terrestrial life. Papers released by the National Archives in 2010 alleged that Churchill had ordered a reported encounter between an RAF plane and a UFO over southern England covered-up, for fear of the mass panic it could cause in the the tense wartime environment. Although the evidence backing up this supposed cover-up is largely anecdotal, it’s nevertheless inspired some conspiracy theorists to speculate on just how much Churchill knew about extra-terrestrials. During his second term as Prime Minister in 1952, Churchill ordered an official investigation into UFO sightings over England. That report concluded most UFO sightings were misidentifications in no need of further examination. Douglas MacArthur A hero of the Pacific theatre during the Second World War, General Douglas MacArthur later suffered the disgrace of being relieved of his command after criticising President Truman’s handling of the Korean War. The controversial military leader also held highly controversial views on extra-terrestrial life. “…the next war will be an interplanetary war. The nations of the earth must someday make a common front against attack by people from other planets. The politics of the future will be cosmic, or interplanetary”, he said publicly in 1955, on one of several occasions he openly discussed the possibility of humans coming into contact with Aliens. MacArthur’s high rank in the military meant he was likely privy to a host of classified information, with some speculating this would have extended to UFO sightings. There is little evidence to actually corroborate the belief, however. Ronald Reagan and Jimmy Carter Two US presidents were both incredibly open about their interests in UFOs. While on the campaign trail, Jimmy Carter promised to make public all documents on UFOs. “I don’t laugh at people anymore when they say they’ve seen UFOs. I’ve seen one myself.” Ronald Reagan meanwhile, claimed to have seen a UFO while governor of California. As his aircraft approached for a landing at Bakersfield California in 1974, the future president supposedly saw a mysterious glowing object in the sky and ordered the aircraft pilot to follow it. “We followed it for several minutes. It was a bright white light.We followed it to Bakersfield, and all of a sudden to our utter amazement it went straight up into the heavens. When I got off the plane I told Nancy all about it.” Christiaan Huygens, Isaac Newton and William Herschel Belief in aliens isn’t merely a modern phenomenon. Christiaan Huygens, a leading Dutch scientist of the seventeenth century famous for explaining the nature of Saturn’s rings and discovering its moon Titan, wrote a long treatise on the prospect of extraterrestrial life. ‘Cosmotheoros (or The Celestial Worlds Discover’d: or, Conjectures Concerning the Inhabitants, Plants and Productions of the Worlds in the Planets’, published shortly after Huygens’ death, explained in detail a hypothetical alien race. “That which makes me of this Opinion, that those worlds are not without such a Creature endowed with Reason, is that otherwise our Earth would have too much the advantage of them, in being the only part of the Universe that could boast of such a Creature…” Huygens’ work was criticised at the time as unscientific, while some modern critics have suggested he was in fact being ironic. Nevertheless, other renowned scientists from the period engaged with the idea of alien life. Isaac Newton said in 1701: “For if all places to which we have access are filled with living creatures, why should all these immense spaces of the heavens above the clouds be incapable of inhabitants?”. William Herschel, who discovered Uranus, made a similar argument, speculating that any celestial body could be inhabited – the sun and moon, even comets and asteroids. ]]>

Robert Hooke and the Wrath of Isaac Newton

His pioneering work with microscopes led to his famous engraving of a fly’s eye. Just as remarkably, his early studies of petrified wood and other fossils made him one of the first to realise they were remains of once living things – a fact so well known now it seems obvious, but revolutionary at the time. How did a man involved in so much innovation, slip into obscurity? It is not as if Hooke was unappreciated in his own time. His book, Micrographia, was a bestseller, inspiring interest in the use of microscopes. He was a longtime president of the Royal Society, showing the regard in which his scientific work was held. However, he also had a powerful rival: Sir Isaac Newton. The two clashed bitterly in attempts to forge reputations as the greatest scientific minds of their age. In life this battle may have been a close run thing, but through history Newton became the undisputed winner. The first signs of conflict between these two massive egos came in 1672, when Newton submitted his first paper to the Royal Society. In the work, Newton claimed light was a particle, contradicting Hooke’s own ideas on the matter. A number of scientists launched attacks on Newton’s paper and methodology, but Hooke’s were the most scathing and his position at the Royal Society meant they also carried the most humiliating weight for Newton. Correspondence between the two became increasingly acrimonious; a major rivalry had started. This simmering tension exploded when Newton published his Principia in 1687, containing his Law of Universal Gravitation. Newton wasn’t the first to postulate about a force holding celestial bodies in place, it was an idea the scientific community had been moving towards for years. Hooke was one of the key figures behind it in the 1670s, suggesting the planets were attracted to the Sun, and that this force of attraction got stronger the closer the objects were together. Crucially, Newton was the first to create rigorous mathematical proof for the idea, but Hooke was convinced Principia would have been impossible if he hadn’t first postulated about the attraction between celestial bodies. A bitter dispute unfolded, Hooke trying to gain credit for his influence, Newton denying it (with the exception of a cursory mention in the third volume of Principia). In part, Hooke was a victim of his own approach: a polymath forming brilliant ideas in a variety of different fields but seldom creating the in depth, rigid proofs needed to back them up. An innovator who often failed to solidify his theories into something tangible and timeless, allowing his contributions to be overshadowed. In 1703 Hooke died, with some medical historians suggesting he suffered from diabetes in his later years. Newton became his successor as the president of the Royal Society, and some say he went to great efforts to tarnish his predecessor’s reputation. The only portrait of Hooke was removed from the Royal Society during Newton’s presidency. It has been suggested this was because he’d ordered it destroyed, or intentionally left it behind when the society moved buildings. As Newton’s reputation grew, Hooke’s deteriorated: a narrative forming that he was a bitter scientist unjustifiably trying to take credit from the work of others. As Newton’s influence continued to extend through the centuries, Hooke’s legacy seemed ever more vindictive, pathetic and jealous. Newton wasn’t the only scientist of the era to come into conflict with Robert Hooke, there are various accounts of his frequent arguments with others regarding credit for ideas. Sometimes Hooke was justified in his anger, sometimes not. Most of the time it is impossible to say due to a lack of evidence. Undoubtedly this was a dark side to his personality, but surely it should not be allowed to overshadow the brilliant contributions he made to the world of science.]]>