Premium Essay

3 Laws of Issaac Newton

In:

Submitted By yusraraouf
Words 388
Pages 2
Let us begin our explanation of how Newton changed our understanding of the Universe by enumerating his Three Laws of Motion.
Newton's First Law of Motion:
I. Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

This we recognize as essentially Galileo's concept of inertia, and this is often termed simply the "Law of Inertia".
Newton's Second Law of Motion:
II. The relationship between an object's mass m, its acceleration a, and the applied force F is F = ma. Acceleration and force are vectors (as indicated by their symbols being displayed in slant bold font); in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the acceleration vector.

This is the most powerful of Newton's three Laws, because it allows quantitative calculations of dynamics: how do velocities change when forces are applied. Notice the fundamental difference between Newton's 2nd Law and the dynamics of Aristotle: according to Newton, a force causes only a change in velocity (an acceleration); it does not maintain the velocity as Aristotle held.

This is sometimes summarized by saying that under Newton, F = ma, but under Aristotle F = mv, where v is the velocity. Thus, according to Aristotle there is only a velocity if there is a force, but according to Newton an object with a certain velocity maintains that velocity unless a force acts on it to cause an acceleration (that is, a change in the velocity). As we have noted earlier in conjunction with the discussion of Galileo, Aristotle's view seems to be more in accord with common sense, but that is because of a failure to appreciate the role played by frictional forces. Once account is taken of all forces acting in a given situation it is the dynamics of Galileo and Newton, not of Aristotle, that are found to be in accord with the observations.

Similar Documents

Free Essay

History of Accounting

...DEVELOPMENT OF CONCEPTS OF CAPITAL AND INCOME IN FINANCIAL REPORTING IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY Calculation, Context and Consequence THOMAS REGINALD (Tom) ROWLES B.Ec (Hons), Dip.Ed (Monash) A THESIS SUBMITED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE SCHOOL OF ACCOUNTING AND LAW OF RMIT UNIVERSITY, MELBOURNE, VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA ii DECLARATION I certify that: Except where due acknowledgement has been made, this thesis is mine alone; and The work has not been submitted previously, in whole or part, to qualify for any other academic award; and The content of the thesis is the result of work that has been carried out since the official commencement date of the approved research programme. THOMAS R. ROWLES iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter Introduction 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 Introduction Purpose of the Study Sombart’s Hypothesis An Alternative Model; Entrepreneurial Decision-making Context: The Industrial Revolution and ‘Profit’ The Changing Nature of ‘Investment’ The Great Depression of 1873-96 Intellectual Introspection Irving Fisher and the Conception of Capital and Income 17 17 17 23 25 26 30 32 34 34 35 36 38 38 38 39 43 46 49 50 51 54 55 1.10 Research Issues Identified 1.11 Summary Derivation of Research Issues 2.1 2.2 Introduction Evidence from Extant Accounts 2.2.1 Fixed Assets in Mercantile Accounting 2.2.2 The East India Company 2.2.3 Fixed Assets and Early Industrial Accounting 2.2.4 Capital Asset Accounting After 1870...

Words: 130630 - Pages: 523