Re: A comment on climate

On Feb 5, 2:59 am, oriel36 <kelleher.ger...@xxxxxxxxx> quoted, in
part:

"The proportion existing between the periodic times of any two planets
is exactly the sesquiplicate proportion of the mean distances of the
orbits, or as generally given,the squares of the periodic times are
proportional to the cubes of the mean distances." Kepler

"That the fixed stars being at rest, the periodic times of the five
primary planets, and (whether of the sun about the earth, or) of the
earth about the sun, are in the sesquiplicate proportion of their mean
distances from the sun." Newton

I had been trying to Google this from your past posts, but I was
looking for another quote.To a naive person, these two quotes would
appear nearly identical; the term 'sesquiplicate proportion' for the
3/2 th power would be obscure. Your conclusion that Kepler's statement
is wonderful, while Newton's statement is awful, would not seem to be
supported, and would even seem bizarre.

True, you do quote Kepler amplifying on his statement, and even in the
sentence quoted, at least he, unlike Newton, refers to squares and
cubes directly so that we can determine what "sesquiplicate
proportion" is supposed to be.

Your objection may be to Newton's explicit statement of the fixed
stars being at rest. But it is only by choosing this particular
standard of rest that the correlation found by Kepler can be seen.

Of course, your distinction between exciting correlations and dreary
laws is presumably due to your objections to Newton's "ballistic
agenda". But most people find memorizing many natural correlations
dreary, while finding a few underlying principles that can be put
together in different ways to explain many phenomena, and also suggest
the construction of new inventions, is what is exciting.

Scientia potentia est - Knowledge is power. And Newton, by extending
the work of Galileo and putting the science of mechanics on a sound
footing, gave mankind knowledge on a Promethean scale.

John Savard
.