Newton's Prism and Spinoza's lens?
371365
Hmmm.  Reading “Tulips” by Padraic Colum?  Anyway…\n\nBoth are optical instruments of the late 17th Century.  Newton used a prism to break sunlight up into its contituent colors—red, orange, yellow, green, blue, purple, and infinitely fine gradations in between.  Spinoza, although nowadays more famous for his philosophy, actually made a living grinding lenses for telescopes and such.  Both tools bend and distort light, and both have (relatively) simple mathematical descriptions.\n\nIf indeed, the aforementioned poem is what called to mind the question, I think the reference has to do with the abstract mathematics of prisms and lenses translating into real-world manipulation of light.\n\n\nRyan Wyatt\nRose Center for Earth & Space\nNew York, New York
305330
Both are used to magnify
307120
Newton: universal absolute time, 3 dimensional Cartesian geometry, action at a distance (force), universal gravitation as a force with an inverse-square law\n\nEinstein: relative time, non-Cartesian geometry, absolute limit to speed (speed of light), 4 dimensional space-time, gravitation as a result of the curvature of space and time.
472213
Sir Isaac Newton, PRS, \n\n\n(4 January 1643 – 31 March 1727) [OS: 25 December 1642 – 20 March 1727] was an English physicist, mathematician, astronomer, alchemist, inventor, and natural philosopher who is generally regarded as one of the most influential scientists in history.\n\nNewton wrote the Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica wherein he described universal gravitation and the three laws of motion, laying the groundwork for classical mechanics. By deriving Kepler's laws of planetary motion from this system, he was the first to show that the motion of bodies on Earth and of celestial bodies are governed by the same set of natural laws. The unifying and deterministic power of his laws was integral to the scientific revolution and the advancement of heliocentrism.\n\nAmong other scientific discoveries, Newton realized that the spectrum of colours observed when white light passes through a prism is inherent in the white light and not added by the prism (as Roger Bacon had claimed in the 13th century), and notably argued that light is composed of particles. He also developed a law of cooling, describing the rate of cooling of objects when exposed to air. He enunciated the principles of conservation of momentum and angular momentum. Finally, he studied the speed of sound in air, and voiced a theory of the origin of stars.\n\nAmong Westerners, Newton played a major role in the history of calculus, sharing credit with Gottfried Leibniz. He also made contributions to other areas of mathematics, having derived the binomial theorem in its entirety. The mathematician and mathematical physicist Joseph Louis Lagrange (1736–1813), said that "Newton was the greatest genius that ever existed and the most fortunate, for we cannot find more than once a system of the world to establish
631876
Partial text of both is included in\n\nhttp://www.maths.tcd.ie/pub/HistMath/People/Newton/CommerciumAccount/CommAcc.pdf
170764
Plato, I guess. the Question is too vague. Plato's geocentric system was refuted by Copernicus, but the Catholic Church refused to accept Copernicus's findings.
47937
"god does not play dice" has been attributed to eintein but he was in fact misquoted on that issue. quantum mechanics and relativity being unified is the most important thing physics has been looking for since the discovery of quantum mechanics.It is unnerving that one set of laws applies to all matter but at a microscopic level a completely diderent set of "rules" apply
342329
Well, I think I found something; it says that the rule is part of the Newton-Cotes formulas (Isaac Newton and Roger Cotes).\n\nThis is the page where I found the info:\nhttp://www.absoluteastronomy.com/ref/trapezium_rule
367376
I agree with Maimonides, who basically also sees eye to eye with classical (i.e. pre-evangelical fundamentalist) Christian theology: the same views were essentially held by St. Ambrose and St. Augustine in the 4th century.
269019
The speed of light is the ratio of electric permitivity to magnetic susceptibility. So prisms, lenses, Pockel cells. Maybe those magnetic seals. An ion filter that blocks electric DC fields, but not alternating.
4008
the formulas are what convince me.  I've had to derive so many complicate formulas myself, and most of them, especially mechanics formulas can be proven, such as measuring a quantities, solving for a missing variable, then doing an experiment and getting the same answer.  This is too much to be a coincedence or something.  Most theories and things are developed before formulas and actual mathamatical relationships are found, then they find them and it all fits together nicely.  Even with reletivity and things with spacetime, there are a lot of concrete formulas, and once you have the satisfaction of deriving them yourself from previously proven formulas... it all clicks nicely, that's why im a physics major, curiosity about everything like this.  I guess human perception can be valid once connections start being made between things, because when ideas are incorrect, they really don't connect to other things very easily.
605893
U mean Plato's CUrsed Triangle?,,\nWell, check out the gradient of the two triangle, ITS different!.\nThe difference of the gradient makes a whole in the next triangle
530815
An interesting point you make, and it is, indeed, true. During the scientific revolution, most of the scientists that participated in it were Christians. Isaac Newton, for example, had believed that his discoveries concerning light and universal gravitation had to do with God. Many scientists were Christians, and did not perceive science as simply an endeavour in which one attempts to legitimately answer a question. Many of these scientists were those who had viewed science as a way of understanding the mind of God. It was thought by many of these prominent scientists (Isaac Newton, Lord Kelvin, and many others) that, if one were to better understand the universe through science, they could see God in all creations and discoveries. In fact, during the scientific revolution, one scientist said that "Science is thinking God's thought's after him." This quote really embodies the basic reason for scientists' devotion to science during the revolution. God was the driving force for many of the scientists, along with interest and the spirit of inquiry.
866589
The formula expanded a bit is: E (joules or kg*m²/s²) = m (kilograms) multiplied by (299,792,458 m/s)2\n\nE is Energy, m is mass and c is the speed of light in a vacuum.  \n\nCheck out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E%3Dmc%C2%B2\n\nOff the subject, but an important reply to Fresh Prince and those of the same mind:\n\nYou seem pretty mad.  It is unfortunate that "[we] people disgust [you]."  It does not diminish Einstein’s discovery to say God created the highly balanced universe which is made up of this mathematic formula as well as all formulas - discovered and undiscovered.  Einstein was doing wonderful work in unlocking the mysteries of Creation - he was a genius among geniuses\n\nEinstein himself believed in a "god / creator" - not the God of the Bible, but a Creator nonetheless.  He was not closed - he acknowledged that the universe is so finely balanced on finite mathematical principals, there is a higher intelligence governing things that we cannot comprehend.  He spent his life exploring the wonder of what has been created and set before mankind.  Please cast aside your disgust.  No one is taking credit away from Einstein - or you.  \n\nRegarding religion, Einstein said: "The most beautiful and deepest experience a man can have is the sense of the mysterious. It is the underlying principle of religion as well as all serious endeavor in art and science. He who never had this experience seems to me, if not dead, then at least blind. To sense that behind anything that can be experienced there is something that our mind cannot grasp and whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly and as a feeble reflection, this is religiousness. In this sense I am religious. To me it suffices to wonder at these secrets and to attempt humbly to grasp with my mind a mere image of the lofty structure of all that is there."\n\nWhen asked: "[Do] You accept the historical Jesus?" \n\nHe replied: "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."\n\nNo, Einstein did not believe in God as Christians believe.  But he recognized the order of the universe as a signpost to a higher being.  The point is, there is no cause to be "disgusted" by ideas outside your paradigm.  I am not disgusted with you.\n\nTake a hint from Einstein - the consummate scientist who believed in a Creator: "...science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."  I will not be blind, so please do not be the former.  Take a look from another perspective; you may learn something of value.\n\nRemember, you may be angry with God, deny God, ignore God, and not care to inquire with an open mind, but God loves you anyway.\n\nHave a blessed day, my friend (that is a positive statement, please take it as such).
260486
im pretty sure itz derived from newtons laws. his F=ma.
204082
i think it might be called a triangular prism\ni am srry that was tough i was trying to get it rite so i could get the ten points for best answer. I AM SORRY!
289487
I think Isaac Newton might have been as good, considering the limitations of his own time. Just remember he had to develop a new whole math to support his theories! (calculus) Then I dunno, but today Stephen Hawking? Have you read a brief history of time and the universe in a nutshell? I dunno, really, Einstein was GREAT!