# Thread: I MAY WIN A NOBEL FOR THIS... IVE DISPROVED NEWTON!!!

1. Newtons first Law of motion says,
“Every body will remain at rest, or in a uniform state of motion unless acted upon by a force.”

However. Force can only be caused by matter, IN WHICH CASE THAT MATTER HAD TO BE IN MOTION IN THE FIRST PLACE...

This simple observation, yet overlooked with such amazingly deplorable lack of foresight by “Greats” such as Newton himself, now opens up the line for my final stunning combination to crush Isaac’s theory, similar to the way I so often crush my opponents, master or otherwise, in chess…
For If it was in motion, it too must have been acted upon by a force, i.e another object which had been acted upon by a force caused by… etc etc, it goes on like a cycle.

Now this is the paradox. What caused the Force in the first place, if the force was caused by an object that initially had to be acted upon by a force which couldn’t have existed unless another object acted upon by a force which could only have been caused by an object caused by a force, and so on ad infinitum?

HAVING THUS CRUSHED NEWTON WITH SUCH TERRIBLE FORCE, LEAVING THE WISPS OF WHAT IS LEFT OF HIS IDEAS GROVELLING IN THE DUST, I NOW TAKE MY LEAVE TO GO ON TO CRUSH MY NEXT WRETCHED VICTIM…GOODBYE

2.

3. IVE DISPROVED NEWTON

4. Yes.

5. Yes.

6. Originally Posted by Darius
IVE DISPROVED NEWTON

7. So you could think of another reality. Could we live inside thoughts of God.

8. With muscleforce your right. Thats impossible. But there has to be a change not directly a force maybe it does, but a change in the musclecell that pulls molecules together. Whare that change come from and it must be physical change, cauze they say the musclecell contains molecules that are physical. All little form round forms clicked togtether those are all that there, atoms.

With musclecells that only can be reached only with electronsignal, cauze those the only that can reach the musclecell. Nothing else can make the change.

9. time for one of the admins to step in - if you want to fill your own threads with drivel, that's one thing, but spreading your drivel to someone else's thread is just not on, even if said thread is drivel of a different kind

10. Cant you think straight? Im not talkin bullshit.

11. ** shrug **

i'm sure you make perfect sense to yourself
trouble is, as long as it is the weed doing the talking, very few of us can make sense of your sense

whatever the case may be, i'm sure the majority of people would agree that your contribution in this thread is decidedly off-topic

12. Originally Posted by marnixR
** shrug **

i'm sure you make perfect sense to yourself
trouble is, as long as it is the weed doing the talking, very few of us can make sense of your sense

whatever the case may be, i'm sure the majority of people would agree that your contribution in this thread is decidedly off-topic
Incomprehensible I'd say.

13. Change have to be made in musclecell. Waiting for cause that will pull the physical muslecell together. Without a cause or a change nothing will happen as everything stays the same.

14. Originally Posted by Leon23
Change have to be made in musclecell. Waiting for cause that will pull the physical muslecell together. Without a cause or a change nothing will happen as everything stays the same.
This has nothing to do with the topic at hand. You already have two threads on exactly the same topic. Stop posting this here please.

15. Disregarding the prior deviation to the topic- whic was pretty interesting mind you, I've come to the conclusion that you make absolute No Sense! Newton's First law states that "an object that is at rest will stay at rest unless acted upon by an Unbalanced force". The part that disproved what you said is that we know that f=m x a. So, as you said, mass does relate to force because without mass we would have no force; however, where in the world is there absolutely no mass? Even at Zero degrees Kelvin there is a slight form of mass.

What you're saying reminds me of Zeno's Paradox- does anyone know what this is? It is a paradox relating to time asking that if one has a straight line representing X amount of time ( _______________), could this 'time' not be divided in half? Then could that half be broken in half? Is there ever a point in time when one must stop, or is it indefinate?

The way you are describing force makes it sound more like the description of energy.

Can anyone back me up here?

16. Hm, that is something to think about. I think it's too narrow minded to say that the outside force is an object completely dependent on some other force to create its motion. The example my eight grade science teacher used was a hand and a ball. The ball and hand both were in an umoving state until the hand decided to push the ball or whatever. I think it all stems off of dependent and independent variables.

I can't really think straight right now, and I don't think I'm really making sense. But those are just my thoughts.

EDIT:
And considering how long this law has been around, for someone to randomly say they've disproved it on a science forum is as plausible as your [ I AM GENIUS] theory. You're probably not the first nor the last to come up with something like this. If Newton's law has been able to last this long, I'd say there's probably truth behind it [not to mention logic]

17. However. Force can only be caused by matter, IN WHICH CASE THAT MATTER HAD TO BE IN MOTION IN THE FIRST PLACE...
Gravity is a force; it doesn't require motion. Likewise, neither do electromagnetism, or the nuclear forces.

So what you have just proposed is therefore incorrect.

Satisfied?

 Bookmarks
##### Bookmarks
 Posting Permissions
 You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts   BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On [VIDEO] code is On HTML code is Off Trackbacks are Off Pingbacks are Off Refbacks are On Terms of Use Agreement