As general relativity and quantum mechanics become more accessible, is Newton going to become the new Aristotle, as the example of being wrong and misleading humanity for centuries? (as opposed to the currently popular idea that Newton came up with the right thing and got people out of the delusion created by Aristotle)
closed as off-topic by Mauro ALLEGRANZA, José Carlos Santos, Geremia, Alexandre Eremenko, Carl Witthoft Mar 25 at 12:38
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "This question does not appear to be about history of science and math, within the scope defined in the help center." – José Carlos Santos, Alexandre Eremenko, Carl Witthoft
I suggest that the baseless suggestion offered in this question can best be answered by Einstein's own words about Newton, written in 1919.
The background was the now-well-known eclipse expedition of 1919, in which the amount of deflection of light from stars close to the sun's limb had been observed during the eclipse. The results gave a probable verification of the predictions of general relativity about the amount of gravitational light-bending -- differing from the amount predicted by classical physics.
The 'Times' newspaper carried in November 1919 a report of the event, and the headline to the article included the words "Newton overthrown".
Remarkably, Einstein himself, asked to comment, wrote back and disagreed. In his letter he gave some explanation, tailored to his audience, of the nature and basis of relativity theory and how it had had to correct Newtonian physics -- though with retention of Newtonian results in very close approximation, in very many situations. But Einstein also wrote:-
"No one must think that Newton's great creation can be overthrown in any real sense by this or by any other theory. His clear and wide ideas will for ever retain their significance as the foundation on which our modern conceptions of physics have been built."
Eisntein's letter to 'The Times' (of Nov. 28, 1919) was widely reproduced, and nearly the full text can now most easily be read in 'Science' (New Series, vol.LI, no.1305, Jan 2, 1920, at pp.8-10). (The only omission is of a personal wry joke in a closing paragraph.)
(The original German was also published in Einstein's 'Mein Weltbild' of 1934, where the paragraph quoted above reads: "Niemand aber soll denken, daß durch diese oder irgendeine andere Theorie Newtons große Schöpfung im eigentlichen Sinne verdrängt werden könne. Seine klaren und großen Ideen werden als Fundament unserer ganzen modernen Begriffsbildung auf dem Gebiet der Naturphilosophie ihre eminente Bedeutung in aller Zukunft behalten.")
This question repeats one of many myths about Newton, repeated uncritically by those who give little sign of wishing to enquire for the truth. One of the important reasons for regretting this proliferation of myth, based largely on fiction and gossip, is that it hinders more serious historical enquiry. Newton was a pioneer over a large field who did make some mistakes and did leave many matters still to be further developed: it could hardly be otherwise, seeing how the lines of investigation for which he set an agenda took centuries after him to be worked out and enriched by many independently ingenious discoverers. The presence of myth and fiction about the roots of Newtonian science, by creating false preconceptions, tends to spoil the subject for proper historical investigation. But unfortunately there is little hope of an end to such false debunking.