<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>The Circular Motion of Fluids on Superphysics</title>
    <link>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/</link>
    <description>Recent content in The Circular Motion of Fluids on Superphysics</description>
    <generator>Hugo</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <atom:link href="https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Proposition 51, Theorem 39</title>
      <link>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-51/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-51/</guid>
      <description>&lt;!-- Newton&#39;s major work Principia included a substantial specific disproof of Descartes&#39; vortex theory of planetary motion, not naming Cartes in this disproof though his was the only such vortex theory at the time. Below you can read all of Principia book 2 section 9, devoted to this disproof. Newton also argued strongly against Descartes&#39; physics more basic requirement that space is filled with a material &#39;ether&#39; substance (also required by the physics of both Aristotle and Einstein). He instead chiefly supported Gilbert&#39;s view that space must be largely really empty, but also his own view that knowing the experimental maths of nature was the limit of science.&#xA;&#xA;In disproving Descartes&#39; vortex theory of planetary motion, and some other aspects of Cartesian physics, Newton claimed to not conclude that he had completely disproved Descartes&#39; general theory of a mechanical push universe, some modified form of which he took as one possible option beside Gilbert&#39;s signal attraction theory in his own black-box &#39;cause unknown&#39; physics. He just did not prove that his good maths produced from Gilbertian attraction theory could also fit any actual valid Cartesian push physics theory - only that it might also fit some possible push physics. Newton&#39;s evidence seemed to clearly favour attraction physics. And Gilbert had also claimed to have disproved Greek-Atomist or Cartesian push-physics if maybe a bit less convincingly. --&gt;&#xA;&lt;h3 id=&#34;hypothesis&#34;&gt;HYPOTHESIS&lt;/h3&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The resistance from the lack of lubricity in a fluid is proportional to the speed of the separation of the fluid&amp;rsquo;s parts.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Proposition 52, Theorem 40</title>
      <link>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-52/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-52/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Assume that:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;a solid sphere in an uniform and infinite fluid revolves around an axis given in position with a uniform motion&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the fluid is forced around by only this impulse of the sphere&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;every part of the fluid perseveres uniformly in its motion.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;The periodic times of the parts of the fluid are as the squares of their distances from the sphere&amp;rsquo;s centre.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Corollaries</title>
      <link>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-52b/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-52b/</guid>
      <description>&lt;h4 id=&#34;corollary-1&#34;&gt;COROLLARY 1&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Hence:&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the angular motions of the parts of the fluid around the axis of the globe are reciprocally as the squares of the distances from the globe&amp;rsquo;s centre.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;li&gt;the absolute velocities are reciprocally as the same squares applied to the distances from the axis.&lt;/li&gt;&#xA;&lt;/ul&gt;&#xA;&lt;h4 id=&#34;corollary-2&#34;&gt;COROLLARY 2&lt;/h4&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Assume that a globe revolves with a uniform motion around an axis in a similar and infinite quiescent fluid with a uniform motion.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Scholium</title>
      <link>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-52c/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-52c/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I have supposed the fluid to consist of matter of uniform density and fluidity.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;A globe placed anywhere in the fluid may propagate with the same motion of its own, at distances from itself continually equal, similar and equal motions in the fluid in the same interval of time.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Proposition 53, Theorem 41</title>
      <link>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-53/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.superphysics.org/research/newton/principia/book-2/sec-09/prop-53/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Bodies carried around in a vortex, and returning in the same orb, are of the same density with the vortex.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;They are moved according to the same law with the parts of the vortex, as to velocity and direction of motion.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
