Isaac Newton vs. Robert Hooke on the law of universal gravitation

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
One of the most disputed controversy over the priority of scientific discoveries is that of the law of universal gravitation, between Isaac Newton and Robert Hooke. Hooke accused Newton of plagiarism, of taking over his ideas expressed in previous works. In this paper I try to show, on the basis of previous analysis, that both scientists were wrong: Robert Hooke because his theory was basically only ideas that would never have materialized without Isaac Newton's mathematical support; and the latter was wrong by not recognizing Hooke's ideas in drawing up the theory of gravity. Moreover, after Hooke's death and taking over the Royal Society presidency, Newton removed from the institution any trace of the former president Robert Hooke. For this, I detail the accusations and arguments of each of the parts, and how this dispute was perceived by the contemporaries of the two scientists. I finish the paper with the conclusions drawn from the contents. Keywords: Isaac Newton, Robert Hooke, law of gravity, priority, plagiarism CONTENTS Abstract Introduction Robert Hooke's contribution to the law of universal gravitation Isaac Newton's contribution to the law of universal gravitation Robert Hooke's claim of his priority on the law of universal gravitation Newton's defense The controversy in the opinion of other contemporary scientists What the supporters of Isaac Newton say What the supporters of Robert Hooke say Conclusions Bibliography DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.19370.26567
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Upload history
Archival date: 2019-06-18
View other versions
Added to PP index

Total views
91 ( #38,439 of 54,695 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
50 ( #13,726 of 54,695 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.