User talk:Mikerollem/sandbox
Hi
I did this because I saw:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_theorem_of_revolving_orbits
and I thought it was truly horrible.
1) The word 'theorem' is not used that way nowadays, so it's off to a bad start.
2) Where is Newton in it? Way down. Be better just to regard it as a modern work on revolving orbits and leave him out completely.
3) Pronouncements by Chandrasekhar regarding Newton are often wrong, as is his quote there. He's not a reliable authority on Newton.
4) I think Newton's geometric methods are very elegant and it's a pity they are so little studied.
This is the first time I've submitted a major article. I probably won't do another because it's such hard work.
Just to add that I have studied the Principia in great detail. I often find that old ideas about Newton that have been superseded by modern scholarship are still to be found in Wikipedia.
Mike
Start a discussion about improving the User:Mikerollem/sandbox page
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "User:Mikerollem/sandbox" page.
