For the past 300 years, we have been misinterpreting a significant law of physics.

When Isaac Newton recorded his famous laws of motion in 1687, he could only have hoped that we would still be discussing them three centuries later. Newton wrote in Latin, outlining three fundamental principles that govern the motion of objects in our Universe. These principles have been translated, transcribed, and extensively discussed and debated.

However, according to philosopher Daniel Hoek from Virginia Tech, we may have been interpreting Newton’s first law of motion incorrectly all this time. Hoek wanted to correct what he believed to be a “clumsy mistranslation” in the original English translation of Newton’s Latin Principia from 1729.

Based on this translation, many academics and teachers have understood Newton’s first law of inertia to mean that an object will continue moving in a straight line or remain at rest unless an external force acts upon it. While this description seems accurate, it fails to consider the constant presence of external forces, which Newton surely took into account when formulating his wording.

Upon revisiting the archives, Hoek discovered that this commonly paraphrased interpretation contained a misinterpretation that went unnoticed until 1999. Two scholars noticed that a Latin word, “quatenus,” had been overlooked in the translation. This word means “insofar” rather than “unless.”

According to Hoek, this small change in interpretation is significant. Instead of describing how an object maintains its momentum in the absence of external forces, Newton’s new reading suggests that every change in an object’s momentum, whether it be a sudden jolt, dip, swerve, or spurt, is caused by external forces.

In a blog post detailing his discoveries, Hoek elucidates that by reintroducing the overlooked term “insofar,” those esteemed scholars have successfully reinstated one of the fundamental principles of physics to its original magnificence. This significant rectification, however, failed to gain widespread acceptance and may still struggle to gain momentum in the face of centuries of repetition.

Hoek acknowledges that some individuals perceive his interpretation as too audacious and unconventional to be taken seriously, while others consider it to be so evidently accurate that it hardly necessitates any argument. From the perspective of ordinary individuals, this may appear to be a mere matter of semantics. Furthermore, Hoek concedes that this reinterpretation does not and will not alter the field of physics. Nonetheless, a meticulous examination of Newton’s own writings provides clarity regarding the thoughts of this pioneering mathematician during that period.

Hoek, who was initially perplexed as a student by Newton’s intentions, explains that a significant amount of discussion has been dedicated to the purpose of the law of inertia. If we consider the commonly accepted interpretation, which suggests that objects continue to move in straight lines unless acted upon by an external force, it raises the question of why Newton would formulate a law concerning bodies unaffected by external forces when such forces, like gravity and friction, are always present in our Universe.

According to George Smith, a philosopher at Tufts University and an expert in Newton’s writings, the primary objective of the first law is to deduce the existence of forces. In an interview with journalist Stephanie Pappas for Scientific American, Smith emphasizes that Newton provided three specific examples to illustrate his first law of motion. Among these examples, the most enlightening, as noted by Hoek, is that of a spinning top, which gradually slows down due to the air’s friction, forming a tightening spiral.

Hoek argues that by presenting this example, Newton explicitly demonstrates how the First Law applies to accelerating bodies subjected to forces, thus making it applicable to real-world scenarios. This revised interpretation highlights one of Newton’s groundbreaking ideas at the time, which asserts that the same physical laws govern both celestial bodies like planets and stars, as well as objects on Earth.

From the smallest atomic particles to vast swirling galaxies, Hoek ponders that every alteration in speed and change in direction is governed by Newton’s First Law. This realization fosters a sense of connection to the farthest corners of space, reminding us of our place in the universe.

The paper discussing these ideas has been published in the Philosophy of Science journal.

This article is republished from sciencealert under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.