Abstract
Newton's third law is not something which students easily accept. This is largely due to the widespread notion that the force exerted by a moving body is directly related to the speed or to the mass of the body (or to both) and not to the nature of any interaction in which that body might be involved. The aim of the paper is to identify some of the issues upon which debate took place over the phenomenon of impact in the early 18th Century. This is achieved by studying a number of the popular textbooks and commentaries on mechanics which were published at that time. Some implications for teaching Newtonian mechanics are outlined.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Algarotti, F. (1739).Sir Isaac Newton's philosophy explained for the use of ladies (trans. Elizabeth Carter). London: E. Cave.
Blackwell, R.J. (1966). Descartes' laws of motion.Isis, 57, 220–234.
Gabbey, A. (1980). Force and inertia in the seventeenth century: Descartes and Newton. In S. Gaukroger (Ed.)Descartes: philosophy, mathematics and physics. Brighton: Harvester, 230–320.
Gaukroger, S. (1982). The metaphysics of impenetrability: Euler's conception of force.British Journal for the History of Science, 15, 133–154.
Gauld, C. (1993). The historical context of Newton's third law and the teaching of mechanics.Research in Science Education, 23, 95–103.
Gjertsen, D. (1986).The Newton handbook. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
'sGravesande, W.J. (1720).Mathematical elements of physics (trans. by J. Keill). London: G. Strahan.
'sGravesande, W.J. (1721).Mathematical elements of natural philosophy (trans. by J.T. Desaguliers). London: J. Senex.
'sGravesande, W.J. (1741).An explanation of the Newtonian philosophy in lectures read to the youth of the University of Leyden (trans. by E. Stone). London: W. Innys.
Hankins, T.L. (1965). Eighteenth century attempts to resolve the vis viva controversy.Isis, 56, 281–297.
Helsham, R. (1739).A course of lectures in natural philosophy. London: Bryan Robinson.
Hoskin, M.A. (1962). ‘Mining all within’: Clarke's notes to Rohault's Traite de Physique.The Thomist, 24, 353–363.
Iltis, C. (1971). Leibniz and the vis viva controversy.Isis, 62, 21–35.
Iltis, C. (1973a). The Leibnizian-Newtonian debates: Natural philosophy and social psychology.The British Journal for the History of Science, 6, 343–377.
Iltis, C. (1973b). The decline of Cartesianism in mechanics: The Leibnizian-Cartesian debates.Isis, 64, 356–373.
Keill, J. (1720).An introduction to natural philosophy or philosophical lectures read in the University of Oxford Anno Dom 1700. London: W. & J. Innys.
Leibniz, G.W. (1686/1969a). A brief demonstration of a notable error of descartes and others concerning a natural law (originally published 1686). In G.W. LeibnizPhilosophical papers and letters (trans. and ed. by L. Loemker). Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 296–302.
Leibniz, G.W. (1692/1973). Essay on dynamics (originally published 1692). In P. Costabel,Leibniz and dynamics: The texts of 1692. Paris: Hermann, pp. 108–131.
Leibniz, G.W. (1695/1969b). Specimen Dynamicum (originally published 1695). In G.W. Leibniz,Philosophical papers and letters (trans. and ed. by L. Loemker). Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 435–452.
Martin, B. (1751).Plain and familiar introduction to the Newtonian experimental philosophy. London: W. Owen.
Newton, I. (1729/1960).The mathematical principles of natural philosophy (trans. A. Motte, 1729; revised F. Cajori, 1934). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Papineau, D. (1977). The vis viva controversy: Do meanings matter?Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 8, 111–142.
Pemberton, H. (1728).A view of Sir Isaac Newton's philosophy. London: J. Hyde.
Rohault, J. (1723).Ronault's system of natural philosophy illustrated with Dr Samuel Clarke's Notes (trans. by John Clarke). London: James Knapton.
Sarton, G. (1948). The study of early scientific textbooks.Isis, 38, 137–148.
Shea, W. (1988). The unfinished revolution: Johann Bernoulli (1667–1748) and the debate between the Cartesians and the Newtonians. In W. Shea (ed.)Revolutions in science: Their meaning and relevance. Canton, MA: Science History Publications, pp. 70–92.
Weiner, P.P. (1951).Leibniz: Selections. New York: Charles Scribners.
Whiston, W. (1716).Sir Isaac Newton's mathematick philosophy more easily demonstrated. London: Senex & Taylor.
Whiteside, D. (1972).The mathematical papers of Isaac Newton, Volume V, 1683–1684. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Young, T. (1807).A course of lectures on natural philosophy and the mechanical arts. London: Joseph Johnson.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Specializations: physics education, concept development, history and philosophy of science in science teaching.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gauld, C. Newton's Third Law after Newton. Research in Science Education 24, 93–101 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356333
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356333