Newton vs Einstein
This is for all the science folk out there who get aroused by science stuff.
Choose a scientist in round 1 and the debate is on!
I hope that my opponent uses credible, reliable evidence to back up his claims and that grammar, conduct, and professionalism are all superb.
First of all I thank my opponent for accepting this debate. The reason I created this debate is because I believe anything can be compared if proper and justifiable parameters for comparisons are specified. The main objective of this debate is is to put across palatable information that might have been previously unknown to the public about these two legends who have changed the world and how we perceive it. I encourage my opponent to take this perspective when he makes his case.
“The true sign of intelligence is not knowledge but imagination,” (Albert Einstein).
Sheer number of contribution
The number of contributions Einstein made by itself exceeds that of newton. Einstein in his entire lifetime formulated 11 powerful independent theories/concepts that revolutionized the world.
Einstein’s major contributions: Photoelectric effect, E=mc2, General relativity and special relativity, Theory of Brownian motion, Einstein field equations, Bose–Einstein statistics, Bose–Einstein condensate, Gravitational wave, Cosmological constant, Unified field theory, EPR paradox.
Newton of course wasn't any much inferior, having formulated 8 independent theories which have had wide array of applications.
Newton’s major Contributions: Newtonian mechanics, Calculus, Universal gravitation, Newton's laws of motion, Optics, Binomial series, Newton's method.
But Einstein's contributions outweigh Newton's contribution in sheer numbers!
Einstein established new pathways for space exploration and interplanetary travel through his theories of general and special relativity, created new opportunities for power production, photomultipliers and image sensing with his discovery of the photoelectric effect and much more. The year 1905 was a magical year for Einstein. He published four papers during this year, representing Quantum theory, Brownian motion (existence of atoms), Electrodynamics of moving bodies and the most famous equation in the world – the E=MC2 equation – establishing the relationship between mass and energy. At this time, he was just 26 years old and worked during the day at a patent office!
However, it should be understood that I’m not trying to demean Newton's contributions to the world nor am I trying to make it any inferior. The point I'm trying to make is that Einstein had a larger impact on a variety of fields in physics/science than Newton.
Breaking barriers: Einstein's audacity
Albert Einstein stood for what he believed in, even if it meant standing alone. This was one of the admirable qualities he had. He literally set the stage for all of modern physics today. His theories were way ahead of his time and many of them were very difficult to experimentally verify at the period of his discovery.
In a 1905 paper, Einstein postulated that light itself consists of localized particles (quanta). This was the equivalent of saying that the moon had another hidden face coloured green in today's world. It was simply laughed at and dismissed. Einstein's light quanta were nearly universally rejected by all physicists, including Max Planck and Niels Bohr. This idea only became universally accepted 14 years later in 1919 when the physicist Robert Millikan's practically conducted detailed experiments on the photoelectric effect, with the measurement of Compton scattering. Isaac Newton on the other hand largely had little opposition to his theories and it was almost always backed up by experimental evidences. Einstein didn’t have such a cushion as the theories he postulated didn’t have credible experimental setups to rely on and the whole world looked at them as mere ridiculous predictions which he had to over come. Thus, Einstein was more audacious than Newton.
Possession of other talents: The inner musician
Einstein developed an appreciation of music at an early age. According to conductor Leon Botstein, Einstein is said to have begun playing when he was 5. At age 17, he was heard by a examiner in Aarau as he played Beethoven's violin sonatas, who described his music as "remarkable and revealing of 'great insight'." What struck the examiner, writes Botstein, was that Einstein "displayed a deep love of the music, a quality that was and remains in short supply." Einstein even played chamber music with a few professionals, and he performed for private audiences and friends. He personally has said that, “If I were not a scientist, I would be a musician.” We see that there are no signs of Isaac Newton having possessed such talents.
Superiority in philanthropy: Einstein's Benevolence
Einstein was a passionate, committed anti-racist and joined National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) in Princeton, where he campaigned for the civil rights of African Americans. He considered racism America's "worst disease," seeing it as "handed down from one generation to the next." As part of his involvement, he corresponded with a civil rights activist W. E. B. Du Bois and was even prepared to testify on his behalf during his trial in 1951. When Einstein offered to be a character witness for Du Bois, the judge decided to drop the case.
In 1946 Einstein visited Lincoln University in Pennsylvania where Einstein gave a speech about racism in America, adding, "I do not intend to be quiet about it." A resident of Princeton recalls that Einstein had once paid the college tuition for a black student, and black physicist Sylvester James Gates states that Einstein had been one of his early science heroes, later finding out about Einstein's support for civil rights. Newton wasn’t involved in philanthropic activities as such.
Humbleness: He never let his greatness get to his head
Albert Einstein could be considered as the epitome of humbleness. Usually when people get greeted by good fortune and success as he was, they naturally become bombastic and egotistic but this was not the case for Einstein. He used to often say, and I quote “It’s not that I’m so smart, it’s just that I stay with problems longer.”
Einstein never let the laurels he received faze him and when he was about to be bestowed the greatest honor in the physics world ‘The Nobel Prize’ he wasn’t even present because he was away on travel to the far east to resolve a dispute between two communities in 1922. In his place, the banquet speech was held by a German diplomat, who praised Einstein not only as a scientist but also as an international peacemaker and activist.
Einstein was a figurehead leader in helping establish the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, which opened in 1925, and was among its first Board of Governors. Earlier, in 1921, he was asked by the biochemist and president of the World Zionist Organization, Chaim Weizmann, to help raise funds for the planned university which he gladly did.
Chaim Weizmann later became Israel's first president and upon his death while in office in November 1952 and at the urging of Ezriel Carlebach, Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion offered Einstein the position of President of Israel which he politely refused.
I have provided four concrete evidences, some of them, irrefutable, on why Albert Einstein can be considered better than Newton. I now leave the stage to my adversary.
Fun fact : Albert Einstein is an anagram of Ten elite brains.
Good morning. I appreciate my opponent's contentions, however I would like to clarify something. For the remainder of this round, the voter should decide only on which of the two men, Albert Einstein or Isaac Newton, had a GREATER IMPACT ON SOCIETY. I specified this framework in Round 1, and my opponent neglected to refute it, so this is how the voter should determine the round. My opponent says that Einstein was "better" than Newton, but this is vague, informal, and unspecific. It would be more intriguing to compare which of the two men had a stronger influence on the world (and on current knowledge). So, I would politely ask the voter to disregard the contention regarding Einstein's musical interests; this is not relevant for the debate.
RELEVANCE TO THE FRAMEWORK
I proceed to refute my opponent's contentions and show how they do NOT show that Einstein had a greater influence on society. First, my opponent claims that Albert Einstein disovered the photoelectric effect. This is blantantly untrue. It was Heinrich Hertz who observed that light can be thought of as an electromagnetic wave but also that it carries energy. Albert Einstein simply elaborated this principle and then constructed an essay about it. It is a stretch to grant photoelectric effect to Einstein.
With regard to the contention about audacity, again this is not relevant to the framework of the debate: which man had a larger impact on society. Just because Einstein's ideas were laughed at but then reconsidered does not mean that he was more influential on society. Please disregard the section that starts with "Breaking barriers".
The section regarding philanthropy is only tangentially related to the debate, but I will let it stand for now. I proceed to my contentions to discuss why Newton is much more influential than Einstein. If my opponent is unable to show that Einstein's impacts on society overwhelmingly outweigh Newton's, the Con (Newton) should win this round. (I also recommend that the Pro change the name of the debate to "Resolved: Albert Einstein had a larger impact on society than did Isaac Newton."
My opponent facilitates my contentions by listing the primary discoveries and developments of Isaac Newton: mechanics, calculus, gravitaiton, and so many others. I will briefly describe each of these discoveries and why each of them are so much more valuable and intriguing than anything that Einstein was able to derive.
NEWTON AND GRAVITATION
When Isaac Newton was asleep under an apple tree one afternoon, an apple fell on his head unexpectedly. This led him to believe (and publicize) the notion that there exists a force of attraction between two bodies of mass: in this case, the apple and planet Earth. This makes Newton's law of gravitation extremely interesting and relevant to today's society. Children of all ages and hobbies will ask why things tend to "go down" or why the sun appears to rise each morning and set each evening. All of these groundbreaking phenomena cannot be taken for granted; they are the conclusions of Isaac Newton. Albert Einstein might have paved the way for special relativity and general relativity, but these topics are extremely esoteric; they apply only to those who are scientifically inclined and not to the average American who wants to know more about how the foundational world works.
NEWTON, DERIVATIVES, AND INTEGRALS
Calculus is defined as the mathematical study of change, in the same way that algebra is the mathematical study of relationships. It is a very essential field in a wide variety of disciplines, some of which are not as technical as one might expect: mathematics, physics, engineering, economics, psychology, chemistry, and a wide variety of other topics. Due to Isaac Newton, we are able to explain what it means to differentiate a function with respect to a variable, or how to find the area of a region that is enclosed by two curves. These fundamentals might seem mathematically advanced, but in truth they are the underlying methods by which we understand and interpret statistics, rates of changes, areas, sums, and everything else that anybody might use in his life. Again, Einstein's work in relativity and light is somewhat relevant, but it just fails to bear the same impact that gravitation and calculus do. Already, Newton is seen as more influential than Einstein.
LONGER, MORE SUSTAINED IMPACT
A voter might be concerned that Albert Einstein is a much more recent scient (1900's as opposed to the 1600's) than Isaac Newton. However, if anything, this means that Newton was indeed more influential. The several-hundred-year-old work of Isaac Newton has provided an intellectual basis for much more mathematical and scientific theory that has been discovered and utilitized by other scientists, such as Einstein himself. In other words, Isaac Newton's theories are older and have been part of the reason why Albert Einstein is so undeservingly prominent.
WHEN NEWTON BROUGHT MATH AND PHYSICS TOGETHER
Isaac Newton also built the first reflecting telescope, allowing us to understand and apply crucial principles of ray optics, lenses, and mirrors. Newoon also developed a theory of color based on a prism that decomposed white light into all of the colors of the visible spectrum. This is one of Pink Floyd's most famous graphics and is rooted in science that is attributable only to Isaac Newton. He also formulated a law of cooling (known as Newton's law of cooling, which is a differential equation that relies not only on physics/chemistry but also on mathematics), determined a quantity for the speed of sound, and introduced a Newtonian fluid.
In addition to discovering and developing basic differential and integral calculus, the mathematician in Newton developed the poewr series, the binomial theorem, a root-finding method studied in numerical analysis (known as Newton's method), and cubic plane curves. These are all incredible feats for someone who lived so long ago.
Isaac Newton also approximated partial sums of the harmonic series by using logarithms and was the first to use power series with confidence. This type of mathematics might not be learned until high school or college, but for anyone with the least bit of a quantitative career (all careers except perhaps religion or history), Newton's discoveries and conclusions are crucially important.
Isaac Newton developed three laws of motion, which can be summarized in two sentences: a net force that is applied in a certain direction to a mass causes the mass to accelerate in that direction. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. These are essential properties that explain why it is hard to push a heavy crate forward, why we rush forward when we are driving a car and quickly come to a stop, why a block of ice has a hard time decelerating when it is moving on another block of ice. These are crucial theories that are conveniently summed up in Newton's laws of motion.
Isaac Newton also publicized his heliocentric view of the Solar System. His insights on this verified the validity of this view and allowed Albert Einstein (and everyone else falling after Newton) to know that the Earth orbits the Sun.
ALSO A MATHEMATICIAN
What ultimately makes Isaac Newotn much more influential than Albert Einstein is that he was not only a physicist but also a mathematician. My opponent briefly mentions Bose-Einstein statistics; this might be misconstrued as mathematical, but in truth it relates only to complicated physics theory that only 1% of people would argue "is influential". The mathematics that Isaac Newton grew to understand, publish, and spread has led many generations to understand mathematics better and to use it to their intellectual advantage. Einstein is simply a physicist, so anyone who does not like physics is neither impacted nor influenced by Einstein's theories.
Isaac Newton is overwhelmingly more influential than Albert Einstein. Please vote Con!
Before beginning I would like to thank my opponent for fabulously, spectacularly and splendidly ruining this debate. -_-
But nevertheless I'll clear up any misconceptions and set things straight.
RELEVANCE TO THE FRAMEWORK
Primarily, the resolution for this debate says 'Newton vs Einstein' which translates to Newton AGAINST Einstein and nothing more. There is not really anything vague about the resolution. For a contender who choses a scientist, he/she has to simply prove that their scientist is BETTER in ways they seem fit, that is quite all. If CON found this vague he could have either
a) Not chosen to accept this debate.
b) Could have asked and clarified about it in a PM or in the comments section.
He did neither. So his ranting in round 2 is quite unjustified.
Secondly, he claims I did not refute what he has said in round 1.
But all he has said is
'since the topic does not specify science (let alone physics), we will extend our arguments to which man had a bigger influence ALTOGETHER.'
Yes CON is right about one thing here the topic DOES NOT specify science alone and that exactly was the intention.
Next he wants to extend arguments to who had a bigger influence. But never said that the debate should ONLY be about that. There was no constraints imposed here and thus, there was no need for me to refute what CON said because simply because 'influence' too was a small subset of the whole debate.
My adversary wants the debate title to be changed to 'Resolved: Albert Einstein had a larger impact on society than did Isaac Newton'
I encourage him to instigate a debate of his own if he wants to debate the topics he desires but this debate is remaining the way it is meant to be.
With that cleared up I will now justify my contentions on why it makes Einstein BETTER than Newton.
better: more desirable, superior, or higher in quality.
The confidence in one's own discoveries is without argument something essential and desirable for a scientist.
C2) Possesion of other talents
Both Albert Einstein and Newton were talented in their own field. They both had the necessary curiosity to become great scientists and contribute a lot to the world. But apart from their ability to find answers to the mysteries of the universe what other abilities do they have? Einstein's talent in music takes him one step furthur than Newton because he clearly has something MORE than what they both had in common and thus that makes him better.
This is self explanatory. Going out of one's selfish interests to help another human being is definitely a desirable quality that makes a person better than his counterparts.
Humblesness is a virtue. Being humble after having had the success Einstein did is no ordinary feat. Thus it's a desirable quality in an individual as well and Einstein is more humble than Newton.
Now since my adversary insists on comparing influences I'll concur with him and show that Einstein too had equal if not more influence on the society. I do this simply because it's a part of the debate as well.[1,2]
i) Global Positioning System and Navigation
In order for your car's GPS navigation to function as accurately as it does, satellites have to take relativistic effects into account. This is because even though satellites aren't moving at anything close to the speed of light, they are still going pretty fast. The satellites are also sending signals to ground stations on Earth. These stations (and the GPS unit in your car) are all experiencing higher accelerations due to gravity than the satellites in orbit.
If no relativistic effects were accounted for, a GPS unit that tells you it's a half mile (0.8 km) to the next gas station would be 5 miles (8 km) off after only one day.
If Isaac Newton had been right in assuming that there is an absolute rest frame, we would have to come up with a different explanation for light, because it wouldn't HAPPEN AT ALL. "Not only would magnetism not exist but light would also not exist, because relativity requires that changes in an electromagnetic field move at a finite speed instead of instantaneously," Moore, of Pomona College, said. "If relativity did not enforce this requirement … changes in electric fields would be communicated instantaneously … instead of through electromagnetic waves, and both magnetism and light would be unnecessary."
iii) Nuclear Plants
Relativity is one reason that mass and energy can be converted into each other, which is how nuclear power plants work, and why the sun shines. Another important effect is in supernova explosions, which signal the death of massive stars.
It is thanks to his Special Theory of Relativity that we are able to receive such sharp images today. Electrons are accelerated in a television and, according to the Theory of Relativity, the mass of electrons thereby increases measurably. If one did not take this increase in mass into account, the electrons on the screen would show divergences in the millimetre range. All the images would be blurred.
v) Digital Cameras
Digital cameras can only take pictures because they contain a small sensor which converts light into electricity. The principle can be traced directly back to Einstein, who explained the Photoelectric Effect in 1905. Not only does this work form the basis for the development of all equipment which converts light into electricity – from digital cameras to solar cells – it also earned him the Nobel Prize in November 1921 (awarded 1922).
All technologies which involve the use of laser beams are based on Einsteins theories. In 1924, Einstein was the first person to recognise the principles of monochrome, bundled laser light.
So you see Einstein's theories are all around us in the form of practical applications.
Now I'll move on to examine my opponent's case.
He claims, It is a stretch to grant photoelectric effect to Einstein.
To this I have only one thing to say, 'If we were to accept Einstein never created the theory of Photoelectric effect then Newton never created calculus as well'. I mean Einstein was given the Nobel Prize for his discovery of the law of the photoelectric effect! Heinrich Hertz merely observed it happening and never gave a cogent explanation for it. If we were to follow my adversary's logic then Newton shouldn't be credited with calculus either because there is undeniable proof that it was created 250 years ago in India before Newton. Furthermore, Leibniz too had independently contributed a lot to the fundamentals of calculus so in effect my opponents arguments should fail as well.
Einstein’s Contribution to Mathematics
My adversary makes it look like Einstein had nothing to do with mathematics but the truth is even though Einstein was remembered for his contributions to physics, he also made contributions in mathematics. He contributed several equations to calculus and geometry, ten of which are called the Einstein Field Equations. He first published these equations in 1915. 
I have made a cogent case and have firmly established that Einstein is much better than Newton. Five of my contentions are still unrefuted and I’ve provided enough evidence that upholds my stance in this debate. I request voters to not get distracted by CON’s derailment of this debate and vote according to who has done a better job at making a convincing case in accordance with the resolution of this debate.
My opponent's conduct is very poor, and the voters need to be extremely aware of this. He gets carried away with ad hominem attacks and insults. I have not "ruined" the debate; I have merely challenged the framework of it and will proceed to return to the framework debate.
Please, do not weigh contentions on "who was better than the other person". This is a silly framework that is ambiguous. What does better mean? My opponent tries to define it, but it's just too broad and too vague. I suggested at the very beginning of the debate that we consider which man was more influential, and we are sticking to that framework, especially since my opponent agreed to it in the previous round and yet for some reason wants to take it back now. The arguments about piano playing and all this other nonsense are non-topical, so voters should ignore these arguments without me even needing to refute them.
I just asked to change the name of the debate, because "Newton v. Einstein" is very vague and unprofessional. Furthermore, with that title, it seems as though the Pro is arguing to Newton while Con is promoting Einstein, but it is the opposite of this. I am just trying to make sure that this debate is professional and objective and clear, but my opponent is having a very hard time trying to keep it that way.
Ok, now with all of the technical and semantic details cleared out, I can finally re-refute my opponent's contentions. He did not refute ANY of my contentions. For example, he did not counter my impacts of Newton's laws, Newton's numerical method of root-finding, Newtonian solids, or anything in between. He will have one more chance (round) to refute these impacts, but so far I have demonstrated why these impacts collectively go much further (i.e. were much more influential) than just special and general relativity, which are really the only things that Einstein can claim to fame.
So, my opponent chooses to bring up audacity again. I already explained why Newton is more audacious than Einstein. So, this argument no longer holds, especially since the one sentence that my opponent provided this round does nothing to support this argument. Even if Einstein were more audacious than Newton, this does not explain why Einstein had a greater influence than Newton and therefore should not be considered by voters.
For the "possession of other talents" section, again my opponent fails to interpret the framework. Even if Einstein was able to play the piano or whatever, this has absolutely no impact on society today and therefore does not tie back to the framework. It is therefore an irrelevant argument. My opponent must remember to be topical and provide reasons only why Einstein was more influential. He is failed to do this so far and is quickly running out of chances to do so.
Same for philanthropy. It is non-topical.
It seems as though this debate has become less of a content debate and more of a framework debate, which is the unfortunate truth. Voters can ask themselves: "Does the fact that Einstein played piano but Newton didn't, make Einstein a more influential man? Is piano-playing what I should remember Einstein by?" No, this has nothing to do with which man had a greater influence on society. Hopefully, the rest of the debate can be more about content, because the framework for the rest of the debate is "which man had a greater influence on [present-day] society?"
The rest of my opponent's case is simply a condescending science lessno about how the GPS and light work. Albert Einstein was not responsible for any of these impacts. The first global positioning system on the economic market was released decades after the publication of Einstein's essays in 1905. Nuclear plants have nothing to do with Einstein's arguments, so it is bafflilng to me why the opponent thinks that he can attribute scientific discoveries to Einsteni. Television agian has nothing to do with Einstein. If you are not convinced by this, I have posted some articles that underline the history of these developments. Rarely do they even mention Albert Einstein. I will also show in the evidence section how Isaac Newton was directly responsible for much of the mathematical and scientific knowledge that we have available today: GRAVITY, FORCE, CALCULUS, ALGEBRA, and everything in between. Newton's impacts are much more tangible, relevant, and most importantly much more influential to present-day society than Einstein's were.
My opponent tires to describe Einstein Field Equations as finally one mathematical influence that Albert Einstein had. While these equations are technically mathematical, they are not really rooted in mathematics; they didn't help mathematics go any further or become any deeper, they simply were an algebraic way to describe the theory of general relativity. Then, my opponent can argue that these equations demonstrate Einstein's discovery of general relativity. Yes, they do, but this is a narrow and esoteric field of knowledge that simply does not demonstrate anywhere near the amount of impact that Isaac Newton's laws of motion, for example, have had.
Contrary to what my opponent whats voters to believe, I did counter all of my opponent's contentions, not only in this round but also in the round before. I will spend the rest of this round highlighting Newton's achievements and then substantiating them with irrefutable evidence.
We proceed to return to the topical arguments I made in the previous round. Remember that evidence is provided for all of them at the bottom of this section:
1. Albert Einstein did not discover the photoelectric effect; Heinrich Hertz did.
2. Isaac Newton developed laws of motion that are taught to almost every middle school and high school student. They are influential because they explain why an apple can fall on a man's head, or why a heavy box barely moves when one applies a force to it. These are tangible and extremely relevant impacts that should be considered by the voters.
3. Newton's theory of gravitation explain why the planets orbit the Sun, rather than vice versa. This is important for astronomy, physics, and space exploration, wide fields which in turn lend themselves to a huge number of other applications.
4. Gottfried Leibniz assisted Isaac Newton in paving the way for differential and integral calculus that economists, engineers, physicists, chemists, and everyone in between takes advantage of each day. Without calculus, we would not be able to mathematically interpret the notion of "change".
5. Isaac Newton lived and discovered hundreds of years before Albert Einstein did. This means that a huge number of scientists after Newton used Newton's work to facilitate their own discoveries. Furthermore, this should not be a handicap. Even if Einstein developed "deeper" science than Newton, this is only because Einstein had more knowledge available to him.
6. Newton is responsible for the theory of color, the law of cooling, ray optics, the speed of sound, and Newtonian fluids. Each of these impacts are hugely influential and must individually be refuted by my opponent in the next round.
7. Newton is responsible for a huge amount of mathematics, not just physics. This includes Newton's method, the binomial theorem, and a wide variety of other, useful mathematical techniques.
My opponent now has the burden of justifying his own contentions, tying them back to the framework (greater inflience), and successfully refuting my contentions, none of which he has done this far. If he is unable to achieve all three of these burdens within the next 72 hours, you should immediately vote Con.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|