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
Keywords Isaac Newton  Robert Hooke  law of gravitation
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Invention of Celestial Mechanics.Ofer Gal - 2005 - Early Science and Medicine 10 (4):529-534.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Hooke and the Law of Universal Gravitation: A Reappraisal Af a Reappraisal.Richard S. Westfall - 1967 - British Journal for the History of Science 3 (3):245-261.
The Structure of a Scientific Controversy: Hooke Versus Newton About Colors.Maurizio Mamiani - 2000 - In Peter K. Machamer, Marcello Pera & Aristeidēs Baltas (eds.), Scientific Controversies: Philosophical and Historical Perspectives. Oxford University Press. pp. 143.
Isaac Newton (1642–1727).Zvi Biener - 2017 - Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Hooke and Linus: Critics of Newton’s Theory of Light.F. F. Centore - 1969 - Philosophical Studies (Dublin) 18:14-24.
Hooke and Linus: Critics of Newton’s Theory of Light.F. F. Centore - 1969 - Philosophical Studies (Dublin) 18:14-24.


Added to PP index

Total views
814 ( #8,857 of 2,518,495 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
250 ( #1,880 of 2,518,495 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes