Freedom of Science

Water inside a rotating sphere:

I assume that the spiral shape arises because the bottom of the vortex touches the sphere?
Here’s a simplified geometry of the same phenomenon:

This is figure 11.7: Shape of liquid surface in a rotating bucket, in Equilibrium statistical physics by Michael Plischke and Birger Bergersen. They reason that “in a normal fluid, […]

Every important unit in physics progresses through five stages. The following process is a constant of physics and cannot be changed.
1. No unit
Initially a proportionality new to physics is stated without a unit. In the 18th century physics textbooks stated “Newton’s law” as 1/R2. Just like that, no unit, no constant and no M&ms attached […]

Is there really a distinction between a physical quantity and a non-physical quantity? Judging from the definition of physical quantity, there isn’t. “Physical” means “belonging or owned by the profession of physics.” If a quantity exists in the legal physics code, it is called a physical quantity. It is implied that only what belongs to […]

To me F=ma is an absurd statement which is equal to

Here’s the derivation: F is the Newtonian force. By definition the Newtonian force acts instantaneously from a distance. Therefore, for the Newtonian force all distances are zero. As far as F is concerned radius R of any orbit is zero because F traverses any […]

Newton was a crank and a recluse and a religious bigot who spent much of his time dwelling in a self-generated fog of superstition and crankery . . . says Christopher Hitchins.1 I guess Newton still had enough quality time left to orchestrate one of the greatest upheavals in European history. Newton was able to […]

Urs Schreiber in article Charges and Twisted Bundles, III: Anomalies writes:
They are called “anomalies”, I’d say, because to a large extent in physics the approach is to pretend that working locally is fine – until one happens to run head-on into global issues. A mathematician might say at this point: “We made a mistake at […]

In their derivation of orbital motion physicists write down the mass m of the orbiting satellite and later cancel it and they conclude correctly that the orbit is not dependent on m, as stated on this NASA page:
There is an important concept evident in all three equations – the period, speed and the acceleration [i.e. […]

1. F=ma
Physicists start their derivation with

This statement may be meaningful to physicists but the truth is that all three terms, F, m and a, disappear during the derivation. None of these Newtonian terms enter the formula used to compute orbits. From this observation we must conclude that F, m and a are not quantities that […]

From Dreams of Calculus - Perspectives on Mathematics Education:1
Classical Greek or Latin formed an important part of secondary education only 50 years ago, with motivations similar to those currently used for mathematics: studies in these subjects would help develop logical thinking and problem solving skills. Today, very few students take Greek and Latin with […]

The ignorance or willing negligence of data types allows physicists to write absurd statements such as

Physicists are very proud of the logo of the House of Newton but what does it mean to multiply two masses?
It is

absurd

physical

Type Newton
In the multiplication

both M and m are type Newton. Yesterday we saw that little m, […]