Pith. Sign in

RECORD

Modern light on ancient feud: Robert Hooke and Newton's graphical method

PaperPDF from arXiv

data files

Paper breakdownThe authors' claims, conditions and measurements, as JSON Signed receiptProof this review has not been altered
X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit Hacker News
Siu A. Chin

History and Philosophy of Physics · Submitted 13 Jun 2021

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim A detailed comparison between this analytical orbit and Hooke's drawing shows that it is unlikely that Hooke had used Newton's graphical method and obtained the correct orbit.

how it is stated · hedged possibility 0.73 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗
Cite ▾
arXiv ID2106.07082 (version 1)
Pith IDQGVASNBY, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review
CitationSiu A. Chin. "Modern light on ancient feud: Robert Hooke and Newton's graphical method." arXiv:2106.07082 (2021). https://pith.science/paper/QGVASNBY
Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,419 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.05 · states limitation 0.18 · human participants 0.02 · controlled comparison 0.10 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.05 · compares with prior results 0.86 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; .

The feud between Robert Hooke and Isaac Newton has remained ongoing even after 300 years, over whether Newton should have acknowledged Hooke's influence on his graphical method of constructing planet orbits, the celebrated Proposition 1, Theorem 1 of the $Principia$. The drama has escalated in recent decades, with a claim that Hooke may have used the same method and obtained an elliptical orbit for a linear force, a feat that some considered Newton never did for the inverse-square force. Modern understanding of Newton's graphical method as a symplectic integrator can now shed light on whether this claim is creditable. This work, based on knowing the Hamiltonian of the symplectic integrator, deduced the analytical orbit corresponding to Newton's graphical construction. A detailed comparison between this analytical orbit and Hooke's drawing shows that it is unlikely that Hooke had used Newton's graphical method and obtained the correct orbit.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#sentencerolethe authors' own workstates the main conclusionstrength
s0 The feud between Robert Hooke and Isaac Newton has remained ongoing even after 300 years, over whether Newton should have acknowledged Hooke's influence on his graphical method of constructing planet orbits, the celebrated Proposition 1, Theorem 1 of the $Principia$. background 1.00 0.03 0.03 asserted 0.99
s1 The drama has escalated in recent decades, with a claim that Hooke may have used the same method and obtained an elliptical orbit for a linear force, a feat that some considered Newton never did for the inverse-square force. background 0.97 0.04 0.03 hedged possibility 1.00
s2 Modern understanding of Newton's graphical method as a symplectic integrator can now shed light on whether this claim is creditable. method 0.30 0.14 0.05 hedged possibility 0.70
s3 This work, based on knowing the Hamiltonian of the symplectic integrator, deduced the analytical orbit corresponding to Newton's graphical construction. method 0.70 0.94 0.06 asserted 1.00
s4 A detailed comparison between this analytical orbit and Hooke's drawing shows that it is unlikely that Hooke had used Newton's graphical method and obtained the correct orbit. result 0.87 0.91 0.93 hedged possibility 0.73

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.96 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.99.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read
  • arXiv listing abstract v1
not examined
  • full text
  • figures and tables
  • references and citing sentences
  • relations to other papers
levels run
  • P abstract
not run
  • S sections
  • T body sentences
  • C citations
  • R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper
Original abstract

The feud between Robert Hooke and Isaac Newton has remained ongoing even after 300 years, over whether Newton should have acknowledged Hooke's influence on his graphical method of constructing planet orbits, the celebrated Proposition 1, Theorem 1 of the $Principia$. The drama has escalated in recent decades, with a claim that Hooke may have used the same method and obtained an elliptical orbit for a linear force, a feat that some considered Newton never did for the inverse-square force. Modern understanding of Newton's graphical method as a symplectic integrator can now shed light on whether this claim is creditable. This work, based on knowing the Hamiltonian of the symplectic integrator, deduced the analytical orbit corresponding to Newton's graphical construction. A detailed comparison between this analytical orbit and Hooke's drawing shows that it is unlikely that Hooke had used Newton's graphical method and obtained the correct orbit.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.