I show that Aristotelian physics is a correct and non-intuitive approximation of Newtonian physics in the suitable domain (motion in fluids), in the same technical sense in which Newton theory is an approximation of Einstein’s theory. Aristotelian physics lasted long not because it became dogma, but because it is a very good empirically grounded theory. The observation suggests some general considerations on inter-theoretical relations.
This is a good counter-arguement! Though I think the missing factor of a square root doesn’t change the qualitative nature of natural i.e. steady-state motion. But that’s not much of a defence, is it? Especially when Aristotle stuck his neck out by saying double the weight, double the speed. It is to his detriment that he didn’t check.
No? At least, Aristotelian physics was a reasonable approximation of Newtonian physics when you care about motion in fluids in everyday life.
See the paper “Aristotle’s Physics: A Physicist’s Look”. Here’s the abstract
Here is a counter-argument against Rovelli I found reasonable: Aristotle and Falling Objects | Diagonal Argument
This is a good counter-arguement! Though I think the missing factor of a square root doesn’t change the qualitative nature of natural i.e. steady-state motion. But that’s not much of a defence, is it? Especially when Aristotle stuck his neck out by saying double the weight, double the speed. It is to his detriment that he didn’t check.
That part seems reasonable.