Originally Posted By: Bill
So I don't see where Finiter's problem is. Except that he apparently doesn't understand just how energy works.

Not that I do not understand the present notion, but that I argue the present notion is not correct.

You have stated the three laws of motion. If you take the first law as a physical law, then it implies that a body can remain at rest, and a body can move along a straight line. If we take it as a mathematical law, then it is just a law regarding motion; the body is just an imaginary concept used to explain motion. Then, it does not say anything about a physical body: whether it can remain at rest or whether it can move along a straight line, etc.(I would argue that nothing, not even light, can move along a straight-line path in a three-dimensional space)

Regarding the second law, I have already explained the difference.

If the third law is taken as a physical law, then it is not clear where the action and reaction are. Newton has not stated whether the same body will be subjected to both action and reaction, and whether the action and reaction happens at the same time. Why did he not specify that? I argue that he intended the law to be mathematical. When there is an action there will be reaction; it is the mathematical law of conservation. If you add 'x', then you have to remove 'x' for conservation, and that is what the third law states.