Newton merely algebraized Kepler's three orbital constraints,
which enabled Gauss to determine the orbit of Ceres,
using only three sightings (and I think,
the assumption that Earth's orbit is circular,
was close-enough for such determination .-)

NB: Gauss didn't bother with Newton's thing for that,
I assume. Newton's "laws" indeed are the two-body problem,
with the proviso that he stole the inverse-second-power "law"
from Hooke, whose portraits were burned by President N.

that quote about Dirac, sounds very Islamic!

Your encyclopedia is wrong. Keplers' laws are a special case of the
solution to the two body problem of Newtonian theory of gravity. They
give no where near enough accuracy for most space probe work. For that

You mean, unlike Kepler's laws, Newton's theory of gravity and motion
ARE the cornerstone of space-flight planning, except where cases of
utmost accuracy is needed and then relativistic effects must be taken
into account.

"If I understand Dirac correctly, his meaning is this: there is no God,
and Dirac is his Prophet,"

this just in:
yesterday's (Tues,. Nov.15) *UCLA Daily Bruin* finally noted that
darfur is entirely Muslim, though downplaying it AMAP.

thus:
Dick Cheeny, Don Rumsfeld and Osama bin Latin form a mission
to Darfur, to prevent a war instead of to start one:
if Darfur is "100% Muslim," then
what's really going on, there?
is it just aother British Quag for USA soldiers to get bogged
into, with Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan et al ad vomitorium,
under auspices of the UN and NATO?

why won't the Bruin publish the fact of Islam on the ground,
therein?

thus:
Why doesn't the [UCLA Daily] Bruin report that
Darfur's populace is "100%" Muslim,
according to the DAC's sponsor,
Terry Saunders?...
"99%" was the figure given
by Brian Steidle, when I finally found
him at the Hammer, after everyone else
had left (he, his friend & I were the
very last to leave!)...
What could it possibly mean?

--The Other Side (if it exists)