[allyoop1234 (OP)]

Newton's third law says "For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.". In my opinion, this is not right at all.bIt's not just the fact that there is no such thing
as equality, given no two things can ever be exactly the same, but it's also not right in other ways. He said, when you sit on a chair you have an equally opposing Force to the
Force of you sitting down, yet, he said Force is equal to mass by acceleration. The mass of you combined with the acceleration of you sitting down is completly different than
the mass and the acceleration of the chair counteracting the downward force. So this is completely contradictory. If it were an "...equal and opposite reaction" when you would
kick a football, your exact same foot would come out of the football and kick you're foot, and of course, that doesn't happen. Instead, the ball lifts into the air, it picks up pace,
it spins, it bends, it dips, the goal keeper dives, the ball hits the post, it hits the back of the net, the keeper lands, the fans cheer, the footballers celebrate, the ball goes
back for kick off and then it just keeps going. So the concept of "...equal and opposite reaction" is flawed. It is everything but that. Look at an atomic bomb, you split a tiny atom
and it produces one of the largest destructive forces the planet has ever seen. If it was "..an equal and opposite reaction" the atom would just combine again. If it were
"..an equal and opposite reaction" there would be no Universe because after the Big Bang the universe would have automatically detracted back into itself.
Consider your life, After the egg gets fertilized, you grow, you're born, you make any multitude of decisions in your life each if which have the capacity to bring you down
a completely different direction thereby having a completely different outcome and it keeps going until you die and then it continues again in your afterlife.and it just keeps going
indefinitely with you making decisions all along the way.

So based on this, this law needs to changed to

"For every action, there is an infinite number of reactions of varying strength and varying direction"

Final example: When does the aftermath of a nuclear bomb end? The answer is, never! There is always going to be something reacting in accordance to that one event.
So, every action has an inifnite number of reactions of varying strength and varying direction.

[Kryptid]

when you would kick a football, your exact same foot would come out of the football and kick you're foot, and of course, that doesn't happen.

I... I don't even... you're kidding right? Please don't tell me that you actually think Newton's laws suggest something that ridiculous.

[evan_au]

your exact same foot would come out of the football and kick you're foot, and of course, that doesn't happen

Newton's laws of motion does describe the forces involved in kicking a football. It does not ascribe these forces to little homunculi living inside the football.

When you kick a football, the kinetic energy of your foot and leg is transferred to the ball by means of forces between your shoe and the ball. This is much more complicated than two billiard balls hitting each other; these forces build up and fall away in a complicated way that would have to be modeled on a computer.

But the outcome is that the force from your foot on the ball causes the ball to accelerate, and the equal and opposite force of the ball on your foot causes your foot and leg to decelerate. If you were perfectly efficient as a kicker, at the start the ball would be stationary, and at the end your foot would be stationary, with all of the kinetic energy transferred to the ball.

you split a tiny atom and it produces one of the largest destructive forces the planet has ever seen. If it was "..an equal and opposite reaction" the atom would just combine again

There are systems where things split apart and recombine repeatedly; this is the concept of an equilibrium in chemistry.

However, where a large amount of energy is released (eg in a nuclear explosion), the reaction tends to go all the way in one direction, with no going back.
At the detailed level, Newton's laws of motion do explain how the force of superheated plasma in a nuclear explosion can flatten buildings and turn over vehicles. But it does not attempt to deal with temperature (Carnot did that with thermodynamics) or nuclear interactions (Otto Hahn et al did that), or even the political repercussions of a rogue state setting off a nuclear explosion today...

You have to use scientific laws within a certain realm of applicability; if you use judicial law injudiciously, you would rightly come to the conclusion that "the law is an ass".

every action has an infinite number of reactions of varying strength and varying direction.

Newton's laws are a statement in Physics, specifically in the area of motion of individual objects, and shows how you can predict the outcome of an individual encounter (at least, down to the level of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, of which Newton was unaware).

The proposed improvement is a statement in philosophy, or perhaps thermodynamics, where there are an immense number of statistically possible outcomes, and you give up trying to predict the outcomes of individual encounters.

[@@]

Cause and affect, it does sound like there's two things happening but there's actually only one thing happening, and that one thing is the actual point of impact. Both the boot and the ball can be seen as the impactor or the impacted, what's more is they are both the impactor and the impacted all at the same time.
  Like in a simple sum 1+3, the boot and the ball (the impactor or the impacted) can be either. They would go on forever and ever being 1 and 3 until they meet or come together, the result is always the same, nothing is gained or lost in the meeting Fore instance, if the boot is coming towards the ball at 30mph and hits it ( doesn't matter which one is doing the moving)  one will slow down and the other one will speed up, the 30mph will never be lost

[@@]

PS, don't ever get caught in your own subjective bubble. Newtons Law is only a well established set of sums/equations, that work perfectly for the world that we see on a human being's size.
  Pretty well all the questions we, as enthusiasts, can think of, have already been posited and  answered.

[chris]

Newtons Law is only a well established set of sums/equations, that work perfectly for the world that we see on a human being's size.

I don't think that's entirely true; they work well, not perfectly, which is what gave Einstein his break.

[allyoop1234 (OP)]

when you would kick a football, your exact same foot would come out of the football and kick you're foot, and of course, that doesn't happen.

I... I don't even... you're kidding right? Please don't tell me that you actually think Newton's laws suggest something that ridiculous.

People like you shouldn't bother posting at all if you're going to be rude like that. Don't wb.

[puppypower]

Newton's law of action and reaction is more concerned with forces, and not necessarily all the variety of things that may result from applying a force. If you were designing a machine that moves up and down, side to side, and had to specific the materials, Newton's law says you can draw a force diagram at every junction of a complex process, that is transmitting the original force from the motor. There is a conservation of force. that allows you to know what to expect. Some part of the machine may need to be steel and others can use plastics.

Often in Newtonian Physics, one uses the example of billiard balls to demonstrate the law of action and reaction, since these are hard and effectively transmit the force in complete ways. If you use tennis balls or footballs, the analysis becomes more complex in terms of how the forces spread out. But once you figure that out; materials and continuum mechanics, all the forces will balance out.

[allyoop1234 (OP)]

[qoute]

every action has an infinite number of reactions of varying strength and varying direction.

Newton's laws are a statement in Physics, specifically in the area of motion of individual objects, and shows how you can predict the outcome of an individual encounter (at least, down to the level of Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, of which Newton was unaware).

The proposed improvement is a statement in philosophy, or perhaps thermodynamics, where there are an immense number of statistically possible outcomes, and you give up trying to predict the outcomes of individual encounters.
[/quote]
[/quote]

Thanks for all of that, that's a great answer. Ok, so more philosophical. I was menat to put it in the "New Theories" section. Any value in doing that now or is there nothing here of value? Thanks

[allyoop1234 (OP)]

Newtons Law is only a well established set of sums/equations, that work perfectly for the world that we see on a human being's size.

I don't think that's entirely true; they work well, not perfectly, which is what gave Einstein his break.

Thank you, i agree, nothings perfect, if it's not for speculation and it's not for questioning no-one would ever get anywhere in science. After reading these comments i can see the reasoning is flawed.

Oh, well better look next time.

[Kryptid]

you shouldn't bother posting at all if you're going to be rude like that. Don't wb.

You're right, I should have thought my post through more carefully. I apologize. I think your example took "equal and opposite" too literally.