The history of scientists is often hype, simplified and turned into easily digestible semi-fictions. For example in this controversy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leibniz–Newton_calculus_controversy it’s often said that “they each developed their ideas independently and then got mad and claimed they stole each other’s ideas”. But how independently DID they work on their Calculi? I have no doubt a slightly deeper reading of the history of the time would uncover some of the fictions that go along with their biographies; inspirational tales told to current and future mathematicians and physicists to encourage them on their work, the messy details left aside for historians. For example, to understand Newton, it’s important to understand medieval impetus theories; there more to it than Newton dabbling in alchemy: alchemy _was_ a science at the time and taken very seriously and a number of ideas from alchemy made it into modern mathematics and modern sciences.

it’s often said that “they each developed their ideas independently and then got mad and claimed they stole each other’s ideas”.

But how independently DID they work on their Calculi?

I have no doubt a slightly deeper reading of the history of the time would uncover some of the fictions that go along with their biographies; inspirational tales told to current and future mathematicians and physicists to encourage them on their work, the messy details left aside for historians.

For example, to understand Newton, it’s important to understand medieval impetus theories; there more to it than Newton dabbling in alchemy: alchemy _was_ a science at the time and taken very seriously and a number of ideas from alchemy made it into modern mathematics and modern sciences.