Answer: 11.4 million

Context: By the opening of the 2008 General Conference, total UMC membership was estimated at 11.4 million, with about 7.9 million in the U.S. and 3.5 million overseas. Significantly, about 20% of the conference delegates were from Africa, with Filipinos and Europeans making up another 10%. During the conference, the delegates voted to finalize the induction of the Methodist Church of the Ivory Coast and its 700,000 members into the denomination. Given current trends in the UMC—with overseas churches growing, especially in Africa, and U.S. churches collectively losing about 1,000 members a week—it has been estimated that Africans will make up at least 30% of the delegates at the 2012 General Conference, and it is also possible that 40% of the delegates will be from outside the U.S. One Congolese bishop has estimated that typical Sunday attendance of the UMC is higher in his country than in the entire United States.

Question: By the opening of the 2008 General Conference, what was the total UMC membership?


Answer: 7.9 million

Question: By the opening of the 2008 General Conference, what was the total UMC membership in the U.S.?


Answer: 3.5 million

Question: By the opening of the 2008 General Conference, what was the total UMC membership overseas?


Answer: Wesleyan Holiness Consortium

Context: The UMC is also a member of the Wesleyan Holiness Consortium, which seeks to reconceive and promote Biblical holiness in today's Church. It is also active in the World Methodist Council, an interdenominational group composed of various churches in the tradition of John Wesley to promote the Gospel throughout the world. On July 18, 2006, delegates to the World Methodist Council voted unanimously to adopt the "Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification", which was approved in 1999 by the Vatican and the Lutheran World Federation.

Question: Which group seeks to reconceive and promote Biblical holiness in today's church?


Answer: World Methodist Council

Question: What is an interdenominational group composed of various churches to promote the Gospel throughout the world?


Answer: July 18, 2006

Question: When did delegates to the World Methodist Council vote to adopt the joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification?"


Answer: 1754–1763

Context: The French and Indian War (1754–1763) was the North American theater of the worldwide Seven Years' War. The war was fought between the colonies of British America and New France, with both sides supported by military units from their parent countries of Great Britain and France, as well as Native American allies. At the start of the war, the French North American colonies had a population of roughly 60,000 European settlers, compared with 2 million in the British North American colonies. The outnumbered French particularly depended on the Indians. Long in conflict, the metropole nations declared war on each other in 1756, escalating the war from a regional affair into an intercontinental conflict.

Question: When was the French and Indian War?


Answer: colonies of British America and New France

Question: Who fought in the French and Indian war?


Answer: roughly 60,000 European settlers

Question: How many people were in French North American Colonies?


Answer: 2 million

Question: How many people were in British North American Colonies?


Answer: primarily along the frontiers between New France and the British colonies

Context: The war was fought primarily along the frontiers between New France and the British colonies, from Virginia in the South to Nova Scotia in the North. It began with a dispute over control of the confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers, called the Forks of the Ohio, and the site of the French Fort Duquesne and present-day Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The dispute erupted into violence in the Battle of Jumonville Glen in May 1754, during which Virginia militiamen under the command of 22-year-old George Washington ambushed a French patrol.

Question: Where was war fought?


Answer: dispute over control of the confluence of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers, called the Forks of the Ohio

Question: How did war start?


Answer: Battle of Jumonville Glen in May 1754,

Question: When did violence start in war?


Answer: 1755

Context: In 1755, six colonial governors in North America met with General Edward Braddock, the newly arrived British Army commander, and planned a four-way attack on the French. None succeeded and the main effort by Braddock was a disaster; he was defeated in the Battle of the Monongahela on July 9, 1755 and died a few days later. British operations in 1755, 1756 and 1757 in the frontier areas of Pennsylvania and New York all failed, due to a combination of poor management, internal divisions, and effective Canadian scouts, French regular forces, and Indian warrior allies. In 1755, the British captured Fort Beauséjour on the border separating Nova Scotia from Acadia; soon afterward they ordered the expulsion of the Acadians. Orders for the deportation were given by William Shirley, Commander-in-Chief, North America, without direction from Great Britain. The Acadians, both those captured in arms and those who had sworn the loyalty oath to His Britannic Majesty, were expelled. Native Americans were likewise driven off their land to make way for settlers from New England.

Question: When did colonial governors meet with General Edward Braddock about attack on the french?


Answer: disaster; he was defeated in the Battle of the Monongahela

Question: How successful was initial effort by Braddock?


Answer: combination of poor management, internal divisions, and effective Canadian scouts, French regular forces, and Indian warrior allies

Question: Why did British operation fail in 1755, 56, 57?


Answer: Fort Beauséjour

Question: In 1755 what fort did British capture?


Answer: expulsion of the Acadians

Question: What order did British make of French?


Answer: William Pitt

Context: After the disastrous 1757 British campaigns (resulting in a failed expedition against Louisbourg and the Siege of Fort William Henry, which was followed by Indian torture and massacres of British victims), the British government fell. William Pitt came to power and significantly increased British military resources in the colonies at a time when France was unwilling to risk large convoys to aid the limited forces it had in New France. France concentrated its forces against Prussia and its allies in the European theatre of the war. Between 1758 and 1760, the British military launched a campaign to capture the Colony of Canada. They succeeded in capturing territory in surrounding colonies and ultimately Quebec. Though the British were later defeated at Sainte Foy in Quebec, the French ceded Canada in accordance with the 1763 treaty.

Question: Who increased British military resources in colonies?


Answer: unwilling to risk large convoys to aid the limited forces it had in New France

Question: How much resources were French placing in North America?


Answer: against Prussia and its allies in the European theatre of the war.

Question: Where was France concentraing efforts?


Answer: Sainte Foy in Quebec

Question: Where were British defeated in Canada?


Answer: territory east of the Mississippi to Great Britain

Context: The outcome was one of the most significant developments in a century of Anglo-French conflict. France ceded its territory east of the Mississippi to Great Britain. It ceded French Louisiana west of the Mississippi River (including New Orleans) to its ally Spain, in compensation for Spain's loss to Britain of Florida (Spain had ceded this to Britain in exchange for the return of Havana, Cuba). France's colonial presence north of the Caribbean was reduced to the islands of Saint Pierre and Miquelon, confirming Britain's position as the dominant colonial power in eastern North America.

Question: What territory was ceded to Britain?


Answer: French Louisiana west of the Mississippi River (including New Orleans) to its ally Spain

Question: What land was ceded to Spain?


Answer: confirming Britain's position as the dominant colonial power in eastern North America

Question: What was the significance of British win?


Answer: 1740s

Context: The conflict is known by multiple names. In British America, wars were often named after the sitting British monarch, such as King William's War or Queen Anne's War. As there had already been a King George's War in the 1740s, British colonists named the second war in King George's reign after their opponents, and it became known as the French and Indian War. This traditional name continues as the standard in the United States, but it obscures the fact that Indians fought on both sides of the conflict, and that this was part of the Seven Years' War, a much larger conflict between France and Great Britain. American historians generally use the traditional name or sometimes the Seven Years' War. Other, less frequently used names for the war include the Fourth Intercolonial War and the Great War for the Empire.

Question: When was King George's war?


Answer: Indians fought on both sides of the conflict, and that this was part of the Seven Years' War

Question: What is the confusion of the French and Indian war?


Answer: much larger conflict between France and Great Britain

Question: What was the Seven Years War?


Answer: Fourth Intercolonial War and the Great War for the Empire

Question: What are other alternative names for French and Indian War?


Answer: declaration of war in 1756 to the signing of the peace treaty in 1763

Context: In Europe, the North American theater of the Seven Years' War usually is not given a separate name. The entire international conflict is known as the Seven Years' War. "Seven Years" refers to events in Europe, from the official declaration of war in 1756 to the signing of the peace treaty in 1763. These dates do not correspond with the fighting on mainland North America, where the fighting between the two colonial powers was largely concluded in six years, from the Battle of Jumonville Glen in 1754 to the capture of Montreal in 1760.

Question: What time framd does the Seven Years War cover?


Answer: six years

Question: How long did the fighting last in Seven Years War?


Answer: 1760

Question: When was Montreal captured?


Answer: Battle of Jumonville Glen

Question: What was first battle in 1754?


Answer: about 75,000

Context: The French population numbered about 75,000 and was heavily concentrated along the St. Lawrence River valley, with some also in Acadia (present-day New Brunswick and parts of Nova Scotia, including Île Royale (present-day Cape Breton Island)). Fewer lived in New Orleans, Biloxi, Mississippi, Mobile, Alabama and small settlements in the Illinois Country, hugging the east side of the Mississippi River and its tributaries. French fur traders and trappers traveled throughout the St. Lawrence and Mississippi watersheds, did business with local tribes, and often married Indian women. Traders married daughters of chiefs, creating high-ranking unions.

Question: What was French population in North America?


Answer: heavily concentrated along the St. Lawrence River valley, with some also in Acadia

Question: Where were French North Americans settled?


Answer: St. Lawrence and Mississippi watersheds, did business with local tribes, and often married Indian women

Question: Where did French fur trappers travel?


Answer: 20 to 1

Context: British settlers outnumbered the French 20 to 1 with a population of about 1.5 million ranged along the eastern coast of the continent, from Nova Scotia and Newfoundland in the north, to Georgia in the south. Many of the older colonies had land claims that extended arbitrarily far to the west, as the extent of the continent was unknown at the time their provincial charters were granted. While their population centers were along the coast, the settlements were growing into the interior. Nova Scotia, which had been captured from France in 1713, still had a significant French-speaking population. Britain also claimed Rupert's Land, where the Hudson's Bay Company traded for furs with local tribes.

Question: What was the ratio of British settler to French?


Answer: from Nova Scotia and Newfoundland in the north, to Georgia in the south

Question: Where did British settlers live?


Answer: along the coast, the settlements were growing into the interior

Question: Where were populations centered in colonies?


Answer: native tribes

Context: In between the French and the British, large areas were dominated by native tribes. To the north, the Mi'kmaq and the Abenaki were engaged in Father Le Loutre's War and still held sway in parts of Nova Scotia, Acadia, and the eastern portions of the province of Canada, as well as much of present-day Maine. The Iroquois Confederation dominated much of present-day Upstate New York and the Ohio Country, although the latter also included Algonquian-speaking populations of Delaware and Shawnee, as well as Iroquoian-speaking Mingo. These tribes were formally under Iroquois rule, and were limited by them in authority to make agreements.

Question: In between French and British, what groups controlled land?


Answer: Mi'kmaq and the Abenaki

Question: What tribes were in Father Le Loutre's War?


Answer: present-day Upstate New York and the Ohio Country

Question: Where did Iroquois Confederation control?


Answer: Iroquois rule, and were limited by them in authority to make agreements

Question: What rule did some native live under?


Answer: Catawba, Muskogee-speaking Creek and Choctaw

Context: Further south the Southeast interior was dominated by Siouan-speaking Catawba, Muskogee-speaking Creek and Choctaw, and the Iroquoian-speaking Cherokee tribes. When war broke out, the French used their trading connections to recruit fighters from tribes in western portions of the Great Lakes region (an area not directly subject to the conflict between the French and British), including the Huron, Mississauga, Ojibwa, Winnebago, and Potawatomi. The British were supported in the war by the Iroquois Six Nations, and also by the Cherokee – until differences sparked the Anglo-Cherokee War in 1758. In 1758 the Pennsylvania government successfully negotiated the Treaty of Easton, in which a number of tribes in the Ohio Country promised neutrality in exchange for land concessions and other considerations. Most of the other northern tribes sided with the French, their primary trading partner and supplier of arms. The Creek and Cherokee were subject to diplomatic efforts by both the French and British to gain either their support or neutrality in the conflict. It was not uncommon for small bands to participate on the "other side" of the conflict from formally negotiated agreements, as most tribes were decentralized and bands made their own decisions about warfare.

Question: What are the Siouan-speaking tribes?


Answer: western portions of the Great Lakes region

Question: What areas did French recruit natives from?


Answer: Iroquois Six Nations, and also by the Cherokee

Question: What tribes supported British?


Answer: no French regular army troops were stationed in North America

Context: At the start of the war, no French regular army troops were stationed in North America, and few British troops. New France was defended by about 3,000 troupes de la marine, companies of colonial regulars (some of whom had significant woodland combat experience). The colonial government recruited militia support when needed. Most British colonies mustered local militia companies, generally ill trained and available only for short periods, to deal with native threats, but did not have any standing forces.

Question: What was Frensh military presence at start of war?


Answer: few British troops

Question: How much British military was in North America at start of War?


Answer: mustered local militia companies, generally ill trained and available only for short periods, to deal with native threats, but did not have any standing forces.

Question: What was normal British defense?


Answer: about 3,000 miles (4,800 km) between June and November 1749.

Context: Céloron's expedition force consisted of about 200 Troupes de la marine and 30 Indians. The expedition covered about 3,000 miles (4,800 km) between June and November 1749. It went up the St. Lawrence, continued along the northern shore of Lake Ontario, crossed the portage at Niagara, and followed the southern shore of Lake Erie. At the Chautauqua Portage (near present-day Barcelona, New York), the expedition moved inland to the Allegheny River, which it followed to the site of present-day Pittsburgh. There Céloron buried lead plates engraved with the French claim to the Ohio Country. Whenever he encountered British merchants or fur-traders, Céloron informed them of the French claims on the territory and told them to leave.

Question: What was extent of Celeron's expedition?


Answer: 200 Troupes de la marine and 30 Indians

Question: Who was on Celeron's expedition?


Answer: British merchants or fur-traders, Céloron informed them of the French claims on the territory and told them to leave.

Question: How did Celeron handle business on trip?


Answer: informed Céloron that they owned the Ohio Country and that they would trade with the British regardless of the French

Context: When Céloron's expedition arrived at Logstown, the Native Americans in the area informed Céloron that they owned the Ohio Country and that they would trade with the British regardless of the French. Céloron continued south until his expedition reached the confluence of the Ohio and the Miami rivers, which lay just south of the village of Pickawillany, the home of the Miami chief known as "Old Briton". Céloron threatened "Old Briton" with severe consequences if he continued to trade with the British. "Old Briton" ignored the warning. Disappointed, Céloron returned to Montreal in November 1749.

Question: How did Natives in Logstown take Celeron's information?


Answer: village of Pickawillany

Question: Where did Old Briton call home?


Answer: threatened "Old Briton" with severe consequences if he continued to trade with the British

Question: How did Celeron handle meeting with Old Briton?


Answer: ignored the warning.

Question: What was Old Briton's response to Celeron?


Answer: very badly disposed towards the French, and are entirely devoted to the English

Context: In his extensively detailed report, Céloron wrote, "All I can say is that the Natives of these localities are very badly disposed towards the French, and are entirely devoted to the English. I don't know in what way they could be brought back." Even before his return to Montreal, reports on the situation in the Ohio Country were making their way to London and Paris, each side proposing that action be taken. William Shirley, the expansionist governor of the Province of Massachusetts Bay, was particularly forceful, stating that British colonists would not be safe as long as the French were present. Conflicts between the colonies, accomplished through raiding parties that included Indian allies, had taken place for decades, leading to a brisk trade in European colonial captives from either side.

Question: How did Celeron feel about Native relations?


Answer: proposing that action be taken

Question: How were leaders back in Europe feeling about news from Celeron expedition?


Answer: British colonists would not be safe as long as the French were present

Question: How did William Shirley feel about French advancement?


Answer: 1749

Context: In 1749 the British government gave land to the Ohio Company of Virginia for the purpose of developing trade and settlements in the Ohio Country. The grant required that it settle 100 families in the territory, and construct a fort for their protection. But, as the territory was also claimed by Pennsylvania, both colonies began pushing for action to improve their respective claims. In 1750 Christopher Gist, acting on behalf of both Virginia and the company, explored the Ohio territory and opened negotiations with the Indian tribes at Logstown. He completed the 1752 Treaty of Logstown in which the local Indians, through their "Half-King" Tanacharison and an Iroquois representative, agreed to terms that included permission to build a "strong house" at the mouth of the Monongahela River (the site of present-day Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania). By the late 17th century, the Iroquois had pushed many tribes out of the Ohio Valley, and kept it as hunting ground by right of conquest.

Question: When did British government give land for development of Ohio Country?


Answer: Ohio Company of Virginia

Question: Who was given land by British goovernment for development of Ohio Country?


Answer: Christopher Gist

Question: Who explored Ohio territory in 1750?


Answer: Treaty of Logstown

Question: What agreement was made for trade with natives and British?


Answer: mouth of the Monongahela River (the site of present-day Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania)

Question: According to agreement between Iroquois and British, where was a strong house to be built?


Answer: King George's War

Context: The War of the Austrian Succession (whose North American theater is known as King George's War) formally ended in 1748 with the signing of the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle. The treaty was primarily focused on resolving issues in Europe. The issues of conflicting territorial claims between British and French colonies in North America were turned over to a commission to resolve, but it reached no decision. Frontiers from between Nova Scotia and Acadia in the north, to the Ohio Country in the south, were claimed by both sides. The disputes also extended into the Atlantic Ocean, where both powers wanted access to the rich fisheries of the Grand Banks off Newfoundland.

Question: What was the North American portion of War of Austrian Succession?


Answer: 1748 with the signing of the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle

Question: What was the end of the War of the Austrian Succession?


Answer: conflicting territorial claims between British and French

Question: What issues were not addressed in the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle?


Answer: Frontiers from between Nova Scotia and Acadia in the north, to the Ohio Country in the south, were claimed by both sides

Question: When a commission reached no decision, what happened?


Answer: Marquis de la Jonquière

Context: On March 17, 1752, the Governor-General of New France, Marquis de la Jonquière, died and was temporarily replaced by Charles le Moyne de Longueuil. His permanent replacement, the Marquis Duquesne, did not arrive in New France until 1752 to take over the post. The continuing British activity in the Ohio territories prompted Longueuil to dispatch another expedition to the area under the command of Charles Michel de Langlade, an officer in the Troupes de la Marine. Langlade was given 300 men, including French-Canadians and warriors of the Ottawa. His objective was to punish the Miami people of Pickawillany for not following Céloron's orders to cease trading with the British. On June 21, the French war party attacked the trading centre at Pickawillany, capturing three traders and killing 14 people of the Miami nation, including Old Briton. He was reportedly ritually cannibalized by some aboriginal members of the expedition.

Question: What Governor in charge of New France died in 1752?


Answer: 300 men, including French-Canadians and warriors of the Ottawa

Question: How many were in Langlades expedition?


Answer: punish the Miami people of Pickawillany for not following Céloron's orders to cease trading with the British

Question: Was was the plan for Langlades mission?


Answer: capturing three traders and killing 14 people of the Miami nation, including Old Briton

Question: What was result of French attack of trading centre?


Answer: Paul Marin de la Malgue

Context: In the spring of 1753, Paul Marin de la Malgue was given command of a 2,000-man force of Troupes de la Marine and Indians. His orders were to protect the King's land in the Ohio Valley from the British. Marin followed the route that Céloron had mapped out four years earlier, but where Céloron had limited the record of French claims to the burial of lead plates, Marin constructed and garrisoned forts. He first constructed Fort Presque Isle (near present-day Erie, Pennsylvania) on Lake Erie's south shore. He had a road built to the headwaters of LeBoeuf Creek. Marin constructed a second fort at Fort Le Boeuf (present-day Waterford, Pennsylvania), designed to guard the headwaters of LeBoeuf Creek. As he moved south, he drove off or captured British traders, alarming both the British and the Iroquois. Tanaghrisson, a chief of the Mingo, who were remnants of Iroquois and other tribes who had been driven west by colonial expansion. He intensely disliked the French (whom he accused of killing and eating his father). Traveling to Fort Le Boeuf, he threatened the French with military action, which Marin contemptuously dismissed.

Question: Who took command of French in spring of 1753?


Answer: Fort Presque Isle (near present-day Erie, Pennsylvania

Question: Where did Marin build first fort?


Answer: Fort Le Boeuf (present-day Waterford, Pennsylvania

Question: Where was Marin's second fort constructed?


Answer: protect the King's land in the Ohio Valley from the British

Question: What was Marin's orders?


Answer: Tanaghrisson

Question: What native chief travelled to French fort and threatened Marin?


Answer: British Superintendent for Indian Affairs in the New York region and beyond

Context: The Iroquois sent runners to the manor of William Johnson in upstate New York. The British Superintendent for Indian Affairs in the New York region and beyond, Johnson was known to the Iroquois as Warraghiggey, meaning "He who does great things." He spoke their languages and had become a respected honorary member of the Iroquois Confederacy in the area. In 1746, Johnson was made a colonel of the Iroquois. Later he was commissioned as a colonel of the Western New York Militia. They met at Albany, New York with Governor Clinton and officials from some of the other American colonies. Mohawk Chief Hendrick, Speaker of their tribal council, insisted that the British abide by their obligations and block French expansion. When Clinton did not respond to his satisfaction, Chief Hendrick said that the "Covenant Chain", a long-standing friendly relationship between the Iroquois Confederacy and the British Crown, was broken.

Question: What was William Johnson's role in British military?


Answer: Warraghiggey, meaning "He who does great things."

Question: What was William Johnson's Iroquois name?


Answer: colonel of the Iroquois

Question: What title did Iroquois give Johnson?


Answer: Mohawk Chief Hendrick

Question: Who was the speaker of the tribal council?


Answer: Ohio Company

Context: Governor Robert Dinwiddie of Virginia was an investor in the Ohio Company, which stood to lose money if the French held their claim. To counter the French military presence in Ohio, in October 1753 Dinwiddie ordered the 21-year-old Major George Washington (whose brother was another Ohio Company investor) of the Virginia Regiment to warn the French to leave Virginia territory. Washington left with a small party, picking up along the way Jacob Van Braam as an interpreter; Christopher Gist, a company surveyor working in the area; and a few Mingo led by Tanaghrisson. On December 12, Washington and his men reached Fort Le Boeuf.

Question: Governon Robert Dinwiddie had an investment in what significan company?


Answer: Major George Washington

Question: Who did Dinwiddie order to address French in Virginia territory?


Answer: Jacob Van Braam as an interpreter; Christopher Gist, a company surveyor working in the area; and a few Mingo led by Tanaghrisson

Question: Who was added to party as Washington went on the way?


Answer: December 12

Question: When did Washington reach Fort Le Boeuf?


Answer: Jacques Legardeur de Saint-Pierre

Context: Jacques Legardeur de Saint-Pierre, who succeeded Marin as commander of the French forces after the latter died on October 29, invited Washington to dine with him. Over dinner, Washington presented Saint-Pierre with the letter from Dinwiddie demanding an immediate French withdrawal from the Ohio Country. Saint-Pierre said, "As to the Summons you send me to retire, I do not think myself obliged to obey it." He told Washington that France's claim to the region was superior to that of the British, since René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle had explored the Ohio Country nearly a century earlier.

Question: Who invited Washington to dine with him?


Answer: Dinwiddie demanding an immediate French withdrawal from the Ohio Country

Question: What letter did Washington present to Saint-Pierre ?


Answer: As to the Summons you send me to retire, I do not think myself obliged to obey it.

Question: How did Saint-Pierre respond to Washington?


Answer: France's claim to the region was superior to that of the British

Question: Why did French feel they had right to Ohio claim?


Answer: Contrecœur led 500 men south from Fort Venango on April 5, 1754

Context: Even before Washington returned, Dinwiddie had sent a company of 40 men under William Trent to that point, where in the early months of 1754 they began construction of a small stockaded fort. Governor Duquesne sent additional French forces under Claude-Pierre Pecaudy de Contrecœur to relieve Saint-Pierre during the same period, and Contrecœur led 500 men south from Fort Venango on April 5, 1754. When these forces arrived at the fort on April 16, Contrecœur generously allowed Trent's small company to withdraw. He purchased their construction tools to continue building what became Fort Duquesne.

Question: How many men did Duquesne send to relieve Saint-Pierre ?


Answer: early months of 1754

Question: When did British begin to build fort under William Trent?


Answer: Fort Duquesne.

Question: What was the fort that was being built to be named?


Answer: with Tanaghrisson and his party, surprised the Canadians on May 28 in what became known as the Battle of Jumonville Glen

Context: After Washington had returned to Williamsburg, Dinwiddie ordered him to lead a larger force to assist Trent in his work. While en route, Washington learned of Trent's retreat. Since Tanaghrisson had promised support to the British, Washington continued toward Fort Duquesne and met with the Mingo leader. Learning of a French scouting party in the area, Washington, with Tanaghrisson and his party, surprised the Canadians on May 28 in what became known as the Battle of Jumonville Glen. They killed many of the Canadians, including their commanding officer, Joseph Coulon de Jumonville, whose head was reportedly split open by Tanaghrisson with a tomahawk. The historian Fred Anderson suggests that Tanaghrisson was acting to gain the support of the British and regain authority over his own people. They had been inclined to support the French, with whom they had long trading relationships. One of Tanaghrisson's men told Contrecoeur that Jumonville had been killed by British musket fire.

Question: Upon learning of a French scounting party in the area, what did Washington do?


Answer: killed many of the Canadians, including their commanding officer, Joseph Coulon de Jumonville

Question: What were casualties of battle?


Answer: regain authority over his own people. They had been inclined to support the French, with whom they had long trading relationships

Question: Why was Tanaghrisson supporting British efforts?


Answer: dislodge the French

Context: News of the two battles reached England in August. After several months of negotiations, the government of the Duke of Newcastle decided to send an army expedition the following year to dislodge the French. They chose Major General Edward Braddock to lead the expedition. Word of the British military plans leaked to France well before Braddock's departure for North America. In response, King Louis XV dispatched six regiments to New France under the command of Baron Dieskau in 1755. The British, intending to blockade French ports, sent out their fleet in February 1755, but the French fleet had already sailed. Admiral Edward Hawke detached a fast squadron to North America in an attempt to intercept the French.

Question: What was the goal of Braddock's expedition?


Answer: plans leaked to France well before Braddock's departure

Question: When did French learn about Braddock's plans?


Answer: dispatched six regiments to New France under the command of Baron Dieskau in 1755.

Question: How did King Louis XV respond to British plans?


Answer: blockade French ports, sent out their fleet in February 1755

Question: What were British plans against French?


Answer: Albany Congress

Context: An early important political response to the opening of hostilities was the convening of the Albany Congress in June and July, 1754. The goal of the congress was to formalize a unified front in trade and negotiations with various Indians, since allegiance of the various tribes and nations was seen to be pivotal in the success in the war that was unfolding. The plan that the delegates agreed to was never ratified by the colonial legislatures nor approved of by the crown. Nevertheless, the format of the congress and many specifics of the plan became the prototype for confederation during the War of Independence.

Question: What political response was convening in June/July 1754?


Answer: formalize a unified front in trade and negotiations with various Indians, since allegiance of the various tribes and nations was seen to be pivotal

Question: What was the goal of congress?


Answer: The plan that the delegates agreed to was never ratified by the colonial legislatures nor approved of by the crown

Question: Was the plan formalized?


Answer: format of the congress and many specifics of the plan became the prototype for confederation during the War of Independence

Question: What was the importance of the congress?


Answer: Braddock (with George Washington as one of his aides) led about 1,500 army troops

Context: Braddock (with George Washington as one of his aides) led about 1,500 army troops and provincial militia on an expedition in June 1755 to take Fort Duquesne. The expedition was a disaster. It was attacked by French and Indian soldiers ambushing them from up in trees and behind logs. Braddock called for a retreat. He was killed. Approximately 1,000 British soldiers were killed or injured. The remaining 500 British troops, led by George Washington, retreated to Virginia. Two future opponents in the American Revolutionary War, Washington and Thomas Gage, played key roles in organizing the retreat.

Question: Who went to Fort Dusquesne in June 1755?


Answer: The expedition was a disaster

Question: How much success did this expedition with Braddock find?


Answer: Approximately 1,000 British soldiers were killed or injured.

Question: How many casualties did British get?


Answer: Washington and Thomas Gage

Question: What future Revolutionary key figures participated in this attack?


Answer: Shirley and Johnson.

Context: The French acquired a copy of the British war plans, including the activities of Shirley and Johnson. Shirley's efforts to fortify Oswego were bogged down in logistical difficulties, exacerbated by Shirley's inexperience in managing large expeditions. In conjunction, Shirley was made aware that the French were massing for an attack on Fort Oswego in his absence when he planned to attack Fort Niagara. As a response, Shirley left garrisons at Oswego, Fort Bull, and Fort Williams (the latter two located on the Oneida Carry between the Mohawk River and Wood Creek at present-day Rome, New York). Supplies for use in the projected attack on Niagara were cached at Fort Bull.

Question: Whose activities were the French able to gain knowledge of?


Answer: efforts to fortify Oswego were bogged down in logistical difficulties, exacerbated by Shirley's inexperience

Question: What difficulties was Shirly having?


Answer: planned to attack Fort Niagara

Question: Where was Shirey going to be when Fort Oswego was to be attacked?


Answer: garrisons

Question: Who did Shirley leave at Oswego?


Answer: Marquis de Vaudreuil.

Context: Johnson's expedition was better organized than Shirley's, which was noticed by New France's governor, the Marquis de Vaudreuil. He had primarily been concerned about the extended supply line to the forts on the Ohio, and had sent Baron Dieskau to lead the defenses at Frontenac against Shirley's expected attack. When Johnson was seen as the larger threat, Vaudreuil sent Dieskau to Fort St. Frédéric to meet that threat. Dieskau planned to attack the British encampment at Fort Edward at the upper end of navigation on the Hudson River, but Johnson had strongly fortified it, and Dieskau's Indian support was reluctant to attack. The two forces finally met in the bloody Battle of Lake George between Fort Edward and Fort William Henry. The battle ended inconclusively, with both sides withdrawing from the field. Johnson's advance stopped at Fort William Henry, and the French withdrew to Ticonderoga Point, where they began the construction of Fort Carillon (later renamed Fort Ticonderoga after British capture in 1759).

Question: Who was New France's governor?


Answer: sent Dieskau to Fort St. Frédéric to meet that threat

Question: How did Vaudreuil react when Johnson was seen as larger threat?


Answer: inconclusively, with both sides withdrawing from the field

Question: Who won the battle of Lake George?


Answer: Fort William Henry

Question: Where did Johnson stop?


Answer: Ticonderoga Point,

Question: Where was French withdrawal to?


Answer: Colonel Monckton

Context: Colonel Monckton, in the sole British success that year, captured Fort Beauséjour in June 1755, cutting the French fortress at Louisbourg off from land-based reinforcements. To cut vital supplies to Louisbourg, Nova Scotia's Governor Charles Lawrence ordered the deportation of the French-speaking Acadian population from the area. Monckton's forces, including companies of Rogers' Rangers, forcibly removed thousands of Acadians, chasing down many who resisted, and sometimes committing atrocities. More than any other factor, the cutting off of supplies to Louisbourg led to its demise. The Acadian resistance, in concert with native allies, including the Mi'kmaq, was sometimes quite stiff, with ongoing frontier raids (against Dartmouth and Lunenburg among others). Other than the campaigns to expel the Acadians (ranging around the Bay of Fundy, on the Petitcodiac and St. John rivers, and Île Saint-Jean), the only clashes of any size were at Petitcodiac in 1755 and at Bloody Creek near Annapolis Royal in 1757.

Question: Who captured Fort Beausejour?


Answer: deportation of the French-speaking Acadian population from the area.

Question: How were British able to cut supplies to Louisbourg?


Answer: Petitcodiac in 1755 and at Bloody Creek near Annapolis Royal in 1757

Question: What other clashes were involved in taking Louisbourg?


Answer: William Shirley

Context: Following the death of Braddock, William Shirley assumed command of British forces in North America. At a meeting in Albany in December 1755, he laid out his plans for 1756. In addition to renewing the efforts to capture Niagara, Crown Point and Duquesne, he proposed attacks on Fort Frontenac on the north shore of Lake Ontario and an expedition through the wilderness of the Maine district and down the Chaudière River to attack the city of Quebec. Bogged down by disagreements and disputes with others, including William Johnson and New York's Governor Sir Charles Hardy, Shirley's plan had little support.

Question: After Braddock died, who controlled North American British forces?


Answer: Albany

Question: In what meeting did Shirley lay out plans for 1756?


Answer: capture Niagara, Crown Point and Duquesne, he proposed attacks on Fort Frontenac on the north shore of Lake Ontario

Question: What proposed attacks did Shirley plan?


Answer: through the wilderness of the Maine district and down the Chaudière River to attack the city of Quebec

Question: Where was Shirley planning an expedition?


Answer: Major General James Abercrombie

Context: Newcastle replaced him in January 1756 with Lord Loudoun, with Major General James Abercrombie as his second in command. Neither of these men had as much campaign experience as the trio of officers France sent to North America. French regular army reinforcements arrived in New France in May 1756, led by Major General Louis-Joseph de Montcalm and seconded by the Chevalier de Lévis and Colonel François-Charles de Bourlamaque, all experienced veterans from the War of the Austrian Succession. During that time in Europe, on May 18, 1756, England formally declared war on France, which expanded the war into Europe, which was later to be known as the Seven Years' War.

Question: Who was appointed as second in command to Lor Loudoun in 1756?


Answer: Major General Louis-Joseph de Montcalm

Question: Who led New France reinforcements in 1756?


Answer: May 18, 1756

Question: When did England formally declare war on France?


Answer: Oneida Carry

Context: Governor Vaudreuil, who harboured ambitions to become the French commander in chief (in addition to his role as governor), acted during the winter of 1756 before those reinforcements arrived. Scouts had reported the weakness of the British supply chain, so he ordered an attack against the forts Shirley had erected at the Oneida Carry. In the March Battle of Fort Bull, French forces destroyed the fort and large quantities of supplies, including 45,000 pounds of gunpowder. They set back any British hopes for campaigns on Lake Ontario, and endangered the Oswego garrison, already short on supplies. French forces in the Ohio valley also continued to intrigue with Indians throughout the area, encouraging them to raid frontier settlements. This led to ongoing alarms along the western frontiers, with streams of refugees returning east to get away from the action.

Question: Where was there a weakness in British supply chain?


Answer: Battle of Fort Bull

Question: What was the attack on the British weakness?


Answer: 45,000 pounds

Question: How much gun powder was destroyed in attack?


Answer: hopes for campaigns on Lake Ontario, and endangered the Oswego garrison

Question: What plans of the British did this attach on Oneida Carry set back?


Answer: Abercrombie

Context: The new British command was not in place until July. When he arrived in Albany, Abercrombie refused to take any significant actions until Loudoun approved them. Montcalm took bold action against his inertia. Building on Vaudreuil's work harassing the Oswego garrison, Montcalm executed a strategic feint by moving his headquarters to Ticonderoga, as if to presage another attack along Lake George. With Abercrombie pinned down at Albany, Montcalm slipped away and led the successful attack on Oswego in August. In the aftermath, Montcalm and the Indians under his command disagreed about the disposition of prisoners' personal effects. The Europeans did not consider them prizes and prevented the Indians from stripping the prisoners of their valuables, which angered the Indians.

Question: Who refused to act until Loudoun approved plans?


Answer: Ticonderoga

Question: Where did Montcalm move his heaquarter to show strategic advancement?


Answer: Oswego

Question: Where did Moncalm slip away to attack, left largely unprotected?


Answer: disposition of prisoners' personal effects

Question: What disagreement did Montcalm and Indians have?


Answer: attack on New France's capital, Quebec

Context: Loudoun, a capable administrator but a cautious field commander, planned one major operation for 1757: an attack on New France's capital, Quebec. Leaving a sizable force at Fort William Henry to distract Montcalm, he began organizing for the expedition to Quebec. He was then ordered by William Pitt, the Secretary of State responsible for the colonies, to attack Louisbourg first. Beset by delays of all kinds, the expedition was finally ready to sail from Halifax, Nova Scotia in early August. In the meantime French ships had escaped the British blockade of the French coast, and a fleet outnumbering the British one awaited Loudoun at Louisbourg. Faced with this strength, Loudoun returned to New York amid news that a massacre had occurred at Fort William Henry.

Question: What was Loudoun's plans for 1757?


Answer: to distract Montcalm

Question: What was the purpose of Loudoun's troops at Fort Henry?


Answer: William Pitt

Question: Who ordered Loudoun to attack Louisbourg?


Answer: returned to New York amid news that a massacre had occurred at Fort William Henry.

Question: Given the strength of French forces at Louisbourg, what did Loudoun do?


Answer: French irregular forces (Canadian scouts and Indians)

Context: French irregular forces (Canadian scouts and Indians) harassed Fort William Henry throughout the first half of 1757. In January they ambushed British rangers near Ticonderoga. In February they launched a daring raid against the position across the frozen Lake George, destroying storehouses and buildings outside the main fortification. In early August, Montcalm and 7,000 troops besieged the fort, which capitulated with an agreement to withdraw under parole. When the withdrawal began, some of Montcalm's Indian allies, angered at the lost opportunity for loot, attacked the British column, killing and capturing several hundred men, women, children, and slaves. The aftermath of the siege may have contributed to the transmission of smallpox into remote Indian populations; as some Indians were reported to have traveled from beyond the Mississippi to participate in the campaign and returned afterward having been exposed to European carriers.

Question: What troops attacked Fort William Henry in early 1757?


Answer: Lake George

Question: On what lake did troops attack fort willima henry in winter?


Answer: attacked the British column, killing and capturing several hundred men, women, children, and slaves.

Question: During withdrawal from Fort William Henry, what did some Indian allies of French do?


Answer: British blockade of the French coastline limited French shipping.

Context: Vaudreuil and Montcalm were minimally resupplied in 1758, as the British blockade of the French coastline limited French shipping. The situation in New France was further exacerbated by a poor harvest in 1757, a difficult winter, and the allegedly corrupt machinations of François Bigot, the intendant of the territory. His schemes to supply the colony inflated prices and were believed by Montcalm to line his pockets and those of his associates. A massive outbreak of smallpox among western tribes led many of them to stay away from trading in 1758. While many parties to the conflict blamed others (the Indians blamed the French for bringing "bad medicine" as well as denying them prizes at Fort William Henry), the disease was probably spread through the crowded conditions at William Henry after the battle. Montcalm focused his meager resources on the defense of the St. Lawrence, with primary defenses at Carillon, Quebec, and Louisbourg, while Vaudreuil argued unsuccessfully for a continuation of the raiding tactics that had worked quite effectively in previous years.

Question: What was causing New France to have issues with resupplying?


Answer: poor harvest

Question: What other reason caused poor supply of New France from a difficult winter?


Answer: St. Lawrence, with primary defenses at Carillon, Quebec, and Louisbourg,

Question: Where was Montcalm focusing the defense for New France?


Answer: British failures in North America, combined with other failures in the European theater

Context: The British failures in North America, combined with other failures in the European theater, led to the fall from power of Newcastle and his principal military advisor, the Duke of Cumberland. Newcastle and Pitt joined in an uneasy coalition in which Pitt dominated the military planning. He embarked on a plan for the 1758 campaign that was largely developed by Loudoun. He had been replaced by Abercrombie as commander in chief after the failures of 1757. Pitt's plan called for three major offensive actions involving large numbers of regular troops, supported by the provincial militias, aimed at capturing the heartlands of New France. Two of the expeditions were successful, with Fort Duquesne and Louisbourg falling to sizable British forces.

Question: What led to Newcastle's fall from power as military advisor?


Answer: Loudoun

Question: Who did Abercrombie replace as commander in chief?


Answer: three major offensive actions involving large numbers of regular troops

Question: Pitt's plan called for what attacks?


Answer: Two of the expeditions were successful, with Fort Duquesne and Louisbourg

Question: How many of the Pitt's planned expeditions were successful?


Answer: 3,600

Context: The third invasion was stopped with the improbable French victory in the Battle of Carillon, in which 3,600 Frenchmen famously and decisively defeated Abercrombie's force of 18,000 regulars, militia and Native American allies outside the fort the French called Carillon and the British called Ticonderoga. Abercrombie saved something from the disaster when he sent John Bradstreet on an expedition that successfully destroyed Fort Frontenac, including caches of supplies destined for New France's western forts and furs destined for Europe. Abercrombie was recalled and replaced by Jeffery Amherst, victor at Louisbourg.

Question: How many Frenchman won Battle of Carillon?


Answer: 18,000 regulars, militia and Native American allies

Question: How many troops were defeated for British in BAttle of Carillon?


Answer: sent John Bradstreet on an expedition that successfully destroyed Fort Frontenac

Question: What success did Abercrombie gain out of the defeat at Carillon?


Answer: recalled and replaced by Jeffery Amherst, victor at Louisbourg.

Question: What impact did this loss have on Abercrombie?


Answer: invasion of Britain, to draw British resources away from North America and the European mainland

Context: In the aftermath of generally poor French results in most theaters of the Seven Years' War in 1758, France's new foreign minister, the duc de Choiseul, decided to focus on an invasion of Britain, to draw British resources away from North America and the European mainland. The invasion failed both militarily and politically, as Pitt again planned significant campaigns against New France, and sent funds to Britain's ally on the mainland, Prussia, and the French Navy failed in the 1759 naval battles at Lagos and Quiberon Bay. In one piece of good fortune, some French supply ships managed to depart France, eluding the British blockade of the French coast.

Question: In 1758 what was duc de Choiseul's plan for focused military efforts?


Answer: The invasion failed both militarily and politically, as Pitt again planned significant campaigns against New France

Question: How successful was the French revised efforts?


Answer: Lagos and Quiberon Bay.

Question: What naval battles did France lose in 1759?


Answer: James Wolfe

Context: British victories continued in all theaters in the Annus Mirabilis of 1759, when they finally captured Ticonderoga, James Wolfe defeated Montcalm at Quebec (in a battle that claimed the lives of both commanders), and victory at Fort Niagara successfully cut off the French frontier forts further to the west and south. The victory was made complete in 1760 when, despite losing outside Quebec City in the Battle of Sainte-Foy, the British were able to prevent the arrival of French relief ships in the naval Battle of the Restigouche while armies marched on Montreal from three sides.

Question: Who defeated Montcalm at Quebec?


Answer: cut off the French frontier forts further to the west and south

Question: What was the significance of victory at Forth Niagara for British?


Answer: Battle of Sainte-Foy

Question: What battle outside Quebec City did British lose in 1760?


Answer: naval Battle of the Restigouche

Question: What victory at thwarted efforts of French relief ships.


Answer: Governor Vaudreuil

Context: In September 1760, and before any hostilities erupted, Governor Vaudreuil negotiated from Montreal a capitulation with General Amherst. Amherst granted Vaudreuil's request that any French residents who chose to remain in the colony would be given freedom to continue worshiping in their Roman Catholic tradition, continued ownership of their property, and the right to remain undisturbed in their homes. The British provided medical treatment for the sick and wounded French soldiers and French regular troops were returned to France aboard British ships with an agreement that they were not to serve again in the present war.

Question: In Sept 1760 who negotiated a capitulation from Montreal?


Answer: freedom to continue worshiping in their Roman Catholic tradition, continued ownership of their property,

Question: What were requests made to British?


Answer: General Amherst.

Question: What British General negotiated at Montreal?


Answer: signing of the Treaty of Paris on 10 February 1763

Context: The war in North America officially ended with the signing of the Treaty of Paris on 10 February 1763, and war in the European theatre of the Seven Years' War was settled by the Treaty of Hubertusburg on 15 February 1763. The British offered France the choice of surrendering either its continental North American possessions east of the Mississippi or the Caribbean islands of Guadeloupe and Martinique, which had been occupied by the British. France chose to cede the former, but was able to negotiate the retention of Saint Pierre and Miquelon, two small islands in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, along with fishing rights in the area. They viewed the economic value of the Caribbean islands' sugar cane to be greater and easier to defend than the furs from the continent. The contemporaneous French philosopher Voltaire referred to Canada disparagingly as nothing more than a few acres of snow. The British, for their part, were happy to take New France, as defence of their North American colonies would no longer be an issue and also because they already had ample places from which to obtain sugar. Spain, which traded Florida to Britain to regain Cuba, also gained Louisiana, including New Orleans, from France in compensation for its losses. Great Britain and Spain also agreed that navigation on the Mississippi River was to be open to vessels of all nations.

Question: When did the North American French and Indian War end?


Answer: Treaty of Hubertusburg on 15 February 1763

Question: When was the European portion of the Seven Years War complete?


Answer: continental North American possessions east of the Mississippi or the Caribbean islands of Guadeloupe and Martinique

Question: What choice did French have for surrendering land?


Answer: value of the Caribbean islands' sugar cane to be greater and easier to defend than the furs from the continent

Question: Why did France choose to give up continental lands?


Answer: 80,000

Context: Britain gained control of French Canada and Acadia, colonies containing approximately 80,000 primarily French-speaking Roman Catholic residents. The deportation of Acadians beginning in 1755 resulted in land made available to migrants from Europe and the colonies further south. The British resettled many Acadians throughout its North American provinces, but many went to France, and some went to New Orleans, which they had expected to remain French. Some were sent to colonize places as diverse as French Guiana and the Falkland Islands; these latter efforts were unsuccessful. Others migrated to places like Saint-Domingue, and fled to New Orleans after the Haitian Revolution. The Louisiana population contributed to the founding of the modern Cajun population. (The French word "Acadien" evolved to "Cadien", then to "Cajun".)

Question: How many French colonists were gained by British?


Answer: 1755

Question: When was the deportation of Acadians?


Answer: throughout its North American provinces

Question: Where did British resettle many Acadians?


Answer: New Orleans

Question: Although some Acadians went to France and other destiantions, what North American city did many move to?


Answer: King George III

Context: Following the treaty, King George III issued the Royal Proclamation of 1763 on October 7, 1763, which outlined the division and administration of the newly conquered territory, and to some extent continues to govern relations between the government of modern Canada and the First Nations. Included in its provisions was the reservation of lands west of the Appalachian Mountains to its Indian population, a demarcation that was at best a temporary impediment to a rising tide of westward-bound settlers. The proclamation also contained provisions that prevented civic participation by the Roman Catholic Canadians. When accommodations were made in the Quebec Act in 1774 to address this and other issues, religious concerns were raised in the largely Protestant Thirteen Colonies over the advance of "popery"; the Act maintained French Civil law, including the seigneurial system, a medieval code soon to be removed from France within a generation by the French Revolution.

Question: Who issued the Royal Proclamation of 1763?


Answer: outlined the division and administration of the newly conquered territory

Question: What was the objective of Royal Proclamation of 1763?


Answer: west of the Appalachian Mountains

Question: What lands were reserved for natives?


Answer: Most went to Cuba,

Context: For many native populations, the elimination of French power in North America meant the disappearance of a strong ally and counterweight to British expansion, leading to their ultimate dispossession. The Ohio Country was particularly vulnerable to legal and illegal settlement due to the construction of military roads to the area by Braddock and Forbes. Although the Spanish takeover of the Louisiana territory (which was not completed until 1769) had modest repercussions, the British takeover of Spanish Florida resulted in the westward migration of tribes that did not want to do business with the British, and a rise in tensions between the Choctaw and the Creek, historic enemies whose divisions the British at times exploited. The change of control in Florida also prompted most of its Spanish Catholic population to leave. Most went to Cuba, including the entire governmental records from St. Augustine, although some Christianized Yamasee were resettled to the coast of Mexico.

Question: Where did many Spanish Catholic move after British takeover in Florida?


Answer: military roads to the area by Braddock and Forbes

Question: What made Ohio Country vulnerable?


Answer: 1769

Question: When was Spanish takeover of Louisiana Territory complete?


Answer: Choctaw and the Creek

Question: What natives were displaced by British takeover in Florida?


Answer: disappearance of a strong ally and counterweight to British expansion, leading to their ultimate dispossession

Question: What did the loss mean to France?


Answer: force

Context: Philosophers in antiquity used the concept of force in the study of stationary and moving objects and simple machines, but thinkers such as Aristotle and Archimedes retained fundamental errors in understanding force. In part this was due to an incomplete understanding of the sometimes non-obvious force of friction, and a consequently inadequate view of the nature of natural motion. A fundamental error was the belief that a force is required to maintain motion, even at a constant velocity. Most of the previous misunderstandings about motion and force were eventually corrected by Galileo Galilei and Sir Isaac Newton. With his mathematical insight, Sir Isaac Newton formulated laws of motion that were not improved-on for nearly three hundred years. By the early 20th century, Einstein developed a theory of relativity that correctly predicted the action of forces on objects with increasing momenta near the speed of light, and also provided insight into the forces produced by gravitation and inertia.

Question: What concept did philosophers in antiquity use to study simple machines?


Answer: fundamental error

Question: What was the belief that maintaining motion required force?


Answer: Sir Isaac Newton

Question: Who had mathmatical insite?


Answer: nearly three hundred years

Question: How long did it take to improve on Sir Isaac Newton's laws of motion?


Answer: Einstein

Question: Who develped the theory of relativity?


Answer: Standard Model

Context: With modern insights into quantum mechanics and technology that can accelerate particles close to the speed of light, particle physics has devised a Standard Model to describe forces between particles smaller than atoms. The Standard Model predicts that exchanged particles called gauge bosons are the fundamental means by which forces are emitted and absorbed. Only four main interactions are known: in order of decreasing strength, they are: strong, electromagnetic, weak, and gravitational.:2–10:79 High-energy particle physics observations made during the 1970s and 1980s confirmed that the weak and electromagnetic forces are expressions of a more fundamental electroweak interaction.

Question: What has partical physics made to describe sub-atomic forces?


Answer: gauge bosons

Question: What are the exchanged particles predicted by the standard Model?


Answer: strong

Question: What is the strongest main interaction?


Answer: gravitational

Question: What is the weakest main interaction?


Answer: electroweak interaction

Question: What are weak and electromatic forces expressions of?


Answer: Aristotle

Context: Aristotle provided a philosophical discussion of the concept of a force as an integral part of Aristotelian cosmology. In Aristotle's view, the terrestrial sphere contained four elements that come to rest at different "natural places" therein. Aristotle believed that motionless objects on Earth, those composed mostly of the elements earth and water, to be in their natural place on the ground and that they will stay that way if left alone. He distinguished between the innate tendency of objects to find their "natural place" (e.g., for heavy bodies to fall), which led to "natural motion", and unnatural or forced motion, which required continued application of a force. This theory, based on the everyday experience of how objects move, such as the constant application of a force needed to keep a cart moving, had conceptual trouble accounting for the behavior of projectiles, such as the flight of arrows. The place where the archer moves the projectile was at the start of the flight, and while the projectile sailed through the air, no discernible efficient cause acts on it. Aristotle was aware of this problem and proposed that the air displaced through the projectile's path carries the projectile to its target. This explanation demands a continuum like air for change of place in general.

Question: Who provided a philosophical discussion of force?


Answer: Aristotelian cosmology

Question: What was the concept of force an integral part of?


Answer: four

Question: How many elements did Aristotle believe the terrestrial sphere to be made up of?


Answer: on the ground

Question: Where did Aristotle believe the natural place for earth and water elements?


Answer: unnatural

Question: What did Aristotle refer to forced motion as?


Answer: 17th century

Context: The shortcomings of Aristotelian physics would not be fully corrected until the 17th century work of Galileo Galilei, who was influenced by the late Medieval idea that objects in forced motion carried an innate force of impetus. Galileo constructed an experiment in which stones and cannonballs were both rolled down an incline to disprove the Aristotelian theory of motion early in the 17th century. He showed that the bodies were accelerated by gravity to an extent that was independent of their mass and argued that objects retain their velocity unless acted on by a force, for example friction.

Question: When were the shortcomings of Aristotle's physics overcome?


Answer: Galileo Galilei

Question: Whose work corrected Aristotle's physics in the seventeenth century?


Answer: impetus

Question: What did objects in forced motion contain according to the late Medieval idea that influence Aristotle?


Answer: Galileo

Question: Who experimented by rolling stones and canonballs down a steep incline?


Answer: friction

Question: What force acted on bodies to retard their velocity?


Answer: Newton

Context: Newton's First Law of Motion states that objects continue to move in a state of constant velocity unless acted upon by an external net force or resultant force. This law is an extension of Galileo's insight that constant velocity was associated with a lack of net force (see a more detailed description of this below). Newton proposed that every object with mass has an innate inertia that functions as the fundamental equilibrium "natural state" in place of the Aristotelian idea of the "natural state of rest". That is, the first law contradicts the intuitive Aristotelian belief that a net force is required to keep an object moving with constant velocity. By making rest physically indistinguishable from non-zero constant velocity, Newton's First Law directly connects inertia with the concept of relative velocities. Specifically, in systems where objects are moving with different velocities, it is impossible to determine which object is "in motion" and which object is "at rest". In other words, to phrase matters more technically, the laws of physics are the same in every inertial frame of reference, that is, in all frames related by a Galilean transformation.

Question: Whose First Law of Motion says that unless acted upon be forces, objects would continue to move at a constant velocity?


Answer: lack of net force

Question: What insight of Galileo was associated with constant velocity?


Answer: Newton

Question: Who proposed that innate intertial is the natural state of objects?


Answer: Newton's First

Question: What law connects relative velocities with inertia?


Answer: the same

Question: What are the laws of physics of Galileo, in reference to objest in motion and rest?


Answer: laws of physics

Context: For instance, while traveling in a moving vehicle at a constant velocity, the laws of physics do not change from being at rest. A person can throw a ball straight up in the air and catch it as it falls down without worrying about applying a force in the direction the vehicle is moving. This is true even though another person who is observing the moving vehicle pass by also observes the ball follow a curving parabolic path in the same direction as the motion of the vehicle. It is the inertia of the ball associated with its constant velocity in the direction of the vehicle's motion that ensures the ball continues to move forward even as it is thrown up and falls back down. From the perspective of the person in the car, the vehicle and everything inside of it is at rest: It is the outside world that is moving with a constant speed in the opposite direction. Since there is no experiment that can distinguish whether it is the vehicle that is at rest or the outside world that is at rest, the two situations are considered to be physically indistinguishable. Inertia therefore applies equally well to constant velocity motion as it does to rest.

Question: What doesn't change from being at rest to movement at a constant velocity?


Answer: parabolic

Question: What path does a ball thrown up and down in a moving vehicle take when seen by an outside observer?


Answer: at rest

Question: What sate are things inside of a moving vehicle as seen by a person inside the vehicle?


Answer: Inertia

Question: What applies to equally to constant velocity motion as it does to rest.


Answer: inertia

Context: The concept of inertia can be further generalized to explain the tendency of objects to continue in many different forms of constant motion, even those that are not strictly constant velocity. The rotational inertia of planet Earth is what fixes the constancy of the length of a day and the length of a year. Albert Einstein extended the principle of inertia further when he explained that reference frames subject to constant acceleration, such as those free-falling toward a gravitating object, were physically equivalent to inertial reference frames. This is why, for example, astronauts experience weightlessness when in free-fall orbit around the Earth, and why Newton's Laws of Motion are more easily discernible in such environments. If an astronaut places an object with mass in mid-air next to himself, it will remain stationary with respect to the astronaut due to its inertia. This is the same thing that would occur if the astronaut and the object were in intergalactic space with no net force of gravity acting on their shared reference frame. This principle of equivalence was one of the foundational underpinnings for the development of the general theory of relativity.

Question: What concept explains why objects continue in constant motion?


Answer: rotational inertia of planet

Question: What makes day length constant on Earth?


Answer: Albert Einstein

Question: Who explained that inertial reference frames equaled reference frames subject to constant acceleration?


Answer: weightlessness

Question: What do astronaughts experience while in free-fall?


Answer: principle of equivalence

Question: What was the basis mentioned for the develpment of the general theory of relativity?


Answer: Newton's Second Law

Context: Newton's Second Law asserts the direct proportionality of acceleration to force and the inverse proportionality of acceleration to mass. Accelerations can be defined through kinematic measurements. However, while kinematics are well-described through reference frame analysis in advanced physics, there are still deep questions that remain as to what is the proper definition of mass. General relativity offers an equivalence between space-time and mass, but lacking a coherent theory of quantum gravity, it is unclear as to how or whether this connection is relevant on microscales. With some justification, Newton's second law can be taken as a quantitative definition of mass by writing the law as an equality; the relative units of force and mass then are fixed.

Question: What describes the proportionality of acceleration to force and mass?


Answer: kinematic

Question: What kind of measurements define accelerlations?


Answer: General relativity

Question: What has an equivalence between mass and space-time?


Answer: General relativity

Question: What is missing a theory on quantum gravity?


Answer: fixed

Question: In Newton's second law, what are the units of mass and force in relation to microscales?


Answer: Newton's Third

Context: Newton's Third Law is a result of applying symmetry to situations where forces can be attributed to the presence of different objects. The third law means that all forces are interactions between different bodies,[Note 3] and thus that there is no such thing as a unidirectional force or a force that acts on only one body. Whenever a first body exerts a force F on a second body, the second body exerts a force −F on the first body. F and −F are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. This law is sometimes referred to as the action-reaction law, with F called the "action" and −F the "reaction". The action and the reaction are simultaneous:

Question: When forces are from the presence of differnet objects, what law gives symmetry?


Answer: Newton's Third

Question: What law staes that forces are interactions between bodies?


Answer: unidirectional

Question: What kind of force does not exist under Newton's third law?


Answer: magnitude

Question: What is the equality of forces between two objects exerting force on each other??


Answer: center of mass

Context: This means that in a closed system of particles, there are no internal forces that are unbalanced. That is, the action-reaction force shared between any two objects in a closed system will not cause the center of mass of the system to accelerate. The constituent objects only accelerate with respect to each other, the system itself remains unaccelerated. Alternatively, if an external force acts on the system, then the center of mass will experience an acceleration proportional to the magnitude of the external force divided by the mass of the system.:19-1

Question: What experiences acceleration when external force is applied to a system?


Answer: closed

Question: In what kind of system of particles are there no unbalanced iinternal forces?


Answer: mass of the system

Question: What is the magnitude of force divided by when external force is added?


Answer: intuitive understanding

Context: Since forces are perceived as pushes or pulls, this can provide an intuitive understanding for describing forces. As with other physical concepts (e.g. temperature), the intuitive understanding of forces is quantified using precise operational definitions that are consistent with direct observations and compared to a standard measurement scale. Through experimentation, it is determined that laboratory measurements of forces are fully consistent with the conceptual definition of force offered by Newtonian mechanics.

Question: What does pushing and pulling perceptions provide for describing forces?


Answer: standard measurement scale

Question: What is used to quantify the intuitive undestanding of forces?


Answer: Newtonian mechanics

Question: What offers a conceptual definition of force?


Answer: experimentation

Question: How are laboratory measurements of forces determined?


Answer: vector quantities

Context: Forces act in a particular direction and have sizes dependent upon how strong the push or pull is. Because of these characteristics, forces are classified as "vector quantities". This means that forces follow a different set of mathematical rules than physical quantities that do not have direction (denoted scalar quantities). For example, when determining what happens when two forces act on the same object, it is necessary to know both the magnitude and the direction of both forces to calculate the result. If both of these pieces of information are not known for each force, the situation is ambiguous. For example, if you know that two people are pulling on the same rope with known magnitudes of force but you do not know which direction either person is pulling, it is impossible to determine what the acceleration of the rope will be. The two people could be pulling against each other as in tug of war or the two people could be pulling in the same direction. In this simple one-dimensional example, without knowing the direction of the forces it is impossible to decide whether the net force is the result of adding the two force magnitudes or subtracting one from the other. Associating forces with vectors avoids such problems.

Question: How are forces classified with regard to push and pull strengt?


Answer: denoted scalar quantities

Question: What physical quantities do not have direction?


Answer: Associating forces with vectors

Question: How do you avoid problems when determining forces involved on an object from two or more sources?


Answer: ambiguous

Question: If you do not know both magnitude and direction of two forces on an object, what would you call that situation?


Answer: Associating forces with vectors

Question: How do you determine the acceleration of a rope when two people are pulling it?


Answer: static equilibrium

Context: Historically, forces were first quantitatively investigated in conditions of static equilibrium where several forces canceled each other out. Such experiments demonstrate the crucial properties that forces are additive vector quantities: they have magnitude and direction. When two forces act on a point particle, the resulting force, the resultant (also called the net force), can be determined by following the parallelogram rule of vector addition: the addition of two vectors represented by sides of a parallelogram, gives an equivalent resultant vector that is equal in magnitude and direction to the transversal of the parallelogram. The magnitude of the resultant varies from the difference of the magnitudes of the two forces to their sum, depending on the angle between their lines of action. However, if the forces are acting on an extended body, their respective lines of application must also be specified in order to account for their effects on the motion of the body.

Question: In what conditions were forces first measured historically?


Answer: magnitude and direction

Question: What do forces have with regard to additive quantities?


Answer: net force

Question: What is the resultant force called when two forces act on a particle?


Answer: respective lines of application

Question: When forces are acting on an extended body, what do you need to account for motion effects?


Answer: parallelogram

Question: What geometric shape is used in equations to determine net force?


Answer: independent components

Context: As well as being added, forces can also be resolved into independent components at right angles to each other. A horizontal force pointing northeast can therefore be split into two forces, one pointing north, and one pointing east. Summing these component forces using vector addition yields the original force. Resolving force vectors into components of a set of basis vectors is often a more mathematically clean way to describe forces than using magnitudes and directions. This is because, for orthogonal components, the components of the vector sum are uniquely determined by the scalar addition of the components of the individual vectors. Orthogonal components are independent of each other because forces acting at ninety degrees to each other have no effect on the magnitude or direction of the other. Choosing a set of orthogonal basis vectors is often done by considering what set of basis vectors will make the mathematics most convenient. Choosing a basis vector that is in the same direction as one of the forces is desirable, since that force would then have only one non-zero component. Orthogonal force vectors can be three-dimensional with the third component being at right-angles to the other two.

Question: Whwn forces are at right ngles to each other what can they be broken down to?


Answer: two

Question: If a force is pointing horizontally to the northeast, how many forces can you split the force into?


Answer: the original force

Question: What do you get when you figure the sum of forces with vector addition?


Answer: orthogonal

Question: What are the independant components of a vector sum that has been determined by scalar addition of individual vectors?


Answer: three-dimensional

Question: What can orthogonal forces be when there are three components with two at right angles to each other?


Answer: static friction

Context: Pushing against an object on a frictional surface can result in a situation where the object does not move because the applied force is opposed by static friction, generated between the object and the table surface. For a situation with no movement, the static friction force exactly balances the applied force resulting in no acceleration. The static friction increases or decreases in response to the applied force up to an upper limit determined by the characteristics of the contact between the surface and the object.

Question: What can keep an object from moving when it is being pushed on a surface?


Answer: static friction

Question: What is generated between a surface and an object that is being pushed?


Answer: applied

Question: Static friction balances what force when there is no movement of an object on a surface?


Answer: applied force

Question: What makes static friction go up or down in responce to contact characteristics between an object and the surface it is on?


Answer: forces

Context: A static equilibrium between two forces is the most usual way of measuring forces, using simple devices such as weighing scales and spring balances. For example, an object suspended on a vertical spring scale experiences the force of gravity acting on the object balanced by a force applied by the "spring reaction force", which equals the object's weight. Using such tools, some quantitative force laws were discovered: that the force of gravity is proportional to volume for objects of constant density (widely exploited for millennia to define standard weights); Archimedes' principle for buoyancy; Archimedes' analysis of the lever; Boyle's law for gas pressure; and Hooke's law for springs. These were all formulated and experimentally verified before Isaac Newton expounded his Three Laws of Motion.

Question: What can scales and spring balances measure between two forces by using static equilibrium?


Answer: spring reaction force

Question: What force acts on an object suspended on a spring scale in addition to gravity?


Answer: gravity

Question: What equals the spring reaction force on an object suspended on a spring reaction scale?


Answer: gravity

Question: Objects of constant density are proportional to volume by what force to define standard weights?.


Answer: Isaac Newton

Question: Who expounded the Three Laws of Motion?


Answer: Galileo

Context: Dynamic equilibrium was first described by Galileo who noticed that certain assumptions of Aristotelian physics were contradicted by observations and logic. Galileo realized that simple velocity addition demands that the concept of an "absolute rest frame" did not exist. Galileo concluded that motion in a constant velocity was completely equivalent to rest. This was contrary to Aristotle's notion of a "natural state" of rest that objects with mass naturally approached. Simple experiments showed that Galileo's understanding of the equivalence of constant velocity and rest were correct. For example, if a mariner dropped a cannonball from the crow's nest of a ship moving at a constant velocity, Aristotelian physics would have the cannonball fall straight down while the ship moved beneath it. Thus, in an Aristotelian universe, the falling cannonball would land behind the foot of the mast of a moving ship. However, when this experiment is actually conducted, the cannonball always falls at the foot of the mast, as if the cannonball knows to travel with the ship despite being separated from it. Since there is no forward horizontal force being applied on the cannonball as it falls, the only conclusion left is that the cannonball continues to move with the same velocity as the boat as it falls. Thus, no force is required to keep the cannonball moving at the constant forward velocity.

Question: Who first described dynamic equilibrium?


Answer: rest

Question: What does motion at a constant velocity equal?


Answer: Galileo

Question: Who had the idea of a natural state for objects at rest?


Answer: behind the foot of the mast

Question: Where will a canonball dropped from the crow's nest of a ship land according to Aristotle?


Answer: foot of the mast

Question: Where does a canonball dropped from the crow's nest of a ship actually land?


Answer: dynamic equilibrium

Context: A simple case of dynamic equilibrium occurs in constant velocity motion across a surface with kinetic friction. In such a situation, a force is applied in the direction of motion while the kinetic friction force exactly opposes the applied force. This results in zero net force, but since the object started with a non-zero velocity, it continues to move with a non-zero velocity. Aristotle misinterpreted this motion as being caused by the applied force. However, when kinetic friction is taken into consideration it is clear that there is no net force causing constant velocity motion.

Question: What occurs when traveling across a surface at a constant velocity with regard to friction?


Answer: kinetic friction force

Question: What directly opposes the force applied to move an object across a surface?


Answer: kinetic friction

Question: What has to accounted for that causes no net force being the cause of constant velocity motion?


Answer: Aristotle

Question: Who thought that applied force caused movement of an object regardless of non-zero velocity?


Answer: Schrödinger

Context: The notion "force" keeps its meaning in quantum mechanics, though one is now dealing with operators instead of classical variables and though the physics is now described by the Schrödinger equation instead of Newtonian equations. This has the consequence that the results of a measurement are now sometimes "quantized", i.e. they appear in discrete portions. This is, of course, difficult to imagine in the context of "forces". However, the potentials V(x,y,z) or fields, from which the forces generally can be derived, are treated similar to classical position variables, i.e., .

Question: What equation currently decribes the physics of force.


Answer: Newtonian

Question: What equation desribed the physics of force before the current Schrodinger equation?


Answer: classical position variables

Question: How are the forces derived from fields treated similarly to?


Answer: quantized

Question: What type of measurements result under Schrodinger equations when using operators instead of Newtonian variables?


Answer: force

Question: What notion keeps it's meaning through both Netonian and Schrodinger physics equations?


Answer: spin

Context: However, already in quantum mechanics there is one "caveat", namely the particles acting onto each other do not only possess the spatial variable, but also a discrete intrinsic angular momentum-like variable called the "spin", and there is the Pauli principle relating the space and the spin variables. Depending on the value of the spin, identical particles split into two different classes, fermions and bosons. If two identical fermions (e.g. electrons) have a symmetric spin function (e.g. parallel spins) the spatial variables must be antisymmetric (i.e. they exclude each other from their places much as if there was a repulsive force), and vice versa, i.e. for antiparallel spins the position variables must be symmetric (i.e. the apparent force must be attractive). Thus in the case of two fermions there is a strictly negative correlation between spatial and spin variables, whereas for two bosons (e.g. quanta of electromagnetic waves, photons) the correlation is strictly positive.

Question: What is the intrisic angular variable called when particles act upon one another?


Answer: Pauli

Question: What is the principle about relating spin and space variables?


Answer: spin

Question: What value does the seperating into fermions and bosons depend?


Answer: antiparallel

Question: If the apparant force of two fermions is attractive, what is the spin function?


Answer: parallel

Question: If the apparant force of two fermions is repulsive, what is the spin function?


Answer: mathematical by-product

Context: In modern particle physics, forces and the acceleration of particles are explained as a mathematical by-product of exchange of momentum-carrying gauge bosons. With the development of quantum field theory and general relativity, it was realized that force is a redundant concept arising from conservation of momentum (4-momentum in relativity and momentum of virtual particles in quantum electrodynamics). The conservation of momentum can be directly derived from the homogeneity or symmetry of space and so is usually considered more fundamental than the concept of a force. Thus the currently known fundamental forces are considered more accurately to be "fundamental interactions".:199–128 When particle A emits (creates) or absorbs (annihilates) virtual particle B, a momentum conservation results in recoil of particle A making impression of repulsion or attraction between particles A A' exchanging by B. This description applies to all forces arising from fundamental interactions. While sophisticated mathematical descriptions are needed to predict, in full detail, the accurate result of such interactions, there is a conceptually simple way to describe such interactions through the use of Feynman diagrams. In a Feynman diagram, each matter particle is represented as a straight line (see world line) traveling through time, which normally increases up or to the right in the diagram. Matter and anti-matter particles are identical except for their direction of propagation through the Feynman diagram. World lines of particles intersect at interaction vertices, and the Feynman diagram represents any force arising from an interaction as occurring at the vertex with an associated instantaneous change in the direction of the particle world lines. Gauge bosons are emitted away from the vertex as wavy lines and, in the case of virtual particle exchange, are absorbed at an adjacent vertex.

Question: How are the particle forces and accelerations explained as by gauge bosons exchange?


Answer: force

Question: What is the redundant concept coming from momentum conservation?


Answer: conservation of momentum

Question: What is more fundamental than force in quanton field theory?


Answer: Feynman

Question: What diagrams are used to simplify particle interactions on a fundamental level?


Answer: straight

Question: Matter particles are shown as what kind of lines in a Feynman diagram?


Answer: four

Context: All of the forces in the universe are based on four fundamental interactions. The strong and weak forces are nuclear forces that act only at very short distances, and are responsible for the interactions between subatomic particles, including nucleons and compound nuclei. The electromagnetic force acts between electric charges, and the gravitational force acts between masses. All other forces in nature derive from these four fundamental interactions. For example, friction is a manifestation of the electromagnetic force acting between the atoms of two surfaces, and the Pauli exclusion principle, which does not permit atoms to pass through each other. Similarly, the forces in springs, modeled by Hooke's law, are the result of electromagnetic forces and the Exclusion Principle acting together to return an object to its equilibrium position. Centrifugal forces are acceleration forces that arise simply from the acceleration of rotating frames of reference.:12-11:359

Question: How many interactions are all of the universal forces based on?


Answer: strong and weak

Question: What nuclear forces only act at short distances?


Answer: electromagnetic

Question: What force acts between electric charges?


Answer: masses

Question: What do gravitational forces act between?


Answer: Pauli exclusion principle

Question: What prohibits atoms from passing through each other?


Answer: Isaac Newton

Context: The development of fundamental theories for forces proceeded along the lines of unification of disparate ideas. For example, Isaac Newton unified the force responsible for objects falling at the surface of the Earth with the force responsible for the orbits of celestial mechanics in his universal theory of gravitation. Michael Faraday and James Clerk Maxwell demonstrated that electric and magnetic forces were unified through one consistent theory of electromagnetism. In the 20th century, the development of quantum mechanics led to a modern understanding that the first three fundamental forces (all except gravity) are manifestations of matter (fermions) interacting by exchanging virtual particles called gauge bosons. This standard model of particle physics posits a similarity between the forces and led scientists to predict the unification of the weak and electromagnetic forces in electroweak theory subsequently confirmed by observation. The complete formulation of the standard model predicts an as yet unobserved Higgs mechanism, but observations such as neutrino oscillations indicate that the standard model is incomplete. A Grand Unified Theory allowing for the combination of the electroweak interaction with the strong force is held out as a possibility with candidate theories such as supersymmetry proposed to accommodate some of the outstanding unsolved problems in physics. Physicists are still attempting to develop self-consistent unification models that would combine all four fundamental interactions into a theory of everything. Einstein tried and failed at this endeavor, but currently the most popular approach to answering this question is string theory.:212–219

Question: Who formed the universal theory of gravitation?


Answer: 20th

Question: In what century was quantum mechanics made?


Answer: unification

Question: What kind of self-consistent models are physicists trying to make that would create a theory of everything?


Answer: self-consistent unification

Question: What type of physics model did Einstein fail to make?


Answer: Isaac Newton

Context: What we now call gravity was not identified as a universal force until the work of Isaac Newton. Before Newton, the tendency for objects to fall towards the Earth was not understood to be related to the motions of celestial objects. Galileo was instrumental in describing the characteristics of falling objects by determining that the acceleration of every object in free-fall was constant and independent of the mass of the object. Today, this acceleration due to gravity towards the surface of the Earth is usually designated as and has a magnitude of about 9.81 meters per second squared (this measurement is taken from sea level and may vary depending on location), and points toward the center of the Earth. This observation means that the force of gravity on an object at the Earth's surface is directly proportional to the object's mass. Thus an object that has a mass of will experience a force:

Question: Who identified gravity as a force?


Answer: Galileo

Question: Who came up with the concept that falling objects fell at the same speed regardless of weight?


Answer: about 9.81 meters per second squared

Question: How fast do objects fall on Earth?


Answer: sea level

Question: Where was the measurment for the standard gravity on Earth taken?


Answer: force of gravity

Question: What is an object's mass proportional to at the surface of the Earth?


Answer: at larger distances.

Context: Newton came to realize that the effects of gravity might be observed in different ways at larger distances. In particular, Newton determined that the acceleration of the Moon around the Earth could be ascribed to the same force of gravity if the acceleration due to gravity decreased as an inverse square law. Further, Newton realized that the acceleration due to gravity is proportional to the mass of the attracting body. Combining these ideas gives a formula that relates the mass () and the radius () of the Earth to the gravitational acceleration:

Question: How might gravity effects be observed differently according to Newton?


Answer: the Moon

Question: What could be attributed to gravity acceleration around the Earth?


Answer: mass

Question: What is gravitational acceleration proportional to?


Answer: radius () of the Earth

Question: What is included along with gravitational acceration, and mass of the Earth in a formula about rotation about the Earth?


Answer: Newton's Universal Gravitation Constant,

Context: In this equation, a dimensional constant is used to describe the relative strength of gravity. This constant has come to be known as Newton's Universal Gravitation Constant, though its value was unknown in Newton's lifetime. Not until 1798 was Henry Cavendish able to make the first measurement of using a torsion balance; this was widely reported in the press as a measurement of the mass of the Earth since knowing could allow one to solve for the Earth's mass given the above equation. Newton, however, realized that since all celestial bodies followed the same laws of motion, his law of gravity had to be universal. Succinctly stated, Newton's Law of Gravitation states that the force on a spherical object of mass due to the gravitational pull of mass is

Question: What is used to figure the relative strengh of gravity?


Answer: Henry Cavendish

Question: Who made the first to measure value of the Newton Universal Gravitation Constant?


Answer: 1798

Question: When was the first measurement of the value of the Newton Universal Gravitation Constant?


Answer: Newton

Question: Who figured out that his law of gravity had to be universal?


Answer: Mercury

Context: It was only the orbit of the planet Mercury that Newton's Law of Gravitation seemed not to fully explain. Some astrophysicists predicted the existence of another planet (Vulcan) that would explain the discrepancies; however, despite some early indications, no such planet could be found. When Albert Einstein formulated his theory of general relativity (GR) he turned his attention to the problem of Mercury's orbit and found that his theory added a correction, which could account for the discrepancy. This was the first time that Newton's Theory of Gravity had been shown to be less correct than an alternative.

Question: What planet seemed to buck Newton's gravitational laws?


Answer: Vulcan

Question: What planet did astrophysisist predict to explain the problems with Mercury?


Answer: theory of general relativity

Question: What theory accounted for the Mercury problem?


Answer: Albert Einstein

Question: Who came up with the theory of relativity?


Answer: Albert Einstein

Question: Who first showed that Newton's Theory of Gravity was not as correct as another theory?


Answer: general relativity

Context: Since then, and so far, general relativity has been acknowledged as the theory that best explains gravity. In GR, gravitation is not viewed as a force, but rather, objects moving freely in gravitational fields travel under their own inertia in straight lines through curved space-time – defined as the shortest space-time path between two space-time events. From the perspective of the object, all motion occurs as if there were no gravitation whatsoever. It is only when observing the motion in a global sense that the curvature of space-time can be observed and the force is inferred from the object's curved path. Thus, the straight line path in space-time is seen as a curved line in space, and it is called the ballistic trajectory of the object. For example, a basketball thrown from the ground moves in a parabola, as it is in a uniform gravitational field. Its space-time trajectory (when the extra ct dimension is added) is almost a straight line, slightly curved (with the radius of curvature of the order of few light-years). The time derivative of the changing momentum of the object is what we label as "gravitational force".

Question: What theory best explains gravity?