String Tension and Pitch: Uncovering the Origins of Physics

  • Thread starter Thread starter Loren Booda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the origins of physics, highlighting the Pythagorean school's discovery of the relationship between string tension and pitch as a potential starting point. It also considers the empirical understanding of geometrical relationships as foundational to physics, predating Euclid's formalization. Aristotelian mechanics is mentioned as a significant early formulation, with Aristotle's works being pivotal in the history of mechanics. The conversation touches on Archimedes' contributions, particularly in statics, which advanced the field further. Ultimately, the definition of "earliest physics" remains open to interpretation, influenced by how one categorizes these early discoveries.
Loren Booda
Messages
3,108
Reaction score
4
Is the oldest known physics the relation between string tension and pitch, first discovered by the Pythagorean school?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I would say that the oldest physics (although it is often seen as "mathematics") is probably the empirical discovery of certain geometrical relationships, which are nothing else but properties of space (before this was cast in a more comprehensive whole by Euclid).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Might I assume that you mean the earliest formulation of physics? The earliest physics, in my opinion, would be whatever the hell went on when the Big Bang detonated.
 
According to "A History of Mechanics" by Dugas, the first recorded textbook devoted to mechanics (simple machines) orginates with Aristotle (384-322 BC), "or, more accurately, with the author of the probably acrocryphal treatise called 'Problems of Mechanics'. Aristotle wrote other texts as well, including 'Physics' and 'Treatise on the Heavens'.

Archimedes (287-212 BC) made statics an autonomous theoretical science with his treatise on the lever.
 
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...

Similar threads

Back
Top