What Is the Significance of PF Signatures in Historical Physics Debates?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter dextercioby
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mean
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the significance of historical dates in physics, specifically contrasting the year 1686, associated with Isaac Newton, and 1874, linked to Sophus Lie. Participants explore the implications of these dates in the context of physics' development and the contributions of these figures.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Historical

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that physics did not begin in London in 1686, but rather in 1874 in Kristiania, suggesting a significant shift in the understanding of physics during that time.
  • There is a clarification regarding the publication date of Newton's "Principia," which was published in 1687, and the birth year of Sophus Lie in 1874.
  • One participant notes the potential irony or controversy surrounding the interpretation of these dates and their significance in the history of physics.
  • Another participant proposes that the distinction might relate to the final manuscript date versus the publication year of Newton's work.
  • A later reply summarizes the discussion by stating that Newton found the equations while Lie established the invariants, indicating differing contributions to the field.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the significance of the dates in question, with no consensus reached on whether one date is more pivotal than the other in the context of physics' history.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference specific historical figures and their contributions, but the discussion does not resolve the implications of these contributions or the criteria for determining the "beginning" of physics.

dextercioby
Science Advisor
Insights Author
Messages
13,404
Reaction score
4,184
Physics did not begin in London in 1686. It began 2 centuries later in 1874 in Kristiania.
@fresh_42 Sorry for the blatant off-topic, please explain this text in your signature. Thanks!

Physics did not begin in London in 1686. It began 2 centuries later in 1874 in Kristiania.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
dextercioby said:
Physics did not begin in London in 1686. It began 2 centuries later in 1874 in Kristiania.
@fresh_42 Sorry for the blatant off-topic, please explain this text in your signature. Thanks!
1686 was Newton, but 1874 was Lie.
 
Aaa, 1686 was what? Principia was published in 1687. And 1874 is the birth year of Sophus Lie, right?
 
dextercioby said:
Aaa, 1686 was what? Principia was published in 1687.
1677856173231.png

dextercioby said:
And 1874 is the birth year of Sophus Lie, right?
https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/when-lie-groups-became-physics/
 
Oh, the irony/controversy.
Capture.JPG
 
  • Wow
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: pinball1970 and fresh_42
It might be the final manuscript date vs. the publication year.

I had no idea Samuel Pepys was involved. Whaddaya know.
 
dextercioby said:
Oh, the irony/controversy.
Maybe, it could be summarized as: Newton found the equations, and Lie established the invariants.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
11K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
9K
  • · Replies 140 ·
5
Replies
140
Views
13K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
11K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
5K