5 ms·

It’s really strange reading the words of such an intelligent person beginning to understand something back then that is so fundamental today that even laypeople

by wycy 2y ago

It’s really strange reading the words of such an intelligent person beginning to understand something back then that is so fundamental today that even laypeople understand it more scientifically. Really weird, but really cool to get a peek back into a scientific mind in the 1700s.

jstanley 2y ago
> even laypeople understand it more scientifically Laypeople use more scientific-sounding words, sure, but what more scientific way is there to understand something than to have discovered it yourself through experiment?
- utensil4778 2y ago
  Experimentation brings knowledge, not understanding. Franklin did not understand electricity, but merely observed it. It wasn't until we discovered the electron proper and Maxwell did his work that we-- anyone-- understood electricity. Understanding comes from scientific and academic rigor after the discovery.
  - OJFord 2y ago
    Or just separately from, like Higgs understanding and theorising a boson years before it was actually 'discovered'/detected experimentally.
  - neuralRiot 2y ago
    > It wasn't until we discovered the electron proper I’d even say that we don’t yet fully understand the electron!
detourdog 2y ago
I often prefer the original language of discovery. My favorite is the term accumulator compared to battery.
- somat 2y ago
  That is a much better term, battery: inconsequential detail on how it is constructed. accumulator: what it does.
  - a1445c8b 2y ago
    Using the word “accumulator” wouldn’t be enough to differentiate batteries from capacitors, inductors, etc. which are also accumulators.
    - detourdog 2y ago
      In system design that distinction may not matter.
      - sudhirj 2y ago
        Seems like capacitors, inductors and batteries differ only quantitively in their response curves, not in qualitatively? As in they all do different things to the circuit on the voltage, amperage and time axis? We would need separate words for them, but accumulators seems like a decent umbrella.
    - B1FF_PSUVM 2y ago
      > inductors, etc. which are also accumulators. In what sense do inductors accumulate? Batteries and capacitors accumulate (i.e. integrate) current. Inductors differentiate current: v = L di/dt means you get voltage out of current changes.
      - TheOtherHobbes 2y ago
        Inductors accumulate a magnetic field.
      - utensil4778 2y ago
        The main way that inductors function is by storing energy in a magnetic field, exactly analogous to the way capacitors store energy in an electric field.
IAmNotACellist 2y ago
TBH that's how I feel trying to intuitively understand and remember the various colors of quarks and their interactions.
teraflop 2y ago
Along similar lines, I recently learned about an early nuclear physics textbook written by George Gamow. The first edition came out in 1931, and the preface of the second edition in 1937 describes how the book had to be completely written because the state of knowledge had changed so radically in those few years -- most notably, by the discovery of the neutron and of induced radioactivity. It's fun to think about a time when this stuff that we now take for granted as basic physics was not just new and poorly understood, but the forefront of knowledge was advancing so rapidly. I haven't been able to find an online copy of the 1931 edition, but the 1937 edition is called Structure of Atomic Nuclei and Nuclear Transformations, and it's available through the Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.501245 https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.501245
- teraflop 2y ago
  D'oh -- I meant to say "the book had to be completely rewritten" but it's too late to edit my comment.
freedomben 2y ago
Indeed! I love reading Benjamin Franklin for exaclty that. If you haven't read it, Walter Isaacson's biography on Franklin is absolutely fascinating. Brilliant, hilarious, driven, and wildly accomplished. The dude was (IMHO) one of the most interesting humans to have ever lived. Highly recommend.
lupire 2y ago
This was how the 18th Century worked. In the 19th Century mathematical language became rigorous and formal, better able to handle more complex constructions accurately, but harder for lay people to learn, as it became a new language.
- kqr 2y ago
  Well... going by the Fermi biography and the first few chapters of The Idea Factory (about Bell Labs) I would think this is what it always sounds like in the early stages of humans discovering a new part of nature. It's just that our most recent theories have been so rich that we have happened to discover many things theoretically before we find them in real life. (Theory has preceded practice in recent decades, rather than the other way around which is historically more common.) I'm not sure this will always be so, it might be a temporary leap.

by wycy 2y ago

jstanley 2y ago

> even laypeople understand it more scientifically Laypeople use more scientific-sounding words, sure, but what more scientific way is there to understand something than to have discovered it yourself through experiment?

utensil4778 2y ago
Experimentation brings knowledge, not understanding. Franklin did not understand electricity, but merely observed it. It wasn't until we discovered the electron proper and Maxwell did his work that we-- anyone-- understood electricity. Understanding comes from scientific and academic rigor after the discovery.
- OJFord 2y ago
  Or just separately from, like Higgs understanding and theorising a boson years before it was actually 'discovered'/detected experimentally.
- neuralRiot 2y ago
  > It wasn't until we discovered the electron proper I’d even say that we don’t yet fully understand the electron!

detourdog 2y ago

I often prefer the original language of discovery. My favorite is the term accumulator compared to battery.

somat 2y ago
That is a much better term, battery: inconsequential detail on how it is constructed. accumulator: what it does.
- a1445c8b 2y ago
  Using the word “accumulator” wouldn’t be enough to differentiate batteries from capacitors, inductors, etc. which are also accumulators.
  - detourdog 2y ago
    In system design that distinction may not matter.
    - sudhirj 2y ago
      Seems like capacitors, inductors and batteries differ only quantitively in their response curves, not in qualitatively? As in they all do different things to the circuit on the voltage, amperage and time axis? We would need separate words for them, but accumulators seems like a decent umbrella.
  - B1FF_PSUVM 2y ago
    > inductors, etc. which are also accumulators. In what sense do inductors accumulate? Batteries and capacitors accumulate (i.e. integrate) current. Inductors differentiate current: v = L di/dt means you get voltage out of current changes.
    - TheOtherHobbes 2y ago
      Inductors accumulate a magnetic field.
    - utensil4778 2y ago
      The main way that inductors function is by storing energy in a magnetic field, exactly analogous to the way capacitors store energy in an electric field.

IAmNotACellist 2y ago

TBH that's how I feel trying to intuitively understand and remember the various colors of quarks and their interactions.

teraflop 2y ago

Along similar lines, I recently learned about an early nuclear physics textbook written by George Gamow. The first edition came out in 1931, and the preface of the second edition in 1937 describes how the book had to be completely written because the state of knowledge had changed so radically in those few years -- most notably, by the discovery of the neutron and of induced radioactivity. It's fun to think about a time when this stuff that we now take for granted as basic physics was not just new and poorly understood, but the forefront of knowledge was advancing so rapidly. I haven't been able to find an online copy of the 1931 edition, but the 1937 edition is called Structure of Atomic Nuclei and Nuclear Transformations, and it's available through the Internet Archive: https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.501245 https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.501245

teraflop 2y ago
D'oh -- I meant to say "the book had to be completely rewritten" but it's too late to edit my comment.

freedomben 2y ago

Indeed! I love reading Benjamin Franklin for exaclty that. If you haven't read it, Walter Isaacson's biography on Franklin is absolutely fascinating. Brilliant, hilarious, driven, and wildly accomplished. The dude was (IMHO) one of the most interesting humans to have ever lived. Highly recommend.

lupire 2y ago

This was how the 18th Century worked. In the 19th Century mathematical language became rigorous and formal, better able to handle more complex constructions accurately, but harder for lay people to learn, as it became a new language.

kqr 2y ago
Well... going by the Fermi biography and the first few chapters of The Idea Factory (about Bell Labs) I would think this is what it always sounds like in the early stages of humans discovering a new part of nature. It's just that our most recent theories have been so rich that we have happened to discover many things theoretically before we find them in real life. (Theory has preceded practice in recent decades, rather than the other way around which is historically more common.) I'm not sure this will always be so, it might be a temporary leap.