you physics maniacs look here

[mingshey]

Newton's Principia(in neo-latin, maybe...) is on burndy library home page.<br />

Three editions.
• 1687
• 1713
• 1726

<br />If you want to learn physics in latin, this is a good start, really. ;D<br /><br />

[Lumen_et_umbra]

His physics, though brilliant in their inception, have begun to be outdated. The physics detailed in that book are, now, even well know to the bourgoise (and lower) and have become ponderous and obvious. I find Quantum Mechanics, the M-theory, Supersymetry, etc... to be the most fascinating theories of modern physics. <br /><br />Also, that book being mathematically inclined, the Latin in it would have required the creation of many new words (which I certainly wouldn't know). Incidentally, his pursuits did required a new form of mathematics (Calculus. Though, I am pretty sure everyone knew that historical tidbit.)<br /><br />This book however, would be interesting for the mathematical historian and linguistician.<br /><br />p.s. Sorry to seem like I am just being a wet blanket on your posting, just for the fun of it... I am just joking...

[mingshey]

...<br /><br />Also, that book being mathematically inclined, the Latin in it would have required the creation of many new words (which I certainly wouldn't know). Incidentally, his pursuits did required a new form of mathematics (Calculus. Though, I am pretty sure everyone knew that historical tidbit.)<br /><br />This book however, would be interesting for the mathematical historian and linguistician.<br />

<br /><br />Hahaha, you're right. <br />Newton had written his book without using calculus, which might have greatly reduced the volume. It's full of geometrical diagrams. Surely it also won't be a recommendable reader for latin learners. <br />But if you wonder how you could describe the classical mechanics without calculus, this book shows how, and the energy of the maestro.<br />Latin(neo-latin) has been in common usage until quite recently among the scholars, and had to be alive in some degree, so no wonder new words had to be coined for new concepts(vinum<br /> novum in utres novos).<br />Anyway, as you pointed out, this book has more historical value than educational. (And I wonder what Schrödinger had to say if required to describe quantum mechanics without using calculus and algebra. ;D)<br /><br />Thanks for comments!

[Lumen_et_umbra]

Shrodinger was the man who cheated on his wife many many times and whose wife actually encouraged him to leave if he so desired, despite that it would have hurt her emotionally, right?<br /><br />If this is the person, her wife was very odd in her behavior: she loved him and didn't want him to leave, but she so desired his happiness that she, as far as I know, never once became irate with him when he cheated on her. Also, she was only 14 or so when he met her. He was quite promiscuous in his sexual activites... <br /><br />Besides the sordid details of his life, I do not remember what he contributed to Quantum Mechanics...

[Milito]

Amazing.... All I remember about Schrodinger is that he came up with The Cat Who Walks Through Walls (although Heinlein wrote the novel....)<br /><br />The idea is that if you put a cat in a box with a vial of poison, you have no way of knowing what "state" the cat is in, without opening the box, and thus changing the "state"..... The only way you could find out without altering the "state" of the box-environment is if the cat could walk through the wall and prove to you that it hadn't (or had) ingested the poison and died (or not)...<br /><br />I think he was trying to illustrate the Uncertainty Principle, but I'm not entirely sure, and my knowledge of physics is nothing but patchwork.....<br /><br />Kilmeny

[mingshey]

Hmm, yes he had his cat.<br />And I still wonder why nobody yet checked his gedanken-experiment. One could replace the cat with a cockroach or some other thing which is politically not incorrect to destroy.<br />Too obvious to try and see?

[klewlis]

[quote author=mingshey link=board=6;threadid=533;start=0#4737 date=1061602016]<br />Hmm, yes he had his cat.<br />And I still wonder why nobody yet checked his gedanken-experiment. One could replace the cat with a cockroach or some other thing which is politically not incorrect to destroy.<br />Too obvious to try and see?<br />[/quote]<br /><br />I think because the experiment, like all thought experiments, was never meant to be physically tried in that sense... perhaps on the quantum level though ;)

[Keesa]

I"ve always wanted to read Principia, never mind that it's outdated. As I understand it, Nathaniel Bowditch learned Latin just so he could read Principia...and this was back when Principia hadn't yet been understood by the masses, and was still in that whole realm of semi-mysticism that the learned once had. <br /><br />I also love physics, particularly things like quantum mechanics and wormholes and the theory of parallel universes-although I don't believe that one-and all those other fascinating, crazy, science-fiction-like ideas. <br /><br />I'll have to look into that Principia, although I doubt I'll be able to read it yet...<br /><br />Keesa

[Emma_85]

thanks for the link mingshey! i will take a look at that, though right now i'm a bit busy trying to revise the stuff we're doing right now in physics. i want to study phisics at uni and it would be great to read the principia in the original. <br />i always find it better to read things in the origian whenever possible. for example descartes is much better in latin (though i've only read a small passage in latin). i'd love to read that in the original!

[mingshey]

Though I can't decipher latin myself(many words look familiar, but the inflections are strange to me yet), and read principia through english translation(and only the first few pages), all the confusing basic concepts such as momentum, force, power, etc. are explained for the world illiterate of physics-as-we-know-of.<br />Thus in pedagogical point of view, principia has some value for the beginner of classical physics as a reference. <br />(ontogenesis recapitulates phylogenesis )<br /><br />Nevertheless, I also find PSSC movies and Feynmann lectures series(3 volumes) very helpful. And Conceptual physics(or Thinking physics) by Hewitt et. al. may give you many important hints on what you have to fully understand.<br />