4 ms·

The Heaviside–Lorentz unit system

peter_d_sherman 3y ago
This is a very interesting page. Why? Because it shows something of a Rosetta-Stone-like quality. Here however, instead of multiple versions of language side-to-side, we have multiple versions of mathematical equations, side-to-side. We have SI, Heaviside-Lorentz, and Gaussian. When viewed in this format, the similarities are absolutely striking... This gives rise to the following question: Who copied who, when? Or perhaps rather: Who derived what from who, when? When viewed side-by-side, these formulas would seem to trace back to Gauss, in one way or another: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Friedrich_Gauss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Friedrich_Gauss But, I don't have the time to do the research to prove or disprove that... It might make an interesting future research project however... Figure out what Gauss knew mathematically (in his own historical time period) about the equations that would later become the equations in future electromagnetic theory... What did Gauss know, and what didn't he know (based on his historical writings)?
- pyinstallwoes 3y ago
  Yes, this is very much what I found interesting; beside the normalization of speed of light/rationalization and the quibble in the talk pages over it. The 1800's were a very interesting time. I wish I could hear the conversations between the 'electro-static-magnetic-aether-types' arguing. From your question on what they knew.... I've asked myself similar questions and I think at the very least... the method of measurement and let alone the method of units used influences a type of thinking, which further biases interpretations and understandings. Similarly, Maxwell's equations are usually displayed in a 'reformatted form' which loses a certain perspective in the core inception of the monumental work. When systems fold other systems, a lot of nuance can get lost and at a huge detriment to the sense making over the factor of convenience.

This is a very interesting page. Why? Because it shows something of a Rosetta-Stone-like quality. Here however, instead of multiple versions of language side-to-side, we have multiple versions of mathematical equations, side-to-side. We have SI, Heaviside-Lorentz, and Gaussian. When viewed in this format, the similarities are absolutely striking... This gives rise to the following question: Who copied who, when? Or perhaps rather: Who derived what from who, when? When viewed side-by-side, these formulas would seem to trace back to Gauss, in one way or another: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Friedrich_Gauss https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Friedrich_Gauss But, I don't have the time to do the research to prove or disprove that... It might make an interesting future research project however... Figure out what Gauss knew mathematically (in his own historical time period) about the equations that would later become the equations in future electromagnetic theory... What did Gauss know, and what didn't he know (based on his historical writings)?

pyinstallwoes 3y ago
Yes, this is very much what I found interesting; beside the normalization of speed of light/rationalization and the quibble in the talk pages over it. The 1800's were a very interesting time. I wish I could hear the conversations between the 'electro-static-magnetic-aether-types' arguing. From your question on what they knew.... I've asked myself similar questions and I think at the very least... the method of measurement and let alone the method of units used influences a type of thinking, which further biases interpretations and understandings. Similarly, Maxwell's equations are usually displayed in a 'reformatted form' which loses a certain perspective in the core inception of the monumental work. When systems fold other systems, a lot of nuance can get lost and at a huge detriment to the sense making over the factor of convenience.