3 ms·
Agreed - OP's criticism is way over the top. This blog post is very much "first principles" for the layperson. It's not the level of "first principles" that a
by DiogenesKynikos 1y ago
Agreed - OP's criticism is way over the top.
This blog post is very much "first principles" for the layperson. It's not the level of "first principles" that a trained physicist would expect (where there would be rigorous derivations involving dielectric functions and the like), but it's great for a layperson who wants to understand why the world looks the way it does.
- godelski 1y agoSo then, why use that phrase and not a more accurate one?
- DiogenesKynikos 1y agoBecause it's a widely used phrase that everyone understands. What the "first principles" are for a layperson and a physicist are different, as is the expected level of rigor in the derivations.
- godelski 1y ago> that everyone understands. We wouldn't be having this conversation if this were true
- DiogenesKynikos 1y agoNo, we're having this argument because of pedantry, not because someone doesn't understand the term "first principles."