News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The “uncertainty principle” is a mis-translation (2014). Parent comment

Re:The “uncertainty principle” is a mis-translation (2014) by klodolph on Friday May 20, 2016 @01:31PM (#11739756)
I can't agree with the argument that "relativeness is not the new part"--since relativity introduces the idea that measurements of time and space (and mass, electric fields, magnetic fields, etc.) are relative to the reference frame. Classical mechanics only admits relative measurements of velocity (and energy, momentum, etc).

But if you want to rename it, Einstein said that he should have named it the Theory of Invariance. I'm fond of "relativity" because it admits adjectives like "relativistic". We can say, "At relativistic speeds."

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The “uncertainty principle” is a mis-translation (2014) by dnautics on Friday May 20, 2016 @01:38PM (#11739825)
well popularly (non-scientifically) relativity is thought to mean that a measurement is relative, and that's generally an older concept than Einstein, even though classical mechanics have a more limited scope of quantities that are measured relatively (position, velocity). There are still things in einstein's theory of relativity that aren't relative, even which would have been relative in the classical system (the speed of light). And the initial math outlays (lorentz transformations) are exactly as I described them, shutting down the possibility that the speed of light is relative, creating an "absolute" measurement.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The “uncertainty principle” is a mis-translation (2014) by klodolph on Friday May 20, 2016 @02:48PM (#11740442)
What you are describing as "absolute" is described in the literature as "invariant", which might help if you are doing web searches for more information. "Absolute" usually has a different meaning.
[ Parent | on HN ]