Talk:Principles of Optics

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Principles of Optics article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

A fact from Principles of Optics appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 5 January 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that according to a 2005 biography, Max Born (pictured), the author of the classic textbook Principles of Optics, felt dejected when he did not share in the 1932 Nobel Prize that was given to his assistant Werner Heisenberg?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The End of the Certain World.

Wikipedia

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

‹See TfM›

Physics: Publications Mid‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Publications Taskforce.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 19:42, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

( Comment or view )

( Article history links:

)

Photo of Born

... that despite the major role he played in developing quantum mechanics, Max Born (pictured), author of the classic textbook Principles of Optics, was not awarded a Nobel prize until 1954 and the 2005 book by Nancy Greenspan was his first full-length biography? Source: "He was among the small number of mainly European thoreists who created quantum mechanics during the 1920s... Yet Born was among the last of those who led the quantum revolution to receive a Nobel prize for his work; and he was, until now, among the last to receive the attention of a full-scale biography." Review by David C. Cassidy on JSTOR

Reviewed: Exempt with less than five credits
Comment: Am open to suggestions on alternative hooks and am quick to respond. I converted this to a double nomination. If anyone opposes that, I am happy to revert and open a separate nomination for Principles of Optics.

Created by Footlessmouse (talk). Self-nominated at 01:27, 29 November 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Sorry, the hook reads like PROMO. "pivotal" is rarely WP:IMPARTIAL language and it often takes many years for important discoveries to be validated and recognized. (t · c) buidhe 08:28, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe: I changed the word "pivotal" to "major" without really changing anything, though please note in this very exceptional case "pivotal" is appropriate. The routine downplaying of Born's contributions to physics and the slight of not giving him a timely Nobel is well-documented and not controversial at all, it was mentioned in basically every review of his biography and is a well-known historical fact. Footlessmouse (talk) 08:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am open to suggestions on further changes, though, I just wanted to point out that many reliable sources say he played a pivotal role in developing quantum mechanics, a term he actually coined, and that his lack of attention is well-documented and was a major point of many of the reviews, so I thought it would work well for a hook. Footlessmouse (talk) 08:44, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Buidhe: Is this any better? Footlessmouse (talk) 09:19, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note Max Born lived from 11 December 1882 – 5 January 1970. I just noticed this, but if there is any way (if it passes) that it could go on the main page on either December 11th or January 5th, that would be cool. Footlessmouse (talk) 09:28, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 ... that according to his 2005 biography, Max Born (pictured), author of the classic textbook Principles of Optics, felt dejected when he did not share in the 1932 Nobel prize that was given to his assistant, Werner Heisenberg? Source: "Together with his assistants Jordan and Heisenberg, Born formulated the matrix version of of quantum mechanics... He also formulated the statistical interpretation of Schrodinger's wave function... He was forced to watch hurt dejection as the Nobel committee awarded the 1932 and 1933 prizes to Heisenberg, Schrodinger, and Paul Dirac for the creation of quantum mechanics." Review by David C. Cassidy on JSTOR same as above

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith Interesting:

Image eligibility:

Freely licensed: - Licensing is dubious. It doesn't provide evidence that Born, or someone else who died 70+ years ago, held the copyright of the photograph, and doesn't give an original publication date. Hence, the public domain claim needs more evidence.
Used in article:
Clear at 100px:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Either ALT0 or ALT1 is good in my opinion (I am satisfied with the tweaks to ALT0). Picture not approved due to licensing issues. Thanks for your work improving the encyclopedia! (t · c) buidhe 23:23, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I am a little embarrassed, I apologize for not noticing the image before. I will work on finding a proper license or replacing it. I would greatly prefer to have a pic of him, but it can go without if there are no alternatives. Thanks! Footlessmouse (talk) 23:27, 29 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note I have completed Template:Did you know nominations/Synergus japonicus and Template:Did you know nominations/Ceroplastes ceriferus that can be used for DYK for this entry, as I will have 5 credits by the time it is promoted. Can this be used on a special occasion of January 5th? Born died that day in 1970. I hope to find a better picture of him by them, but there is a good chance we will have to do without it. Footlessmouse (talk) 22:24, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came by to promote ALT1 for January 5, but I don't see the hook fact in either article. I would assume it would be in the 2005 biography page. Yoninah (talk) 18:52, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Yoninah: Sorry about that! I have added it all to the 2005 biography page. Footlessmouse (talk) 19:33, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Hook fact verified and cited inline. Rest of review per Buidhe. ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 19:40, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Additions to the article

It is great to see an article about this wonderful book.

There is a lot of interesting information about its genesis in Peter Knight's foreword in the Anniversary edition as well in Nancy Greenspan's biography of Max Born, and the Born-Einstein letters. i hope to add more in the near future.

The battle with Robert Maxwell might merit an article on its own. Epzcaw (talk) 14:55, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded the contents section to include some detail about what is covered in each chapter, and what changed from edition - this is all from the prefaces to the new editions. Epzcaw (talk) 08:46, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Epzcaw: Nice work! I actually created both this page and the one for The End of the Certain World and your contributions are most welcome. I have been too busy lately to allow myself to use WP and will remain so for a while (I am an addict and if I allow myself 5 minutes, I will spend all day on here), so it is great to see others picking up the articles and improving them. Also note, WP:NBOOK is pretty lax, if you can find significant material talking about it, being in scattered reviews, forwards, etc., then you can make an article for the book. I honestly think it is important that significant textbooks have a place on here, their timeline tells the story of the history of physics. Footlessmouse (talk) 05:45, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Footlessmouse: Thanks. Will look into [[WP:BOOK}} Epzcaw (talk) 08:53, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]