Talk:Potential

Contents

1 Reddi edits 2 A lay-definition 3 Don't copy/paste move 4 Potential of a quantum field?

Reddi edits

User:Reddi keeps adding the following edits. At the beginning:

A Potential, generally, is the inherent ability for coming into being._{[1] (http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn?stage=1&word=potential)} These are states that something can achieve. This concept is related to probability.

and, at the end, under Engineering:

In mechanical work, machines transmits (or modifies) energy to perform or assist in the performance of human tasks. It's potential energy exists because of the relative positions of two or more objects. _{[2] (http://www.tpub.com/content/fc/14104/css/14104_41.htm)} This potential is measured in foot-pounds (ft-lb).

In Electric circuits, potential is the voltage at a point relative to some reference point. _{[3] (http://www.bpa.gov/Corporate/KCC/defn/defnsmal/pq.htm)} It is the ability of the electromagnetic's magnetic force's ability to push one Ampere of energy through one ohm of resistance. The magentic force oscillates the the current in circuits. This is also know as Potential differences.

My objection to these are as follows:

• First of all, we assume that readers of the English Wikipedia speak English; there's no need to define the ordinary English meaning of the word (Wikipedia is not a dictionary), especially when the article begins in physics. Even if you want to do so, if you look in a good dictionary you'll find more varied and more sophisticated definitions than "the inherent ability for coming into being".

• Second, I'm not aware of a specific technical meaning (beyond ordinary English) of "potential" in probability theory; if there is one, the oblique reference you give is insufficient. (Note that in statistical and quantum physics, there is a relationship between probability and potential energy, but potential there is still being used in the sense the article already describes.)

• The potential energy used for mechanical work (i.e. classical mechanics) is exactly the "physics" meaning for potential energy already described in the article; there is no separate "engineering" meaning. (foot-pound is just a non-metric unit for energy, by the way; no reason to cite it specifically here.)

• The potential used for circuits is also no different from the electrostatic potential already described, plus emf as already described; again, there's no separate "engineering" meaning. Also, your definition here is garbled, and not just grammatically; one of the strange facts of electromagnetism is that magnetic forces can do no work (because they are always perpendicular to the direction of motion of the charge); they can only do work indirectly via the induced electric field of Faraday's law.

—Steven G. Johnson 05:17, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC)

I made a a disambiguation page. Moved the physics stuff here. JDR

This is simply avoiding the issue. The point is that, other than the ordinary English meaning (which Wikipedia does not try to define anyway), there are no substantially different technical usages of Potential. Reverted. —Steven G. Johnson 06:12, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a dictionary ... but when disambiguation is needed for CLARITY, such a page is used ... it's an inclusion vs exclusion thing here ... you want to exclude the info ... I want to include it ...

not "technical" ... but wikipedia uses the common terms [read as "laymen"] ... "potential" (in a general sense) deals directly with probability, the article need a link to it ...

"engineering" meanings are to reference the associated pages ... (BTW, I know the diff of the american - metric units ... and there isn't a real reason why they shouldn't be referenced)

"potential used for circuits is also no different from the electrostatic potential already described"? no .. the concepts are not explicitly mentioned ... that's why I have an' will add the info ...

"garbled and not just grammatically"? sure ... whatever ...

BTW, the magnetic field "pushes" the elctric field through the conductor ...

Sincerely, JDR (knows this is a direct result of the axiom about substituting mathematics for experiments)

PS. gonna post a factual inaccuracy tag ...

You really shouldn't edit topics that you so clearly fail to comprehend. And as for "clarity"...well, the samples of your writing do not speak eloquently of your judgement in that regard. —Steven G. Johnson 17:55, Apr 7, 2004 (UTC)

A lay-definition

"In physics, a potential is a scalar field used to describe a conservative (curl-free) vector field, such that the vector field is the gradient of the potential."

Whoa, can't we get a simpler definition for that first sentence? This is an encyclopedia, not a physics textbook. anthony (see warning) 23:41, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'll try to make a more accessible topic sentence. —Steven G. Johnson 22:16, Apr 11, 2004 (UTC)

Don't copy/paste move

Don't perform moves by copy and paste. This destroys the page history. anthony (see warning) 23:46, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sorry. Reddi had moved the page to Potential (physics), and Wiki didn't allow me to simply move the page back because the Potential page he replaced it with got in the way. It looks like you solved this by moving Potential to another, temporary name; I didn't think of that.

Potential of a quantum field?

The sentence beginning with "In quantum theory" is at best unclear and at worst wrong. If someone (the author?) knows what was meant, could e please explain so it can be improved? My attempt at an interpretation would be that it refers to an "effective potential" that can be derived from the photon field, but it's a bit unusual to speak of the "wave function" of a photon. Fpahl 08:58, 22 Sep 2004 (UTC)

That sentence was written by the anonymous author of the initial version of this article. I agree that it's too difficult to tell what exactly he/she meant, and I removed it. —Steven G. Johnson 15:48, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)