wje@gummo.UUCP (W. J. Eagan) (07/25/83)
I have heard celebrities and politicians use the phrase "quantum leap" or "quantum jump" to refer to a big change, in policy for instance. Where and when did quantum become associated with bigness? A quantum might have a quality of discreteness, but not size. Is this a misnomer used by those with no knowledge of quantum physics?
larry@grkermit.UUCP (Larry Kolodney) (07/25/83)
I think most politicians use the term quantum leap as a cliche', not really knowing the technical meaning, but knowing that it is associated with major changes. If it is used with major changes, it can be construed as being correct in that major changes, while being big, also tend to put the field that they occur in in an entirely new state of (i.e. a descrete jump has occured). -- Larry Kolodney #8 (Moving up) (USENET) decvax!genrad!grkermit!larry allegra!linus!genrad!grkermit!larry (ARPA) rms.g.lkk@mit-ai
smb@ulysses.UUCP (07/25/83)
William Safire mused about that usage as well. The explanation I favor is that "quantum leap" is used to mean "discrete change", i.e., a change from one state to another without assuming any intermediate values. Thus, if the entire workforce of GM were dismissed one day, that would be a quantum leap. Of course, politicians usually use the phrase metaphorically, implying (at best) a change that appears instantaneous within the limits of the measurements we use.
rh@mit-eddie.UUCP (Randy Haskins) (07/25/83)
I think the politician/cretins say quantum leap because quantum stuff implies discontinuity (and discontinuities are fun, they have infinite rate of change). It's like getting to somewhere that it seems you shouldn't be able to get (like electrons do all the time). -- Randwulf (Randy Haskins) genrad!mit-eddie!rh or... rh@mit-ee (via mit-mc)
FtG@rochester.UUCP (FtG) (07/25/83)
They're right, you're wrong. "Quantum" is a Latin word meaning "quantity", my dictionary lists "a large amount" as the third meaning of "quantity". Ipso facto ergo (and any other Latin phrase you care to thrown in) "quantum" can mean "a large amount/increment" (among other things). The thing to remember is that bald headed guys in togas were using the word long before Max Planck was a gleam in his mother's eye. Just because a group of people extend the meaning of the word doesn't negate the original concept. (Now if you want to debate whether it should be "quanta jump" or some such, I'll surrender right now. I don't know that much Latin.) FtG
levy@princeton.UUCP (08/03/83)
So you go to your Latin-English dictionary, find out that "quantum" translates as "quantity", and since your Webster's says that "quantity" *can mean* "large amount", you decide that's what Latin "quantum" means. By the same token, "wars" and "pretty" mean the same thing, since they can both be translated by Latin "bella"... "Quantum" does not mean "large amount" any more than "small amount". Its application in physics (and consequently in the expression "quantum leap") derives from the connotation of discrete change, as opposed to gradual or continuous change. In this sense the expression "quantum leap" makes sense, but the problem is that in physics quantum leaps are very tiny ones, so to some people at least (those who care about such things anyway) the expression is associated with smallness, whereas many people who use it (especially politicians) mean a big change, instead of a discrete one (not much use in trying to blame them for change the original meaning, people have always done that. One of the joys of nlang.)
FtG@rochester.UUCP (FtG) (08/04/83)
So somebody disputes my method for deducing that "Quantum leap" is acceptable usage? But is the conclusion wrong? I repeat a very simple and obvious fact: "Quantum" as a perfectly ordinary word meaning "an unspecified (and usually large) amount" predates Quantum Pysics by two thousand or more years. The extension to mean a discrete jump (which is small only by macro-world standards) is very RECENT. "Quantum leap" passes what I consider to be the two main tests: 1. Do people unambiguously understand its meaning? Yes. 2. Does the dictionary back it up? Yes. (Mine does anyway.) Rememer, over 90% of the population never heard of Max Planck and wouldn't know an h-bar if it hit them over the head. FtG
halle1@houxz.UUCP (08/04/83)
This discussion of dictionaries giving misleading or incorrect definitions out of context reminds me of a roommate's translation of that famous Latin passage, with all words taken from a Latin-English dictionary: Gaul was quartered into three halves.