JohannesBorgen Profile picture
Nov 8, 2020 42 tweets 8 min read Read on X
I hope 25% won’t immediately unfollow me! But, hey, physics is beautiful, and history is fun, so let's start...

...with the history of light as a physical concept, because a very large part of what physics is today comes from studying light.
The early study of light was mostly geometric & about straight lines. Thales’s theorem proven (hum!) using the shadows of the great pyramid, Eratosthenes’ measurement of the Earth’s circumference using the shadows in Alexandria & Assouan: light rays contributed to progress. Image
But one phenomenon baffled scientists and philosophers for centuries: refraction. And they were right to be baffled because understanding refraction led to the discovery of one of the most important principles of physics…But let’s not get ahead of ourselves.
In case you forgot your high school class, refraction is what happens when something in water appears to be broken, as this pen. Image
The reason why it looks “broken” is simply because light rays (they’re not really “rays” but never mind) change course when they move in or out of the water (see drawing). Greek philosophers had already understood this, but they couldn’t solve two mysteries! Image
Mystery number 1: what is the equation giving the angle for the deviation?

Mystery number 2: why is there a deviation in the first place????
It took centuries to make any progress.

In 773 an Indian delegation went to visit the calif of Bagdad, Al Mansour, and a geometry treatise was given as a precious gift.

It contributed to developing extensive scientific research in Bagdad!
In 983, a mathematical genius, Ibn Sahl, wrote a book that included the first description of the law of refraction. This is the crucial excerpt from his manuscript. If the proof isn’t super clear, it’s ok. And this time don’t blame me for the blurry pics! Image
Unfortunately, Ibn Sahl was overshadowed by another later Arab genius, Ibn al-Haytham, a polymath who became known as the father of optics.
Ibn al-Haytham studied the eye and combined the mathematical rays of Euclid, the medical work of Galen to show that Aristotle was right and Pythagoras wrong: the light comes to the eye, not from the eye! (Yes, Pythagoras had some weird theories)
For reasons that are still unclear, Ibn al-Haytham did not use Ibn Sahl’s work and had his own law of refraction, but which was only valid for tiny angles. Because Ibn al-Haytham was so famous, his work came all the way to Europe and became a very early reference on optics.
Ibn Sahl’s work was totally forgotten… to the point that we had to wait for 1980 to realize that Ibn Sahl was the real inventor of the law of refraction!

In the meantime, three European scientists had been fighting for that honor!
Meet Thomas Harriot, one of the very first British scientists and an early explorer of the New World!

He began experimenting on refraction in the 1590s and probably discovered the law of refraction in 1602… but didn’t find any reason to write it down anywhere!
Instead, he kept writing to Kepler accurate estimates for refraction angles, which drove Kepler totally mad because he could not understand where the numbers were coming from!

When Harriot died from cancer in 1621, most of his work remained unpublished.
Which is sad, because it looked nice Image
In fact, when the Royal Society was founded in London, the first meetings were full of discussions about finding Harriot’s lost and mysterious papers!
You would think nobody else would be dumb enough to discover one of the most important laws of physics and forget to publish it? Hum. Willebrord Snellius started on Eratosthenes’ footsteps & was the first to reproduce his measurement of the circumference of the Earth in 1615.
Yes, European science hadn’t progressed much in 1500 years…
By doing some refraction experiments, Snell discovered the so-called sine law and the fact that every substance has a specific "refractive index” driving the angle of refraction. But he did not realize that this was so important and left it unpublished.
He had to wait a little less than Ibn Sahl’s to get his fame restored: Huygens, in Dioptrica published in… 1703, finally gave credit to Snell.
But the situation is a bit frustrating because none of them *explained* how they got to the sine law. It could be because they found it by pure guessing or because they didn’t publish their reasoning… we simply don’t know!
So, we are left with Descartes, the French philosopher, who was the first one to publish an actual “proof”. This is why French people call it the law of Snell-Descartes (forgetting poor Harriot, not to mention Ibn Sahl, a mere… 550 years before!)
But this is where it gets funny because Descarte’s proof was totally bogus. He probably did just like the others, found the law by guessing, and then did his best to come up with a theory. He got two ideas correct, though:
He realised that speed could be at the heart of the issue and that the frontier between air and water was key
His idea was best expressed in this drawing: basically, he thought that at the exact frontier between air and water, the perpendicular component of the speed of light would change and this would trigger refraction. Image
The idea was not bad… but there were two tiny problems. The first one was that Descartes also believed… that light had an infinite speed! (A story for another thread.)
Yeah, mathematical rigor was not exactly the same back in the days. Infinite speed and... change in speed didn’t sound like a big contradiction!
But the second problem was what killed his theory. His equations worked only if the speed of light was *higher* in water. And someone didn’t agree with that *at all*.
This someone was probably the most famous amateur mathematician of all times and surely you’ve heard his name before: Pierre de Fermat, a French judge.
Fermat liked to tease & pretend that he had a very simple and elegant proof that x^+y^n=z^n had no integer solution for N>2. (But not enough space to write it down)
It took 350 years, hundreds of wrong proofs, thousands of frustrated mathematicians, and Andrew Wiles’ 500-page long proof to show that the theorem was correct!
Meanwhile, in the 1630s, Fermat was convinced that Descartes was wrong and that light was gong faster in the air than in water. Why was he convinced? Because he had found another way to prove “Descartes’s” law, but it required light to be faster in the air.
Why his proof rather than Descartes’s, then? I mean at the time, there was no way to measure the speed of light with that kind of accuracy. Fermat thought he was right simply because his proof had an exceptional beauty.

And honestly, he had a point.
When Maupertuis generalized it in 1774 , he was so thrilled that he believed he had discovered proof of God’s existence, no less!
So what is this fantastic principle?

We now call it the “principle of least action” and this is how Fermat saw it: in simple words, Fermat discovered that light always takes the path that can be traversed in the least time.
It is exactly as if light always knows how to get somewhere as quickly as possible, by the virtue of some magical knowledge!

It is easy to imagine how enthusiastic Fermat was when he discovered it.
This idea is enough to explain the law of refraction because light will try to travel more in the “high-speed medium” and less in the “low-speed medium”.

Simple maths show that in this situation, the quickest path obeys the sine law.
In the drawing below, you can see that if you are in L and want to save someone drowning in X the safe strategy is not to run straight ahead to the water because you swim slowly! Image
It turned out Fermat had only rediscovered an idea posited by Heron of Alexandria, in the 1st century!

And that idea would turn out to be so interesting that it is now at the core of quantum mechanics and most of modern physics…
Ultimately, the law of refraction led to

i) the discovery of the principle of least action
ii) new research on the speed of light and
iii) Newton’s famous prism experiments!

Not bad, for a broken pencil. But far from over, as double refraction would soon puzzle scientists...
That's for another week!
And here's the link to the next thread, about color, Newton's theory of light, double refraction, the first theory of light as a wave, and how the Vikings discovered America!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with JohannesBorgen

JohannesBorgen Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jeuasommenulle

Feb 20
Interesting note this morning from DB about ECB policy review and money market rates. Let me summarize it.

ECB has de facto moved from a corridor system to a floor system with unlimited MRO + QE.

But as QE etc unwind, there’s a big risk lurking. A thread
For those unfamiliar with the jargon, a corridor means that the market rate (EONIA) is stuck between two policy rates, the deposit facility rate (DLF) and the marginal lending rate (MLF.)

That’s what it looked like before 2008 & the GFC.

(Market rate is yellow) Image
After all hell broke loose in '08, the ECB flooded the market with money and this is what it looked like: market rates were stuck at ECB deposit rates because there was too much money in the system and it had to be deposited back at the ECB (ECB money is just doing round trips). Image
Read 10 tweets
Nov 24, 2023
My 2 favorite docs are the Jap & Ger financial stability reports because they give a glimpse at the horror of small unlisted banks😁(don’t sue me, I’m just kidding).

What did we get from the new German one ?

Buckle up, as they say in 10,000$ a year doomsday newsletters.
You won’t believe it: CRE is in trouble – but tbh office is surprisingly resilient so far. Image
Ok, CRE is fun, but have you tried interest rates risk and bn of securities unrealized losses in the balances sheet?

Realised is 25.8bn so total is around 70bn€. Tbh this is also not that much compared to the US shitshow. Image
Read 14 tweets
Nov 20, 2023
With all the macro debates going on around rates, recession, CRE, etc, banks’ loan losses are obv key. They are what makes the diff between recession & depression imo

That’s why the EBA report on banks’ provisioning practices is key – Here are my main takeaways.
1) Stage 2 loans (i.e. deteriorating loans for which lifetime expected credit losses = ECL should be booked) are a total mess. There's no consistency in methodologies. Here are the main problems
Collective assessments are still lacking (but are compulsory under IFRS9) Image
Read 18 tweets
Oct 9, 2023
A few comments on the Metro Bank situation & capital rausing plan announced yesterday evening.

I'll start with a quick recap and then what I think it means for Metro and (more importantly) for the sector.
The deal has four components:
- Haircut of 40% on Tier 2 debt + extension of the 60% left, but voluntary, not bail-in
- Extension of MREL debt to 2029 (+4y) and new MREL issuance at 12%
- 150m new equity at 30p (IPO was at 2190p…)
- Planned asset sale of 3bn of resi mortgages
Now, what I think is important:

1. last minute rescue plan of MREL bondholders, shareholders are wiped out and T2 debt gets a mixed deal but the bonds were trading at 30%.

2. We might get retail s/h litigation / misselling claims
Read 14 tweets
Oct 6, 2023
IFRS & bank regs are almost killing bank M&A - something the Brits might regret in the next few days 😉 & the SSM might consider unintended consequence !

Here's why.
Let's take a simple bank with loans & deposits. Regulations (IRRBB) and common sense mean they can't massive interest rate riskj, so on top you add some rates derivatives to hedge.
Floating loans have an easy IR profile, mortgages are more complicated profile (fixed rate, prepayment risk). Deposits are much more complicated: sight deposits are not really floating not really fixed, so the hedging is complicated and requires modelling.

Back to M&A now
Read 8 tweets
Sep 26, 2023
The ECB just published an economic bulletin on banks’ distributions, and I’m still puzzled as to why the ECB is so obsessed with this and constantly fight payouts.

So a thread about bank dividends !
My commonsense view here is that the EA banking sector is trading at unhealthy P/B ratios & it’s both in the banks’ and supervisors’ interests to see them go up.

But it looks like the ECB disagrees. Image
Again, commonsense view is that the best protection against financial distress is to be able to raise capital when you need it... and you’re only able to do that if you have an equity story to sell to investors.

If you can’t even distribute your earnings, it’s a tough sell.
Read 14 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(