Anna is bored and must be amused,

[SluttyShemaleAnna]

Originally Posted by smc

I was with you, Anna, until the "counterintuitive" part ... all lined up with this tidbit. So, I'll go ahead anyway.

My students often use the phrase "quantum leap" to describe a major advance, a big step, a tremendous innovation, a paradigm shift -- in other words, something HUGE.

But in physics, a quantum represents the minimum of something, namely, the minimum amount of a physical entity that may be involved in any given entity. So, this idea of quantum as BIG or HUGE is rather ridiculous.

I have begun a crusade at my university to expunge the English language of this phrase "quantum leap" used this way. People find it amusing that I'm doing so. Perhaps, since you are -- as we say in Boston -- "wicked smaht," you will find it amusing, too.

Hmmm, I always saw the use of quantum leap to describe certain innovation as being thus: The most interesting thing about transition between energy states is, there is no intermediate. An electron will pass to a higher orbit without passing through any space between.

With technology, quantum leap generally refers to something entirely new, with no precursor, and no link to previous technology. So technology has advanced with no intervening transition. eg, invention of the steam engine, besicly people went from a horse walking in a circle, to steam engine, bam, quantum leap, it's just like boom steam engine, no intervening step there, it's not like the advance from the first low pressure engines to steam locomotives, where it's a long string of small improvements, it's just boom, whole new technology, it's gone from one thing to the other with nothing in between.

that's how I've always seen it anyway.