arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.14122

The Relation Before Lorenz: Kirchhoff, 1857, and the Symbols Lorenz Inherited

María Florentina Mendoza Urán
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

A relation between the quantities now called the scalar potential and the vector potential, of the same form, up to a sign, as the one the literature attributes to Ludvig Lorenz in 1867, was written ten years earlier by Gustav Kirchhoff, with the same status: derived, unnumbered and unnamed. This paper documents, on the basis of the 1857 originals, that Kirchhoff obtains the relation as the result of a calculation and does not impose it; that the quantity now called the vector potential bears no name at all in his text, whereas the scalar one bears the name "Potentialfunction", potential function, in both papers; that Lorenz writes those same letters, $Ω$, U, V and W, and inherits with them the absence of a name for the three components, although the relation he writes is in other quantities, $α$, $β$ and $γ$, and carries the opposite sign; and that the English translation of one of the two papers suppresses the word "function" from the term "Potentialfunction", with which Kirchhoff names his scalar quantity. The paper concludes that the pattern documented in the 1867 paper predates Lorenz and comes from the source from which he starts: a relation without number or name, components without a denomination, and a vocabulary added later.

Explore related subjects

physics.hist-phphysics.class-ph

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

María Florentina Mendoza Urán. 2026-10-09. The Relation Before Lorenz: Kirchhoff, 1857, and the Symbols Lorenz Inherited. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.14122

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Geometry of the "Gauge Argument"

We show how the "gauge argument", widely criticized by philosophers as ad hoc and unconvincing, may be reconstructed rigorously, and, we believe, convincingly, as an argument concerning the geometry of vector bundles. In this form, the gauge argument has two parts, the first of which is strongly analogous to the Weyl-Stein argument for Galilean spacetime as the appropriate setting for Newtonian gravitation; and the second of which invokes a classic result in the Yang-Mills theory literature, due to Utiyama [1956, "Invariant Theoretical Interpretation of Interaction", Phys. Rev. 101, 1597].

physics.hist-ph↗
arXiv2026

Rethinking Symmetry Principles and Partial Observables With Reference Frames

Dynamically uncoupled fields are a modelling device used in the literature on reference frames, classical and quantum. We argue that the device is not innocuous. First, uncoupled fields violate Earman's symmetry principle SP1---that every dynamical symmetry is a spacetime symmetry---and the violation, unlike the familiar Newtonian one, cannot be repaired by excising surplus spacetime structure: it arises from a deficit of dynamical structure, not an excess of spatiotemporal structure. This qualifies implicit assumptions of Earman's SP1, while leaving its diagnostic role intact. Second, uncoupled fields expose a lacuna in the partial/complete observables programme: only dynamically coupled fields can serve as bona-fide partial observables, so partial observability is derivative on complete observability. We then reinterpret the standard formalism for partial observables: qua measurable, a partial observable is a relational quantity expressed with respect to an uncoupled frame, and it remains gauge-variant. This reinterpretation vindicates Rovelli's claim that partial observables are individually measurable, against Thiemann and Adlam, and separates two properties easily conflated in the generally covariant formulations of theories: invariance under diffeomorphisms and invariance along the gauge flow.

physics.hist-ph↗
arXiv2026

Becoming, Duration, and the Evolving Block Universe

The two-times problem asks how the directed, oriented time of biological and conscious systems relates to the time of fundamental physics. The Evolving Block Universe, in which spacetime grows through an irreversible quantum dynamics along physically preferred worldlines, accounts for the direction of physical time and for its emergence across scales up to the time kept by the brain. It leaves open the relation between this physical time and the experience of passage. We argue that Bergson's durée, the continuous qualitative experience of lived time, names this residue and marks the first-person level at which the physical hierarchy reaches its limit. On this reading the two accounts divide the problem between them: the Evolving Block Universe describes its structural, third-person half, and durée its experiential, first-person half. The remaining gap between the two halves is explanatory. It is an instance of the familiar gap between the physical description of a system and the character of its states as they are lived, and it is compatible with physicalism.

physics.hist-ph↗