|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Copyright Permission to modify and distribute this and other timelines originally developed by Niel Brandt have been granted to wikipedia. See Talk:Timeline of transportation technology
|The contents of the Timeline of electromagnetic theory page were merged into Timeline of electromagnetism and classical optics on 25 October 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see ; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.|
I am trying to determine the origin of the term "microwave," but as yet I have not been successful in determining how it was first used. Any ideas?
I added this then I found out its from a Peusdo-Aristotle but I am unsure of the date. *350 BC The earliest written evidence of a camera obscura is found in Aristotle's description of a device in 350 BC in Problemata" (Patti, 1993). Aristotle's apparatus contained a dark chamber that had a single small hole to allow for sunlight to enter. With this device, he made observations of the sun. He noted that no matter what shape the hole was, it would still display the sun correctly as a round object. Another observation that he made was that when the distance between the aperture (the tiny hole) and the surface with the image increased, the image would become amplified. Many attribute the invention of the camera obscura to Aristotle. He also rejected the vision theory of Plato of light rays emitted from the eyes.J8079s (talk) 23:36, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
Hauksbee and 1737
I am having considerable trouble in understanding why Hauksbee is there with Du Fay. It couldn't be Francis Hauksbee the elder who was long dead. And I'm not seeing anything about Francis Hauksbee the younger that would justify the inclusion. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:55, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
An IP user proposed a merger of Timeline of electromagnetic theory but never started a discussion. I think there are two good reasons for merging them. First, Timeline of electromagnetic theory is a misnomer, since there are more articles on experiments than theory. Second, there is so much overlap between the lists that there is little point in maintaining them separately. If the list gets too bulky, a split between electromagnetism and optics might be appropriate. RockMagnetist(talk) 00:30, 21 October 2015 (UTC)