Sorry, then. I misunderstood. I thought you were using Urban Dictionary as a citation for a discussion in GQ.
[/QUOTE]
Well, this whole thing is silly and has gone on too long, but to be clear it was a citation as a primary source of someone’s usage of the term and their understanding of it, which was part of the question. I did not mean it to be cited as an accurate secondary source on the etymology of the word (in fact, I claim that it is inaccurate), so apologies if that was not clear.
Si Amigo, if you would like to prove your case via Urban Dictionary, then I would suggest building a time machine, creating Urban Dictionary before the Internet existed (it can migrate to the Internet later), and ensuring that an entry describing usage like this is properly dated pre-1983 in an auditable way that survives until the present day
Of course, I’m willing to lend some credence to your claim without written evidence, too, but are you actually serious? I’m actually quite curious.
No, I don’t. I’ve tried using it a few times for slang, and the definitions tend to be all over the map. I think I’ve used it half a dozen times and only found a definition that made sense once.
[/QUOTE]
I find that weird. Can you show me an example? I use it regularly, and I’ve never seen it wrong on a well-rated definition.
Off the top of my head, nothing comes to mind. Until this thread came along I hadn’t looked anything up there in at least a year, so I don’t remember any of the words.
When I was an editor at a tech magazine, I watched how words get screwed around with by marketing types. I remember when 24/7 was used only in comp engineering(I think, I don’t know it’s etymology) and then it became keen and neato for business types to say.
Here are some terms that come to mind that I think originated as technical jargon:
Growing exponentially - this used to have a precise meaning as something growing at a rate proportional to its value. It is now used devoid of any precise meaning. It simply means growing fast and the typical user has no idea what an exponential function is.
Quantum leap - this has a precise meaning in quantum theory. It represents the smallest possible change, usually observable only with the most precise measurements. It has come to mean an enormous change, dissociated from the context of quantum theory.
Flip-flop - this was a technical term for a particular form of one bit memory circuit, in which feedback is used to force the circuit to be bistable. With appropriate inputs it can be flipped between these two states. It is now used as a verb, to flip-flop, for example as a disparaging term for an opportunistic politician (is that redundant?)
I don’t have any citations to prove that these all originated in a technical context.
That’s not the way I interpret it. As I see it, for example, an electron is in one orbital one moment. Then ba-BAM! it’s in another, without actually having traveled the distance between the orbitals. To me, that seems sudden, dramatic, and (on the subatomic level), a pretty damn far distance.
Interesting interpretations above on quantum leap, both by laymen (like me) from science trickle downs (both with fast-and-loose science), with different metaphors taken advantage of, for opposite conclusions. Both valid, and you don’t even have to invoke the Humpty Dumpty clause.
Thanks for bringing some facts to my idle speculation. Mainly I wanted to get the discussion off the topic of urban dictionary and get some more possible examples on the table.
Yes, I understand that, and that is certainly valid, though I kind of like the irony of the other interpretation. Either way, it is beside the point of whether or not this is a bit of technical jargon that is now more commonly used by people with no connection to the original technical context.
A thread about the origin of the word ‘ping’ and yet no mention of the internet = nerds = Monty Python’s Meaning of Life"the machine that goes ping" connection?!
Good grief. Again? “Quantum” is an old Latin word for “amount”. Julius Caesar never had atomic physics in mind when he used the word “quantum”. The Physics use of the term is the fourth listing in my computer dictionary.
If anything, using it to mean a tiny amount is the mistake.
Of course it is, as should be obvious to anyone who has used the word “quantity”. I am not talking about that. The words quanta and quantum have a long history of use by physicists, dating back to at least the mid 19th century. Einstein used the term to describe his notion of quanta of light, which we now call photons. The term was later used by Max Born to describe the emerging field of quantum mechanics.
I am talking about the phrase “quantum leap” or “quantum jump,” which according to the Online Etymological Dictionary is first recorded in 1955. I suspect it is actually older than that. It is standard terminology in physics, but has found its way into common parlance, disassociated from its technical context, which is what this thread is about.
