Disputatio:Lex Crameri

Linear...linealis?--Ioshus Rocchio 08:05, 20 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linearis -e, gen. pl. -ium. The suffix -alis usually turns into -aris if there's already an l in the word.

But as for the title of this article, is this the proper way to name a mathematical law? Laws, in the civic sense, are generally named with adjectives, not genitives: Lex Cramerana. But I don't know if this applies to mathematical laws as well: can anyone provide me with parallel examples? --Iustinus 15:01, 20 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lex Euleris, no?--Ioshus Rocchio 17:21, 20 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Leges motus Newtoni...?--Ioshus Rocchio 17:28, 20 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lex Euleris: Well, given that his Latin name is Eulerus -i, that can't be right ;) In any case, I don't find any google hits for that.

As for Leges Motus Newtoni, well... I came up with that locution, and I wasn't really thinking about the issue when I did. But I did have some good reasons nonetheless: Newton himself used the expression Leges Motus (it's even the header on the page he describes them in, as you can see in the image), and so just as one can say "Principia Mathematica Newtoni", it makes sense to say Leges Motus with the author's name in the genitive as if it were the the title of a work. But you do have a point: if these were laws he passed in the senate, they would likely be called Leges Newtonianae de Motibus.

Well for now let's let this page stand, and if we see any citations in Latin authors on mathematics and physics for "So-and-so's law" let's report them immediately. --Iustinus 21:39, 20 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a deal. I'll keep my eye out...I'm curious now. But I think opera are usually referred to by genitive of the author, right? Taciti annales, Livii historiae, Menaechmi Plauti. As for Eulerus... oops! =]--Ioshus Rocchio 01:51, 21 Augusti 2006 (UTC)[reply]