Talk:Paul Dirac

Internal links and syntax

If you have never used this tool before, I recommend it: http://can-we-link-it.nickj.org/. You just type (or copy) the name of an article in the box, and Nick rummages through your article, to end up by suggesting many different internal links which you might have overlooked. Most of them are good; some are not (you have to check). Nick won't make any suggestions until the syntax of your article is correct: Usually bad syntax is caused by stray brackets or apostrophes in the copy. Nick provides you with a list of the bad apples, but then you have to seek them out. A fairly easy way is to copy the text into a word processor and then search for the stray marks there. (The new links for this article are indicated here.) Of course one must be cautious in doing so and not engage in linking just for the sake of linking. I hope this has been helpful. Again, I recommend using Nick's very valuable tool. Yours sincerely,

Semi-protected edit request on 15 February 2020

change connexion to connection 93.35.160.107 (talk) 19:28, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It seems to be part of a quotation. Gap9551 (talk) 19:35, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Agreed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:38, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2020

change connexion to connection 93.35.160.107 (talk) 20:08, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

 Done thank you - FlightTime (open channel) 20:12, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

"Connexion" is the spelling in the source, screenshot here. This is an archaic spelling but it is not incorrect.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

@Ianmacm: Thank you for the heads up. - FlightTime (open channel) 14:59, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Religious development

"Later in life, Dirac's views towards the idea of God were less acerbic", the "Religious views" section says between two quotations. But their contexts are too different to assume that: the first a conversation with friends, the second a didactic metaphor in an article. What we know (unless someone has more information) is that the latter statement is less critical (a more neutral word than "acerbic") and also happens to be later. 151.177.57.24 (talk) 23:38, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Worth pointing out, and visible in the photo here on Wikipedia: Dirac's tombstone carries the inscription, "...because God made it that way." Related reference: here. --2600:1700:80:5AD0:CD57:4CC:4BFE:892B (talk) 12:30, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Might still be a figure of speech (cf. the 1971 quote), he might have wavered or seen it differently from different angles, it's not a simple question, his development was probably not so simple either and is in any case not described. 151.177.57.24 (talk) 13:40, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

I remember reading in Graham Farmelo's excellent biography that Dirac, towards the end of his life (it always is!) once made remarks to the effect that the existence of God is 'one of the most important questions in physics today'. This may well be relevant here, and I can fish it out from my old paperback copy if necessary. I suppose one of the intergalactic wizards here at Wikipedia could find it online, but my tech skills aren't up to scratch. I'm sure Dirac was a committed atheist, but it seems relevant. Daedalus 96 (talk) 21:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 September 2020

"... a paper entitled ..." -> "... a paper titled ..."

"His last paper (1984), entitled ..." -> "His last paper (1984), titled ..." 67.171.68.192 (talk) 17:04, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

•  Not done: Had to check for advice on this here and here. They both agree that there is no real difference between titled and entitled, although some people may prefer one over the other.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:06, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Nationality

The article states that Dirac's nationality was Swiss from 1902 to 1919 and British from 1919 onwards.

1. Before 1983, being born in Britain automatically made one a British citizen, with a couple of exceptions (born to a diplomat, etc) none of which apply to Dirac. So he was a British citizen from birth.

2. Acquiring British citizenship (by birth or otherwise) does not necessarily cause the loss of any other citizenship(s) a person holds. Both Britain and Switzerland permit their citizens to hold other citizenships. I don't know whether Swiss law at that time would have removed Dirac's Swiss citizenship. If the article is going to state that he stopped being Swiss in 1919 then I think that should be justified by a reliable reference.

3. There is a reference to Farmelo's book which states that Dirac's father, Charles, was naturalised in 1919 (with a reference to an official record of Charles' naturalisation), and Farmelo goes on to assert - with no supporting reference - that Charles' children became British on that day. But there is no reference to any naturalisation document for P.A.M. Dirac - because he was never naturalised, he was British from birth. (Farmelo seems to think, or to imply, that when a person is naturalised, all his existing children automatically acquire the father's new citizenship, which is nonsense.) Longitude2 (talk) 23:43, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

This source says "Although Paul was born in the UK and his mother was British, his father made sure his children were Swiss rather than British citizens. Paul only became a British citizen at age 17, on October 22, 1919, when his father also took citizenship"; there are various sources saying this. However, since he was born in Britain to a British mother, it is almost certain that he would have had British citizenship automatically at birth. This may mean that he had dual nationality, but this needs further sourcing.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:02, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

According to History of British nationality law, the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act 1914 would have given British subject status to anyone who was born within His Majesty's dominions, so there would have been no need for naturalisation in 1919. Dirac's father may have naturalised to British citizenship in 1919, but his children, being born in Britain, would have had British citizenship automatically. This is known in legalese as Jus soli, and was accepted in English common law before 1914. The sourcing in Graham Farmelo's book may be confused over this issue; possibly Charles Dirac registered his children as Swiss citizens so that they had dual nationality and Charles became a naturalised British citizen in 1919. Paul Dirac could not have had only Swiss citizenship from 1902 to 1919, because being born in Britain would have given him British citizenship automatically.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:43, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

There is a parallel with Isambard Kingdom Brunel. Brunel's father Marc Isambard Brunel was born in France while his mother was English. Brunel was born in Portsmouth and I've never seen a source saying that he was French simply because his father was French.--20:00, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

• The sourcing for this is page 34 of Graham Farmelo's book.[1] The quote is "In the spring of 1919, for reasons that are not clear, Charles Dirac sought British nationality for the first time... Whatever his motivation, Charles swore allegiance to George V in front of a justice of the peace in Bristol on 22 October 1919. On that day, his children also became Britons, having previously been classed as Swiss, a status that, according to Betty's [Paul's younger sister Béatrice, born in Bristol in 1906] later recollections, caused her to be teased in the playground for being 'one of those Europeans'. Paul Dirac was no longer a foreigner, but, to many British eyes, he would always have the air of one." (fuller version of the quote here). It makes sense that Charles Dirac wanted to naturalise as a British citizen, but the children born in Britain would have had British nationality already, whatever the playground teasers might have assumed. Farmelo's book seems to be confused over this.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:03, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Briefly, I asked the author who stated that in writing the book he followed Dirac's own view that on the basis of their fathers nationality, he and his siblings were Swiss until Charles took British nationality. So the book can be used to source Dirac's belief that he was Swiss until 1919. There could be a number of reasons why Dirac was legally British or Swiss or both but despite the apparent legal situation, we have to follow the sources and avoid original research. Polyamorph (talk) 20:45, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Please do not change direct quotes

@JN Dela Cruz:

I notice that your recent copyedits of this article have modified several direct quotes. As a general rule, words within quotation marks should be modified at all, even to correct grammar or clarify the meaning, because the quotation marks indicate that the words within are supposed to be the original words of the person quoted, here Paul Dirac. So could you please verify which edits modified quotes and restore the original. I checked quickly and found 3 examples, including the (original) words "in an incomprehensible way", "we have no need for such solutions", and "risen up against injustice". Thank you. Dirac66 (talk) 16:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC) (not Paul :-))

kk thanks for the heads-up uwu

Gravity subsection in Career section

The subsection "Gravity" looks out of place in the "Career" Section, it is both anachronistic in the sense that Dirac's work on Quantum theory came first, and also wrongly placed in the sense of what Dirac is most notable for. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RomQuant (talk • contribs) 17:08, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. I have now moved "Gravity" to after "Magnetic Monopoles", as per the chronological order given in the book source by Shifman. Dirac66 (talk) 19:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Autism

I am wondering why there is no mention of autism on the article page.