Talk:Waves

I've added navigation to some of the sub pages here, but before I go ahead and do the rest, is it a good idea to do this? -- Jimregan 16:07 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hey Jimregan, I tweaked the navigation of the first subpage on the first chapter. I think the new way is a little bit better, and would like to see all of the pages linked this way. What do you think ? Karl Wick 20:43 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * What I think is, it'd be best if we get the sub-page editing that's just come onto the english wikipedia; you can edit the whole page or just a particular section, and it generates a hideable table of contents. -- Jimregan 00:49 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Sub page editing is a very cool feature. My preference is still smaller pages but I am not actively working on the book and the way with the TOC works too.--Karl Wick 03:52 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Navigation
I went through and standardized all the navigation on these pages, as well as the rest of the book. Every page now begins with a ModernPhysicsNav template, that provides a back-link to the main page, and to this section. Also, every page has--at top and at bottom--one of the individual navigation templates for use within that particular progression:


 * Template:1DWavesTOC
 * Template:2-3DWavesTOC
 * Template:GopticsTOC

All of these templates add pages to the : category. --Whiteknight (talk) (projects) 19:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

A Little Well Earned Praise
From just a quick overview, this book looks like an excellent primer for modern physics regarding the applied mathematics of waves. I have linked to it from several places. Please keep up the good work! mirwin @ Wikiversity.

______________________________________________________________________________

I agree. Thankyou very much for this wonderful resource, it has helped me immensely at school and I can understand it better than my school textbook!

Thoughts on Merger
This wave article is off to a very good start. Work to do, lots of work to do, but still good work indeed.

The proposal to Merge it with optics, which I removed, has been in place since 7 August 2006 (for over 8 months) without a single comment. I normally discuss before I remove - but if no one supports for 8 months....

As to why I removed, I fully agree that wave mechanics is important to optics, just as it is to:
 * Mechanical vibrations - from the violin string to fatigue damage
 * Quantum mechanics - wave particle duality, neutrinos, x-rays, gamma rays, etc.,
 * Electrodynamics - radio waves, microwaves & all of Maxwell's Equations implications
 * Hydraulics - already discussed although much more to say - for example solitons
 * Sounds waves - the phonons in solids (lattice oscillations) make a perfectly interesting wave phenomena - supersonic shock waves - atmoshperic waves (or perhaps they belong in hydrodynamics)- blast waves
 * Seismic waves - earthquake waves are different enough to warrant their own discussion - you'll never get a Rayleigh Wave (surface acoustic waves) in optics
 * Graviational waves - Einstein's and Wheeler's contribution of gravitational physics, with some elegant tensor waves, shouldn't be completely neglected.
 * Chemical reactions front - for example the wave effect of the propagation for a deflgration to a detonation is very much a wave phenomena
 * Plasma physics includes a complex set of wave phenomena - e.g., the Alfvén wave in a plasma is a traveling oscillation of the ions and the magnetic field.
 * Other wave phenomena - e.g., the Fir wave - alternating bands of fir trees in sequential stages of development, observed in forests on exposed mountain slopes - are subject to analytic prediction as well

So yes optics is best understood by understanding wave phenomena, but no - we should NOT merge Waves with Optics. If we do, we wind up merging 80% of all physics with wave phenomena.

Williamborg 03:40, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't make waves
Greetings,

Hope this message finds all of you well.

Adding wave theory to optics is jumping the gun.

To understand waves you need to know Calculus and some basic Differential Equations.

When working on my B.S. in Imaging Science at R.I.T., we first had optics. To take geometrical optics it was assumed that we first finished 3/4 of University Calculus(though very little or no Calc. came into play). Then, to take Wave Theory we needed to have completed Calculus and a basic working knowledge of Differential Equations.

For those not familiar with these courses, you have to finish Calulus before taking Differential Equations.

I believe the above to be true in other schools. I've confirmed this by checking out some of the opencourse-ware at M.I.T.

Introducing wave theory to optics will likely serve to confuse and frustrate the casual user(which is learning on their own) and school student that's using this site to better understand their classes.

Enjoy the day, ChambersburgWill````