User talk:Karol Langner

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archives:

User talk:Karol Langner/Archive 1 (archived on 12.11.2005)

User talk:Karol Langner/Archive 2 (archived on 15.11.2006)

[edit] Typos

In the following template, energy is spelled "enrgy":

[edit] Polytropic versus Polytropic process

Karol,

It really does seem silly to have an entry for Polytropic and an entry for Polytropic process. I don't know which entry came first but the two do seem redundant. But perhaps I am wrong - there are , after all, entries for Isothermal process and other thermodynamic processes. Thoughts? Petwil 08:13, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly unfree Image:Kolakowski.jpg

[edit] Westport Country Playhouse / Lawrence Langner

I happened upon your comment on Talk:Westport Country Playhouse, and I couldn't help but wonder if you were related to Lawrence Langner. Are you?

• Lawrence Langner is the founder of the Westport Country Playhouse. Given your last name and the nature of your message on the page, I figured you were his daughter-in-law or some such. --Cryptic C62 15:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Oops. You're male. Hee. Anywho, I seem to be souping up Westport Country Playhouse single-handedly, so if you'd like to join me in my quest, I'd certainly appreciate it. --Cryptic C62 15:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Q-curvature

In a recent edit, you recategorized Q-curvature from Cat:Physics to Cat:Topology, and in doing so, you removed the {{copyvio}} message from the page. Was that intentional? --Rob Kennedy 21:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why did you delet this text

Walter Ritz pointed out seven problems with Maxwell-Lorentz electromagnetic field equations, which are based on the concept of a solid deformable ether.

(1) Electric and magnetic forces really express relations about space and time and should be replaced with non-instantaneous elementary actions (his emission theory).

(2) Advanced potentials don't exist (and their erroneous use led to the Rayleigh-Jeans ultraviolet catastrophe).

(3) Localization of energy in the ether is vague.

(4) It is impossible to reduce gravity to the same notions.

(5) The unacceptable inequality of action and reaction is brought about by the concept of absolute motion with respect to the ether.

(6) Apparent relativistic mass increase is amenable to a different interpretation.

(7) The use of absolute coordinates, if independent of all motions of matter, requires throwing away the time honored use of Galilean relativity and our notions of rigid ponderable bodies.--Biggy P 16:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Total re-write of the main Physics page is in progess

You might like to join us at Physics/wip where a total re-write of the main Physics page is in progess. At present we're discussing the lead paragraphs for the new version, and how Physics should be defined. I've posted here because you are on the Physics Project participant list. --MichaelMaggs 08:04, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: Motion Trio

Hi Karol. They might be notable, but the article didn't say why. I've moved its contents to User:Karol Langner/Motion Trio so you can work on it and upload it to article space when you're ready. Cheers, Fang Aili ^talk 14:03, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Just for future reference, an article does need to declare notability, otherwise it can be deleted under speedy criteria A7. Cheers, Fang Aili ^talk 12:55, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

The article Acoustics, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup. If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page.