Talk:Disk laser
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yes, Srleffler; something wromg with citations.. I try to understand, what is the matter. dima 09:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] combine with active mirror?
I know how to improve the citations. I do it.
By the way, how about to combine this article with active mirror?
dima 09:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Since active mirror seems to be just an earlier name for a disk laser, the contents of that article should be merged here, and that article should be replaced with a redirect to here. Wikipedia articles are organized by thing, not by name. Each thing gets one article (normally), regardless of how many names it has.
- By the way, is the title spelled correctly? The normal spelling for the geometric figure is "disc", not "disk". Floppy disks are an exception to normal English spelling.--Srleffler 05:39, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
C O M B I N E D !!! dima 14:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Institute for Laser Science
Mein Gott, the articles Institute for Laser Science and Laboratory of Laser Energetic are not yet at Wiki??? Or I again misspell the names? dima 09:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Laboratory for Laser Energetics has an article.--Srleffler 05:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks, Srleffler!
Hi, Srleffler. I got your smile. Thank you.
I try to arrange links before to combine the articles.
I corrected the links to the institutes you mention.
The spelling of the disk is not so easy: in some publicaitons it appears as disk, in some as disc. Perhaps, we should mention both spellings. dima 14:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] formatting
It seems, some non-ascii character in the references instead of - (separator in indication of pages) causes a conflict with math expression, if appear in the same paragraph; this leads to the wrong formatting; which appears after to save, and is not seen at the preview. I just replaced this character, and now the paragraph looks much better. Is it only at my conputer, or other users see the same? dima 03:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
The problem with formulas disappeared, but now some problem with Fig.1. Since today, it appears as {?] in the article. Is it because of the license, of because of the format, or a wikibug? I have converted it to jpg,
,
it seems to work, but now some formulas appear as [?], Now previous versions also do not look better... What is the matter?
dima 03:03, 29 March 2007 (UTC) P.S. I could not reproduce the error; I did not change anything, but now the figures at the right hand side look identical. (as they were supposed to be initially). Now all seems to work well, I do not know what was the matter; it seems, we can delete one of identical pics. dima 06:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] renaming
I see the term disk laser is not good, because of many other meanings of the word disk, at least in English version of Wikipedia. How about other languages, should we care of compatibility of terminology, making the English version of wikipedia?
The term disk laser seems to appear first in the publication [1] by German colleagues (who are not native English speakers), and this term does not correspond to the commnon meaning of word disk.
I consider to rename the article to active mirror, keeping disk laser as redirection. dima 05:58, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] USA patent 6347109
Something is wrong with reference to US patent 6347109: two different sites suggest different order of authors. I keep both until anybody provides a link indicating that one of the sites is wrong. dima (talk) 04:41, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
The same problem with another patent about Disk Lasers: compare
and
http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6763050-fulltext.html
If anyone has an idea, how to cite them correctly? dima (talk) 05:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] References
- ^ A. Giesen; H. Hügel, A. Voss, K. Wittig, U. Brauch and H. Opower (1994). "Scalable concept for diode-pumped high-power solid-state lasers". Applied Physics B 58 (5): 365–372.
