User talk:DJIndica

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Rydberg atom

Thank you for your contributions to Rydberg atom, and welcome to Wikipedia! --Christopher Thomas 22:14, 1 January 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] Stark effect

Please look at the discussion of the Stark effect (I'm proposing to remove your nice drawing)--P.wormer 09:43, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for opinion about the Stark drawing. Could you perhaps add to the caption an explanation why all levels are split into 7 sublevels? If I counted correctly it seems to me that n=9 has 6 sublevels and n=14 splits into 11. I probably overlook something, but it is likely that I am not alone in that. So please add some extra clarification, thank you--P.wormer 09:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
Drawing is OK and also illuminating. But could you re-enter the magnetic quantum number m to the caption? This is a nice qn because it indicates axial symmetry.--P.wormer 13:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Euler-Cromer method

Hello. I'm intrigued by the article on the Euler-Cromer algorithm that you created, because it looks like I should know about this method. I have a couple of questions which I hope you could answer:

  • You wrote it performs better for oscillatory solutions. What is the basis for the statement? I find it hard to believe that this is true in general, but it may well be true in special cases (and these special cases may constitute the majority of problems of interest).
  • Can you look at the method again and tell me where the functions a and v that appear in the ODE come in? I suppose that an stands for a(vn,xn,tn)?
  • Any references? Where did you get the method from? Mr Google confirms that the method exist, but I can't find much analysis. To be honest, the method looks very similar to Verlet integration (which sorely needs to be cleaned up; there is always so much more work to be done here).

I realize that you may not know all the answers, but anything you can say would be much appreciated. Cheers, Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


Thanks for your answer. Could you please check this edit of mine where I tried to clarify a couple of things, especially about the form of the equation? After quickly reading Verlet integration, it seems that that article describes a different method than the method I have in mind; I need to find out what's going on here. I'll need to think a bit more about the connection with the Verlet method. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:02, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


I copied our discussion to Talk:Euler–Cromer algorithm, so that other people interested in the article can also find it, and added another comment. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 11:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] impedance

Hey, glad to see someone fixing that page up, it really needed it. I responded on its talk page. Fresheneesz 19:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New template for electromagnetism

Yes, the new template certainly does address my concerns. Thanks!Bless sins 15:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)