Talk:Steady state

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Merger proposal

I think that the current disambiguation list does not really disambiguate between different uses, as they all boil down to the concept of a steady state as used in dynamic systems theory. Hence, the concept should perhaps be explained in detail on Steady state, with a brief listing of applications in different fields (perhaps with links to a corresponding main article), and with see also links to Steady state theory, Engine test stand and Homeostasis. -- Mietchen (talk) 14:18, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

I have added the links mentioned above (plus a few more). Good starting points for realizing the merger might be Dynamic equilibrium or Steady state (chemistry). -- Mietchen (talk) 16:33, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Strongly disagree -- I think the use in special fields is distinctive, and I suggest that they in general remain, certain the ones for biochemistry and chemistry:

They all have independent literature, and are part of different subjects, even though they are based upon the same systems approach. I note the use of some of these long antedated formal systems theory.

even more so Steady state theory, a non-standard cosmological view developed in 1949 by Fred Hoyle and others as an alternative to the Big Bang theory, is certainly a very distinctive concept quite different in implication from the others,and must have a separate article. DGG (talk) 06:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
I think this article and the Steady state (disambiguation) could and should be merged. The term "Steady state" is basically a formal term without any specific meaning. Adding a listing and references to the specific meanings to this article should be a good thing.
Further more I think two of the smaller articles Steady state (macroeconomics) and Steady state (biochemistry) could be merged in here, as long there is not more to say about these subjects.
-- Mdd (talk) 23:36, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose, Steady state (chemistry) is integral part of chemistry cannot possibly merged. V8rik (talk) 20:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Oppose: these are all very different in each field. Since Mietchen hasn't even defended the idea for over 3 months, I'm going to edit boldly and remove the merge proposal from this page.--Hraefen Talk 16:18, 30 May 2008 (UTC)