![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
Amphidromic points have little to do with standing waves. They do not represent a 3D version of a standing wave either. An amphidromic points has to do with the way the tidal waves travel through the oceans. Due to the coriolis effect and the shape of the ocean basins, the waves do not travel in straight lines but become deflected, in about the same way as air circulation does. In air you see the eye of a low pressure system, which is the point around which the flow circles. This can be seen as an equivalent to the amphidromic point. Wikiklaas 00:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
First of all there is no such thing as Coriolis Effect. If you have ever watch the cyclogenesis of a tropical storm for example and followed the process through to cyclosis you will realise this.
Weatherlawyer ( talk) 00:49, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Because getting out the Oceanography textbooks feels like work man. This is in every modern textbook in the section on tides. FX ( talk) 03:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Added one more ref. All of them need tweaking to meet wikipedia standards. FX ( talk) 03:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Other wise it is original content and will be deleted. Arguing in the comment section is considered bad form. That's what the talk page is for.
FX ( talk) 22:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I added a link to a source that says each major tidal component has it's own amphidromic system. The sort of thing I was asking you about. FX ( talk) 16:48, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Patent nonsense. FX ( talk) 23:06, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
It's great that someone created this but next it could use work. There is no summary /lead...instead the body of the article is put into the position of the lead. The main explanation of what Amphidromic point is is put in words even more abstract than the word itself. North8000 ( talk) 17:28, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
The "Infinitely Long Channel" and "Semi-Enclosed Basin" sections (which aren't necessarily great names here, descriptively, for a general audience) reference "Animation 1" and "Animation 2" repeatedly, and no such animations seem to be on the page. Are these files that were edited out and the text not changed accordingly? Or is there some weirder issue? Rkolozsvari ( talk) 08:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
Amphidromic points have little to do with standing waves. They do not represent a 3D version of a standing wave either. An amphidromic points has to do with the way the tidal waves travel through the oceans. Due to the coriolis effect and the shape of the ocean basins, the waves do not travel in straight lines but become deflected, in about the same way as air circulation does. In air you see the eye of a low pressure system, which is the point around which the flow circles. This can be seen as an equivalent to the amphidromic point. Wikiklaas 00:27, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
First of all there is no such thing as Coriolis Effect. If you have ever watch the cyclogenesis of a tropical storm for example and followed the process through to cyclosis you will realise this.
Weatherlawyer ( talk) 00:49, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Because getting out the Oceanography textbooks feels like work man. This is in every modern textbook in the section on tides. FX ( talk) 03:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Added one more ref. All of them need tweaking to meet wikipedia standards. FX ( talk) 03:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Other wise it is original content and will be deleted. Arguing in the comment section is considered bad form. That's what the talk page is for.
FX ( talk) 22:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
I added a link to a source that says each major tidal component has it's own amphidromic system. The sort of thing I was asking you about. FX ( talk) 16:48, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Patent nonsense. FX ( talk) 23:06, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
It's great that someone created this but next it could use work. There is no summary /lead...instead the body of the article is put into the position of the lead. The main explanation of what Amphidromic point is is put in words even more abstract than the word itself. North8000 ( talk) 17:28, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
The "Infinitely Long Channel" and "Semi-Enclosed Basin" sections (which aren't necessarily great names here, descriptively, for a general audience) reference "Animation 1" and "Animation 2" repeatedly, and no such animations seem to be on the page. Are these files that were edited out and the text not changed accordingly? Or is there some weirder issue? Rkolozsvari ( talk) 08:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC)