This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kennelly鈥揌eaviside layer article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Somebody said it's "ridiculous" to put a spoiler warning in a physics article. However, the warning was in the "Cultural Impact" section because said section gives away the ending of the musical CATS. With this is mind, should there be a spoiler warning, or is this just a case of somebody making judgments without even reading the article? If there's a good reason why that should not be marked as a spoiler, I won't question the issue further, but I would like to know this person's reasoning... Lycanthrope777 19:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
How can people in 1902 predict the existence of something the existence of which was proven experimentally in 1899?
The book 鈥淲onders of Science鈥 (Metro Publications, New York, 1943) describes a first Heaviside layer (40-50 miles altitude) and a second Heaviside layer (100-120 miles altitude). Both layers are descibed to contain 鈥渕inute nitrogen crystals鈥 that reflect wireless waves to the Earth. Does anyone know the history on how this evolved into our present understanding? 鈥擯receding unsigned comment added by ShermansPlanet ( talk 鈥 contribs) 17:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
The last note in this article is incorrect "This may be a scientific pun by Eliot". Anions and cations are from the same roots as anode and cathode "up pole" and "down pole". See the respective articles in Wikipedia. 75.57.252.95 ( talk) 15:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
As written, the article states, "It (Kennelly-Heaviside) reflects medium-frequency radio waves..."
This isn't true. The E-layer reflects radio waves in the higher parts of the high-frequency and in the the very-high frequency spectrum. Medium-frequency waves are not propagated by the E-layer See:
http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/pdf/119962.pdf 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.147.72.48 ( talk) 16:44, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
This part is not true: "Conversely, on the night (lee) side of the Earth, the solar wind drags the ionosphere further away, thereby greatly increasing the range which radio waves can travel by reflection."
The ionosphere appears to move up on the nightside because the source of ionization (sunlight) is removed, and the lower part recombines more rapidly due to increased collisions with the neutral atmospheric gas, which is more dense at lower altitudes. 鈥斅燩receding unsigned comment added by 128.244.38.5 ( talk) 14:32, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
I've heard of the "Heaviside layer" for most of my life. I've heard of the "Kennelly鈥揌eaviside layer" once, here. Does anyone actually call it this, or is this simply someone being pedantic? Maury Markowitz ( talk) 16:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
An IPC para has twice been removed now, explaining the relationship of the Heaviside Layer to the musical and recent film Cats.
Fortunately we have an article at Heaviside Layer, which does much the same job. As the pageview traffic shows that is getting four times the traffic this is, and with a large spike overall when the film came out, clearly this section should not be deleted as "unimportant trivia". Like it or not, the world's interest is more about a film than ionospheric propagation.
So, what's to do?
Andy Dingley ( talk) 20:29, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Can't someone just add one of those top article redirect links saying "If you're looking for the stupidly-named thing from that damn awful musical, click here"? -- 2600:1700:B450:7500:A1E7:CB1B:4BB5:B617 ( talk) 07:58, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Request for clarification: what is the downside of including the IPC paragraph? At present, if a user searches for "Heaviside layer" directly, the user is directed to this article, which does not mention the reference in the musical. The reference is definitely inspired by the scientific concept, albeit abstractly [1]. This article, as it stands, isn't terribly long; an IPC paragraph doesn't seem to add a significant maintenance burden and adds better interconnection for people searching the term because they heard it in the musical.
There is discussion on moving the existing " Heaviside_Layer_(Cats)" page into the Cats_(musical) page, which would diminish the utility of the current solution. Mtomczak ( talk) 20:36, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Kennelly鈥揌eaviside layer article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources:聽 Google ( books聽路 news聽路 scholar聽路 free images聽路 WP聽refs)聽路 FENS聽路 JSTOR聽路 TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Somebody said it's "ridiculous" to put a spoiler warning in a physics article. However, the warning was in the "Cultural Impact" section because said section gives away the ending of the musical CATS. With this is mind, should there be a spoiler warning, or is this just a case of somebody making judgments without even reading the article? If there's a good reason why that should not be marked as a spoiler, I won't question the issue further, but I would like to know this person's reasoning... Lycanthrope777 19:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
How can people in 1902 predict the existence of something the existence of which was proven experimentally in 1899?
The book 鈥淲onders of Science鈥 (Metro Publications, New York, 1943) describes a first Heaviside layer (40-50 miles altitude) and a second Heaviside layer (100-120 miles altitude). Both layers are descibed to contain 鈥渕inute nitrogen crystals鈥 that reflect wireless waves to the Earth. Does anyone know the history on how this evolved into our present understanding? 鈥擯receding unsigned comment added by ShermansPlanet ( talk 鈥 contribs) 17:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
The last note in this article is incorrect "This may be a scientific pun by Eliot". Anions and cations are from the same roots as anode and cathode "up pole" and "down pole". See the respective articles in Wikipedia. 75.57.252.95 ( talk) 15:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
As written, the article states, "It (Kennelly-Heaviside) reflects medium-frequency radio waves..."
This isn't true. The E-layer reflects radio waves in the higher parts of the high-frequency and in the the very-high frequency spectrum. Medium-frequency waves are not propagated by the E-layer See:
http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/pdf/119962.pdf 鈥 Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.147.72.48 ( talk) 16:44, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
This part is not true: "Conversely, on the night (lee) side of the Earth, the solar wind drags the ionosphere further away, thereby greatly increasing the range which radio waves can travel by reflection."
The ionosphere appears to move up on the nightside because the source of ionization (sunlight) is removed, and the lower part recombines more rapidly due to increased collisions with the neutral atmospheric gas, which is more dense at lower altitudes. 鈥斅燩receding unsigned comment added by 128.244.38.5 ( talk) 14:32, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
I've heard of the "Heaviside layer" for most of my life. I've heard of the "Kennelly鈥揌eaviside layer" once, here. Does anyone actually call it this, or is this simply someone being pedantic? Maury Markowitz ( talk) 16:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
An IPC para has twice been removed now, explaining the relationship of the Heaviside Layer to the musical and recent film Cats.
Fortunately we have an article at Heaviside Layer, which does much the same job. As the pageview traffic shows that is getting four times the traffic this is, and with a large spike overall when the film came out, clearly this section should not be deleted as "unimportant trivia". Like it or not, the world's interest is more about a film than ionospheric propagation.
So, what's to do?
Andy Dingley ( talk) 20:29, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Can't someone just add one of those top article redirect links saying "If you're looking for the stupidly-named thing from that damn awful musical, click here"? -- 2600:1700:B450:7500:A1E7:CB1B:4BB5:B617 ( talk) 07:58, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
Request for clarification: what is the downside of including the IPC paragraph? At present, if a user searches for "Heaviside layer" directly, the user is directed to this article, which does not mention the reference in the musical. The reference is definitely inspired by the scientific concept, albeit abstractly [1]. This article, as it stands, isn't terribly long; an IPC paragraph doesn't seem to add a significant maintenance burden and adds better interconnection for people searching the term because they heard it in the musical.
There is discussion on moving the existing " Heaviside_Layer_(Cats)" page into the Cats_(musical) page, which would diminish the utility of the current solution. Mtomczak ( talk) 20:36, 9 July 2020 (UTC)