This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I would like to know, what was his primary occupation. What did he do for a living and how did he get his money. Can we call him a gentleman scientist ??
The "publications" after 1925 need some kind of annotation ... are they reprints? When were they written? I don't know the facts here or the standard way of presenting such information or I'd try some edits directly ..
Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction (which is most common) does not link to "Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction", but Fitzgerald-Lorentz contraction does! I don't know how that works... Harald88 21:15, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
fixed: redir to section of length contraction article-Pournami (talk)
The twenty equations of electromagnetism originally written by Maxwell include much more than the "canonical" Maxwell equations. Ohm's law, for example, is included and it is not really a law of electromagntism but an empirical description of some materials. The four canonical vector equations correspond to only twelve of Maxwell's twenty (there is one for each Cartesian coordinate). I've made small revisions accordingly. Shrikeangel ( talk) 16:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
The first paragraph of the article (I'm not a regular editor, so I don't know the terminology), but the part at the very begining of the page, before the table of contents, that says "Oliver Heaviside was a self-taught..." is the exact same text, word for word, as a footnote in M.J.Roberts' Signals and Systems, second edition, page 25. ISBN 978-0-07-338068-1 Hard to say who copied whom, but neither credits the other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.185.183.35 ( talk) 17:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
It seems a little strange that such claims about someones personal character could be made without a proper verified source. A citation with an unknown title or page number is unacceptable as it is impossible to verify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.33.143.13 ( talk) 05:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
After reading this article, I also feel like painting my fingernails pink, removing all my furniture from my house, and sleeping on a block of stone.
No mention of the aether? 67.206.163.72 ( talk) 21:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
"World's Only Remaining Renaissance Man"? It would befit Oliver. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danshawen ( talk • contribs) 18:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
This has been added and reverted twice. [6] It is not the job of Wikipedia articles to give a free plug to charitable causes, no matter how worthy they are. There also appears to be a WP:COI here, as the user involved has made no edits other than to mention this website. Articles should be based on secondary sources, and this is a WP:SPS.-- ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I seek advice and guidance. I'm involved in the development of a non-commercial "hobby-site", 'Oliver Heaviside' at http://www.oliver-heaviside.net/. I think that this meritsa place in the 'External links'. However, I suspect that if I try to add the link, the wrath of Wikipedians will descend upon me. Can I ask others to look at the site and decide whether it's worthy of inclusion? Geoffw1948 (talk) 14:00, 11 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geoffw1948 ( talk • contribs)
I am puzzled by this from the article: "Less well known is that Heaviside's equations and Maxwell's are not exactly the same, and in fact it is easier to modify the latter to make them compatible with quantum physics."
I understand that their forms are different, but surely they are equivalent. Saying they are not "exactly the same" is true but sounds strange. Zedshort ( talk) 16:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I studied Ramo, Whinnery, and Van Duzer's classic book in detail before designing a pulsed transmission line system. My take is that insulation resistance is not a factor in real systems and that pulse dispersion is caused by resistance in series with the inductor. I believe my wording is more accurate. Overjive ( talk) 21:39, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Oliver Heaviside. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.freitag.de/2002/44/02441801.phpWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:55, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
A translation, if the original German is found, may be a useful contribution to this article. — Rgdboer ( talk) 01:19, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
In the list of Heaviside's contributions to electromagnetic vocabulary, the term “reactance” is starkly absent. Did someone else invent that particular term? Or is it an unintended omission? (Perhaps dropped during a cut-and-paste.) 2603:3004:210:DE00:A045:B48E:4D3:A344 ( talk) 05:44, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
This whole article is anti-intellectualism and slander campaign against Oliver Heaviside. When you bring up valid points you are you are ignored because there is really nothing to debate. Those who claim to be English and write articles as so, are imposters to the Anglo-Saxon. K00la1dx ( talk) 18:06, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
This is not mentioned in the article and little seems to be known but one thing that is certain is that he was against it. I once read some of his letters held at the Heaviside Collection in London referred to in the article. I cannot remember exact details now which is why I add remarks on the talk page. In one letter commenting on a review of the Special Theory he said "It is a good review but the theory is of course all nonsense" In another letter I remember he called General Relativity "a theory of curved nothingness". Typical Heaviside! Perhaps someone may be interested to find out his views more exactly. JFB80 ( talk) 21:16, 23 September 2020 (UTC) Read Heaviside's electromagnetic theory. There is absolutely no need for Einstein. Einstein even admitted that there was in fact an ether. K00la1dx ( talk) 16:34, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
I can't believe it says in the article that Heaviside independently developed vector calculus when he was the inventor. Has anyone read all three books of Heaviside's electromagnetic theory? Who do you think was the inventor? Did you know Heaviside disproved the atomic model of the atom in his works? K00la1dx ( talk) 12:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
I've put a citation needed on the claim that this is due to Heaviside. The claim is not expanded on in the article and I've found several sources that contradict it. Kline names Wietlisbach as the first to use this analysis (Kline, p. 1669). Several sources name Kennelly (eg [7]). Kline also says that while Heaviside noted that his "resistance operator" was a complex number, he did not write his equations in complex form (Kline, p. 1671). Spinning Spark 13:30, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
"Also during his latter years, Heaviside introduced the concept of reactance. " https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/history/pioneers/oliver-heaviside-biography.php
This is a credible website crediting Heaviside to Reactance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K00la1dx ( talk • contribs) 13:21, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I hope this addition is acceptable without prior 'talk' notification. The words and cites have been checked by IET Archives and should therefore be correct in all aspects. Please feel free to use the email in cite 28 if you wish to query anything. Windswept ( talk) 19:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I would like to know, what was his primary occupation. What did he do for a living and how did he get his money. Can we call him a gentleman scientist ??
The "publications" after 1925 need some kind of annotation ... are they reprints? When were they written? I don't know the facts here or the standard way of presenting such information or I'd try some edits directly ..
Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction (which is most common) does not link to "Lorentz-Fitzgerald contraction", but Fitzgerald-Lorentz contraction does! I don't know how that works... Harald88 21:15, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
fixed: redir to section of length contraction article-Pournami (talk)
The twenty equations of electromagnetism originally written by Maxwell include much more than the "canonical" Maxwell equations. Ohm's law, for example, is included and it is not really a law of electromagntism but an empirical description of some materials. The four canonical vector equations correspond to only twelve of Maxwell's twenty (there is one for each Cartesian coordinate). I've made small revisions accordingly. Shrikeangel ( talk) 16:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
The first paragraph of the article (I'm not a regular editor, so I don't know the terminology), but the part at the very begining of the page, before the table of contents, that says "Oliver Heaviside was a self-taught..." is the exact same text, word for word, as a footnote in M.J.Roberts' Signals and Systems, second edition, page 25. ISBN 978-0-07-338068-1 Hard to say who copied whom, but neither credits the other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.185.183.35 ( talk) 17:42, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
It seems a little strange that such claims about someones personal character could be made without a proper verified source. A citation with an unknown title or page number is unacceptable as it is impossible to verify. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.33.143.13 ( talk) 05:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
After reading this article, I also feel like painting my fingernails pink, removing all my furniture from my house, and sleeping on a block of stone.
No mention of the aether? 67.206.163.72 ( talk) 21:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
"World's Only Remaining Renaissance Man"? It would befit Oliver. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danshawen ( talk • contribs) 18:02, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
This has been added and reverted twice. [6] It is not the job of Wikipedia articles to give a free plug to charitable causes, no matter how worthy they are. There also appears to be a WP:COI here, as the user involved has made no edits other than to mention this website. Articles should be based on secondary sources, and this is a WP:SPS.-- ♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 18:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I seek advice and guidance. I'm involved in the development of a non-commercial "hobby-site", 'Oliver Heaviside' at http://www.oliver-heaviside.net/. I think that this meritsa place in the 'External links'. However, I suspect that if I try to add the link, the wrath of Wikipedians will descend upon me. Can I ask others to look at the site and decide whether it's worthy of inclusion? Geoffw1948 (talk) 14:00, 11 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geoffw1948 ( talk • contribs)
I am puzzled by this from the article: "Less well known is that Heaviside's equations and Maxwell's are not exactly the same, and in fact it is easier to modify the latter to make them compatible with quantum physics."
I understand that their forms are different, but surely they are equivalent. Saying they are not "exactly the same" is true but sounds strange. Zedshort ( talk) 16:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
I studied Ramo, Whinnery, and Van Duzer's classic book in detail before designing a pulsed transmission line system. My take is that insulation resistance is not a factor in real systems and that pulse dispersion is caused by resistance in series with the inductor. I believe my wording is more accurate. Overjive ( talk) 21:39, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Oliver Heaviside. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.freitag.de/2002/44/02441801.phpWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:55, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
A translation, if the original German is found, may be a useful contribution to this article. — Rgdboer ( talk) 01:19, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
In the list of Heaviside's contributions to electromagnetic vocabulary, the term “reactance” is starkly absent. Did someone else invent that particular term? Or is it an unintended omission? (Perhaps dropped during a cut-and-paste.) 2603:3004:210:DE00:A045:B48E:4D3:A344 ( talk) 05:44, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
This whole article is anti-intellectualism and slander campaign against Oliver Heaviside. When you bring up valid points you are you are ignored because there is really nothing to debate. Those who claim to be English and write articles as so, are imposters to the Anglo-Saxon. K00la1dx ( talk) 18:06, 22 November 2022 (UTC)
This is not mentioned in the article and little seems to be known but one thing that is certain is that he was against it. I once read some of his letters held at the Heaviside Collection in London referred to in the article. I cannot remember exact details now which is why I add remarks on the talk page. In one letter commenting on a review of the Special Theory he said "It is a good review but the theory is of course all nonsense" In another letter I remember he called General Relativity "a theory of curved nothingness". Typical Heaviside! Perhaps someone may be interested to find out his views more exactly. JFB80 ( talk) 21:16, 23 September 2020 (UTC) Read Heaviside's electromagnetic theory. There is absolutely no need for Einstein. Einstein even admitted that there was in fact an ether. K00la1dx ( talk) 16:34, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
I can't believe it says in the article that Heaviside independently developed vector calculus when he was the inventor. Has anyone read all three books of Heaviside's electromagnetic theory? Who do you think was the inventor? Did you know Heaviside disproved the atomic model of the atom in his works? K00la1dx ( talk) 12:15, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
I've put a citation needed on the claim that this is due to Heaviside. The claim is not expanded on in the article and I've found several sources that contradict it. Kline names Wietlisbach as the first to use this analysis (Kline, p. 1669). Several sources name Kennelly (eg [7]). Kline also says that while Heaviside noted that his "resistance operator" was a complex number, he did not write his equations in complex form (Kline, p. 1671). Spinning Spark 13:30, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
"Also during his latter years, Heaviside introduced the concept of reactance. " https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/history/pioneers/oliver-heaviside-biography.php
This is a credible website crediting Heaviside to Reactance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by K00la1dx ( talk • contribs) 13:21, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I hope this addition is acceptable without prior 'talk' notification. The words and cites have been checked by IET Archives and should therefore be correct in all aspects. Please feel free to use the email in cite 28 if you wish to query anything. Windswept ( talk) 19:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)