Wikipedia:Pages needing attention/Physics

Physics

Energy transfer - someone tried to add info, but it sounds a lot like uneducated babble. Defitely could use wikifying, more rigourous definitions, and less personal commentary. 128.104.112.72 23:19, 11 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tetraneutron - speculative, though it might be OK. Experiment details somewhat unsourced. William M. Connolley 22:03:31, 2005-07-09 (UTC).
- I remember the press releases from the time this research took place. From what I recall, the research was valid, though I don't know if the result has been replicated/confirmed yet. I'll dig up proper citations this coming week (very busy this weekend). --Christopher Thomas 00:47, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Electric Universe model - looks like more pet-theory stuff. Up on VFD at the moment. William M. Connolley 2005-07-09 11:39:36 (UTC).
- It looks like a duplicate of plasma cosmology. I've suggested a merge. --Christopher Thomas 9 July 2005 14:46 (UTC)

Expansion theory - Appears to be based on a publication somewhere, but cites a Dilbert collection and archives of email as references. Requires overhaul or VfD, and looks like enough of a "lone proponent" scenario that I'm not touching it until I can think about HT without wincing. --Christopher Thomas 15:18, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Dark energy star - Needs to be overhauled by a physicist familiar with the models involved. As-is, several points in the description are inaccurate (noted in the article's talk page). The model has been published in reputable journals, if I'm remembering which one this is correctly. Still fringe science, for now. --Christopher Thomas 01:23, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Aetherometry and associated pages - Could someone with patience and a really large hatchet help to make these fringe scientific sound more like fringe scientific theories rather than the greatest scientific discoveries in the history of the world?? Dragons flight 21:35, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Still on fringe-theory sabbatical after harmonics theory ate a month. I'll add it to the "pages to look at" list, though. --Christopher Thomas 22:01, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Update - still active squabbling going on, so I'm not touching it for now. --Christopher Thomas 6 July 2005 20:38 (UTC)

List of relativistic equations - blanked for a long time; could be a useful list, but needs some explanations. --Minesweeper 23:54, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

This list is pointless. And it belongs under physics, anyway. --192.35.35.34 21:12, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I moved this from the "mathematics" section. Paul August ☎ 18:33, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Quantum electrodynamics - I fixed the broken LaTex formula to conform to the author's apparent intent. I'm not sure if the "D" in the sentence following the formula should also be slashed. Could someone who knows QED double-check this please? --Ortonmc 23:22, 13 Sep 2003 (UTC)

cleaned up some Latex, but it still needs a lot of work lethe

I moved this from the "mathematics" section. Paul August ☎ 18:33, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Measurement in quantum mechanics - "I think this is a mess but I lack the skills to fix it. Someone who knows QM well might comment" from cleanup >2 months, needs someone knowledgeable on subject. rhyax 06:24, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've gone over the grammar, and made a suggestion for dealing with it more thoroughly on the article's talk page Bth

I moved this from the "mathematics" section. Paul August ☎ 18:33, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)

Infrared fixed point - is this article for real? RJFJR 19:59, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)
- It seems to be a real term, as far as Google can tell; it's used in journal articles by many different authors (unlike crackpot science, which tends to be cited among a small circle of authors). I didn't find peer-reviewed publications on the first search, but I spent all of 5 minutes on it. The article needs cleanup by a particle physicist, though. --Christopher Thomas 20:14, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- Yes its real. Comes from renormalization group theory, though the article needs to be rewritten. I have to think about it more , but I started to fix it upSalsb 1 July 2005 18:23 (UTC)
Energy density - Needs cleanup for narrative viewpoint, and would probably be better folded into vacuum energy based on its current content. --Christopher Thomas 22:56, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Wave loading This article was apparently created to support another on liquefaction and seems to be rather limited and makes some dubious claims with no references. I don't know enough about the physics involved to either verify or expand it. Vsmith 04:53, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Angular momentum coupling - this article is a mess right now. Passw0rd 21:25, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Objections to the theory of loop quantum gravity Tweet Tweet 01:57, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Cosmic censorship hypothesis - the article is not very well written, the narration is weak, I had to reread it a few times before I noticed some of the factual statements (even though it's very small and relatively simple). For example, in one place it says "special situations just mentioned", but it's not clear, what are these situations. Paranoid 19:41, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Electron configuration: Contains a lot of information duplicated at Atomic orbital, and a bit of advanced math that's far over my head. If someone could move the math over to Atomic orbital in some sensible fashion, I'd eventually get around to fixing the rest of the article. --Smack 00:05, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Permittivity, permeability - these should be explained more thoroughly; in particular, it's unclear what any of these mean. --[[User:Eequor|ᓛᖁᑐ]] 14:36, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Fractional quantum Hall effect: Article appears to be completely bogus, I'm sure someone could do this article more justice than I could. ENGIMa 14:20, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- This was replaced with sane content by 216.111.184.11 (talk · contribs), and redirected to Quantum Hall effect (which contains the relevant information) by CYD. I'll remove this entry from PNA in a few days. --Christopher Thomas 17:58, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Astrodynamics#Historical_approaches: needs to be re-written. Just throwing in names of famous scientists in history is useless. -- PFHLai 23:04, 2004 Oct 22 (UTC)
Molecular orbital Unclear, poorly wikified. I know a lot more about atomic orbitals than molecular ones, so I'm unwilling to do much here. --Smack 03:58, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Also see: hybridisation,atomic_orbital,electron_orbital, and sp2 bond. And as Smack says above, electron configuration. Lot's of conceptual overlap. rmbh 01:31, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

Liquid helium Could use a lot of info, such as uses of liquid helium and some technical informations and charts.

Should be merged with Helium and Superfluid, I think. Zaha 15:57, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I've taken a stab at rewriting and expanding this article. It would be nice if phase diagrams could be included. The article could be merged with Helium, but liquid helium is not always superfluid, especially in its commercial applications; so it would not be appropriate to merge it with Superfluid. M. S. Pettersen, 29 Sep 2004.

Testatika This sort-of perpetuum mobile has already the loving attention of User:Reddi, which I explicitely do not accuse of bad faith. But his ever more involved descriptions of how this engine is supposed to work, I don't know what to say about. See also the VdD discussion [1] -- Pjacobi 18:19, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
(Consolidated the QM topics into a list, moved discussion to PNA/Physics talk page. Concerns were expressed about accuracy and POV bias for these articles. --Christopher Thomas 18:44, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC))
Josef Schneider -- allegedly Germany's first producer of electricity. Anyone good at physics can probably turn these notes into complete sentences and nice paragraphs. I can't. <KF> 22:37, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This looks like it was translated from another language (probably German). It needs grammar and history not physics. I've done what I can, but I've never really heard of the guy. I don't think this article belongs on this list if it even really needs to be on a list at all.Starfoxy 29 June 2005 16:30 (UTC)