Talk:World line
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, which collaborates on articles related to physics. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. [FAQ] | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating within physics. | |
|
Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. |
||
--Sir48 9 July 2005 12:13 (UTC)What is this ?
- It's user:Fwappler. See also Duration. Fwappler, please explain these things you are adding! Wikipedia is a general encyclopedia, not a scientific text. That doesn't mean anything must be dumbed down, but articles need an introduction that establishes CONTEXT and gives an overview -- Tarquin 10:54 Jan 5, 2003 (UTC)
I known I found this article trying to understand duration.
As for the above:
- I'm sorry, the notion of Worldline which I've added doesn't readily admit any explanation besides those stated already, and as (at least partially) provided through their Links.
- Set and Observational content are about as plain as I know to put it.
- If this were not the principal notion of Worldline which We like to see, then my addition may constitute merely the aspect of Worldline:Scientific text. The article which links to this page might be similarly parcelt [parceled(?) - Patrick] . I surely don't wish to extend my reach beyond my grasp. Fortunately We seem to agree that Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a general encyclopedia to the exclusion of scientific text.
Best regards, Frank W ~@) R, Jan. 5, 20:57 PST.
Fwappler, something in the style of http://library.thinkquest.org/27930/worldlines.htm (which you've linked to) is required, at least for the introduction. -- Tarquin 09:32 Jan 6, 2003 (UTC)
I could not understand the content as it was and I have replaced the item with an entirely new text. Please add the old text again, but try to place it in a better context, starting e.g. with In philosophy a wordline is ... Jheise 18:00 Jan 6 2004
Why does this article in the text and the thumb-text of the illustration talk about the earth's orbit as (almost) a circle? The right expression "an ellipse" should be well known. --Sir48 9 July 2005 12:13 (UTC)
I changed the word 'singular' to unique in the first sentence. Worldlines are continuous and smooth most places. 'Singular' might be confused with a discontinuity or discontinuous derivative. -r
