Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Physics articles by quality/2

The article has good amount of information What is needed is :-

1. More references
2. Copyedit (edit comment)

The wavelength is related to the frequency by

   \lambda = { c \over \nu }.

The law is sometimes written in terms of the spectral energy density

   u(\nu,T) = { 4\pi \over c } I(\nu,T) = \frac{8\pi h\nu^3 }{c^3}~\frac{1}{e^{\frac{h\nu}{kT}}-1}

which has units of energy per unit volume per unit frequency (joule per cubic meter per hertz). Integrated over frequency, this expression yields the total energy density. The radiation field of a black body may be thought of as a photon gas, in which case this energy density would be one of the thermodynamic parameters of that gas.

The spectral energy density can also be expressed as a function of wavelength:

   u(\lambda,T) = {8\pi h c\over \lambda^5}{1\over e^{\frac{h c}{\lambda kT}}-1}

as shown in the derivation below.

??? nu3/c3 = c/lambda5 ??? (edit comment)

Time and space are like the x,y, cartesan coordinate axes to help locating "events". An 'event' could be defined as the smallest unit of "change" ( measurable or not), occuring in the inter or intra relationships between energy states ( radiating or massive or dark , in cosmic vacuum).Energy is always in an ever-vibrational mode. Change is the defining quality of energy. Like Lee-simolin said , spacetime doesnt exist independent of events. Spacetime is a relational parameter and not absolute parameters.An example given ( an example which goes a long way though not all the way ), is that spacetime is just like a sentencein any written form of communication, in which the words are likened to events. This makes spacetime as an emergent phenomena and events ( changes with respect to other changes) as the more fundamental phenomena. Spacetime is the hardware and change is the operating software.Phenomena is a network of changes ( or exchanges).A computer is NOT a computer without its operational software.To discern changes we created the artifact of spacetime.

Change with respect to what ? Not with respect to space or time or spacetime, rather it is Change with respect to other events ie, other configurations of change in relationships . Spacetime is a mathematical artifact ( artificial reference boundaries),like the definition of the cartesan coordinate system to make it easy to grasp and fix 'changes in the relationships' that keep coursing through the universe to some degree of perpetuity in our minds (at least giving changes some sort of instataneous 'stability', like we freeze-study static electricity ),and make it manipulatively comprehensible to our senses. Changes apparently occur continuously, at macrocosmic scales but actually fluctuating discretly at nanocosmic ranges. Macrocosm is but a statistically averaged stable state or condition of the randomly chaotic microcosm .Like our integers which are but averaged states of infinite fluctuations at specific nodes, pre-specified just to suit our convenience , arbitarily.

Spacetime is just like a net to catch events, to take it home. And, what is a net? In Johnson's english dictionary,( the very first english dictionary ever published ) it is succintly defined as "holes tied together" .Events are "nothingness' tied together.Spacetime is derived out of events.Events give meaning to spacetime.Spacetime is also one of the catches of events. There are events that transcend spacetime like the null event, or the non-causal spontaneous vacuum fluctuations in quantum science.For events to occur ( ie,relatinships to change )spacetime is not a pre-requisite. But for spacetime to be born 'events' are a must.

'Spacetime is the language in which changes in relationships are expressed .'. one of the languages of spacetime is mathematics. Other languages to express spacetime in a manner that is appealing to our senses,may be fine art or the universe of sound,or through 'feelings' of the mind.

This provides an 'exchange rate' to 'feelings' with mathematical logic for the expression of changes,manifest or unmanifest. Further discussions are welcome . < theunnies at yahoo.com >

This article could use some cleanup/copyediting, references and a section on (or at least mention of) osmotic shock. The two example pictures don't work in my browser. - tameeria 19:25, 18 February 2007 (UTC) (edit comment)

One minor motivational issue: the sum(p.r) expression looks like something whose usefulness would be severly limited by its strong dependency on the frame of reference. Is one supposed to be thinking in terms of a coordinate system centered on, and moving with, the center of mass? If not, I wonder why anybody studied this expression long enough to discover how useful it is.

The electromagnetic part at the end seemed a bit much. (edit comment)

• Origin of term
• Major reference for term "trace-reversed Ricci tensor"
• Discussion of derivation of EFE from conservation of energy-momentum and Bianchi identities (edit comment)

Low-importance: Part of a few viable physics concepts, such as CTCs and the modeling of antimatter as retrocausal, but hardly a topic that demands immediate attention by any means.

Start-class: I've done most of what I can ... the absorber theory stuff is a cast-off substub of a section, and I don't know where to look for more. I'm not sure how much further discussion on CTCs, Roman rings, etc. belongs here and not at their articles. Another couple sets of eyes from the Project won't hurt.

And, of course, the philosophy/social discussion section its a separate beast, although I'd like to think I've given it the same measure of attention. --Serpent's Choice 06:34, 7 January 2007 (UTC) (edit comment)

In addition, numerous other things, including the viale Alessandro Volta in Florence, are named after the scientists, so either the "Honors" section should be expanded, or it should include a disclaimer as to its incompleteness.

Itahist 19:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC) (edit comment)

asymmetry of the observed universe (aka the Baryon number problem). As noted, it is experimentally verifiable and has several possible cosmological implications. (edit comment)

And better structure.--Yannismarou 08:46, 27 January 2007 (UTC) (edit comment)

I recently rated this article as Start-class. My comments on that,

• Too much mathematics, needs more explanation for causal reader.
• Need to re-organize the article. Sections like vorticity are not required. Good to mention about vorticity but not as a separate section.
• Equations don't need to be numbered if they are not referred to again in the article.
• The continuity derivation is not well written. Also stream functions are defined so as to satisfy the continuity equation. Does not make sense to derive the continuity equation back from the stream functions.
• While it is mentioned that stream functions can be defined in 3D system, no example is provided of such definition.

With little bit more editing and cleanup can move the article to B-class. myth 19:45, 20 December 2006 (UTC) (edit comment)