Talk:Finite-difference time-domain method

message: Where to start... First, it says that FDTD uses no linear algebra, which is nonsensical. Maybe whoever wrote that meant that FDTD avoids matrix inversions. Otherwise, the rest of the list is largely a rehashing of strengths of FDTD that were already listed in the rest of the article. Every single point in that list is a referenced to this one book. Is this section just a recreation of a section in the book? That doesn't seem to fit into the spirit of an encyclopedia. If there aren't any authors discussing FDTD's popularity apart from this one author, then this section isn't a good fit for a general encyclopedia, considering the same information is repeated elsewhere in the article already.142.244.63.13 (talk) 19:02, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Problems with the popularity section

message: The article seems to believe the method is only useful for electromagnetic problems, when in fact the FDTD framework is far more general in solving partial differential equations in time and space.  Acoustics is another application (which also involves solving the wave equation), as well as problems involving the diffusion equation. Granted the majority of research (and publications) are in computational EM, but I don't believe the article's leading statement 'Finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) is a popular computational electrodynamics modeling technique' is in any way fair.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.9.42.83 (talk) 05:02, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I think this is a fair point, but the suggested fix is wrong. If you have experience working with FDTD in other areas, expand this page to include them. But it is true hat by far the largest use of FDTD is electromagnetic. Yee, of Yee-cell fame, was working in electromagnetics. If you look further up this page, you will see comments from A. Taflove, another significant figure in the development of FDTD - as far as I know he has also worked mainly in electromagnetics. So, I expect this page will always have a strong EM bias, which I think fits well with majority use, but we should certainly make it clear that this is not the only use, and detail some other examples. GyroMagician (talk) 08:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It is certainly true that the term "finite difference time domain" can be (and is) applied to many PDEs besides Maxwell's equations.  It is also true the term "FDTD" appears to be most commonly applied to the electromagnetic application.  However, I think it would be helpful to readers to make this distinction clear.  Perhaps the article could be retitled to "Finite-difference time-domain method (electromagnetism)", following the usual Wikipedia disambiguation convention.  — Steven G. Johnson (talk) 05:40, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article should be renamed 'Electromagnetic applications of the FDTD Method' 

message: But I think that creating a new page with a redirect is above my permissions level as a non-registered user. 165.132.24.183 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 10:43, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: FDTD already redirects here?! Is that what you intend? -- Crowsnest (talk) 13:36, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  'FDTD' should redirect here 

message: The section Popularity contains seven reasons for the popularity of FDTD. This part seems to be copied verbatim from the book "Computational electrodynamics: the finite-difference time-domain method" by Allen Taflove and Susan C. Hagness.
In the second edition the text can be found on page 4. It might be somewhere else in the recent third edition, but I don't have access to that.
The source should be indicated or the section removed / rephrased.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.131.210.49 (talk) 15:32, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible plagiate from book: Computational electrodynamics 

message: Since the conversation about external links to vendors which reached the conclusion that they should be deleted (see below), the links starting cropping up again. Deleted them again.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.176.222.197 (talk) 11:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleted links to software / vendors 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Finite-difference time-domain method. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090626051810/http://www.thecomputationalphysicist.com/ to http://www.thecomputationalphysicist.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:21, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Finite-difference time-domain method. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100617131759/http://www.ece.unm.edu/~simpson/Paper1.pdf to http://www.ece.unm.edu/~simpson/Paper1.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110517102321/http://www.its.caltech.edu/~seheon/FDTD.html to http://www.its.caltech.edu/~seheon/FDTD.html
*Added archive https://archive.is/20121217222254/http://cs.tu-berlin.de/~peutetre/sfdtd/ to http://cs.tu-berlin.de/~peutetre/sfdtd/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:47, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Reading through this article, there is too much Frederick Moxley.  There are three mentions of him in the section about important historical developments in fdtd(along with people like Yee and von Neumann), and the article ends with his "suggestion" to do other things with fdtd.  Compared to someone like Taflove, who appears to be a major player, Moxley appears to have a minor academic record and not many citations for fdtd work.  https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=bH0FvSAAAAAJ&hl=en I suspect this is a case of self-promotion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.149.87.38 (talk) 09:56, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too much Frederick Moxley