Talk:Resonator

message: The automotive section on resonators is very short, and even biased. More work needs to be done at making it a little more detailed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.132.180 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Automotive section

message: The patents section probably should be clarified to indicate that it only pertains to electromagnetic resonators.  This article currently refers to other types of resonators (acoustic resonators) that I'm guessing are classified differently by the USPTO, though I haven't done any research to find out what class/subclass is applicable.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.225.141.201 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Patents section

message: The link under "Websites" does not seem to redirect to its listed description, but rather to what seems to be an endorsement for a commercial website.  I may not have pursued deeply enough to find the listed reference, but I shouldn't have to. MVD (talk) 10:50, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch, those spamlinks keep popping up.  Get rid of it, and if you can find from the page history who added it, be sure to put a spam warning template on his talk page. --ChetvornoTALK 12:28, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Flamurai added the basic link a long time ago in this diff. Maybe the website author used to have the listed book featured but moved it in a redesign. I think they moved it to this word doc. The word doc talks about marimba resonators at length, but I don't think it's worthy of inclusion as an external link here on this page. Maybe on the marimba page... I'm taking the link out. Binksternet (talk) 15:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Websites" listing 

message: This sounds a bit iffy:
:"A hollow conductor that uses resonance to amplify an electromagnetic wave is called a cavity resonator." (my italics)
What about 'cavity filters' etc. they don't amplify, do they? Sounds like some sort of parametric amplifier to me. --220.101.28.25 (talk) 21:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reworded that, sound ok now? SpinningSpark 20:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: In some fields, such as mechanical or audio engineering, the term amplify is commonly used to mean the multiplication of a conjugate power variable by a passive system.  For instance, using mechanical advantage to increase velocity, or using an impedance transformer to increase sound pressure.  The analogous situation in electrical engineering would be voltage (or current) multiplication.  This can be done by a transformer for instance, but can also be achieved with a resonator.  In this context amplify is correct terminology, but of course electrical engineers would normally mean active amplification even when the device is a voltage amplifier, as opposed to a power amplifier. SpinningSpark 14:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  2.1 Cavity resonators section 

message: But there will be radiation losses; they are intrinsic to the design.  Very significant losses, according to the main article, from radiation out of the open end of the bore, at least in the basic design described here. SpinningSpark 09:02, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loop-gap resonator 

message: This constantly playing animated GIF is annoying !! and should be made closable!!.
Please ping me. Steue (talk) 15:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: How about just moving it down so it is not visible at top? --ChetvornoTALK 18:31, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I would love it if something was done in core code about gifs so users could turn them on and off at will.  That's the real solution.  This article isn't so bad, but some are so completely littered with animations that they are virtually unreadable.  Phabricator task T61217 is relevant to this, but there has been no activity for years.  The last comment was someone saying they would get a discussion going but nothing seems to have happened.  The holdup seems to be mostly that the devs are unsure if this is a feature that would be much used.  I suggest starting a discussion at WP:VPP to test whether this idea has support and then report that back on Phabricator to encourage the devs to actually do it. SpinningSpark 09:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

text: My humble opinion: I think animations are absolutely wonderful tools for getting across physics and engineering concepts to general readers, and should be used more (I have created a number of gifs for WP articles) (but not this one).  I suspect only a minority of readers are irritated by reasonably unobtrusive gifs.  That said, I strongly agree that animations need a prominent ON/OFF button.  However I think the default should be ON.  With an opt-in, the readers who will most benefit from the animation, the uneducated and technically-inexperienced,  will not notice or understand the button and will never turn the animation on. --ChetvornoTALK 19:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

text: Facebook currently shows animated GIF frozen by default. It displays a clear overlay that looks like a button and acts like a button – a simple click starts the animation. I think most people can handle that. A web page should never show an uninvited animation. — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 10:41, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  The animated GIF is annoying !!