Talk:Hydrostatics

message: The "hydrostatic pressure" section makes zero sense, and I'm not just talking about the grammar. Can someone fix it? Piercetheorganist 00:51, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also a shame that such an important topic has no article of its own, just redirects to this bad sub-section. I'm not qualified to write an article, but at least in medicine it's important enough to merit its own, decent article. - Draeco (talk) 05:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Hydrostatic pressure

message: Someone or two people have changed the article to say that
However, I was under the impression that, because pressure is Force over area, pressure was thus caused by a force acting over an area, the force being the weight of the water in this case. Is this not the case? --M1ss1ontomars2k4 (talk) 00:27, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weight of water 

message: Rotational stability depends on the relative lines of action of forces on an object. The upward buoyant force on an object acts through the centre of buoyancy, being the centroid of the displaced volume of fluid. The weight force on the object acts through its center of gravity. An object will be stable if an angular displacement moves the line of action of these forces to set up a 'righting moment'.
A couple of diagrams showing a canoe verses a coal barge and explaining the line of action, would help us stay dry. Please don't take as a complaint, I think your doing an important job.    Thanks.          Art.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.190.246.208 (talk) 22:12, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A graphic would go a long way to explain stability. 

message: The person named in this section as creating the fluid statics field is wrong.  Hydrostatics dates back to Archimedes.  He wrote several papers on fluid mechanics which are still being recovered.  His entire theory of buoyancy is based on hydrostatics as well.  He didn't just find out oh, things float.  He actually determined the pressure gradient relation to depth and speculated on why.  I believe he even quantified it in some papers recovered from that era but I don't have any sources for that. 
Iron_Engineer (talk) 20:18, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: I feel this should be moved to buoyancy.  It just doesn't relate to the theory of fluid statics.  This topic arises when discussing a system, most notably a ship, subjected to buoyant forces.  This article is targeted at the theory of static fluid mechanics.  Ultimately, stability is an area associated with dynamic system analysis that arises from a separate area of investigation than static fluids.  I would like someone to respond before I move it but that doesn't seem likely as the previous message is dated to almost a year ago.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iron Engineer (talk • contribs) 08:08, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stability 

message: Hydrostatic paradox redirects here, but is not explained. It should get either a section or an article of its own. Paradoctor (talk) 12:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hydrostatic paradox 

message: Please: WP:MOSMATH exists.  I found this:
: z-z0
I changed it to this:
: z − z0
* Clearly the "0" should not be italicized.
* A minus sign should be used; not a hyphen.
* A space should precede and follow the minus sign.
Michael Hardy (talk) 00:37, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  style 

message: I think the term thrown around here for statics, namely rest is conflating the term. Fluids are not at rest like solids are. Their intermolecular motion is far from being "at rest." Is there a more formal way of specifying static fluids than saying that they are simply at rest? I'd like to remove that word in favor of something akin to describing their bulk motion in relation to their container having a zero average velocity. That is quite a lengthy replacement for being "at rest" but I prefer its specificity. I stopped thinking of liquids and gasses as being at rest pretty early in my studies. To say it now seems pretty juvenile. Fluids can be static, but never at rest! I like to saw logs! (talk) 10:58, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Can u review the edit: diff ?? The wikipedia page for Hydrostatic equilibrium states the same thing: "fluids at rest" - but that page can be improved later. For the time being, i hope that a proper term is used at least in this article. Also, the citation i gave (of wikibooks, dont know if that counts as a valid citation) states hydrostatic eqm in more precise terms. You might also want to check that out. Awaiting reply :) Yashpalgoyal1304 (talk) 06:59, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rest? You've got to be kidding 

message: Add diff with  hygrostatics? Ema--or (talk) 23:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Disam/clarf suggestion

message: * what is z' here?? is it dz/dt ??
* can some consistency be brought in the expression here, and on/with other pages?? like
** Free_surface#Rotation
** Hydrostatic_equilibrium#Derivation_from_force_summation
** Fluid_Mechanics/Analysis_Methods#Hydrostatics on wikibooks Yashpalgoyal1304 (talk) 07:56, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  hydrostatic pressure 

message: — Assignment last updated by Kmijares (talk) 22:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: 4A Wikipedia Assignment