Talk:Kennelly–Heaviside layer

message: Somebody said it's "ridiculous" to put a spoiler warning in a physics article. However, the warning was in the "Cultural Impact" section because said section gives away the ending of the musical CATS. With this is mind, should there be a spoiler warning, or is this just a case of somebody making judgments without even reading the article? If there's a good reason why that should not be marked as a spoiler, I won't question the issue further, but I would like to know this person's reasoning... Lycanthrope777 19:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Spoilers

message: The book “Wonders of Science” (Metro Publications, New York, 1943) describes a first Heaviside layer (40-50 miles altitude) and a second Heaviside layer (100-120 miles altitude).  Both layers are descibed to contain “minute nitrogen crystals” that reflect wireless waves to the Earth.  Does anyone know the history on how this evolved into our present understanding?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShermansPlanet (talk • contribs) 17:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: First and Second Heaviside Layers?

message: As written, the article states, "It (Kennelly-Heaviside) reflects medium-frequency radio waves..."
This isn't true. The E-layer reflects radio waves in the higher parts of the high-frequency and in the the very-high frequency spectrum. Medium-frequency waves are not propagated by the E-layer See:
http://www.arrl.org/files/file/Technology/pdf/119962.pdf  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.147.72.48 (talk) 16:44, 28 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong frequency band! 

message: This part is not true: "Conversely, on the night (lee) side of the Earth, the solar wind drags the ionosphere further away, thereby greatly increasing the range which radio waves can travel by reflection."
The ionosphere appears to move up on the nightside because the source of ionization (sunlight) is removed, and the lower part recombines more rapidly due to increased collisions with the neutral atmospheric gas, which is more dense at lower altitudes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.244.38.5 (talk) 14:32, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrong physics! 

message: I've heard of the "Heaviside layer" for most of my life. I've heard of the "Kennelly–Heaviside layer" once, here. Does anyone actually call it this, or is this simply someone being pedantic? Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: much more commonly simply called the "Heaviside Layer".  The article should be renamed this, and "Kennelly–Heaviside layer" should be the redirect, instead of vice versa. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 03:17, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Totally agree, I'd never even heard of Kennelly before visiting this page. I suspect some proud American patriot has decided to wave the flag a bit, but that's not what WP is for. --Ef80 (talk) 15:06, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: See this n-gram  https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Kennelly-Heaviside+layer%2C+Heaviside+layer%2C&year_start=1800&year_end=2019&corpus=en-2019&smoothing=3 Constant314 (talk) 18:46, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does anyone actually call it this?