lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Landé g-factor

message: According to two of the most standard quantum mechanics textbooks (Griffiths and Merzbacher), as well as most (though not quite all) publications I can find, the term "Landé g-factor" refers specifically to gJ, while the term "g factor" or "g value" refers to the more general case of any dimensionless factor in an equation for a magnetic moment.
Therefore, I wrote the article g factor on the more general topic of g factors, leaving in this article only the information on gJ. I will also put in a note warning that this usage is not quite universal.Steve 01:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: g-factor

message: I added a derivation since I have found the derivation in the ref[1] (http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/HBASE/quantum/Lande.html) is not good enough (though comes out in the first place when one does google). It tried to define the magnetic moment alone the direction of the external magnetic field (z-axis), and made use of the following expression
:\vec A \cdot \vec B =\frac{(\vec A \cdot \vec C) (\vec C \cdot \vec B)}{\vec C \cdot \vec C}  
which is not valid even for normal (non-operator) vectors (therefore some explanation is necessary). To me, two approaches are better, one is to rigorous prove it using Wigner-Eckart theorem (by making use of the fact that \vec \mu_J=\vec \mu_L+\vec \mu_S is a tensor operator) as done in the textbook of Ashcroft, or one simply believes that the magnetic moment lies on the direction of J and calculate the projections of \vec \mu_L and \vec \mu_S on this direction.
Gamebm (talk) 12:51, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: A derivation

message: When accessing this page using http: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land%C3%A9_g-factor) I can't see many of the images including the formulae, but when accessing through https I can.
There are some 503 errors when using http (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bc/Wiki.png [HTTP/1.0 503 Service Unavailable 3ms])
Seems to be a problem with Wikipedia in general. Someone please escalate this as appropriate.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abhijit86k (talk • contribs) 06:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  formulae, images broken - http vs https
Talk:Spectroscopic notation

message: isn't it?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.189.234.102 (talk • contribs) 15:23, 28 November 2006
This page doesn't actually discuss spectroscopic notation. This page: http://quantummechanics.ucsd.edu/ph130a/130_notes/node315.html does. --Graygator10 (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  mnemonic is quite a rubbish 

message: If the sequence is s, p, d, f, g, h, i, j, k, ..., t, u, v, w, x, y, and z, what comes after z in this notation? Does the letter a come next? 108.71.121.83 (talk) 18:59, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the practical answer is that the question doesn't arise because observed energy levels don't go that far. In the NIST Atomic Spectra Database it is very hard to find any states with occupied orbitals past h (l = 5). I may have missed a few with l = 6 or 7, but z orbitals would be l = 20 and I strongly doubt any states have been observed with occupied orbitals for l = 20 or more. Dirac66 (talk) 00:50, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  z orbitals would be l = 21, actually. 108.66.234.235 (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

text:  Refer to this table:
letter	l
s     	0
p     	1
d     	2
f     	3
g     	4
h     	5
i     	6
j     	7
k     	8
l     	9
m     	10
n     	11
o     	12
q     	13
r     	14
t     	15
u     	16
v     	17
w     	18
x     	19
y     	20
z     	21
a     	22
b     	23
c     	24
e     	25
 108.66.234.235 (talk) 18:55, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: But your table includes the letter j, which should be omitted according to the article. If j is removed, then z will be 20. Dirac66 (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: What is the letter for the orbital if l = 22?  108.66.234.235 (talk) 22:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  What letter comes after z?
Talk:Spin–orbit interaction

message: (This section needs also an expression for the expectation value of 1/r^3 that is valid for the l=0 states.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.216.68 (talk) 17:36, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment added to article by IP 

message: Hi @Mominert I saw that you added a subsection about the calculation as seen from the nucleus. The problem of this calculation is that it is tricky due to considerations of hidden momentum and Mansuripur's paradox. If you have not anything against it I will remove the header of the section and just leave the line saying that a similar calculation can be done on that frame. ReyHahn (talk) 10:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Hello. You could edit as you suggested, I'm not an expert! I didn't know this paradox yet I understand the base problem of the "wrong torque" (fig 1 of the article) of the paradox. Perhaps the problem is less problematic here because in the classic picture when the electron moves on a cicular orbit in the x-y plane and with a magnetic dipole moment along the z-axis, the electric diplole moment in the rest frame of the nucleus is parallel to radius vector (nucleus–electron) and hence this "wrong torque" is zero.--Mominert (talk) 19:49, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nucleus calculation
Talk:Electronic correlation

message: In the article it is said that "The difference is called the correlation energy, a term coined by Löwdin.[1]".
Even though Lowdin is very often quoted as the inventor of the term "correlation energy", I don't think this is historically correct.
At most, he made the term very popular in the chemistry community, but "correlation energy" as an expression was first used by Wigner and Seitz in 1934 in the context of studies of the solid state (Phys Rev 509, 1934 ; Phys Rev 1002, 1934).
I also seem to remember that Lowdin in his famous review never claims he invented the term himself.
I'll check the matter in more detail if I have more time.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.5.101 (talk) 13:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Term  "correlation energy" not invented by Lowdin 

message: Coupled cluster should probably be added to the methods list, according to that article it is used quite often. Regretably I don't know enough about it to feel comfortable adding it a.t.m. Mverleg (talk) 04:13, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coupled cluster 

message: The sentence "In them, interactions plays such an important role that qualitatively new phenomena emerge" doesn't make sense, not really. Should it read something along the lines of "In them, interactions become so significant that new phenomena are observed."? Tomásdearg92 (talk) 00:46, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qualitatively emerge. 

message: " The multi-configurational self-consistent field (MCSCF) method takes account of this static correlation but not dynamical correlation."
That is an inaccurate statement. Both dynamic and static correlation effects are taken into account for the electrons and orbitals used in the MCSCF calculation.  Those that are excluded from the MCSCF calculation will not be included in the correlation effects.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.188.178.22 (talk) 16:15, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Static and dynamic correlation
Talk:Wiswesser rule

message: Is this Wiswesser the same as William Wiswesser? If so, there should be a connection to his page.
I looked for "Wiswesser rule" and "Wiswesser function" at the ACS and in Google Scholar but found no hits to either phrase.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.248.192.122 (talk) 23:10, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

message: The periodic system and atomic structure. I. An elementary physical approach
William J. Wiswesser
Journal of Chemical Education 1945 22 (7), 319
DOI: 10.1021/ed022p314
As I am currently unable to access ACS publications I can't say for certain that this source contains Wiswesser's publication of his rule. However under
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/ed026p393.2 (retrieved November 28th 2018, 21:43 CET) I found a letter to the editor of the ACS Journal mentioning Wiswesser's rule being present in the above publication.  Lugouqiaoshibian (talk) 20:44, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential Source from ACS Journal for this article 

message: Should I add them myself? Care to differ or discuss with me? The Nth User 17:19, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The table does not include the values for the s orbitals 

message: The Wiswesser rule as described in this article relies on a single reference and the rule in question is much more clearly described at the article on the Aufbau principle, especially the subsection at Aufbau_principle#Madelung_energy_ordering_rule. William Wiswesser made much more important contributions to chemistry, particularly his Wiswesser line notation and I would propose redirecting the current page here for the "Wiswesser rule" to Aufbau principle, with this reference to his 1945 paper being added there. Does anyone object to this? Michael D. Turnbull (talk) 12:06, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Propose redirect of this article
Talk:Dave Barnes

message: This article needs to be improved, thanks. - Billybob2002 (talk) 21:34, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvement
Talk:Cartoon Network Video

message: it works on firefox now
both toonami jetstream and cartoon network video althought the help section says otherwise-atomic1fire
also it should be noted that there have been some problems with FF 2.0 support (mostly in viewing several videos in a row (cache problem?)) even though FF 1.5 works fine  06:47, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Is CN Video compatible with Windows Vista?--Particleman24 (talk) 14:49, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vista?
Talk:Silex

message: The following text does not use the term "silex" in it's modern English sense.
:The first known use of silex occurs during the Stone Age, it was used for the manufacture of flint tools as it splits into thin, sharp splinters called flakes or blades (depending on the shape) when struck by another hard object (such as a hammerstone made of another material).
:Then in Ancient Rome it is used as a road surface: "Under Nerva and Trajan the Via Appia was repaired; one inscription records expressly the paving with silex (replacing the former gravelling) of the section from Tripontium, 4 miles (6 km) northwest, to Forum Appii".[1]''
They should be moved to a section such as "archaic meanings". It should also be noted that the Romans did not use the Latin word "silex" to refer only to flint, but to any hard rock. --O crandell (talk) 14:07, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

message: Not that this has to be added but I came to this page because in the 1978 Alien script Silex was used as a term for a coffee grinder.
INT. GALLEY
Kane plugs in a Silex.
Lights a cigarette.
Coughs.
Grinds some coffee beans.
Runs some water through.
Is this just a 70s use of the word or was there an actual product called a Silex? Xenomorph erotica (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 21:14, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry to come across this years later, but in case you're still reading:  Silex was a brand name for a coffee maker.  See also Proctor Silex. 216.30.158.37 (talk) 19:13, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Alien
Talk:Effective atomic number (compounds and mixtures)

message: This article makes it seem like 2.94 is the number to use.  In actuality, it depends on the type of interactions and thus on the x-ray spectrum.  So at the least, I think the article needs to mention what energy range that value of 2.94 is appropriate for.  I would edit it in myself, but I don't actually know what the corresponding spectrum is (hence why I surfed to this page).  Anyone know what kind of spectra that value is actually appropriate for?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.190.12.40 (talk) 22:10, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  2.94? 

message: Why 45.215.254.212 (talk) 20:06, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does water not have an atomic number
Category talk:Emission spectroscopy

message: A new spectral line intensity formula for optical emission spectroscopy was presented by Dr:s Bo Thelin (experimental physicist) and Sten Yngström (theoretical physicist) at the beginning of the 1980:s. This formula has shown very good agreement between experiments (Ref 1) and the new theory (Ref 2). These references are summaries of earlier papers.
  I = K \ left (frac { v^2 }{ c^2 }\ right ) \ e^left (\ frac { -J}{ k \ T \ right )} \
\ left (\ e^left ( \ frac { h \ v }{ k \ T \right -  \ 1)^-1 
K  includes transition rates and element concentrations
I= spectral line intensity, V= frequency , J=ionization energy and T=temperature
Many independent experimental methods strongly support the new formula, while the standard intensity formula with the Boltzmann term (upper energy level), deviates very much from experiments.
Ref 1  Yngström,S.  and Thelin,B.  Applied Spectroscopy, 44, 1566, (1990)
Ref 2  Yngström,S.   International Journal of Theoretical Physics,Vol.33,--79.138.179.27 (talk) 21:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Rotational temperature

message: This article mentions where it is used, but doesn't explain what it *is*.  I am now no wiser about what rotational temperature is than before I read the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.82.67 (talk) 15:01, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have tried today to improve the article and explain the physical meaning, at least for the characteristic rotational temperature as already defined in the article for systems at thermodynamic equilibrium. There is also a second meaning which might eventually be included in the article, relating systems with different degrees of freedom (translational, rotational, vibrational, electronic) not in equiilbrium with each other. That is a much more complicated subject. Dirac66 (talk) 16:04, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That gives me much more to chew on, thank you!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.79.82.67 (talk) 04:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Talk:Rydberg state

message: A company called BlackLight Power (http://www.blacklightpower.com) claims to be able to get the electron in a hydrogen atom to jump to a quantum state representing a fractional Rydberg number. As the electron is then closer to the nucleus, energy would be released. This flies in the face of everything I thought I understood about quantum mechanics and atomic structure. Is there a chance the person who wrote this article could add something discussing the possibility (or not) of fractional Rydberg numbers? WilliamSommerwerck (talk) 12:20, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: ''fractional'' Rydberg numbers?

message: I propose merging the article Rydberg correction into this one, because it's a tiny stub lacking context. It would be easier to understand as part of this article. If nobody objects, I will come back in a month or so to do the merge. Reyk YO! 08:25, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Closed, given that there is no support for the merge; there seems no doubt that article improvement is needed, hence the attention from an expert on the subject remains. Klbrain (talk) 21:04, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge
Talk:Core electron

message: The page core charge is a stub which covers very similar ground. Core charge is defined as core electrons + nuclear charge, so the topics aren't exactly the same, but they overlap so heavily I don't think it makes sense to talk about core charge on a separate page. 〈 Forbes72 | Talk 〉 00:58, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Klbrain (talk) 11:26, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge from core charge
Category talk:Optics

message: Obviously this entire category needs a lot of work and I'm going to try and tackle the task by building/editing a page up to GA every week for the next year. However, for all the other potential editors out there, I highly recommend using https://www.rp-photonics.com/ as a basis for articles. Although he references a lot of his own publications, the depth of the majority of articles is quite good and will serve as a wonderful jumping-off point for creating great wiki articles. DavidJonBloom (talk) 03:04, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
Talk:Fock matrix

message: The Fock equations are analogous to the Schrodinger equation for quantum chemistry, so in this field it is VERY important.  in light of this fact, the article should have a higher "importance" ranking.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.222.44.210 (talk) 17:12, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  High Importance Article
Talk:Exoelectron emission

message: The categories in which this article is included seem to suggest that these electrons are emitted by atomic nuclei, but they are not. This exoelectron emission is similar to the photoelectric effect but with a time lag between the cause of the excitation and the resulting emission. Thus it would be more appropriate to categorize it as a chemical process than a nuclear one. JRSpriggs (talk) 07:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is not a nuclear phenomenon
Talk:Release technique

message: The second half of the article [the part that begins "The term "Release Technique" also refers a system developed by physicist Lester Levenson..."] has nothing to do with the dance technique. It should have a page of its own, not in the dance category. Fivel 18:05, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: moved to release technique (alternative medicine) Paul foord 07:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second half of article does not belong here 

message: I added a lot of content. I based this on the information I have gathered over the course of a BA in Choreography from Dartington College of Arts where Mary Fulkerson was head of dance for a long time and Release Technique was very explicitly taught.
I am a poor editor and formatter so please have mercy on me.
I hope this information is a useful expansion and I would love to keep contributing, so please contact me if you have any suggestions. SebastianBechinger (talk) 22:36, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion
Talk:Ridged mirror

message: I am not sure in the sentence by User:Kanzure, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ridged_mirror&diff=128341837&oldid=118804150
In Shimizu's and Fujita's work, atom holography is achieved via electrodes implanted into SiN4 film over an atomic mirror, or maybe as the atomic mirror itself (check refs).
Could anybody explain the sentence above? If prof.Fujita reads this, will you consider to put in the article a picture from your paper?dima 05:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:   SiN<sub>4</sub> film
Talk:Rydberg atom

message: By my standards, this is a surprisingly accurate, complete article that is neither too elementary nor too advanced.  The only significant fix would be to add more references with in-text citations. Teply (talk) 04:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

message: I have added detailed references.  I think there are improvements to be made, which I will work on in due course:
* Details about precession of electron orbits due to core polarization effects (see ref 4, Hezel et al)
* A replacement for the 1/r potential image showing a comparison of A/r with A/r + B/r4  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DJIndica (talk • contribs) 12:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further work 
Talk:Lamplough, Victoria

message: Is this article about Lamplough or Landsborough?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.171.85.67 (talk) 10:03, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Landsborough? 
Talk:Subaru of Indiana Automotive

message: "FHI purchased Isuzu's interest in the venture in 2003 for $1 as that company's sales faltered." I find that hard to believe... It's possible, but $1?!? I'm going to do some searching but it does seem as though a few extra digits have been left off. -- Greaser 03:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  $1 take over?
Talk:Savannah station (Amtrak)

message: I could swear whenever Amtrak stops at Savannah, I can see the enterance for a local subway station. What's the story with that connection? ---- DanTD 04:18, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just found some evidence of this at this link:
**Photo of Savannah Station Subway entrance ---- DanTD 00:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Savannah Amtrak and Subway Station?
Talk:E. O. Smith High School

message: Why does the principal say: panthers ? 76.245.64.199 02:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Problem

message: Why are there no sections on the music and drama departments? Athletics and academics are not the only things about a school, and the music department is often successful at auditions like CMEA (Connecticut Music Educators Association) Eastern Region & All-State; and NEMFA (New England Music Festival Association). Also, the drama department is an annual participant at the CDA (Connecticut Drama Association) Drama Festival and is hosting New Englands this year; our drama director is also the CDA president. The reason I post this up here is because I don't know enough to put information up, but as a part of the music department (orchestra and chorus for me) and having MANY friends in the drama department, I feel it's necessary to include us too.Stjimmy61892 (talk) 23:36, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Music/Drama Departments
Talk:Luther Allison

message: This might be copyvio as it was added in one large chunk by article's creater.  Mattisse(talk) 03:47, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Transduction (biophysics)

message: It is confusing that the article follows its definition of transduction (as the conveyance of energy from one electron to another) with a list of the possible fates of photonic energy from photons, including saying that it may be transduced. So should the article limit the definition of transduction to energy transfer among electrons, or should transduction be redefined to include subatomic particles in general?--Abw20 (talk) 04:30, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Talk:Worm-like chain

message: The article does not give a precise (mathematical) definition
of the (continous) worm-like chain; how to derive the continuum
limit from the discrete worm-like chain?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.175.8.13 (talk) 10:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Precise definition of worm-like chain