Talk:Sources and sinks

Physics Low‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mathematics Low‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-priority on the project's priority scale.

Resulting from previous talk

This article is the result of the discussion from Talk:Current source density analysis. Current sources and sinks now redirects here. @Ldm1954: you might want to take a look at it. I tried to make it coherent. ReyHahn (talk) 13:40, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am on travel, so won't do any serious editing before next week. Ldm1954 (talk) 14:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine. I generalized to "physical sciences" and also engineering. I can't quickly find something in elasticity theory on WP to use, but I know that the concept of a point stress source (Green's function) is/was used.

One suggestion: add the generalized Ampere equation with Div.D = rho since this is more general than the electric field form. Ldm1954 (talk) 20:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning divD = ρ I think it is more general but when most people learn about sources/sinks is when learnig about the divergence of the electric field not D.--ReyHahn (talk) 07:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another, in math fixed-point theory (not just chaos) attractors and repellers play a role. This is related to Lyapunov stability theory that is in many places, although that might be too far/complex. Ldm1954 (talk) 20:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It can be moved to the math section too, or we can remove the chaos theory entirely it is far too complex as you say.--ReyHahn (talk) 07:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are some very nice graphics for strange attractors. I think adding a little with links so readers can go to other pages for more is always good pedagogy. We just have to keep the text clean and simple enough.

For div.D=rho I may currently be a bit biased because I have some recent papers where it is the central physics. Div.E is vacuum and metals (95% confidence); div.D is everything else.

I will let you control the editing, avoid the H.G.Wells issue. (Maybe that needs a WP essay.) Ldm1954 (talk) 13:44, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

what is the H. G. Wells issue?--ReyHahn (talk) 15:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

“No passion in the world is equal to the passion to alter someone else's draft.” Ldm1954 (talk) 15:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]