Talk:David Hestenes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
 
WikiProject Physics / Biographies  (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.
 

TODO[edit]

Personal History[edit]

  • Where was he born?
  • When, where and by what did he earn his Ph.D.?

Works[edit]

Add more works.

  • Space-Time Algebra (1966)
  • with Garret Sobczyk: Clifford Algebra to Geometric Calculus (1987)
  • Eds. J. S. R. Chisholm and R. K. Common: Clifford Algebras and Their Applications in Mathematical Physics. Proceedings of 1985 NATO and SERC Workshop at the University of Canterbury, Kent, England (1986)
  • New Foundations for Classical Mechanics (1985, 1999)
  • The Electron (1991)
  • Mathematical tools for thinking physicists]. Public Lecture at the 9th Annual Spring Meeting of the North Carolina Section of the American Association of Physics Teachers (NCS-AAPT) at Davidson College (October 29-30, 2004). So Hestenes is still active. Here is a link to the Programme.

The following is the text of the abstract, copied here for convenience:

Mathematics is essential for understanding physics, so how should that play out in the high school math/science curriculum? “Conceptual physics” courses ignore the problem. Mathematics teachers are oblivious to the problem. Physics teachers, at least, can understand the problem, though curriculum reform is fraught with difficulty.
We answer two questions: (1) what mathematics is most essential for general scientific literacy? (2) What mathematics is optimal for the math/physics curriculum? The answer to the second question is a pea(->e)k into the future –– an introduction to a new mathematical language called Geometric Algebra that integrates algebra, geometry, and trigonometry into a coherent system that simplifies and enhances applications to physics.
References: D Hestenes, Oersted Medal Lecture 2002: Reforming the mathematical language of physics, AJP 71: 104-121(2003). Available at http://modelingnts.la.asu.edu/. Information and references on Modeling Instruction at http://modeling.asu.edu/.


Future?:

  • New Foundations of Mathematical Physics alias NFII

Broken Link[edit]

the link Emeritus page at ASU at the very end, is broken. Cláudio Valente

Fixed. --Chris Howard (talk) 19:20, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

numbering of references[edit]

The method of used for numbering the references here is regrettable. If references are numbered by hand rather than by the software, and someone wants to add another one between 8 and 9, then all of the listed references after number 8 need to get renumbered by hand, and the places where they are cited in the article need to get changed! We have software that takes care of that. But it wasn't used here. Michael Hardy (talk) 04:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Indeed. And there does not seem to be a particular reason why. Or am I missing something? --Chris Howard (talk) 11:47, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
I saw someone started the numbering cleanup but did not get around to completing it, so I completed that part of the work now. The reference numbering should be OK. --Chris Howard (talk) 11:30, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
That was me. I didn't carry on after [19] since there may have been a discrepancy between "[20]" in the list meaning "[19]" in the article or whatever, and didn't want to misplace any references (and had better things to do then anyway). I left a firm (maybe harsh...) note on that user's (Xtr rossi) talk page. Thanks anyway for your tremendous efforts though. F = q(E+v×B) ⇄ ∑ici 12:08, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks!!! I was just thinking that I needed a clap on the back (and a break!). Cheers --Chris Howard (talk) 15:13, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Giant picture[edit]

While the diagram is nice, it isn't really informative about David Hestenes, it is informative about geometric calculus. I'm going to move it over to that article. Rschwieb (talk) 18:32, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Proper names[edit]

I have re-worked much of the article yet remain doubtful about the use of proper names in this case, meaning that many of the words are in capital letters. Example: should the article refer to "Geometric Algebra" (capital letters) or "geometric algebra"? Same story for conformal geometric algebra, etc. It should at least be consistent within the article, better yet consistent with other Wikipedia articles. That would mean small letters—however, there may be a point to writing at least those approaches that Hestenes himself developed in capital letters (as proper names) within this article. The current situation is unsatisfactory. Any opinions? --Chris Howard (talk) 21:40, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to think we can safely reduce "geometric algebra" to all lowercase, but the things like "Modeling Instruction" are a different story. A short time ago, terms like this were introduced in all caps, and then referred to as proper nouns. The all caps approach is certainly not in standard WP style, so that really shouldn't come back. Rschwieb (talk) 00:00, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Good. I've reduced the scientific concepts to lower case now, adding acronyms where it could be helpful to indicate a distinct theory, e.g. "spacetime algebra (STA)". Concepts to be spelled in capitals for other reasons but not having their own Wikipedia article are now in italics for better distinction, e.g. "Modeling Instruction". --Chris Howard (talk) 07:57, 15 April 2012 (UTC)