|WikiProject Physics / Fluid Dynamics||(Rated C-class, Mid-importance)|
thanks for the article - very helpful Suggest the metric units are chagned to the more universal "SI", rather than as shown. Jerryjoynson 08:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Suggest that the symbol for velocity be changed to a common v... It took me a while to realise that the capital V there did not refer to volume. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 21:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Stokes' law is a theme in some of the UK OCR A-level Physics coursework. This means that this article will get increased traffic for the time that students investigate it. Whilst this shouldn't be a problem, I ask that editors with knowledge of this subject please keep an eye on it to revert vandalism, misleading information and good-faith edits which contain untrue information.
I don't predict us having any troubles with this article - A-level Physics students are pretty mundane when it comes to vandalism - but I think it's worth keeping an eye on. And I thought you might appreciate the heads up! Greggers (t • c) 18:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bring this up again, but I feel that the article should read "Stokes's law", regardless of both the popularity of an incorrect spelling and the formal use in a science paper instead of an English one.
- Both variants seem to be allowable, depending on which sources are used regarding style, see Apostrophe#Singular nouns ending with an "s" or "z" sound. A Google Scholar search shows that in scientific publications "Stokes' law" is far more common than "Stokes's law". -- Crowsnest (talk) 21:44, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- Just because something is common does not mean that it is correct. I think we ought to change it, if only to create consistency throughout the entire encyclopedia. Looking at the page, I promounce the title "Stokeses law." If we're going to pronounce the letter, shouldn't we write it also? Just so that we remain consistent with the most important rule, i.e. "Put an apostrophe ess after every single noun to makeit possessive"?126.96.36.199 (talk) 00:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
- Support - You may think that it looks silly but the fact is that Stokes' is incorrect and implies that there are many Stokes to which this law belongs to. The correct grammatical name is Stokes's Law, and any text book that gets this wrong should seriously consider learning the english language. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 07:46, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
- Support - This grammar issue is bothering me also. Why is Gauss's Law correct in Wikipedia but Stokes's Law incorrect?
- Support - It's a ludicrous issue, and often childish and embarassing that there ever was a debate at all. :/ — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 20:19, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Shouldn't it be more accurately expressed by replacement of 'V' for velocity by ? since, as it is, it could imply that the force acts in the same direction as the velocity. At least make it clear by replacing with .
Also, 'V' could be more generally defined by 'relative' rather than the absolute velocity defined here, since that is merely a special case when the fluid is stationary. Hai2410 (talk) 10:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
I disagree with:
"eta is the fluid's kinematic viscosity (in St m2/s)"
It appears to me that eta is the dynamic viscosity (in Pa.s kg/m/s).
Also "mu" should be "eta" in the terminal velocity expression (second equation).
I don't want to change this before asking other people's opinion first.