Talk:James Challis

Astronomy Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

‹See TfM›

Physics: Biographies 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Biographies Taskforce.

Challis's interest in acoustics?

Henry Margenau, in his introduction to the Dover edition of On the Sensations of Tone, states:

"Helmhotz' interest in acoustics was aroused for the first time in 1852, apparently by mathematical errors in the publications of Challis, which he corrected."

There is no entry for "Challis" in my 1922 Grove's Dictionary of Music and Musicians nor in the index of Benade's Fundamentals of Musical Acoustics. The only Challis in Wikipedia in James Challis. Is it he? Cutler 22:57, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

... and there is no other Challis in the Dictionary of Scientific Biography. Margenau was a respected historian of science so would certainly have disambiguated any obscure reference. It must be he.Cutler 19:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cutler, Helmholtz cites a "J Challis". When you look up the first citation it turns out it's the "Plumian Professor of Astronomy and Experimental Philisophy", so yea, Helmholtz is indeed citing the subject of this Wikipedia article. --Distelfinck (talk) 18:48, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on James Challis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070909023322/http://www.winwaed.com/comp/challis/climateprediction.shtml to http://www.winwaed.com/comp/challis/climateprediction.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:55, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not discovering Neptune?

Not discovering Neptune? Why do you write that? Just DON'T write this. 2001:18C0:927:8F00:78CE:37C0:40A:4DD9 (talk) 14:52, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could you be more specific and tell us the reason we shouldn't say it? --Distelfinck (talk) 10:55, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

yeah 2601:805:8300:4990:F536:6CDE:5F21:EB01 (talk) 23:40, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]