Talk:John William Strutt, 3rd Baron Rayleigh

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Pronunciation[edit]

How his family name ('Strutt') is pronounced? Mir76 17:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

I would imagine that it's pronounced like the verb 'to strut.' For my part, I'd like to know how his title is pronounced. I've heard the 'y' pronounced as a 'w'. --Smack (talk) 18:16, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Smack: not according to the OED. They have /ˈreɪlɪ/ (see IPA). — DIV (128.250.204.118 08:38, 5 July 2007 (UTC))

My physics book says that Rayleigh was the last person to understand all of physics and all of mathematics. Is this true? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.87.175.97 (talk) 23:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

I've heard a similar thing said of Hilbert. It's almost certainly not possible to know for sure - what would we include in 'mathematics' and 'physics'? 7daysahead (talk) 14:44, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Most physics types call it ral-lee, as in rally race. Upper class Englishers call it raw-lee, as they have speech impediments caused by 1000yrs of inbreeding. Always some dispute over the last true universalist. It is generally considered to be Henri Poincare (pwarn/car/rey). 220.244.84.219 (talk) 07:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:02, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Rayleigh's son[edit]

Rayleigh's son, Robert John Strutt, 4th Baron Rayleigh, was also a well known physicist. I've added a link to his page. It was Robert John Strutt who discovered active nitrogen in 1910, and I've moved references active nitrogen to Robert John's page. --Ijf3 (talk) 20:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Pronounciation[edit]

I've heard it "Ray lee", "Rah lee", "Rye lih", and several other variations and combinations. Anyone know how it should be? DMacks (talk) 01:37, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Religious views[edit]

Are Rayleigh's views on religion so important that it warrants 1/3 of the content of this page? Surely, there are many more important aspects of his life that could be expanded. 130.237.175.78 (talk) 14:58, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Really bad article[edit]

This has got to be about the worst article in WP. Rayleigh's place in maths/physics is hardly done justice. The separation principle (applicable in optics, statistics, and all spectral analysis) has not been mentioned. Rayleigh terms in the Lagrangian formulation for fluids not mentioned, still unproven. The religious views are simply a nonsense. I'm a physicist who has reviewed the works papers of Kelvin and Rayleigh, and they are NOT religious in any way. Rayleigh is best know for his work on wave theory.220.240.253.34 (talk) 08:31, 19 March 2015 (UTC)