Talk:Ripple (electrical)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Physics (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.
WikiProject Electronics (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk page
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Art project[edit]

For an artistic project I am looking for a cross-section graph (z by x) of the shape that water's surface makes when a single object strikes the surface of a fluid. This would of course change over time and be dependent upon characteristics of the fluid, etc. Lee De Cola 15:40, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Merger proposal[edit]

I disagree with the proposal to merge the Ripple (physics) page with the Capillary wave page. Capillary waves are specific to fluids, but the term "ripple" can also be used to describe a characterisic of an electrical signal, as described in the Ripple article. E James (talk) 00:32, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

A split/merge would be more appropriate.--Srleffler (talk) 03:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
No, I don't think so. A merge is more appropriate. Capilliary waves are a specific type of ripple, therefore it can be included as a new section in 'ripple' Indomaster (talk) 00:01, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Other "ripple" articles of direct interest in this discussion:
My suggestion is, since the electricity ripples are very different from fluid dynamics ripples:
  1. move the material here on capillary waves to Capillary wave
  2. rename Ripple (physics) to Ripple (electricity), and adjust the redirect in Ripple (electrical)
  3. make a redirect page Ripple (fluid dynamics), redirecting to Capillary wave
  4. adjust the disambiguation page Ripple
Crowsnest (talk) 12:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
On second thought, considering there are quite some links to Ripple (physics), leave out step 2 above. Crowsnest (talk) 13:00, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I moved the relevant material on fluid-interface ripples to capillary waves, created a redirect page ripple (fluid dynamics) and changed the disambiguation page ripple accordingly. Crowsnest (talk) 08:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The consensus above seems to be that Ripple (physics) is no longer a good name for this article. I agree with this and propose to move it back to its original title of Ripple (electrical) now that the other branches of physics have gone elsewhere. The only reason given above for not changing it seems to be that it would be too much work to deal with all the existing links. I am prepared to do that work and, actually, there are not too many of them and most of those are still referring to the old title, getting here via a redirect. I also propose to add a section on frequency domain ripple, an important concept which has some incoming links on the dab page but nowhere to go from there. I am also giving the article a general rework and expansion - there are several things in it currently that are jsut plain wrong. SpinningSpark 18:13, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Ripple testing[edit]

I seem to remember hearing recordings of a man on the early BBC saying the words "Ripple testing. Ripple testing". Was this a test for this sort of ripple? Myrvin (talk) 17:59, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Unlikely. There used to be an old test called a "ripple test" that had a similar purpose to VSWR and I would guess that is what it was. Some version of this seems to have found a purpose in the modern world. SpinningSpark 19:04, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
Turns out that the announcer may have made it up. Maybe he thought it sounded nice and had a rolled r and ps too. Myrvin (talk) 07:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)