Room Acoustics Forum by Rives Audio

Welcome! Need support, you got it. Or share you ideas and experiences.

Return to Room Acoustics Forum by Rives Audio

Room Acoustics Forum by Rives Audio

Just the opposite...

70.28.248.66

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Room Acoustics Forum by Rives Audio ]

restock

(A)

In Reply to: Re: Wikipedia is a good first guess... posted by Inmate51 on February 6, 2006 at 13:16:07:

Your attempt to equate Wikipedia with long-established and known accurate
sources of information is just another example of dumbing down the state of
knowledge in the U.S.
No offense, but I am doing just the opposite: I have enough convidence in people on the Asylum to judge AND research the correctness of information, no matter which source. And in this case, the discussion of diffusion in Encyclopedia Britannica is incomplete!
Best regards,
Rene
"I wouldn't trust (no) words written on no piece of paper."
Jim Jarmusch, DEAD MAN 1995

Follow Ups:

Re: Just the opposite... - Inmate51 14:13:11 02/06/06 (1)
I'm not here to defend or decry any source. I simply wanted to note that there are qualitative differences among sources, and that some sources have established a reputation in one way or another, and that some have not established a level of reliability in the educational or research communities.
Because you have questioned the definition of "diffusion" in the totality of the Encyclopedia Britannica (not just the online version), I will make it a point to read my Britannica dictionary definition of the word, as well as Webster's dictionary definition of the word, and the American Heritage dictionary definition, and Cyril Harris' definition, and Everest's definition, and Lawrence's definition, and Beranek's definition, and Runstein's definition, and Olson's definition, and...
...THEN, I'll decide whether or not Wikipedia's definition is exactly right. But I clearly won't rely on Wikipedia first.
- Re: Just the opposite... - restock 14:52:59 02/06/06 (0)
  Inmate51, your point is well taken. I am amazed at the "accuracy" of Wikipedia quite often myself. Curiously I have found Wikipedia to be quite accurate in the description of physical phenomena. Your experience will vary of course from field to field and the accucary can be random.
  In the case of diffusion, I do agree with the expanded definition used in Wikipedia. As a researcher in fields of Optics, Quantum Optics, and Quantum Mechanic myself, I remember the use of the term "diffusion" for effects other than just diffusion of molecules quite often in the above fields. As stated earlier, diffusion referrs to a process, discribed mathematically by the diffusion type differential equation, which applies to many wave propagation phenomena in optics, quantum mechanics, and acoustics. Another common case of use of the term diffusion is the case of heat diffusion which has nothing to do diffusion of molecules in chemistry.
  I would be interesting to see what other enclopedias (not just the limited online version of course) have to say in this subject, although as a scientist I will keep to the more general physics and mathematics definition of diffusion.
  Best wishes,
  Rene
  "I wouldn't trust (no) words written on no piece of paper."
  Jim Jarmusch, DEAD MAN 1995

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Sonic Craft

You can not post to an archived thread.