Talk:Polar wind
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The contents of the Plasma fountain page were merged into Polar wind on 2011-10-11. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Proposed merge of Earth's ambipolar electric field into Polar wind
[edit]I've copied and integrated most of the content of "Earth's ambipolar electric field". At this point that topic is not sufficiently notable to be separate from Polar wind. Johnjbarton (talk) 18:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Per discussions on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Physics#Can_any_encyclopedia-article_title_here,_start_with_these_exact_words? I assume that @Dicklyon supports this merge. @Andrew Davidson as creator, please weigh in. Johnjbarton (talk) 18:58, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! I am 'a Norwegian IP', and i have voiced opposition (on another wikipedia), about (its) "Ambipolar electric field" article - since the end of August.--Within half a week, i hope to have copied, to this talk page - the main (relevant) arguments, that until now, have been used (on talk-pages on wikipedia), about what is 'not okay' about the article, "Earth's ambipolar electric field".--However, I am absolutely not asking anyone to wait, about giving their own opinion, or to wait about referring to the views of others, or facts stated by others.--And yeah, Merge is what i am leaning (hard) toward, and justification for that, should follow within, say, a 'few' days. Thank you. 2001:2020:31B:D1A2:45B3:3A4:A6D4:6CA9 (talk) 18:40, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Update from 'a Norwegian IP' : I am not displeased about 'aggressively bad stuff' having been removed from (relevant) articles on English-wiki.--For now, I am leaning toward Neutral, in regard to Merging-before-Delete.
('Spinning a snowball-Keep', seems at least as doable as other options.)--I am guessing that a dozen of minor threads, will be started over the next seven days; there might be c. no drama in that. Regards! 2001:2020:305:DCFD:1084:26CA:F3C4:A50F (talk) 17:18, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! I am 'a Norwegian IP', and i have voiced opposition (on another wikipedia), about (its) "Ambipolar electric field" article - since the end of August.--Within half a week, i hope to have copied, to this talk page - the main (relevant) arguments, that until now, have been used (on talk-pages on wikipedia), about what is 'not okay' about the article, "Earth's ambipolar electric field".--However, I am absolutely not asking anyone to wait, about giving their own opinion, or to wait about referring to the views of others, or facts stated by others.--And yeah, Merge is what i am leaning (hard) toward, and justification for that, should follow within, say, a 'few' days. Thank you. 2001:2020:31B:D1A2:45B3:3A4:A6D4:6CA9 (talk) 18:40, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Crystal-clear, or not?
[edit]"It is one of several mechanisms for the outflow of ionized particles and it typically refers to ions accelerated by ambipolar electric fields ". 2001:2020:31B:D1A2:45B3:3A4:A6D4:6CA9 (talk) 18:54, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
C/e needed?
[edit]"Additional mechanisms including ion acceleration by solar photoelectrons escaping along magnetic field lines".--Comment: "includes" - would that be a 'better word'? 2001:2020:31B:D1A2:45B3:3A4:A6D4:6CA9 (talk) 19:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
"In region the polar wind, the ionospheric plasma expands and the low density allows gravity to pull ions down relative to the electrons in the plasma."--From Causes (section).--"In the region of the polar wind" - is maybe not too far off? 2001:2020:30D:A266:584B:B4EA:E71D:37BE (talk) 16:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
"Research" section or in the lede or (possibly) where?
[edit]'Research stepping-stones' etc. in regard to the decades of research - should that be in History section or Research section?
"Ions accelerated by a polarization electric field (also[1] known as an ambipolar electric field) is believed to be the primary cause of polar wind, according to a research paper in 2020; furthermore, similar processes operate on other planets.[2]"
(For now, the article could (arguably and) easily be interpreted as 'almost all' research stems (or stemming) from the 2022 rocket-flight.) 2001:2020:305:DCFD:1084:26CA:F3C4:A50F (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree with your assessment. I have made additions to clarify in any case. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:55, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
- Many (most?) readers will come here to find out more about the '2024 music-video from NASA', or just video.--One reads about a 2022 rocket-flight, so one could (easily?) conclude that 'most' of the 'results or information', are from years 2022 to 2024.--If year 2020 (and 'its' paper is not a milestone), then which year(s) between 1960 and 2020, have 'the milestone(s)?--That there is no hurry to fix this, is sort of my view.--User:Johnjbarton has a steady hand on the rudder, it seems. Much of the article's text is now quite fine, and some might be excellent. Regards! 2001:2020:331:9A41:A02C:EC8D:EB24:5952 (talk) 03:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:305:DCFD:1084:26CA:F3C4:A50F
Year 1968, seems to be 'only' mentioned (in the wiki-article), in regard to coining the phrase Polar wind. If the year is a milestone for the research, then that might not be clear from the wiki-article.--No big deal, for now, I might add. 2001:2020:331:9A41:A02C:EC8D:EB24:5952 (talk) 03:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
The year of at least one of the satellites, should perhaps be mentioned.--1969 had the ISIS-2 satellite.--If it feels obvious, which of the satellites could be considered 'more important than the others', then please let this Talk page, know. 2001:2020:331:9A41:C6B:E252:C84F:90BF (talk) 05:02, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
- Many (most?) readers will come here to find out more about the '2024 music-video from NASA', or just video.--One reads about a 2022 rocket-flight, so one could (easily?) conclude that 'most' of the 'results or information', are from years 2022 to 2024.--If year 2020 (and 'its' paper is not a milestone), then which year(s) between 1960 and 2020, have 'the milestone(s)?--That there is no hurry to fix this, is sort of my view.--User:Johnjbarton has a steady hand on the rudder, it seems. Much of the article's text is now quite fine, and some might be excellent. Regards! 2001:2020:331:9A41:A02C:EC8D:EB24:5952 (talk) 03:47, 15 September 2024 (UTC) /2001:2020:305:DCFD:1084:26CA:F3C4:A50F
References
- ^ Ionospheres: Physics, Plasma Physics, and Chemistry by Schunk and Nagy.[index entry,] "ambipolar electric field (see polarization electric field)"
- ^ Gronoff, G.; Arras, P.; Baraka, S.; Bell, J. M.; Cessateur, G.; Cohen, O.; Curry, S. M.; Drake, J. J.; Elrod, M.; Erwin, J.; Garcia-Sage, K.; Garraffo, C.; Glocer, A.; Heavens, N. G.; Lovato, K. (August 2020). "Atmospheric Escape Processes and Planetary Atmospheric Evolution". Journal of Geophysical Research: Space Physics. 125 (8). Bibcode:2020JGRA..12527639G. doi:10.1029/2019JA027639. ISSN 2169-9380.