Talk:Nonlinear metamaterial

Proposed structure

I'm not a large WP user, but am someone familiar with this field. This article needs entirely rewritten in the body. I suggest splitting into areas including, for instance:

• Using nonlinearities to dynamically shift frequency response (and/or linking to tunable metamaterials)
• Using nonlinearities to dynamically change the qualitative character of the response (such as the reconfigurable index, absorbing to reflecting, ref 7, etc)
• Memory effects (such as recent articles that deal with creating metamaterials with memory). There was a recent Science article dealing with this.
• Generation and effects of higher order harmonics with metamaterials. Again, a recent journal authored by Smith and some others dealt with this, and there are others from Kivshar's group.

Also, this needs to be rewritten as not lines copied from the journals. "We" should not be here. There are absolute tons of advances not included/referenced here, many by the groups of Smith, Cummer, and Kivshar. Reorganization as above would allow mentions of different approaches - tunable metamaterials based on MEMS vs embedding varactors, etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.57.254.204 (talk) 01:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I think you have proposed a good organizational structure here. I agree that it needs to be rewritten and this structure is a good way to go. Also, I agree that there are advances that have not been included here. I have been focusing more on the other articles more than this one, and other issues that came up. I recently came across memory metamaterials in Science, and I am looking forward to adding it here. I don't know why I haven't added it already. I have been hoping to get to this article sooner rather than later. Steve Quinn (formerly Ti-30X) (talk) 06:38, 18 March 2010 (UTC)