Talk:Resonator

Automotive section

The automotive section on resonators is very short, and even biased. More work needs to be done at making it a little more detailed.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.248.132.180 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)‎

Merge?

Seems that these 2 pages should be merged. Any opinion?134.193.168.253 15:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I think better linking/labelling would do the trick. I'm happy that the CR article stand alone - perhaps re-labelled "Cavity resonator - Electromagnetic" or something similar, and move the flute references out.--Snori 01:01, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I also think that better linking/labeling would do the trick.

I think the articles can be merged- electromagnetic cavity resonators are a specific example of a resonant device, like guitars, auto exhaust pipes, quartz crystals, etc. The current article titled "Cavity resonators" is sort of broad and shallow and doesn't really need its own entry. If someone were to submit a detailed writeup on EM CR, with diagrams, equations, etc., then maybe it would warrant its own article. I would also like to see some discussion of general resonator theory in the resonator article, maybe a few approachable example equations for common cases (e.g. springs or crystal radios). I plan to submit some of this material this Fall (2006). Mhopeng 23:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I also think that the articles can be merged as the current (Cavity resonator) article is not specific enough. Ksbrown 16:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. At least, the definition is incomplete. It states that a resonator is a system which resonate strongly for some specific frequencies. This is simply incorrect. ANY system having a dominant specific mode would be a 'resonator'!. A resonator in this context is NOT a system, but a DEVICE, 'built for achieving an specific dominant mode', in order to be used by other systems. Also the definition of resonator as a 'single degree' or as a 'simple oscillator' would be ok, but just as a definition, not as a different context. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hypfco (talk • contribs) 04:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Patents section

The patents section probably should be clarified to indicate that it only pertains to electromagnetic resonators. This article currently refers to other types of resonators (acoustic resonators) that I'm guessing are classified differently by the USPTO, though I haven't done any research to find out what class/subclass is applicable.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.225.141.201 (talk • contribs) 13:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

"Websites" listing

The link under "Websites" does not seem to redirect to its listed description, but rather to what seems to be an endorsement for a commercial website. I may not have pursued deeply enough to find the listed reference, but I shouldn't have to. MVD (talk) 10:50, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Good catch, those spamlinks keep popping up. Get rid of it, and if you can find from the page history who added it, be sure to put a spam warning template on his talk page. --Chetvorno^TALK 12:28, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Flamurai added the basic link a long time ago in this diff. Maybe the website author used to have the listed book featured but moved it in a redesign. I think they moved it to this word doc. The word doc talks about marimba resonators at length, but I don't think it's worthy of inclusion as an external link here on this page. Maybe on the marimba page... I'm taking the link out. Binksternet (talk) 15:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

2.1 Cavity resonators section

This sounds a bit iffy:

"A hollow conductor that uses resonance to amplify an electromagnetic wave is called a cavity resonator." (my italics)

What about 'cavity filters' etc. they don't amplify, do they? Sounds like some sort of parametric amplifier to me. --220.101.28.25 (talk) 21:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

I've reworded that, sound ok now? SpinningSpark 20:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

In some fields, such as mechanical or audio engineering, the term amplify is commonly used to mean the multiplication of a conjugate power variable by a passive system. For instance, using mechanical advantage to increase velocity, or using an impedance transformer to increase sound pressure. The analogous situation in electrical engineering would be voltage (or current) multiplication. This can be done by a transformer for instance, but can also be achieved with a resonator. In this context amplify is correct terminology, but of course electrical engineers would normally mean active amplification even when the device is a voltage amplifier, as opposed to a power amplifier. SpinningSpark 14:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Loop-gap resonator

In the absence of radiation losses, the effective resistance of the LGR is determined by the resistivity and electromagnetic skin depth of the conductor used to make the resonator. But there will be radiation losses; they are intrinsic to the design. Very significant losses, according to the main article, from radiation out of the open end of the bore, at least in the basic design described here. SpinningSpark 09:02, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

The animated GIF is annoying !!

This constantly playing animated GIF is annoying !! and should be made closable!!.
Please ping me. Steue (talk) 15:35, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

@Steue: How about just moving it down so it is not visible at top? --Chetvorno^TALK 18:31, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

I would love it if something was done in core code about gifs so users could turn them on and off at will. That's the real solution. This article isn't so bad, but some are so completely littered with animations that they are virtually unreadable. Phabricator task T61217 is relevant to this, but there has been no activity for years. The last comment was someone saying they would get a discussion going but nothing seems to have happened. The holdup seems to be mostly that the devs are unsure if this is a feature that would be much used. I suggest starting a discussion at WP:VPP to test whether this idea has support and then report that back on Phabricator to encourage the devs to actually do it. SpinningSpark 09:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

@Chetvorno and Spinningspark:
on my screen the image is beside the first seven lines of text (not above).
And if I push the right edge of the window towards the left the window remains beside the text.
I would greatley appreciate this suggested switch.
Plus: I would love, if animated gifs were halted by default.

I have made this suggestion: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Any_animated_GIF_should_have_an_ON/OFF_switch

Please ping me. Steue (talk) 07:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

My humble opinion: I think animations are absolutely wonderful tools for getting across physics and engineering concepts to general readers, and should be used more (I have created a number of gifs for WP articles) (but not this one). I suspect only a minority of readers are irritated by reasonably unobtrusive gifs. That said, I strongly agree that animations need a prominent ON/OFF button. However I think the default should be ON. With an opt-in, the readers who will most benefit from the animation, the uneducated and technically-inexperienced, will not notice or understand the button and will never turn the animation on. --Chetvorno^TALK 19:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Facebook currently shows animated GIF frozen by default. It displays a clear overlay that looks like a button and acts like a button – a simple click starts the animation. I think most people can handle that. A web page should never show an uninvited animation. — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 10:41, 15 October 2020 (UTC)