Talk:Vortex dynamics

Untitled

This article has significant importance within the history of theories / models for atomic dynamics. Encouragment is made for more descriptive information to replace the wording "wrong-headed," as the reasons for abandoning a vortex model of the atom are scientifically important in understanding the legacy of physics. Some research on this is underway. If anyone has references for published material in which Lord Kelvin abandoned the vortex atomic model, please post it here or to my talk page.

Shpoffo 19:18, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Vortex dynamics/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article is so boring and un-informative. Why don't you just write 'vortices are important' - that's all this article says. Haha lol, exactly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AkshayGenius (talk • contribs) 01:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Last edited at 01:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:04, 30 April 2016 (UTC)