Talk:History of fluid mechanics

Physics: Fluid Dynamics / History High‑importance

	Physics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Fluid Dynamics Taskforce.
	This article is supported by History Taskforce.

Rename and merge?

It has been suggested that this article be renamed History of fluid mechanics and, possibly, merged with Hydraulics. Please comment. Biscuittin (talk) 19:36, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My preference would be to move Hydromechanics to History of fluid mechanics, and after that redirect Hydromechanics to Fluid mechanics. Of course, much is missing at the moment to make it a full history of fluid mechanics: Prandtl, Rayleigh, Kelvin, Helmholtz, Navier, St. Venant, Stokes, etc. are missing in the 19th century part; Eytelwein and others seem to have been forgotten; while the 20th century is missing completely.

Hydraulics is an out-of-balance problem on itself (giving no information on hydraulics, and giving a history effectively until about 1600). But its strong focus with regards to its history on "innovations" makes me hesitant on including that into the history of the science of fluid mechanics. Perhaps a similar split-off History of hydraulics may help to really start with an article on hydraulics. But that is apart from what is to be done with this article. -- Crowsnest (talk) 20:12, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Crowsnest's suggestion. There's already a "Brief history" section of the fluid mechanics article - linking this article to there might spark some further work on it. Djr32 (talk) 17:09, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the article as suggested, and made Hydromechanics a redirect to Fluid mechanics. As noted above, there's still quite a bit to be done on this article to make it a complete history of fluid mechanics, especially w.r.t. work done in the last 150 years! Djr32 (talk) 12:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the move! And the associated edits. -- Crowsnest (talk) 12:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on History of fluid mechanics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:50, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of fluid mechanics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080226102543/http://www.history-science-technology.com/Notes/Notes%202.htm to http://www.history-science-technology.com/Notes/Notes%202.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:50, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Images

There are many fluid dynamics pictures in wikipedia, this page could be better if someone added more to this history page.MaoGo (talk) 09:25, 23 November 2017 (UTC) Also it would be nice if its more centred in ideas and not personalitiesMaoGo (talk) 13:10, 23 November 2017 (UTC).[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of fluid mechanics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070314022441/http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/email.asp?isbn=0521477395 to http://www.cambridge.org/us/catalogue/email.asp?isbn=0521477395

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:23, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Navier-Stokes?

How is it even possible that this article does not mention Navier-Stokes equation?--ReyHahn (talk) 10:49, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I'll add a section for it just to start off. 2601:2C7:4300:A77:4506:3A49:69D7:AAA8 (talk) 05:48, 9 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is fluid mechanics "one of the most debated fields in physics"?

A comment to this effect was recently added by user TheRevisionary (29 Sept 2024); no citation or reference is given. Is this comment justified? In my experience, most physicists do not even take a class in fluid mechanics, much less debate it. What are examples of debates about fluid mechanics? Historically, the relevance of invsicid theory that did not describe real flows might have been one debate; but I think boundary layer theory resolved this over a century ago? This is meant to discuss possibly undoing the revision made on 29-Sept-2024. Duncanpark (talk) 03:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I reverted the edit. TheRevisionary can explain the rationale here first.--ReyHahn (talk) 14:52, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]