Talk:Heat equation

New applications

I added a sentence mentioning the equations use in image analysis. I have also once seen it mentioned in a textbook on population genetics. Can anyone corroborate that this is a common usage? In that case that should be mentioned too on this page. 130.235.35.201

the matrix A governing heat transfer

Do the eigenvectors of the matrix have physical meaning? ie. do they yield the direction of highest heat flow?

--24.84.203.193 28 June 2005 05:21 (UTC)

Clarification

I think it might be a good idea for someone to explain what situations the heat equation works in. For example, it may just be me, but I didn't understand whether what was being talked about with "propagation" was whether the heat came from a point source, or a source of finite volume is. The equation doesn't make sense to me because it seems like you could have to rooms full of air that were "isotropic" and "homogeneous" and they still could be different temperatures and have different levels rates of change of temperatures. Right? [unsigned]

and also, wouldn't k need units of some sort?

This article starts out overly technical from the beginning. Anyone without a degree in physics or math will get virtually nothing out of this article as they are derailed from the get-go, is that what is desired? One could easily write a simple conceptual paragraph or two for the lay person, another section on the 1D heat equation for say undergrads, and then get into all the gory math detail you wanted later. Mentioning parabolic partial differential equations, causality, the Riemann conjecture, and Ricci flow in the "General-audience description" is pretty hilarious. [unsigned]

Another clarification suggestion: The first paragraph of Heat makes reference to Heat being energy transferred due to convection, conduction, radiation, friction... But which of these does the generic "heat equation" apply to? Should the very first paragraph make clear that we are talking only about conduction (or whatever the right scope statement would be)? Deep down in the article it finally mentions that additional terms can be added to cover radiative losses, etc, but the introduction of the article never clearly describes what physical situations the default discussion is and isn't applicable to (it just says "diffuses"). DKEdwards (talk) 19:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

That was a bad edit which I'm responsible for, I've now moved those paragraphs down the page, leaving just a one-sentence summary in the lead. Gumshoe2 (talk) 06:00, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

"Stochastic heat equation" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Stochastic heat equation has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 5 § Stochastic heat equation until a consensus is reached. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:59, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Convert inline commentary to footnotes

There seems to be numerous inline, tangential information included in the text body, for example redundant definitions of diffusivity constant, or commentary on different notation styles between engineering and mathematics, or edge-case citations. This made for a hard read, even for someone familiar with the topic. Suggest moving this type of information to footnotes to preserve their importance while improving readability. [[1]]

129.94.128.30 (talk) 05:40, 9 January 2025 (UTC)RR

I agree with the problem but not the solution. I think it is better to move or remove the tangential information. Move it down in to its own paragraph or section. If the result is too small, remove it: not notable. I find that the vast majority of footnotes in articles are unsourced non-notable commentary. An encyclopedia is about notable topics: tangential content should be deleted. Johnjbarton (talk) 16:02, 9 January 2025 (UTC)