Talk:Landau–Zener formula
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
‹See TfM›
|
Can not verify source 1 in this article
[edit]I can not verify source 1 in this article:
"L. Landau (1932). "Zur Theorie der Energieubertragung. II". Physics of the Soviet Union 2: 46–51."
Please provide information on where to find this article, resp. which Journal it has been published in. I am unable to verify the existence of a Journal "Physics of the Soviet Union 2".
Thanks for help. 87.147.221.193 (talk) 22:39, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
- Some papers cite the paper as "Landau L 1932 Phys. Z. Sowj. 2 46" or similar, and a Google Scholar search indeed gives "Phys. Z. Sowjetunion" as the name of the Journal. 130.233.204.60 (talk) 08:07, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
The equation in the article is unclear, as the quantity "a" given is never defined. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.40.61.235 (talk) 15:32, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Adressing Too Technical of Nov. 2018
[edit]Hello! I have shortened the image description and reordered the lede as a first attempt to make it more digestable to address the concern in [[1]]. -- Lpd-Lbr (talk) 13:50, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- I do not agree with the change. The article lost some important technicalities. --MaoGo (talk) 14:10, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- I disagree with Your assesment: I have added one additional sentence to the introduction and restructured it. Nothing in the text of the article was removed. I did cut down the description of the image, since it is too technical. Will You agree with my change to change the lede and leave the description of the image? --Lpd-Lbr (talk) 19:19, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- The too technical template addresses most of the article not just the lead. The lead seems ok. The lead is very precise it is a particular formula to calculate the transitions in a 2-level quantum model. I used part of your edition to simplify the image and to add a Template:Short description.--MaoGo (talk) 19:50, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- I disagree with Your assesment: I have added one additional sentence to the introduction and restructured it. Nothing in the text of the article was removed. I did cut down the description of the image, since it is too technical. Will You agree with my change to change the lede and leave the description of the image? --Lpd-Lbr (talk) 19:19, 5 February 2019 (UTC)