Talk:Nonlinear magnetic field

Merging

I disagree with merging this into magnetic field. Certainly Maxwell's equations hold classically, and (as the author of the article points out) the Divergence theorem makes this knot business impossible. This does not appear to be anything even resembling mainstream physics, at least not without more information (see below), and isn't particularly comprehensible either. Deletion seems most sensible to me. -- SCZenz 00:32, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is such a thing as a magnetic knot in the context of plasma physics. This would not be the first time someone has taken a phenomena in plasmas and confused it. There are such things as nonlinear magnetic fields; just not what this anon has written about, so it might make sense to redirect to magnetic field. Salsb 01:34, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect is fine, but not a merge. There's no material here that should be in the B-field article. -- SCZenz 05:34, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and I'm doing so. 13:15, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I have no objection. I wanted to make sure that a physicist had the opportunity to look at this for ideas for magnetic field. Also, merging is less bureaucracy than deletion. — Pekinensis 00:55, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Context

What was the context of Ulam's original remarks? Is it possible to provide a citation? -- SCZenz 00:32, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Early thinking on these topics evenutally gave way to the realization that pair creation happens. WP is not the right place to do original research in the history of physics. linas 19:49, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

VfD

FYI, this is original research, and appears to be a resumption of an earlier article of the same name that was VfD'd. The archives of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive8 document this incident and related articles; please watch for sockpuppets and other activity similar to this. linas 19:46, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]