Talk:Schwarzschild criterion

Astronomy Low‑importance

	Astronomy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

‹See TfM›

Physics Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved per request. Favonian (talk) 17:46, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Schwarzschild Criterion → Schwarzschild criterion –

Wikipedia typically downcases laws, principles, hypotheses, etc. Per WP:MOSCAPS ("Wikipedia avoids unnecessary capitalization") and WP:TITLE, this is a generic, common term, not a propriety or commercial term, so the article title should be downcased. Lowercase will match the formatting of related article titles. Tony (talk) 12:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree.T R 10:48, 19 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom's rationale. Dicklyon (talk) 06:22, 21 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Not clear

Imho, this article is not clear: while I suppose that by Z they mean the radial component, what g do you mean? Like, 9.8 m/s^2 and would that apply to ALL stars? I know another expression for this criterion that does not involve g and Cp, present on Astrophysics for Physicists: would that apply better? Since I am a physicist, but not an astrophysicists, I would not dare to modify the article without previous discussion. Andrejevic (talk) 17:02, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Andrejevic[reply]

Wrong Schwarzschild

I think there Karl Schwarzschild is mistaken for his son, Martin Schwarzschild who was also an astrophysicist but did study convection and is the one actually cited every time Schwarzschild criterion is cited in papers ^[1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Narsonalin (talk • contribs) 14:54, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1958ApJ...128..348S/abstract

[1] ttps://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1958ApJ...128..348S/abstract

[1]