Talk:Collision

Untitled
Undid Davemisiaczuk94 edits, serious articles are not "for fun" and your edits won't stay 190.152.108.20 (talk) 00:19, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Is it just me or is it surreal, inappropriate and impractical to explore every conceivable instance of physical collision (flyswatters, carpet beating)?

Surely we should stick to broad categories of collision and link out appropriately? --Air 11:31, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * I do not see a problem, I have e.g. used the category racquet sport, leaving out any detail about them just like you seem to wish too. I see currently no long lists or elaborations about details that should be moved to a separate article.--Patrick 15:16, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)


 * Perhaps you find it odd to have household items and serious matters like missiles in the same overview, but that is what you get when you analyse kinds of collisions.--Patrick 15:28, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)
 * Hi Patrick. First, I appreciate your enthusiasm for and knowledge of modern guided missile systems. I do find it odd however that an entry for a high-level concept like Collision should include a discussion of explosive vs. non-explosive guided missiles (a low-level topic by anyone's standards), including links to specific missile types. I think we can generalise into a useful high-level point: that modern guidance technology enables collisions to be made between very fast-moving objects. e.g. anti-aircraft missiles, anti-ballistic missiles, etc. Can you think of more examples? --Air 17:57, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * non-explosive vs. explosive means attacking by "just" a collision or attacking by an explosion, that is the essence in this context, not a detail.--Patrick 22:20, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)
 * I think our whole breakdown of projectile types should be moved to Projectile where it belongs. --Air 09:45, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * I dropped flyswatter, it is more crushing than colliding.--Patrick 15:35, 2004 Oct 28 (UTC)

Collisions can be elastic, meaning they conserve energy and momentum, inelastic, meaning they conserve momentum, or totally inelastic (or plastic), meaning they conserve momentum and the two objects stick together. I'm not sure about the phrasing of this: "inelastic, meaning they conserve momentum" implies that elastic collisions are also inelastic. Should it be "inelastic, meaning they conserve momentum but not energy"?Galaxiaad 19:02, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Yes, fixed.--Patrick 00:23, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

I think collision, in this article, is imperceptibly defined in the language of general physics. Isn't the part of definition collision means the action of a system appears vague? It would be better to use the term 'isolated' than to use the phrase external forces can be neglected. I found a better definition for collision from the book Fundamentals of Physics, 6th Edition,

"A collision is an isolated event in which two or more bodies (colliding bodies) exert relatively strong forces on each other for a relatively short time."

This definition seems more tangible and appropriate for the physics article. --Ajinx999 (talk) 09:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Disambiguate me!
This should be separated into a disambiguation and the "main" collision page... --Ihope127 00:18, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Split the page as an exercise in wikification, please take a look to make sure I didn't misplaced any link Teferi 15:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Equations
What is the equation for elastic collision and the equation for inelastic collision? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 168.8.249.93 (talk) 15:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC).

Fundamental interactions
What fundamental interactions are at work in a collision? That is, what "force" in nature is actually responsible for the fact that two particles cannot occupy the same space? That would be a good discussion in this article I think. Mbarbier (talk) 17:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Attack
The connection between collisions (the physical concept) and "attacks" is extremely tenuous. Maybe link to other generic concepts pertaining to collision, e.g. Impact.

I suggest removing the sections "Mathematical description" (seems specific to some formalism in atomic physics, not general enough), "Cue Sports" (pointless!), and "Space Exploration". It's like discussing Sumo wrestling in an article about the physical concept of "Mass". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.141.24.227 (talk • contribs)

Mathematical description (the one involving molecules)

 * I removed the section "Mathematical description". I think the other sections should stay.--Patrick (talk) 14:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the above user -- the section on collisions of molecules is completely opaque. It's not even clear what the problem statement is or what it's trying to solve. Mathematically it just says that you can put collision equations in matrix form. That section should either be removed or it should please be clarified. Gmzh (talk) 03:24, 22 February 2011 (UTC)Gmzh Gmzh (talk) 03:26, 22 February 2011 (UTC)Gmzh

Types of collisions - removed indents
I removed what appeared to be unnecessary indents. As I write this I cannot think of a reason to post on the talk page about such a minor edit but I'm feeling verbose, I suppose.

If anyone really loved those indents you need but speak reason for their return Mattman00000 (talk) 07:05, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Collision. 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://archive.is/20130201232203/http://www.regispetit.com/bil_praa.htm to http://www.regispetit.com/bil_praa.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)