Talk:Hearing the shape of a drum

Other material
There is some other material on this. This is pretty general "question" to ask in harmonic analysis. (I say "question" because it needs to be made a bit more precise.) You "hear" the eigenvalues of the Laplacian, and try to "see" what you can say based on the eigenvalues. Things like the Selberg trace formula give some information (in the hyperbolic case), at least relating the length spectrum (lengths of prime geodesics) to the spectral decomposition (set of eigenvalues). It turns out even in this case, you can't "hear the shape of a drum", although I think the counterexample is not so simple. There's some interesting reading on this for the hyperbolic case in Terras' book "Harmonic Analysis on Symmetric Spaces w/ App, Vol 1". Revolver 00:17, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Bullshit Factor
Needs to be removed from this article. Use plain English and provide a glossary of terms.


 * I don't think there's any "bullshit" here. Links to articles on some standard terms are needed, and are already there.  But this is not supposed to be a remedial math article; standard terms are standard.  When you gratuitously accuse people of "bullshit" you damage your credibility.  Perhaps some parts of the article could be made more comprehensible to non-mathematicians, but that doesn't make them "bullshit".  Michael Hardy 01:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Despite the rudeness of the anonymous poster above, if we don't construe his words too literally, he has a point: the problem can be posed in the language of "lay people". Accordingly, I have just done a bit of editing.  Perhaps more could follow. Michael Hardy 02:34, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * It is looking quite good now, but the term "spectrally rigid" (used in the The answer section) should be explained. I assume that it relates to the statement in the lead that, "No other shape than a square vibrates at the same frequencies as a square." -- 110.49.248.2 (talk) 00:16, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Lacks inline references
I like this article; it's quite readable, although that may be deceptive, since I'm not sure I know as much as I think I do about some of the topics mentioned.

However, tho' there are plenty of references given at the end, there are only two inline citations. Surely we expect better from a B-class article in 2018?

Rather than tagging the page with a refimprove template, I thought I'd mention this first here on the talk page. Should be an easy fix for an editor versed in citation! ;-) yoyo (talk) 14:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)