Talk:Tidal wave

Tidal Wave
If the waters of the ocean were still due to no wind action generating surface waves then approximately twice a day the waters of the oceans would rise to a maximum height and fall to a minimum point with reference to a datum - usually a point within a harbour. The alignment of the Sun - Moon - Earth or Sun - Earth - Moon also known as "Syzygy" pronounced "Siz-ee-gee" cause the tides and hence associated "tidal wave." Should the wind blow on shore the incoming tide will surge higher than it would if there was no wind and if the wind is blowing off shore, the high tide will be lower than predicted. In past years the term "Tidal wave" was used to described a tsunami because of the incoming surge resembled a high tide. Scientifically the term is erroneous and the Japanese term "Tsunami" is universally accepted. Though some people dispute which term - tsunami or tidal wave should be used. The Geologist (talk) 18:35, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

There is no evidence that the term "tidal wave" is erroneous at all. That is a popular myth which has suddenly gained popularity, having previously been held only by seismologists and others in related technical fields. The word "tsunami" was first used in English to describe the same phenomenon about 20 years after "tidal wave". The words "tide" and "tidal" are related to "time" and has not always been applied to the effects of the moon and sun which were discovered after these words were already in use to describe changes in the height of the water at the coast. Compare with "rip tide".

See The Wiktionary article's talk page for "tidal wave", A Wiktionary talk page on "tidal wave" quotations. &mdash; Hippietrail 13:05, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The fact that the terms were used BEFORE the influence of the Sun and Moon upon the rise and fall of the worlds oceans was properly constrained does not preclude there use in the term that they are now used. Actually the English speaking community - rest of the world excluding the USA was using the term "Tsunami" to describe the phenomena long before the term was "Tidal wave" was used in the media. The Geologist (talk) 18:40, 5 May 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what your point is. Tsunamis have nothing to do with tides or "time", and therefore "tidal wave" is indeed incorrect.  As you point out, scientists have long held this point of view, and although "tidal wave" has lingered in popular use, media reporting of recent disaster has universally used the word "tsunami".  So now everyone is familiar with it, and it will be universally used in the future, rendering the issue a bit moot. -- Curps 20:08, 9 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what your point is. Are you saying that for all words which have a traditional synonym and a recently popular synonym, that the traditional forms are now all incorrect? Or is that simply that traditional forms out of favour with scientists are incorrect? As far as I can tell, only your use of the word "incorrect" is incorrect. Can you please point me to a definition which matches your use? Definitions of "universally" and "everyone" might also be helpful in case the tradtional senses of "Relating to or affecting the entire world" and "Every person" are also incorrect. It seems that you might have some very valuable contribuations to add to several articles relating to the English language and prognostication or extrapolation. &mdash; Hippietrail 06:06, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * "Incorrectly considered incorrect" is POV. I have edited the article to state who considers it incorrect and their reasons for (correctly or incorrectly) considering it so.


 * Also, recent extremely widespread media coverage almost exclusively used the term "tsunami" and not "tidal wave", which means that the general public is now very much more familiar with the term "tsunami" than it used to be a few weeks ago, and this should be noted too.


 * By the way, there are numerous examples of popular traditional terms gradually being replaced because they are no longer considered valid. For instance, orca is preferred to "killer whale" because the animal is not in fact a whale, and this term is slowly gaining in popularity at the expense of "killer whale" even among the general public. -- Curps 07:25, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Ok the article is much better now thanks. Stating that "tsunami" is "preferred" to "tidal wave" is both correct and useful in an encyclopedia. Stating that "tidal wave" is erroneous is not correct and was misleading - misleading information should always be avoided in an encyclopedia. It is interesting that some see the use of "tidal wave" as ignorant when it appears that the belief that the English word "tide" being intrinsically tied to gravitational effects is due to ignorance. I think it's worth correcting the correctors though I can get passionate. (-:


 * Also, probing through some stats by use of Google Groups and Google News suggests that "tsunami" is currently about 16 times more popular than "tidal wave" but the latter term is still in quite frequent use: 36 times in the news for January 12, for example. &mdash; Hippietrail 10:49, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Tidal waves are also called Tsunamis but did you know that there is a difference? Yes, there really is Tidal waves aren't as strong or as big as a Tsunami is. I just thought I would add that so you weren't confused because there is a BIG difference... Thank you!!


 * I think part of the problem is that there is no way to distinguish a tsunami from a tidal bore visually, especially when you are on the shore gazing upon it and wondering how quick you can get to higher ground.


 * Certainly the destructive, fast moving, inches-high waves (such as the one which killed half a million people in 2004) are unrelated to the lunar tides. The NOAA and other groups are to be commended for trying to teach people the difference. --Uncle Ed 21:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Just who needed to be taught the difference, and just how is insisting that a Japanese borrowing is "correct" and an extant usage is now "incorrect" going to teach this difference? If the preferred term were earthquake surge or such, I could see the point, but insisting that the things one used to call "tidal waves" with little or no confusion must now be called "tsunamis" (or do we say "tsunami" for the plural?) seems more pedantic than useful.
 * That said, the tsunami usage has taken root. Still, for my money "tidal wave" is just an older usage, not an incorrect one. -Dmh (talk) 03:50, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Tsunami and tidal bores
There is a way to distinguish a tsunami from a tidal bore - the tsunami is usually a lot higher, it travels a lot faster than any tidal bore and a tidal bore can be predicted years in advance. A tsunami can only be pedicted a few hours before it arrives. With respect to the claim that the tsunam of 26th December 2004 wa sonly inches high I witnessed it a close hand and can assure you that it was not inches high - it was an estimated 10 metres high moving at a velocity of approximately 283 m per second, and each cubic metre of ocean impacted with a force of approximately 3.43 x 108 Newtons m2 which is equivalent to 343 million tonnes per metre square. The Geologist (talk) 18:53, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

harbor wave

 * "tsunami" ... means harbor wave in Japanese.

Where's the source? For sure, 津波(tsunami) literally means harbor wave in Kanji. However in actual Japanese it does not mean harbor wave. No ambiguity. --219.167.78.17 21:13, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

tidal(size) wave

 * a wave in the magnitude of the tide (and larger tidal waves). http://books.google.com.vn/books?id=VXgrAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22tidal%20wave%22&pg=PA293#v=onepage&q=%22tidal%20wave%22&f=false Although of differing origin to a normal tidal wave it was/is still associated as a name for the event waves after earthquakes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.73.98.217 (talk) 13:06, 12 April 2013 (UTC)