User talk:FJKuipers



Hello, FJKuipers, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.
 * Please sign your name on talk pages, by using four tildes ( ~ ). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
 * Check out some of these pages:
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Introduction to Wikipedia
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia | Cheatsheet of WikiCode


 * If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, [ ask me on my talk page], or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 15:43, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Please stop adding links to Stochastic Mechanics.
Hi. I see you are adding many links to one article. Please stop.

The link name, in cases where it should be added would be "Stochastic quantum mechanics".

Most of these places are inappropriate. Stochastic quantum mechanics is one of dozens of interpretations of QM. It is listed in the Interpretations of quantum mechanics. That is sufficient for most cases. Just because you like it does not make it more important than any other equivalent interpretation.

Please also be aware of WP:Conflict of Interest.

Johnjbarton (talk) 17:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, thank you for expressing your concern. Let me clarify a few aspects of stochastic mechanics.
 * Stochastic mechanics is a mathematical framework for describing complex diffusion theories. In short, it provides a derivation of the diffusion equations associated to certain types of stochastic processes. It is best known for its derivation of the Schrödinger eq. as the Kolmogorov eq. for a certain type of conservative (a.k.a. unitary) diffusion, but the same methods allow for a derivation of the Heat eq. as the Kolmogorov eq. for Brownian motion. The derivation is based on the extremization of an action in combination with a quantization prescription (similar to canonical quantization and the path integral formalism, and sometimes referred to as (Nelson’s) stochastic quantization or stochasticization). As the theory allows for a derivation of the Schrödinger eq., it has given rise to the stochastic interpretation of quantum mechanics.
 * I presume that, since the framework has been used predominantly for quantum mechanics, the Wikipedia article has the confusing title `Stochastic quantum mechanics’, instead of `Stochastic mechanics’, which is the term commonly used in the literature.
 * When adding the link on various other pages, I intended to refer to this mathematical framework, as it is closely related to the theories discussed on these pages. The links were not intended as a reference to the QM interpretation that has arisen within this framework. Indeed, for this latter purpose the discussion on the page “interpretations of quantum mechanics” would suffice. FJKuipers (talk) 12:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Your claims maybe valid, but the article stochastic quantum mechanics is about an interpretation of QM. Linking it in the way you have been doing is not appropriate. (I don't think the title is confusing but rather helpful.)
 * We could have a page about "a mathematical framework for describing complex diffusion theories", but in that case the links would still be inappropriate. That page would obviously discuss diffusion primarily and the connection to QM secondary.
 * In any case I think the current page stochastic quantum mechanics is just a random collection of things related to the topic. I don't think it is useful as is. Johnjbarton (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * First of all, thank you for your edit! When experts take the time to make/edit/improve wiki pages they should be welcomed with open arms. I share @Johnjbarton's concerns, but I'll just attribute this to the fact that it is your first big edit and assume WP:GOODFAITH. Some issues:
 * While abundant citing of your own work is often common practice when writing papers, on wikipedia this quickly raises eyebrows. On the other hand, this does give you the opportunity to be way more accurate in your referencing (e.g. referring to specific pages, niche papers etc.) which I personally consider to be of great value. Also I can recommend https://citer.toolforge.org/ which automatically generates a proper citation based on the ISBN or DOI.
 * Try to refrain from using terminology that only seems to exist in your own work (e.g. Itô Lagrangian or Stratonovich Lagrangian). Either properly introduce the terms, or provide additional references.
 * Try to introduce symbols as much as possible to clarify the process and avoid ambiguities (e.g. the Dirac Delta symbol is used in 3 different ways)
 * In general it is usefull to keep an eye on your Special:Watchlist to stay in the loop about the latest updates (on the mainpage as well as the talk page); preventing unintentional edit reverts in future ;-). Roffaduft (talk) 09:19, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Dear @Roffaduft, thank you for your feedback. It is well received. I agree that the page on stochastic mechanics needs further improvement. I don’t think that this is the place to discuss this in detail, so I will provide further comments on the related talk page. Here, I will only respond to the earlier comments in this thread:
 * - As I pointed out earlier, there is a clear connection between stochastic mechanics and various other pages. This has been very well explained in various journal articles and books. (I can recommend E. Nelson (1985) and F. Guerra (1981) as cited on the Wikipedia article). However, I realize that readers, who are not familiar with these topics, may not find this relation obvious. Hence, there is a good argument for adding those links, but it is debatable whether this argument is sufficient. (In particular, at a stage where the stochastic mechanics pages still requires further improvement). I have made a mistake in simply adding the links on the other pages, instead of making suggestions on the respective talk pages.
 * - In my contributions to the Wikipedia article, I have cited various works by different authors. For all these authors, the cited articles form only a subset of all their published works on this subject. All these citations are based on relevance, do not excessively cite one particular author or work, nor do they put undue emphasis on the work of specific authors. FJKuipers (talk) 16:48, 14 December 2023 (UTC)