Jump to content

Talk:John Archibald Wheeler

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleJohn Archibald Wheeler has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 13, 2015Good article nomineeListed
On this day...A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on July 9, 2022.

Biography, 1990, 'it from bit'

[edit]

The referenced source also could be found at the google books: [1]--Dc987 (talk) 08:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Einstein Collaborator

[edit]

Wheeler knew Einstein and like to visit him and have conversations. He would also send his students to talk to Einstein. But, I have never heard of Wheeler as being characterized as a collaborator of Einstein's before, and having worked on unified field theory. I suspect this is not correct. At a minimum, whoever put this in needs to provide a citation. Else, this passage should be corrected or expunged. 198.36.32.138 (talk) 04:54, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quotation

[edit]

I deleted the following paragraph:

He is also known for making interesting quotes; one of the best known is: "Time is what prevents everything from happening at once."

While Wheeler is definitely known for turning a phrase, he attributes this quotation to "a graffito that [he] once saw in the men's room of the Pecan Street Cafe in Austin, Texas". Wheeler, Geons, Black Holes, and Quantum Foam: A Life in Physics, p. 351. Finell (Talk) 05:05, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No-hair quotation

[edit]

I believe I read in one of Kip Thorne's books that Wheeler coined the term: "Black holes have no hair." Is this correct? David618 02:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct, he attributes the phrase to Wheeler on page 275 of Black Holes & Time Warps. User: 68.13.181.94 21 May 2006 16:46 UTC

Wheeler books

[edit]

I can not locate a book titled Law Without Law as listed in Wheeler's booklist. Is the title incorrect, or should it be deleted from the list? --Blainster 22:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of James Hartle

[edit]

I have removed the incorrect statement that James Hartle was a doctoral student of Wheeler. He was the student of Gell-Mann. Evidence of this can be found at the Math Genealogy Project [2]bunix 12:32, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Participatory Anthropic Principle

[edit]

Wheeler is also came up with the Participatory Anthropic Principle. Why is this not mentioned in his article?

I cite here: http://home.btconnect.com/scimah/anthropism.htm

This theory is known as the Participatory Anthropic Principle and was first put forward by the physicist John A.Wheeler in 1983. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.42.152.218 (talk) 05:41, 6 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I added a bit on PAP, with a direct quote by Wheeler. In the same radio interview Martin Redfern says: "David Deutsch once studied under the great quantum physicist John Wheeler. It was Wheeler who coined the next term - the participatory anthropic principle. That grew out of his understanding of the role of observation actually making us participators in the quantum universe." But I didn't think it was necessary to attribute that Wheeler coined the term. N.B. The link above is broken, but here's another: http://kwelos.tripod.com/anthropism.htm Aarghdvaark (talk) 09:12, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, Participatory Anthropic Principle is now mentioned twice, redundantly, in the article. Actually, if one considers it part of the "It for Bit" idea, it is covered three times. I am trying to clean up the repetition while retaining some the content that both of you contributed. I will also make sure to use WP:RS references, which tripod dot com blogs generally are not.--FeralOink (talk) 07:01, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm back, after reading that tripod link to Participatory Anthropic Principle. I was wrong: that tripod content can be pretty amazing, even if it isn't an acceptable source for Wikipedia! The guy who had that tripod subdomain, Sean Robsville, has mirrored it, and reproduced the post here. There's a lot of stuff about Buddhism on the blog which I do not know about and am not interested in, but the posts about algorithmic complexity, physics and John Wheeler are impressively well-written. I don't know how to work it into the article, but I will try to figure out something. Aarghdvaark, if you're still around on WP, thank you for sharing!--FeralOink (talk) 08:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

information regarding geometrodynamics is not accurate

[edit]

This is a good article on J.A. Wheeler. However, the information regarding geometrodynamics is not accurate, especially the following statement: "Wheeler abandoned it as fruitless in the 1970s".As a matter of fact, Wheeler kept using the term "geometrodynamics" to describe Einstein's theory of general relativity till his last days. For example, in Gravitation and Inertia, a book written with the Italian physicist I.Ciufolini in 1995(and which was missing from the bibliography), the authors keep referring to "Einstein Geometrodynamics"(the title of Chapter 2) throughout the the book: Chapter 3 is entitled " Tests ofEinstein Geometrodynamics", Chapter 5 is "The Initial-Value Problem in Einstein Geometrodynamics" and Chapter 7:"Some Highlights of the past and a Summary of Geometrodynamics and Inertia".This proves that Wheeler did not abandon the concept at all in the 1970s! 85.195.139.202 (talk) 07:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)Gemb47[reply]

One electron in the universe

[edit]

Seth Lloyd mentioned in a class that John Wheeler, on the phone to a colleague, claimed he had discovered why every electron in the universe has the same weight, charge, etc... because they are the same electron simply interacting with itself forward and backward through time. Lloyd went on to say this has been proven as unlikely, however was this in jest on Wheeler's part? Did he have a theorem and maths to substantiate some part of the claim? Even if not meant in earnest, the concept as a fleeting fancy seems notable enough to me to make a mention of here in this article. If it stands alone as it's own theory by some virtue then even an article would be called for. 66.243.213.232 (talk) 01:11, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reversion of photo

[edit]

I reverted the photo because there is some doubt over whether the new image [3] is J.A.Wheeler (link) or John P. Wheeler III (link). More seriously there is doubt about whether the photo is in the public domain. See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Physics for more discussion. CodeTheorist (talk) 08:50, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For what it is worth, I can now confirm that the photo I reverted is J.A.Wheeler (Emilio Segrè Visual Archives). The copyright status is still very uncertain. CodeTheorist (talk) 21:29, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The new image has now been deleted from Wikimedia Commons as being a copyright violation. The old image has been restored. CodeTheorist (talk) 20:57, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing typo, please unambiguously clarify --

[edit]

-- and thank you in advance for your attention. 

"He also suggested the use of muons as a nuclear probe.[47] This paper, written in 1949 but not published in 1953, resulted in a series of measurements of the Chang radiation emitted by muons."

Sorry, but I'm in "Hard Physics Mode" working on an illustration for John Cramer (UW) involving Dr. Wheeler and that second sentence makes no sense. It's implied that it was written in 1949, but if it weren't published in 1953, why should that matter? (It also wasn't published last year!) Was there some controversy preventing his publication in 1953? Was it published in 1949? Or was it not published until 1953 / published in 1953? (One of the words, "not" or the following, second "in" in that sentence, is a poor choice in an article about spooky actions happening at a distance. We need less Heisenberg in the King's English!)

Your word to Wikipedia's ear ... I recognize that it's grammatically incorrect, but I'm not qualified to fix it accurately, depending upon the intent. Thanks!

All the best, always, WRW Warrenwr (talk) 19:04, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A footnote in [47] says "The present note was written in October 1949 while the author was John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Fellow on leave of absence from Princeton, and was circulated privately." I suggest "This paper, circulated privately in 1949, but not published until 1953," --Kkmurray (talk) 19:40, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Thanks guys. It was a typo. I was only seeking to explain why there was a 1953 date on a 1949 paper. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:43, 10 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on John Archibald Wheeler. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:13, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MANHATTaN PROJECT

[edit]

I would have thought his countries survival would be another personal reason. aND If bomb did exist in 1944, there would have been no delivery method. And Japan had not been hit by Lemays B29S yet, so It woudl NOT have helped his brother. aND ON THAT TIMELINE, JAPAN OR GERMAN YMIGHT HAVE BUILT IT AS WELL Juror1 (talk) 07:20, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The bomb could have been delivered against Germany by an Avro Lancaster. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:50, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:John Archibald Wheeler/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
This is a good article on J.A. Wheeler.However, the information regarding geometrodynamics is not accurate, especially the following statement: "Wheeler abandoned it as fruitless in the 1970s".As a matter of fact, Wheeler kept using the term "geometrodynamics" to describe Einstein's theory of general relativity till his last days. For example, in Gravitation and Inertia, a book written with the Italian physicist I.Ciufolini in 1995(and which was missing from the bibliography), the authors keep referring to "Einstein Geometrodynamics"(the title of Chapter 2) throughout the the book: Chapter 3 is entitled " Tests ofEinstein Geometrodynamics", Chapter 5 is "The Initial-Value Problem in Einstein Geometrodynamics" and Chapter 7:"Some Highlights of the past and a Summary of Geometrodynamics and Inertia".This proves that Wheeler did not abandon the concept at all in the 1970s! 85.195.139.202 (talk) 07:32, 13 February 2009 (UTC)Gemb47[reply]

Last edited at 23:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 20:06, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

checkY Looks like I fixed this years ago. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:11, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Archibald Wheeler. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:09, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Archibald Wheeler. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:35, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accusation of plagiarism regarding "it from bit".

[edit]

With this edit: [4], IP editor 95.90.127.75 has introduced the assertion that Wheeler plagarised the "it from bit" description of the universe. The source cited for this is in German. I feel very uncomfortable about this new text introduced by the IP editor. Thoughts of other editors? Attic Salt (talk) 22:07, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not supported by the supplied source, so removed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:47, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

House style?

[edit]

PhD and Ph.D. are used interchangeably in this article. Should only one style be used consistently? Viriditas (talk) 22:30, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Changed per MOS:ABBR. Viriditas (talk) 23:33, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Archibald_Wheeler&oldid=1208910595"