User talk:Jonmsmith

Welcome!

Hello, Jonmsmith, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! -- RHaworth 06:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bolonkins

I have replied about program management on my talk page. Sorry if I have been a bit harsh. After that, you may find the following request a bit cheeky, but I will ask it!

We recently had a serious attack of Bolonkins on Wikipedia - a glance at this AfD will probably tell you what I mean! I would be fascinated to know what the unofficial (or official) view from inside NASA is of Alexander Bolonkin and his designs. Are any of them feasible? Are any of them notable (ie. do they warrant Wikipedia articles)? -- RHaworth 06:39, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

T-integration

The claim that picking P = 3/2 in T-integration yields the Adams method has repeatedly been inserted, last by you. I find it very hard to believe that this is true. Could you please give a reference to a proof of this fact? Thanks, Jitse Niesen (talk) 08:47, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your kind reply. I'll get your book from the library and see whether that helps me understand what's going on. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 09:26, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Once you convince yourself, will you put the material on Adams method back in my contribution?jonmsmith 02:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the long delay. I tried to read your book Mathematical Modeling and Digital Simulation for Engineers and Scientists. It's tough going for me because it's written in the language of system and control theory with which I'm not very familiar, so I may well misunderstand some parts.

Anyway, equation (7-10) in the book is

X_{n}=X_{n-1}+\lambda T(\gamma {\dot {X}}_{n}+(1-\gamma ){\dot {X}}_{n-1}).

This seems to be the same as the formula in the article on T-integration. Using a gain of

\lambda =1

and a phase of

\gamma =3/2

yields

X_{n}=X_{n-1}+T({\tfrac {3}{2}}{\dot {X}}_{n}-{\tfrac {1}{2}}{\dot {X}}_{n-1}),

which is the formula you wrote on my talk page. However, the Adams method — more specifically, the second-order explicit Adams(-Bashforth) method — is

X_{n}=X_{n-1}+T({\tfrac {3}{2}}{\dot {X}}_{n-1}-{\tfrac {1}{2}}{\dot {X}}_{n-2});

this is equation (7-4) in the book. That looks quite different to me. So, I'm afraid I'm not convinced yet. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 13:27, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

jonmsmith 23:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)Jitse... Good to hear from you. I always enjoy exchanges on numerical analysis. Please take a moment and read pages 258 thru 260 of my book (in library) Mathematical Modeling and Digital Simulation for Engineers and Scientists 2nd edition. Note that the distinction between using a numerical integrator implicitly vs explicitly.[reply]

The form of the Adams integrator you derived is the explicite form. Used directly as a numerical algorithm in a digital computer. This version has a built in destabalizing delay because the present is computed in terms of the past.

The implicite form of the Adams Integrator is the one I propose to include in my Wiki article. It computes the present in terms of the present. That leads to an implicite difference equation that has to be solved for the present in terms of the past. It is done by substituting the numerical integrator into the differential equation and the implicite difference equation solved for present in terms of past algebraically. The resulting difference equation being the algebraically integrated differential equation.

Note that all numerical integrators can be used either implicitly or explicitly. The difference is the resuling difference equation that integrates the differential equation. The implicite versions are the more accurate. The version I use is the implicite version of the Adams integrator, again see my book.

If you have never used integrators this way, Try it with the simple euler integrator (present in terms of past) and the rectangular integrator (present in terms of the present) to see the difference. It is a great insight if you have never done it before.

What do you think? Can I include the implicite Adams in my article?

jonmsmith 01:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Jitse. Are you ok with my including implicite Adams in my article? July 21 2007.[reply]

jonmsmith 23:10, 22 May 2007 (UTC)Jon Michael Smith[reply]

Okay, I think I now see what you're doing. You take the explicit Adams method

X_{n}=X_{n-1}+T({\tfrac {3}{2}}{\dot {X}}_{n-1}-{\tfrac {1}{2}}{\dot {X}}_{n-2});

and then say that you're converting it to implicit form:

X_{n}=X_{n-1}+T({\tfrac {3}{2}}{\dot {X}}_{n}-{\tfrac {1}{2}}{\dot {X}}_{n-1}).

Well, I guess you could, but that's a different method. It's not a well-known technique, as the article used to say. In fact, I've never seen it used. I think it's very misleading to call it an Adams method. There is a method called the "implicit Adams method", also known as the "Adams-Moulton method". In second-order form, it is the trapezoidal rule. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 12:46, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

April 2008

Hi, the recent edit you made to T-integration has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. Calvin 1998 ^(t-c) 01:48, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability of T-integration

I have posted some doubts on Talk:T-integration on whether this article meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for inclusion in Wikipedia. My concerns stem from the fact that I cannot find any evidence that this algorithm or the papers describing it have ever been referenced in any reputable work not written by you. There are also conflict of interest concerns about your efforts to promote your algorithm on Wikipedia; please read the conflict of interest guidelines.

If you can point to sources using this algorithm, not by you, that I have missed, please feel free to comment on Talk:T-integration.

— Steven G. Johnson (talk) 04:20, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of T-integration for deletion

The article T-integration is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/T-integration until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer be able to have them marked as minor by default. For more information on what a minor edit is, see WP:MINOR or feel to get in touch.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 21:23, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This goes on Ron Ritzman's talk page

Hello, you left the following message for Ron Ritzman (talk · contribs) in a new article.

T-integration • ( talk | logs | links | watch | afd ) • [revisions] Mr. Ritzman,

Good morning. I clicked on my citation of your deletion of my article on T-Integration and the WIKI brought me here.

In your citation you claim that T-Integration is not cited in notable documentation. My claim is that it is cited in a notable documentation. The following citation is from the article that started my development of the T-Integrator. The article is in a peer reviewed journal of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.

Jon Michael Smith, "Recent Developments in Numerical Integration," Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, March 1974.

I have a copy of the article and will send it to you if you require.

I respectfully request that you reinstate my article in the Wikipedia.

Jon Michael Smith Jon Michael Smith (talk) 09:51, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

    You are free to present those sources at deletion review. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:09, 27 May 2011 (UTC) 
[[User:Jonmsmith|Jon Michael Smith]] ([[User talk:Jonmsmith|talk]]) 12:53, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I have tagged that article for speedy deletion, since messages for other users belong on their talk pages. The link for Ron Ritzman's talk page is User talk:Ron Ritzman. Feel free to ask me any questions on my talk page, or use {{helpme}} here to request help. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jon has also listed this matte for discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_July_28#T-Integration. I have provided my thoughts there. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:19, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:Program Management Concept.jpg

The file File:Program Management Concept.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused image, no context to determine possible future use.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --TheImaCow (talk) 17:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]