Talk:Ritz method

Physics Redirect‑class Low‑importance

	Physics portal This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics
Redirect	This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This redirect has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Does anyone know if the Ritz method was actually pioneered by Walter Ritz, or was it simply named in honor of him? He died in 1909, so I am wondering how he could have developed such a method (from my understanding, the use of such methodology would require the Schrodinger equation and other techniques that were still 20 years off...) Any mathematical or physics historians have information on this? Nimur 18:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is the same principle as Rayleigh-Ritz method

Please, read:

E. Butkov, Mathematical Physics, "Variational Methods", section 13.5
G. Arfken, Mathematical Methods for Physicists, "Calculus of Variations", section 17.8

You must understand that Wave Mechanics (Quantum Mechanics), Electromagnetic Waves, and Acustic Waves are the same mathematical formalism, satisfying the Sturm-Liouville problem, and belonging to Hilbert Space solutions.

Rayleigh-Ritz method is exactly the same as Ritz method. The preceding unsigned comments were left by User:143.107.133.29

Please sign your edits using four tildes, ~~~~; and consider creating an account to help track your edits. I will look into this issue further; at first glance, I did not agree with the merge, but I will re-read some of my texts as well as your suggested papers. Perhaps a merge should be part of a larger rewrite to establish context for the technique. Check back here at the talk page for further updates. Nimur 19:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I created a acount. Thank you for your advise! RafaelBarreto 20:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose the merge. It seems to me that the merged article would have to have two sections, one for physicists, one for engineers, so we might as well have two articles. I hav been asked to expand the RR page as well, if it comes down to it. Greglocock 02:11, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For a more abstract formulation of Ritz method

IMO right now this article is unnecessarily complicated with quantum mechanics. It would be much better to use a more abstract (and thus easier to understand) formulation. Some information on minimizing sequences or an appropriate link would be nice, too. 95.181.12.52 (talk) 15:19, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. It is clear by this article that he original author is too attached to quantum mechanics to be able to understand the simplicity of this method without turning to needlessly complicated and secondary concepts. -- Mecanismo | Talk 20:49, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]