 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Suggest moving explanation and comment on isopycnic centrifugation elsewhere edit
The comment on the actual physical process underlying isopycnic separation in centrifugation isn't all that helpful without a pointer to a more accurate description of the process (sadly hard to find on wikipedia). It's also a bit out of place to explain isopycnic centrifugation on a geological process page. If the summary description isn't ideal, rather than insert a mildly deprecatory comment, I suggest removing the description here and instead just mentioning the centrifugation usage and pointing to a suitable centrifugation page, where a more precise description and explanation would be entirely appropriate. SLR Ellison (talk) 11:12, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Use of iso-density edit
This I don't understand:
It is common in conversational use to hear isopycnic surfaces referred to simply as "iso-density" surfaces, which while strictly incorrect, is nonetheless abundantly more clear.
- Why is it "[strictly] incorrect"? I understand the very definition of isopycnic is that it are surfaces of equal density, i.e. iso-density.
- What conversational use? At least, when I speak with colleagues (oceanographers) about isopycnic layers, we often clarify it as "surfaces of equal density" (indeed, iso-density, but we don't say this verbatimly). Hulten (talk) 09:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)