<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Ship waves in the presence of uniform vorticity · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1401.1682/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1401.1682/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Ship waves in the presence of uniform vorticity — mentioned by semi-extrinsic</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18822639</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1401.1682:18822639</guid><pubDate>Fri, 04 Jan 2019 08:17:19 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;There&amp;#x27;s plenty examples indeed if you just dig around. I have a colleague who published a theoretical paper [0] in one of the top fluid mechanics journals 5 years back. That paper originated from his lecture notes in a course that he gave for the first time, where in one part he followed the classical theory of waves behind a ship done by Lord Kelvin and others back in the olden days. Then he thought &amp;quot;Hmm, how do we extend this so it works if there is a current in the water?&amp;quot; And it turned out to be both possible to solve analytically, and that nobody had done it before. Nobody had thought it…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1401.1682/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>physics.flu-dyn</category></item></channel></rss>
