Talk:Microwave billiards and quantum chaos
following the remarks of referee A it is suggested to add a section "Historical notes".
Referee A added a paragraph on ray-slitting systems together with two references. I am not happy with these changes for the following reasons:
(i) The article exceeds the recommended maximum length already by a factor of 1.5! I had to skip such important topics as mixed-phase space systems, the random plane wave approach and scattering systems completely, apart from casual mentionings. Compared to these issues of central importance, which are missing, ray-splitting is a subject which to my opinion is too specific for an encyclopaedic article.
(ii) The list of references should contain monographs and review articles only. I followed this recommendation with the only exception of the BGS paper, where I felt that a reference could not be avoided. Even the paper Stöckmann, Stein 1990 triggering the whole activity is only mentioned in some figure captions but not included in the list. Further papers I would have mentioned, were this a review and not an encyclopaedic article, are Heller's paper on scars, and a number of papers (Berry, Sieber/Richter, Haake group) on the proof of the BGS conjecture. In view of this situation I does not seem appropriate to me to include the two papers proposed by Referee A, which had been much less influential than the afore mentioned papers.
For these reasons I skipped the section introduced by referee A again and included instead a reference to the Sirko et al. paper in the "Further readings" section together with a short explanation.
For the same reason I did not add an historical note in the article, but added only a sentence referring to the "Further readings" section, where I added references to all important groups working in the field.
Maybe one remark is appropriate: The selection of experimental examples presented in the article does not reflect an undue preference for the own work, but was motivated exclusively by the wish to illustrate the discussed issues as clearly as possible!
Furthermore I attached a movie, see caption of Fig. 8.