text:
Cookbook:Omelet Recipes

An omelet or omelette is an egg dish consisting of fried beaten eggs, usually with other ingredients either as a filling or mixed into the egg.

Types of Omelets

 * Basic Omelet
 * This recipe includes instructions for both non-stick pans and large flat cook tops.
 * Bacon Cheese Omelet
 * is an omelet filled with bacon and cheese.
 * French Omelette or Western Omelette
 * Considered the 'classic' omelette by many people. The omelette is cooked quickly, solid and very lightly browned on the outside and just a little runny on the inside. Often cooked with a filling, like tomatoes, cheese or mushrooms.

 * Denver Omelet
 * A thick omelet with onions, peppers, and ham embedded in the egg.
 * Indian omelet
 * An omelet thoroughly cooked on both sides, usually containing onions, green chillies, salt, pepper, cumin powder, red chilli powder, cilantro & tomatoes.
 * Spanish Omelet or tortilla de patata
 * A thick omelet with onions and potatoes embedded in the egg.
 * Potato Omelet
 * An omelet stuffed with potatoes, onions, and cheese.
 * Frittata
 * is a kind of Italian omelet that can contain vegetables or even leftover pasta.
 * Friar's Omelette
 * A sweet omelette of Scottish tradition, made with sugar and apples (or other fruit)
 * Baked Brunch Omelet
 * Japanese omelets
 * Omu-Raisu is a fried ketchup-flavored rice sandwiched with a thinly spread beaten egg or covered with a plain egg omelet.
 * Omu-Soba is an omelet with yakisoba as its filling.
 * Okonomiyaki is a Japanese pancake which is often compared to an omelet.
 * Tamagoyaki is a thin Japanese omelet, which is rolled up after cooking.
 * Greek Omelet
 * This recipe is still in progress.

오믈렛

title: Cookbook:Omelet Recipes


text:
Cookbook talk:Omelet Recipes

I've moved everything around, and I think most things are now where they should be. The operation didn't go as fluently as I'd hoped, so please check to see that everything is ok, and makes sense. The only loose end is omelette recipe. I had no idea what to do with that one (see it's talk page for more). risk

 * Now called Cookbook:Basic Omelet. AlbertCahalan 22:08, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, that seems like a good name. Why move this page to Omelette Recipes, though? I proposed to turn omelette/omelet into a sort of disambiguation page, as I thought was the policy with this sort of thing. What's your intention with the omelette/omelet page now? risk
 * That wouldn't be bad I suppose, but "Omelet Recipes" seems more consistent with some of the other pages around here. AlbertCahalan 22:53, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Ah, so the redirect Omelette->Omelet Recipes just stays this way. That's OK. I thought you had some kind of other plan for the Omelet/Omelette page. risk
 * Yes, I think so. I'd be happy to link it to the Basic Omelet recipe if it would be better to quickly direct people to a pretty decent omelet recipe. (I don't think the recipes that risk food poisoning are reasonable choices.) The mix-in varieties (Spanish and Denver) are not what people expect of "Omelet", and the bacon-cheese one is too specific about the filling. AlbertCahalan 23:19, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Cookbook talk:Omelet Recipes


text:
File:Programming Visual Basic Optimization strings timing.png

Chart of execution time for string concatenation in VB6 for concatenation operator and string builder.


text:
Talk:Heat Transfer

Structure
Hm, I have a question on the structure here. Finite Difference Method is a numerical method. I think it is a bit confusing to have such things in many places, especially since Finite Element Method often are needed when doing heat transfer stuff. I would vote for having an appendix which explains the basics of numerical methods and then goes on to talk about the basics of Finite Difference Method etc. Speaking about that, should the book be focused on "pen and paper" or computer calculations? In the courses I'm involved in we tend to do some simple stuff by hand and then they start using computers to get a feeling for more advanced stuff, but there's always a risk with using computers that they go for surface learning (push that button, report to the teacher ;o) rather than deep learning (i.e. computer assignments need to be carefully designed) AND if one focuses on computer stuff in a wikibook, don't we end up in a conflict of interest (or are there apropriate free source software for these things)? Saittam 13 Aug 2005

in my opinion, the book should talk about all kinds of heat transfer techniques and methods used to solve the problem. it is going to be an arduous task to put down a whole book on heat transfer. people who are going to refer to this are mostly going to use it as a reference. the approach has to be the same that is used in classrooms. we'll list the pen and paper methods and the comp methods, with the pen and paper methods preceeding the comp methods. the choice of the method is left to the user.

Computer Stuff
if one focuses on computer stuff in a wikibook, don't we end up in a conflict of interest ...?

I don't understand. Do your concerns also apply to the proprietary software used in the Pro Engineer and Microsoft Excel Programming Recipes wikibooks? What exactly are you concerned might happen? --DavidCary 02:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

LMTD
The module currently says ''The efficiency of a counter flow heat exchanger is sometimes characterized by the Log Mean Temperature Difference (LMTD) between the fluids. Lower values of LMTD indicate better heat exchanger performance.''

I don't understand. What if the output of the initially "cold" fluid is exactly the same temperature as the output of the initially "hot" fluid?

Better yet, what if the output of the initially "cold" fluid is hotter than the output of the initially "hot" fluid? (This *can* happen in a highly efficient counter-flow heat exchanger, right?)

Or is the LMTD calculated from something *other* than the output temperatures? --DavidCary 02:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Yes, see Log mean temperature difference.

I don't think this is true at all. The LMTD is what you start with in designing heat exchangers, and the last thing you want is a low LMTD.Chemical Engineer 18:24, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Software
are there apropriate free source software for these things?

Are you saying some people don't already know? :-)

Off the top of my head, I know some related open-source things that already have a wikibook:

Rather than jump directly from hand-calculations to specialized finite-element software, perhaps some intermediate 1D and 2D problems could use a general-purpose spreadsheet (perhaps OpenOffice.org).

Python (scientific python) and Octave are good open-source tools for general 3D numerical calculations.

--DavidCary 02:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Lienhard and Lienhard
Instead of starting this project from scratch maybe someone could approach Lienhard and Lienhard and see if they would be willing to allow their textbook to be used as the foundation for this Wiki entry. I'm not sure how they would feel about letting people modify their copyrighted material, but it might be worth a shot.

Organization
I have added some links that I propose we break up this wikibook into pages, and these seemed logical to me (they're basically the same as the main headers now), if you think they're appropriate then let me know and I'll just move the information that's already here into those pages, if not feel free to revert my linkage adding. Mattb112885 02:17, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I have broken this book up into chapters, which should be easier to work on.Chemical Engineer 23:01, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Thank you, I intended to do this but I had long since forgotten. It should be much more manageable now Mattb112885 (talk to me) 12:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Heat Transfer


text:
User:Grahn

The little goblin remained flummoxed for several minutes while contemplating the abrupt fate of his newly acquired croque-monsieur, that until recently had exhibited an extraordinary savor.

title: User:Grahn


text:
Abstract Algebra/Ring Homomorphisms

Just as with groups, we can study homomorphisms to understand the similarities between different rings.

Definition
Let R and S be two rings. Then a function $$f:R\to S$$ is called a ring homomorphism or simply homomorphism if for every $$r_1,r_2\in R$$, the following properties hold:
 * $$f(r_1r_2)=f(r_1)f(r_2),$$
 * $$f(r_1+r_2)=f(r_1)+f(r_2).$$

In other words, f is a ring homomorphism if it preserves additive and multiplicative structure.

Furthermore, if R and S are rings with unity and $$f(1_R)=1_S$$, then f is called a unital ring homomorphism.

Examples

 * 1) Let $$f:\mathbb{Z} \to M_2(\mathbb{Z})$$ be the function mapping $$a \mapsto \begin{pmatrix}a & 0\\0 & 0\end{pmatrix}$$. Then one can easily check that $$f$$ is a homomorphism, but not a unital ring homomorphism.
 * 2) If we define $$g:a \mapsto \begin{pmatrix}a & 0\\0 & a\end{pmatrix}$$, then we can see that $$g$$ is a unital homomorphism.
 * 3) The zero homomorphism is the homomorphism which maps ever element to the zero element of its codomain.

Theorem: Let $$R$$ and $$S$$ be integral domains, and let $$f:R\to S$$ be a nonzero homomorphism. Then $$f$$ is unital.

Proof: $$1_Sf(1_R) = f(1_R) = f(1_R^2) = f(1_R)f(1_R)$$. But then by cancellation, $$f(1_R) = 1_S$$.

In fact, we could have weakened our requirement for R a small amount (How?).

Theorem: Let $$R, S$$ be rings and $$\varphi: R \to S$$ a homomorphism. Let $$R'$$ be a subring of $$R$$ and $$S'$$ a subring of $$S$$. Then $$\varphi(R')$$ is a subring of $$S$$ and $$\varphi^{-1}(S')$$ is a subring of $$R$$. That is, the kernel and image of a homomorphism are subrings.

Proof: Proof omitted.

Theorem: Let $$R, S$$ be rings and $$\varphi : R \to S$$ be a homomorphism. Then $$\varphi$$ is injective if and only if $$\ker \varphi = 0$$.

Proof: Consider $$\varphi$$ as a group homomorphism of the additive group of $$R$$.

Theorem: Let $$F, E$$ be ﬁelds, and $$\varphi: F \to E$$ be a nonzero homomorphism. Then $$\varphi$$ is injective, and $$\varphi(x)^{-1} = \varphi(x^{-1})$$.

Proof: We know $$\varphi(1) = 1$$ since fields are integral domains. Let $$x \in F$$ be nonzero. Then $$\varphi(x^{-1})\varphi(x) = \varphi(x^{-1} x) = \varphi(1) = 1$$. So $$\varphi(x)^{-1} = \varphi(x^{-1} )$$. So $$\varphi(x) \neq 0$$ (recall you were asked to prove units are nonzero as an exercise). So $$\ker \varphi = 0$$.

Definition
Let $$R,S$$ be rings. An isomorphism between $$R$$ and $$S$$ is an invertible homomorphism. If an isomorphism exists, $$R$$ and $$S$$ are said to be isomorphic, denoted $$R\cong S$$. Just as with groups, an isomorphism tells us that two objects are algebraically the same.

Examples

 * 1) The function $$g$$ defined above is an isomorphism between $$\mathbb{Z}$$ and the set of integer scalar matrices of size 2, $$S = \left\{\lambda I_2| \lambda\in\mathbb{Z}\right\}$$.
 * 2) Similarly, the function $$\varphi: \mathbb{C} \to M_2(\mathbb{R})$$ mapping $$z \mapsto \begin{pmatrix}a & -b\\b & a\end{pmatrix}$$ where $$z = a+bi$$ is an isomorphism. This is called the matrix representation of a complex number.
 * 3) The Fourier transform $$\mathcal{F}:L^1 \to L^1$$ defined by $$\mathcal{F}(f) = \int_\mathbb{R} f(t)e^{-i\omega t}dt$$ is an isomorphism mapping integrable functions with pointwise multiplication to integrable functions with convolution multiplication.

Exercise: An isomorphism from a ring to itself is called an automorphism. Prove that the following functions are automorphisms:
 * 1) $$f:\mathbb{C} \to \mathbb{C}, f(a+bi) = a-bi$$
 * 2) Define the set $$\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2}) = \left\{a + b\sqrt{2} | a,b\in \mathbb{Q}\right\}$$, and let $$g:\mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2}) \to \mathbb{Q}(\sqrt{2}), g(a+b\sqrt{2}) = a-b\sqrt{2}$$

title: Abstract Algebra/Ring Homomorphisms


text:
Cookbook talk:Turkey and Bacon Salad

original creation note: --Lunar shadows 05:57, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

title: Cookbook talk:Turkey and Bacon Salad


text:
Abstract Algebra/Modules

Motivation
Let G be an abelian group under addition. We can define a sort of multiplication on G by elements of $$\mathbb{Z}$$ by writing $$ng=\underbrace{g+g+\cdots+g}_n$$ for $$n\in\mathbb{Z}^+$$ and $$g\in G$$. We can extend this to the case where n is negative by writing $$(-n)g=\underbrace{-g-g-\cdots-g}_n$$. We would, however, like to be able to define a sort of multiplication of a group by an arbitrary ring.

Definition

 * Definition 1 (Module)
 * Let R be a ring and M an abelian group. We call M a left R-module if there is a function $$R\times M\to M\,:\,(r,m)\mapsto rm$$, called a scalar multiplication, satisfying
 * $$(r+s)m=rm+sm$$,
 * $$r(m+n)=rm+rn$$, and
 * $$(rs)m=r(sm)$$
 * for all $$r,s\in R,\ m,n\in G$$.
 * We call R the ring of scalars of M.

Note: We can also define a right R-module analogously by using a function $$M\times R\to M\,:\, (m,r)\mapsto mr$$. In particular the third property then reads:
 * $$m(rs)=(mr)s$$

Note that the two notions coincide if R is a commutative ring, and in this case we can simply say that M is an R-module.

Definition 2: Given any ring R, we can define it's opposite ring, $$R^{\mathrm{op}}$$, having the same elements and addition operation as R, but opposite multiplication. Their multiplication rules are related by $$r\cdot s = sr$$. In contrast to group theory, there is no reason in general for a ring to be isomorphic to its opposite ring.

The observant reader will have noticed that the scalar multiplication in a left R-module M is simply a ring homomorphism $$\phi\,:\, R\to \mathrm{End}(M)$$ such that $$rm=\phi(r)(m)$$ for all $$r\in R\,,\, m\in M$$. We leave it as an exercise to verify that the scalar multiplication in a right R-module is a ring homomorphism $$\phi^\prime \,:\, R^{\mathrm{op}}\to \mathrm{End}(M)$$. Thus a right R-module is simply a left Rop-module. As a consequence of this, all the results we will formulate for left R-modules are automatically true for right R-modules as well. There are no assumptions that the module is unital, namely that 1m = m for all m in M.

Examples of Modules

 * 1) Any ring R is trivially an R-module over itself. More interestingly, any left ideal I of R is also a left R-module with the obvious scalar multiplication. In addition, if I is a two-sided ideal of R, then the quotient ring $$R/I$$ is an R-module with the induced scalar multiplication $$r(s+I)=rs+I\,,\,(s+I)r=sr+I$$.
 * 2) If R is a ring, then the set $$M_{n,m}(R)$$ of $$n\times m$$ matrices with entries in R is an R-module under componentwise addition and scalar multiplication. More generally, for any set X, the set $$R^X$$ of function from X to R, with or without finite support, is an R-module in an obvious way.
 * 3) The k-modules over a field k are simply the k-vector spaces.
 * 4) As was shown in the introduction of this chapter, any abelian group is a $$\Z$$-module in a natural way. ("Natural" here has a rigorous mathematical meaning which will be explained later.
 * 5) Let S be a subring of a ring R. Then R is an S-module in a natural way. We can extend this as follows. Let S,R be rings and $$\phi\,:\,S\to R$$ a ring homomorphism. Then R is an S-module with scalar multiplication $$sr=\phi(s)r$$ and $$rs=r\phi(s)$$ for all $$s\in S\,,\,r\in R$$.
 * 6) Any matrix ring of a ring R is a R-module under componentwise scalar multiplication.
 * 7) If S is a subring of a ring R, then any left R-module is also a left S-module with the restricted scalar multiplication. We will treat this more generally later.

Submodules
Definition 3: (Submodule)
 * Given a left $$R$$-module $$M$$ a submodule of $$M$$ is a subset $$N\subseteq M$$ satisfying
 * N is a subgroup of M, and
 * for all $$r\in R$$ and all $$ n \in N$$ we have $$rn\in N$$.

The second condition above states that submodules are closed under left multiplication by elements of $$R$$; it is implicit that they inherit their multiplication from their containing module; $$R \times N \to N$$ must be the restriction of $$R\times M \to M$$.

Example 4: Any module M is a submodule of itself, called the improper submodule, and the zero submodule consisting only of the additive identity of M, called the trivial submodule.

Example 5: A left ideal I is a submodule of R viewed as an S-module, where S is any (not necessarily proper) subring of R.

Lemma 6: Let M be a left R-module. Then the following are equivalent.
 * i) N is a submodule of M
 * ii) If $$r_i\in R$$ and $$n_i\in N$$ for all $$i\in I=\{1,\dots,k\}\,,\,k\in\N$$, then $$\sum_{i\in I}r_in_i\in N$$.
 * iii) If $$r_1,r_2\in R$$ and $$n_1,n_2\in N$$, then $$r_1n_1+r_2n_2\in N$$.

Proof: i) => iii): $$r_1n_1$$ and $$r_2n_2$$ are in $$N$$ by the second property, then $$r_1n_1+r_2n_2\in N$$ by the first property of Definition 3.

iii) => ii): Follows by induction on $$k$$.

ii) => i): Let $$k=2$$, $$r_1=1\,,\,r_2=-1$$, then for arbitrary $$n_1,n_2\in N$$ be have $$n_1-n_2\in N$$, proving $$N$$ is a subgroup. Now let $$k=1$$, then for arbitrary $$r_1,n_1\in N$$, $$r_1n_1\in N$$, proving property 2 in Definition 3.

The lemma gives an alternative characterisation of submodules, and those sets closed under linear combinations of elements.

Analogously to the case of vector spaces, we have ways of creating new subspaces from old ones. The rest of this subsection will be concerned with this.

Lemma 7: Let M be a left R-module, and let N and L be submodules of M. Then $$N\cap L$$ is a submodule in M, and it is the largest submodule contained in both N in L.

Proof: Let $$a,b\in N\cap L$$ and $$r,s\in R$$. Then $$ra+sb\in N$$ and $$ra+sb\in L$$ since N and L are submodules, so $$ra+sb\in N\cap L$$ and $$N\cap L$$ is a submodule of M. Now, assume that S is a submodule of M contained in N and L. Then any $$a\in S$$ must be in both N and L and therefore in $$N\cap L$$ such that $$S\subseteq N\cap L$$, proving the lemma.

Now, as the reader should expect at this point, given submodules N and L of M, the union $$N\cup L$$ is in general not a submodule. In fact, we have the following lemma:

Lemma 8: Let M be a left R-module and let N and L be submodules. Then $$N\cup L$$ is a submodule if and only if $$L\subseteq N$$ or $$N\subseteq L$$.

Proof: The left implication is obvious. For the right implication, assume $$N\cup L$$ is a submodule of M. Then if $$n\in N$$ and $$l\in L$$, then $$n+l\in N\cup L$$, which implies that $$n+l\in M$$ or $$n+l\in L$$. Assume without loss of generality that $$n+l\in N$$. Then, since N is a submodule, we must have $$(n+l)-n=l\in N$$, proving $$L\subseteq N$$.

Definition 9: Let M be a left R-module, and let $$N_i$$ be submodules for $$1\le i\le k\in\N$$. Then define their sum, $$\sum_{i=1}^k N_i=\left\{ \sum_{j=1}^{k} n_j \,:\, n_{j}\in N_{j}\right\}$$.

Definition 9 has a straightforward extension to sums over arbitrary index sets. This definition is left for the reader to state. We will only need the finite case in this chapter.

Lemma 10: Let M be a left R-module and let N and L be submodules. Then $$N+L$$ is a submodule of M, and it is the smallest submodule containing both N and L.

Proof: It is straightforward to see that $$N+L$$ is a submodule. To see that it is the smallest submodule containing both N and L, let S be a submodule containing both N and L. Then for any $$n\in N\subseteq S$$ and $$l\in L\subseteq S$$, we must have $$n+l\in S$$. But this is the same as saying that $$N+L\subseteq S$$, proving the lemma.

With Lemma 7 and Lemma 10 established, we can state the main result of this subsection.

Definition 11: Let M be a left R-module. Then let $$\mathcal{S}(M)$$ be the set of submodules ordered by set inclusion.

Lemma 12: Let M be a left R-module. Then $$\mathcal{S}(M)$$ forms a lattice, the join of $$N,L\in\mathcal{S}(M)$$ being given by $$N\vee L=N+L$$ and their meet by $$N\wedge L=N\cap L$$.

Proof: Most of the work is already done. All that remains is to check assosiativity, the absorption axioms and the idempotency axioms. The associativity is trivially satisfied, $$A\cap (B\cap C)=(A\cap B)\cap C$$ and $$(A+B)+C=A+(B+C)$$ for all $$A,B,C\in\mathcal{S}(M)$$. As for absorption, We have to check $$A+(B\cap A)=A$$ and $$A\cap (A+B)=A$$ for all $$A,B\in\mathcal{S}(M)$$, but this is also trivially true. Lastly, we obviously have $$A+A=A$$ and $$A\cap A=A$$ for all $$\mathcal{S}(M)$$, so we are done.

Corollary 13: Let M be a left R-module. Then $$\mathcal{S}(M)$$ is a modular lattice.

Note: Recall that $$\mathcal{S}(M)$$ is modular if and only if whenever $$A,B,C\in\mathcal{S}(M)$$ such that $$A\subseteq C$$, we have $$A+(B\cap C)=(A+B)\cap C$$.

Proof: Let $$a\in A\,,\, b\in B\,,\, c\in C$$ such that $$a+b=c$$. Since $$A\subseteq C$$, we have $$a=c^\prime$$ for some $$c^\prime\in C$$, such that $$b\in C$$. Thus $$b\in B\cap C$$ and $$a+b\in A+(B\cap C)$$. On the other hand, we have $$a+b\in A+B$$ and $$a+b=c\in C$$, so $$a+b\in (A+B)\cap C$$.

Definition 14: Let M be a left R-module. A submodule N is called maximal if whenever L is a submodule satisfying $$N\subseteq L\subseteq M$$, then $$L=N$$ or $$L=M$$.

Theorem 15: Every submodule of a finitely generated left R-module is contained in a maximal submodule.

Proof: Let N be a submodule, and let $$S=\{L\in\mathcal{S}(M)\,|\, N\subseteq L\subset M\}$$. Then S is a poset under set inclusion. Let $$\{U_1,U_2,\dots\}$$ be a chain in S, and note that $$U=U_1+U_2+\cdots$$ is a submodule containing each $$U_i$$, such that U is an upper bound for the chain. Then, since each chain in S has an upper bound, by Zorn's Lemma S has a maximal element, P, say. P is obviously an ideal containing N. By the definition of S, P is also a maximal submodule of M, proving the theorem.

Generating Modules
Given a subset $$A$$ of a left $$R$$-module $$M$$, we define the left submodule generated by $$A$$ to be the smallest submodule (w.r.t. set containment) of $$M$$ that contains $$A$$. It is denoted by $$RA$$ for a reason which will become clear in a moment.

The existence of such a submodule comes from the fact that an intersection of $$R$$-modules is again an $$R$$-module: Consider the set $$S$$ of all submodules of $$M$$ containing $$A$$. Since $$M$$ contains $$A$$, we see that $$S$$ is non-empty. The intersection of the modules in $$S$$ clearly contains $$A$$ and is a submodule of $$M$$. Further, any submodule of $$M$$ containing $$A$$ also contains the intersection. Thus $$RA = \cap S$$.

Assuming that $$M$$ is unitary, the elements of $$RA$$ have a simple description;
 * $$RA = \left\{ \sum_{i=1}^n r_i a_i \mid n\in\N, r_i \in R, a_i \in A \right\}$$.

That is, every element of $$RA$$ can be written as a finite left linear combination of elements of $$A$$. This equality can be justified by double inclusion: First, any submodule containing $$A$$ must contain all left $$R$$-linear combinations of elements of $$A$$ since modules are closed under addition and left multiplication by elements of $$R$$. Thus, $$RA \supseteq \{\sum_{i=1}^n r_i a_i \mid n\in\N, r_i \in R, a_i \in A\}$$. Secondly, the set of all such linear combinations forms a submodule of $$M$$ containing $$A$$ (use $$n=1$$ and $$r_1 = 1_R$$) and hence it contains $$RA$$.

Generating Submodules by Ideals
Consider any ring $$R$$, left ideal $$I \subseteq R$$, and left $$R$$-module $$M$$. One can think of $$I$$ as a subring of $$R$$ (non-unitary when $$I\ne R$$) and hence $$M$$ is an $$I$$-module using the regular multiplication by elements of $$R$$.

If we consider the set $$IM=\{\sum_{i=1}^n r_i m_i \mid n\in\N, r_i \in I, m_i \in M\}$$ we obtain a submodule of $$M$$. This follows from our discussion of generated submodules. However, since $$I$$ is not unitary, it is not necessary that $$IM=M$$.

Thus, we may consider the quotient module $$M/IM$$. Clearly this is an $$R$$-module but it is also an $$R/I$$ module under the obvious action.

 * Proposition: Given an $$R$$-module $$M$$ and ideal $$I$$ of $$R$$, the $$R$$module $$M/IM$$ is an $$R/I$$-module with multiplication $$(r+I)(m + IM) = rm + IM$$.
 * proof.
 * To show that this is well defined, we observe that if $$r + I = s+ I$$ then $$r-s \in I$$ and hence
 * $$(rm +IM) - (sm + IM) = rm -sm +IM = (r-s)m + IM = 0 + IM$$
 * since $$(r-s)m \in IM$$. Thus,
 * $$(r+I)(m+IM) = rm + IM = sm + IM = (s+I)(m+IM)$$
 * which proves that the action of $$R/I$$ on $$M/IM$$ is well defined. It follows now that $$M/IM$$ is an $$R/I$$-module simply because it is an $$R$$-module.

Quotient Modules
Recall that any subgroup $$N$$ of an abelian group $$M$$ allows one to construct an equivalence relation; for $$m,m^\prime\in M$$,
 * $$m \sim m^\prime \iff m-m^\prime \in N$$.

Cosets of $$N$$, equivalence classes under the relation above, can then be endowed with a group structure, derived from the original group, and is given the name M/N. The sum of two cosets $$m+N = [m]$$ and $$m^\prime+N = [m^\prime]$$ is simply $$(m + m^\prime) + N = [m+m^\prime]$$.

Lemma 16 Let M be a left R-module and N be a submodule. Then M/N, defined above, is a left R-module.

Proof: M/N is obviously an abelian group, so we just have to check that it has a well-defined R-action. Let $$r\in R$$ and $$m\in M$$. Then we define $$r(m+N)=rm+N$$. The distributivity and associativity properties of the action are inherited from M, so we just need well-definedness. Let $$m,m^\prime\in M$$ with $$m-m^\prime \in N$$. Then $$r(m-m^\prime+N)=r(m-m^\prime) + N = N$$ since N is a submodule, and we are done.

Module Homomorphisms
Like all algebraic structures, we can define maps between modules that preserve their algebraic operations.

 * Definition (Module Homomorphism)
 * An $$R$$-module homomorphism $$\phi:M\to N$$ is a function from $$M$$ to $$N$$ satisfying
 * $$\phi(m+m') = \phi(m) + \phi(m')$$ (it is a group homomorphism), and
 * $$\phi(rm) = r\phi(m).$$

When a map between two algebraic structures satisfies these two properties then it called an $$R$$-linear map.

 * Definition (Kernel, Image)
 * Given a module homomorphism $$\phi:M \to N$$ the kernel of $$\phi$$ is the set
 * $$\ker \phi = \{m\in M \mid \phi(m) = 0\}$$
 * and the image of $$\phi$$ is the set
 * $$\phi(M) = \{n \in N \mid \exists m \in M, \phi(m) = n\} $$.

The kernel of $$\phi$$ is the set of elements in the domain that are sent to zero by $$\phi$$. In fact, the kernel of any module homomorphism is a submodule of $$M$$. It is clearly a subgroup, from group theory, and it is also closed under multiplication by elements of $$R$$: $$\phi(rm) = r\phi(m) = r(0) = 0$$ for $$m \in \ker \phi$$.

Similarly, one can show that the image of $$\phi$$ is a submodule of $$N$$.

加群

title: Abstract Algebra/Modules


text:
User:Azertus

Shiny index

 * Cookbook
 * Engineering
 * Guitar
 * Spanish

title: User:Azertus


text:
Talk:Conic Sections

What do people think of deleting circles and integrating it with ellipses, since technically the two are the same thing? Also I have started trying to make some big additions to this wikibook, but this is the first time I have ever contributed so please tell me if I do anything wrong. Lakshan 12:45, 25th February 2011

I've moved all 5 pages to WB:NP friendly names... --Azertus 23:00, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Illustrations needed
At a minimum, I suggest two illustrations for each conic, one showing the plane intersecting with the cone to form the conic, and another showing the conic straight on, with characteristic points (center, foci, vertex) and lines (axes, directrix, asymptotes) of the conic section denoted. StuRat 02:38, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Revamping
I hate to be so assertive, but here's what I plan on doing in terms of structure:

Conic Sections Introduction: Just what it says. Connections to Flatland.

Types of Conic Sections General Conic Sections: Two equation formats (Ax^2+Bxy+Cy^2+Dx+Ey+F=0 and (x-h)^2/A+y^2/B=1) The Circle The Ellipse The Parabola The Hyperbola Lines and Points: Unofficial Conic Sections: just to mention it.

Features of Conic Sections Foci of Conic Sections: The foci, directrix, and defining conic sections in terms of that. Conic Sections as Loci: defining conic sections as loci. No axes involved. Eccentricity: Stuff about eccentricity. Identifying conic sections by eccentricity.

Conic Sections as Algebraic Relations Intercepts of Conic Sections: finding x and y intercepts. How this can help graphing Translation of Axes: how the take the ABCDEF format and transpose the x and y axes Rotation of Axes: derivation of most things worth knowing about rotation Rotation of Axes (examples): examples on a seperate page Slopes of Conic Sections: Calculus stuff. Implicit derivation

Concluding Remarks: applications of conic sections (parabolas as paths of objects under gravity, for example) Acknowledgements and Further Reading: Just that. Some sources contributors have found helpful.

Just leave it be for a while. I'll at least establish the structure, and then some. Grace notes  T § 02:48, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Once again, would you be so kind as to not touch anything! Thank you. I'd just like to get off on the right foot. Including me, there have only been 10 edits in the past year. The next one is technically not due until about 2 weeks.Grace notes  T § 02:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

 * This is a wiki. If you ask nicely, I'll leave it alone for a week or two, but eventually this will be "edited mercilessly", etc. How can I help make it better? --DavidCary 20:01, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Conic Sections


text:
Cookbook talk:Policy

Naming Conventions
Regarding titlecase: This runs counter to Wikipedia's naming convention. I think it is noteworthy that this titlecase convention was created, and enforced solely by, User:AlbertCahalan! (See also User talk:AlbertCahalan). Since coming over from Wikipedia, I had been somewhat annoyed with the Cookbook's use of another convention, but I had assumed that it had been adopted through some sort of democratic process. Nope! It was imposed by fiat.

You can verify this easily by looking through the page histories. All calls for titlecase in Grunt Work, etc. were written by Albert, as are all those redirects. As far as I know, he never even made any argument for the change.

 * Since Grunt Work was created by me (Albert) with many items, pointing out that I wrote one particular item is misleading. You make it sound as if I just tacked that item onto the page. It's one of 9 items I added, and was one of the 7 original items. You could equally well point out that all calls to stop spammers and vandals were made by me. AlbertCahalan 20:37, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

What's the rationale behind Wikipedia's convention? Please read this: w:Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (capitalization). In short, it makes linking easier. --- PurplePieman 23:58, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

 * It was in use before I showed up, and rather common in fact. It was so common that I was rather jolted by finding a few pages without it, so naturally I fixed them to be consistent. It's funny that you should point out the Wikipedia rational, because it does not work here. That is, unless you suggest eliminating the "Cookbook:" prefix. AlbertCahalan 01:15, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

 * It may work if the bug to create a proper "Cookbook" namespace on wikibooks is fixed. That aside, it's not that great a rationale for a cookbook anyway since you'll not generally be looking for something uber-specific (unlike an encyclopedia where the thing you want to look up has an obvious name). Perhaps we should try to find a consensus among contributors about what the case should be, apart from what it is already, and if that is the wikipedia case, we can go ahead and change everything. That is within our powers. Kellen T 17:41, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Albert and I have discussed this issue at length, but we couldn't agree. I'm like PurplePieman, because I came over to Wikibooks from Wikipedia, and I found it confusing that the Cookbook appeared to be using several different capitalisation rules.

 * As it is, Wikibook's naming policy doesn't propose any particular rules for capitalising book sub pages. But, I agree with Kellen, maybe we should try to come to a consensus (not just for the Cookbook, but for the whole of Wikibooks).

 * I agree with Wikibook's naming policy, in that we should use title caps or preferably title case for the titles of books. I would also prefer that we use Wikipedia's naming convention, of capitalising only the first letter and all proper nouns in the titles of sub pages of a book.

 * Note that simply by fully defining the capitalisation rules for Wikibooks, we are not saying that they need to be enforced immediately. We can do what has been done with the / and : page delimiters, they are recommended for all new Wikibooks, but it is highly recommended that existing books be changed to conform over time. I would be willing to invest my time to help the Cookbook conform, if I'm needed.

 * For the Cookbook, it is possible to argue that each sub page containing a recipe should also be titled in title case, because it is the title of the recipe (e.g., Toad in the Hole, and not Toad in the hole). I'm pretty neutral on that one, though it may cause confusion for some contributors. But, in my opinion, ingredients should never be in title case, only the proper nouns should be capitalised ( e.g., Brown sugar, and not Brown Sugar). What does everyone else think? Geo.T 02:32, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I not strongly for or against title case, but I am against a wikibooks wide standard. Wikibooks is standardized in a different way from Wikipedia, that is by book and not wiki-wide. This allows for greater flexibility in determining the appropriate layout for a certain book. If a book decides to go with chapter titles like "Limits and Continuity" title case might look better, whereas chapter like "The repurcussions of the Bay-of-Pigs incident" might look better in regular case (or whatever it's called). However, we should really have that discussion elsewhere. On the case of the cookbook, I think recipe titles like "Vegetable Lasagne" look better in title case, whereas ingredient titles, like "Brown sugar" do look better in regular case (it's sugar, not Dickens). Then again, using that as a rule might lead to an awful lot of grey areas where page are both recipe and ingredient (like the recent Italian Pasta). risk 06:50, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Unfortunately, it doesn't look like the Cookbook will be getting it's own name space any time soon. So, it will continue to be part of Wikibooks. Wikibooks policy is currently being consolidated, and the aim seems to be to simplify existing policies and remove policies that differ needlessly from those of other Wikimedia projects. I understand why the Cookbook needs to differ from other books in certain ways, like using a certain layout template, etc. But being needlessly different from the rest of Wikibooks makes the jobs of administration more difficult, as they may need to learn a whole new set of guidelines for each book that they encountered in Wikibooks. When monitoring recent changes to Wikibooks, administrators have to be able to make quick decisions about what is correct, and what is not. I suppose that the main problem is that contributors tend to stick to their own books, and are not interested in Wikibooks as a whole. I would urge contributors to the Cookbook to make sure they contribute to the overall health of Wikibooks from time to time (you don't need to be an administrator to fight vandalism). Geo.T 12:47, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Actually I think the namespace thing might happen soon. I'm not sure how to get a listing of the existing namespaces though (the "extended" ones, not the 0-15 standard ones). I like the idea of having per-book naming conventions, but this requires casual contributors to learn new rules for each book and requires dedicated contributors to form new rules for each book which seems rather haphazard. Kellen T 17:11, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Hopefully we get our own namespace soon, that would make things easier. As you say, rather haphazard, and there is always the danger that the contributors to the book can't agree.;) Geo.T 01:14, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Some measurement templates
If you want to use these, or, even better, make them part of the main Cooking namespace, check these templates for shorthanding links to measurements. I made only the most basic ones. User:Jfingers88/Templates. Jfingers88 00:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Seasonality Templates
I added the seasonality templates, but they got rv'd. Why was that? (I don't mind so much, but I figured this was the place for them). risk 13:14, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ack sorry dude; that was very sloppy on my part. I saw in red: navigationasfdasdf and figured you'd accidentally submitted, but didn't do a close look at the rest. I've fixed it now. Sorry again. Kellen T 14:46, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Default sort key
I thought I'd bring up the new key. This new feature can be used when categorizing pages in the cookbook. In the example above, any page with the default sort key set to foo would appear in each category as if each category was pipe-tricked to sort by foo. For example:

could be replaced with:

Going forward, this could save some time for editors categorizing pages here. Gentgeen 08:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

 * ? They should fix this on the category pages. Bleh. Kellen T 22:39, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Measurement
I just came to the Cookbook site looking for some recipes and found that the ones I read were, effectively, nearly useless because lots of measurements were given in "cups" without any attempt to disambiguate US or Imperial cups (the same problem as with pints). Sure 20% may not seem a large margin of error, but in a sense why bother giving measurements at all if they can't be given correctly. I'm guessing that most contributors are from the US so the measurements are _probably_ US cups, but could there be a convention about this please? Francis Davey (discuss • contribs) 17:16, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

 * I would agree that the majority of the time "cups" will refer to the US version. Most of the other readers will contribute using metric units instead.  Unfortunately there are few contributors to the Cookbook so I'm not sure that there will be much feedback.  If you post a notice at Reading room/Projects we could get more attention to the issue on this page.  I have no problem with defining some standards on this page.  There would be a problem in not knowing for sure what the original contributors were intending with their "cups".  If there are metric units as well, we can probably work backwards from those to determine which "cup" is the actual one intended, then change the "cup" to the one defined in the standard we formulate on this page. – Adrignola discuss 22:41, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

 * Most folks who contribute probably don't think much outside the system they've learned. Another possibility would be to convert wiki recipes to formula percentage (which would first require density calculations to assign missing weights to each volumetric ingredient), to analyze the recipe, but determining outliers (the ~20% error Francis Davey mentioned) would either require several similar recipes to compare against or knowledge of the correct range of values that would be typical. Figoni's Table 1.5, gives a formula "baker's percentage" for a date filling which has no flour at all (but that later seems to go into a baked product).  Figoni also says, "For baked custard, each ingredient is expressed relative to the dairy ingredients---milk and cream."  According to algebraic substitution, any recipe's ingredient or ingredient combinations could arbitrarily be assigned the 100% figure typically used for the "flour mass" in a baker's percentage.  Consider a hypothetical fresh salsa formula, (no flour, just tomatoes, onions, cilantro, chili peppers, fresh garlic, lime juice, and salt) where the 100% ingredient substitution could be "chopped tomato mass = flour mass" and all other ingredient masses are handled in the normal baker's percentage way. Tomatoes are of varying weights, some large and some small, so once the tomatoes are chopped (there is no need for 1/2 a tomato remainder as might happen with a weight based formula), as the 100% ingredient, that weight (mass) is used to calculate the remaining ingredient weights, and the salsa is more consistent from batch to batch whether made from large tomatoes or smaller ones. Wiki cookbooks could be on the leading edge of cookbook publishing if all recipe's ingredients eventually had one column for formula percentage, a separate second column for weight measure, and a third for volumetric measure. Volume measurements are good for speed, weights are good for accuracy, and baker's and formula percentages are good for comparison and analysis, recipe design, and scaling ingredient weights for either slightly or largely different batch sizes. It's just something to muse. Gzuufy (discuss • contribs) 21:56, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Goodness, I can tell you've put a lot of thought into that. I can really only invite you to dive in as I don't do much cooking from recipes, much less think I'd be able to get a handle on that system you describe. – Adrignola discuss 19:35, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

 * The analysis is somewhat time consuming, but it's not that hard. Anyway, I took the plunge and decided to analyze one recipe.  The analysis is currently posted on my talk page section titled by the cookbook's recipe name, and seems to support Frances Davey's observation regarding cup variances, particularly with regard to flour weight in a bread recipe.  When flour weight can be measured accurately, the spreadsheet model shows that variances from other ingredients that lack other severe instructional ambiguities decreases to less than 1% (though I haven't illustrated this point in the analysis).  This is why folks like myself cannot use volume-based recipes, and I'm in the U.S. where they are endemic. I'd be interested in any comments anyone might have regarding the analysis, particularly whether it would be of any value posted on the recipe page it was derived from, along with any changes it may need. Gzuufy (discuss • contribs) 06:24, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

 * According to the recipe template documentation:
 * "*/ Quantities should be listed in whichever system (imperial or metric) the recipe was created in, with the other system's equivalent values listed immediately after, in "". This lets users know which units are "original" and which are estimated conversions. Always provide volume measurements. In some countries, kitchens are simply not equipped to measure by mass or weight. (yes, they lack a balance or scale) Do not specify the size of normal chicken eggs; "Large" in the USA is similar to "size M" (not size L) in the EU, and other countries will surely have their own ideas as well. /*"
 * So, I think it's safe to assume that if you see a "cup", it's imperial . My question is about giving equivalents. I can easily use a metric calculator to convert volumes, but what do I do with teaspoons and tablespoons?—D'Ranged 1 talk 07:04, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I just read up on conversions on the Grunt work page and now realize there's a difference between imperial and what is used in the U.S. My bad, and my apologies. I will endeavor to include all my recipes in the "American recipes" category to indicate that they are using U.S. measurements. Thanks.—D'Ranged 1 talk 07:14, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't be listed in Category:Recipes with images
Because of the usage of Recipe summary, this page is listed in Category:Recipes with images, which it should not be. —Kri (discuss • contribs) 13:02, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Shouldn't be classified as a recipe
This page is classified as a recipe, which it should not be. —Kri (discuss • contribs) 13:03, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Should probably list Module:Temperature as being policy
Module:Temperature is now using sane systems to accomplish its purpose, the only thing left is to start using it in recipes!

Please consider adding it to this page, so contributors are aware of it and properly encouraged to use it. --MarkTraceur (discuss • contribs) 23:15, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Would be nice to explain copyright issues.
The page on the US Copyright Office's website that describes Recipes basically says that the recipes themselves are not copyrightable, just how they are expressed. This is something I didn't know before and would be nice to express on the Policy page for others who came looking for what types of permissions are required to bring recipes here. Zellfaze (discuss • contribs) 12:51, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * This page and this page also get into the details. Zellfaze (discuss • contribs) 13:00, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I would love this as well, the big scary "Did you find your recipe on the internet? IT WILL BE DELETED" message is not at all helpful.  As @Zellfaze says, the ingredients and steps to making a recipe are not copyrightable, a fact which has been upheld by legal precedent.  Milimetric (discuss • contribs) 18:52, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

May I fix missing "title" parameters, or are they correct/intended as is?
Hi~ On some of the and  templates, the images link to their respective "File:" pages, instead of their "Cookbook:". However, the templates already have "Image credit" links to "File:". Also, their alt text is "link=Cookbook:" code instead of "Cookbook:Some recipe". I think the reason for all these is that they're missing the "title" parameter.

Examples:
 * Template:Featured_recipe/1-2-3-4_Cake <-- Missing "title": image link is to the image "File:" and alt text is template code
 * Template:Featured_recipe/Tarbes_Salad <-- Has "title": image link is to the cookbook named

Again, same for ingredient:
 * Template:Featured_ingredient/Rice <-- Missing "title"
 * Template:Featured_ingredient/Tomato <-- Has "title"

 * If it's okay, may I add the missing "title" parameter to the affected templates?
 * Or, are they intended to be like that?

Thanks for reading~ Zeniff (discuss • contribs) 07:35, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I changed the affected pages by adding "|title=" to each. I hope that's okay..? o.o Zeniff (discuss • contribs) 06:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Looking at the template implementations, it appears both of them are designed with  as a required parameter (the template markup appears to assume parameter   will always be provided); so I doubt you're doing any harm by providing it.  (Side note:  The templates have, as you will have noticed, disappointingly no documentation about how to use the template; in place of documentation they have what I'd describe as a "pretend assistant", something that makes believe it's a way to automatically create a featured recipe/ingredient but can't really deliver on the promise because it uses the inadequate facilities that were provided by the wiki software many years ago.  The imho-obvious misdesign of those features was part of the point of wikidialog; these will be a natural choice of things to upgrade with real assistance using wikidialog at some point in future; which will inevitably take some time, but it's coming.)  --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 12:54, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know:) Is there a preferred way to provide documentation? I was thinking I might add just a bit to them, or link to the "blank" example templates. Also, I can't find any "HelpDesign" or "wikidialog" pages on any Wiki projects..:( Maybe the name changed? Zeniff (discuss • contribs) 21:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that was a bizarre typo. The page is   rather than   (fixed the link above).  There is also a copy of that page here on en.wb, Help:Dialog, but I linked to the one on en.wn because on en.wn the wikidialog gadget is selected by default for all users (even IPs), whereas here on en.wb I haven't switched it to default status yet, so the dialog elements on the help page here don't appear unless you select the wikidialog gadget on your Special:Preferences.  The usual way to do documentation is to put at the bottom of the template documentation That facilitates creating a separate page to contain the documentation.  You can see an example at, say, BookCat. --Pi zero (discuss • contribs) 23:15, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you:D That clears up my confusion! Looks complicated, but I'll read it right now and I'll try to learn from/follow the examples. Thank you for the tips!!:) Zeniff (discuss • contribs) 03:45, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Cookbook recipe formatting name change from "procedure" to "method"
Most cook books today would not format the steps to create something under a heading of "procedure", but most would call it their methods or steps. As a stylistic choice, procedure is a very offical sounding word and ridged, whereas cooking has an artistic element to it and varies from person to person.

I think "method" as a name change would be a good balance between outlining to readers the steps of a recipe, whilst not sounding like they are about to start the launch sequence of a rocket. Jamzze (discuss • contribs) 19:20, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

 * I was not here when the guidelines were created, so I unfortunately can't speak to the reasoning behind it. I also couldn't see anything helpful in Cookbook talk:Policy/Recipe template. @Xania I know you've been here for a while and have put a lot of work into the cookbook—do you know why "procedure" was chosen over an alternative like "method"? -- Nostriker (discuss • contribs) 00:43, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comment. Any legacy info would be grand. Also open to what its name should be, I am just not a fan of "procedure".
 * Flicking through some of my cookbooks, a lot of the ones that use sub-headings have phrasing like "To Cook", "Method", and "Instructions" Jamzze (discuss • contribs) 18:46, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Cookbook recipe formatting adding "equipment" as a section
I think another section "equipment" should be added to recipe formatting policy to make it easier for readers to know what they need before tackling the recipe. E.g. it could go Ingredients, equipment, etc. as sections. Jamzze (discuss • contribs) 20:16, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

 * I think that's fair. It's useful to know if a recipe requires a mixer, etc. Mbrickn (discuss • contribs) 20:53, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Including alcoholic beverages
Suggestion - allowing alcoholic beverage recipes

Hey, I think alcoholic beverage recipes should be included within the Cookbook, as the Cookbook beverage page currently outlines they are not allowed. From historical cookbooks to modern cookbooks, most of them have sections on preparing beverages, both non-alcoholic and alcoholic.

Reasoning

 * I have seen it recommended that recipes be added to Bartending, however that book has limited engagement with - meaning recipes might be lost/ quality not upkept and it adds additional effort to the reader to go there from this book.
 * As well, I think it is within scope of the Cookbook to include alcoholic beverages as recipes, for example many recipes here include food intended for individual enjoyment and parities. Things like a single Gin and Tonic or a party Punch Bowl would work well with these recipes and be apt to include and linked to them.
 * I think what would be out of scope would be things like bartender etiquette, history of mixology, and large, industrial-scale recipes for drinks which can remain in the remit of Bartending, Brewing, Wine Making, etc.

 * Edit: having looked through the Beverage recipes category there are already a number of alcoholic drink recipes there. I propose then to remove the wording on Cookbook:Beverages intro and allow alcoholic beverages in.

Jamzze (discuss • contribs) 18:37, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

 * I think it makes sense to include alcoholic beverages like cocktails etc. since other beverages are allowed in the cookbook. Moreover, various alcoholic beverages are used in cooking, and they already exist within the cookbook. I would recommend making sure the recipes are all categorized as beverages! -- Nostriker (discuss • contribs) 22:20, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks @Nostriker - I will edit this in and add the details into the policy.
 * Through my work reorganising the beverage categories, I have added a alcoholic beverage recipe cat, so this can be used to tag them. Jamzze (discuss • contribs) 17:37, 30 July 2022 (UTC)

title: Cookbook talk:Policy


text:
User talk:Magicmonster~enwikibooks

Blue text is good
I was tired of seeing this as a red link so I'm putting this here to make me feel better. Magicmonster 01:14, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Magicmonster. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Magicmonster~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:24, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 05:13, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Magicmonster~enwikibooks


text:
The World of Peer-to-Peer (P2P)/Foreword

Foreword
This book intends to explain to you the overall utilization that P2P (Peer-to-Peer) technologies have in today's world, it goes deeper into as many implementations as it can and compares the benefits, problems even legal implications and changes to social behaviors and economic infrastructures. We explain in detail about the technology and how works and try to bring you a vision on what to expect in the future.

Guide to Readers
This is a wikibook (en.wikibooks.org), as such you should learn a bit about what it is and how it does its magic.

The book is organized into different parts, but as this is a work that is always evolving, things may be missing or just not where they should be, you are free to become a writer and contribute to fix things up...

Reader Comments
If you have comments about the technical accuracy, content, or organization of this document, please tell us (e.g. by using the "discussion" pages or by email). Be sure to include the section or the part title of the document with your comments and the date of your copy of the book. If you are really convinced of your point, information or correction then become a writer (at Wikibooks) and do it, it can always be rolled back if someone disagrees.

Guide to Writers
Authors/Contributors should register if intending to make non-anonymous contributions to the book (this will give more value and relevance to your opinions and views on the evolution of the work and enable others to talk to you) and try to follow the structure. If you have major ideas or big changes use the discussion area; as a rule just go with the flow.

 * Conventions : A set of conventions have been adopted on the creation of this book please read about them before you contribute any content on the book's talk page.


text:
Talk:The World of Peer-to-Peer (P2P)/Foreword

Why Not?
And why not use this template? It'd previous name, Template:Foreword, made it appear like it was an official template to use. It has since been applied to many books, where the message itself was inappropriate for the book. It's wording also serves to discourage contributors.

As of this writing, this template is only used by a book that is going to be deleted anyway. MShonle 23:04, 8 September 2005 (UTC)


text:
Introduction to Game Theory/Dominant Strategies

At the end of the last lesson we looked at the Matrix table for the Prisoner's Dilemma. It was as follows:

We also learned how to determine payoffs from this table. However, how can we analyse this table? Let's take a look...


text:
Talk:French/Lessons/People and things

Untitled
The example of a word that appears to be masculine while being feminine (la photo) is not a good choice, because photo is the abbreviated form of «photographie», which is feminine like all words ending in «ie». —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.48.92.222 (discuss • contribs) 05:05, 14 August 2005

Beau and sympa
Somebody corrected "nice"to be "sympa" instead of "beau".

This made the text not match the audio lesson, so I changed it back, and made nice "handsome" so it won't get changed back, as I am sure that both are accurate definitions.

I think it's important that the text match the audio- the reason I played the audio was to try to correct my pronounciation of "sympa".

Un chaton
We should put "chat" instead of "chaton"...

Liaison
In English it's spelled with one "i" (Liaison) and NOT with two i's (Liaiison, which is French)

le/les
These are pronounced differently, because it's required to determine plurality/singularity of a noun. But I was under impression that "s" at the end of the word doesn't affect pronunciation. Is this an exception to the rule? I suppose "mes" is also pronounced like "les". Also I said "le jus d'orange" to a flight attendant and he thought I wanted two, so apparently he thought I said "les". I think it's pretty lame of a language to not clearly express such a difference. Also au-dessus/au-dessous, why did anyone thought it is a good idea? But I digress. I should've probably said "un jus", because it is indefinite, but maybe I wanted a specific one? Grue (talk) 10:03, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Chat/Chatte
The feminine form of cat in French "chatte" is never used, because it is a slang term for the vagina (I'm sure you know which one I mean). Somebody might want to think about using a different example.

Mistake?
Talking about il y a: "It is important to remember that verb stays as a form of be and not have." - isn't that supposed to be the other way around?

title: Talk:French/Lessons/People and things


text:
Australian History/First Settlers

‹ Return to the Contents ‹ Back to the Introdcution

The exact date when Aboriginal people arrived in Australia from Asia is contested, however it is widely regarded to have been somewhere between 40,000 to 60,000 years ago. Evidence of settlement from 40,000 years ago has been confirmed. Tasmania was first inhabited by the Tasmanian Aborigines. Evidence indicates their presence in the region, later to become an island, at least 35,000 years ago. Rising sea levels cut Tasmania off from mainland Australia about 10,000 years ago.

Captain Cook was the first European recorded to have contact with the East coast of Australia.

Forward to Early Explorers ›

title: Australian History/First Settlers


text:
Art History/Authors

 * Serge Tom Westland - Organization, initial work on pages.
 * Mbrickn - Adding images, examples.

title: Art History/Authors


text:
Talk:Material & Energy Balances

I pasted this from wikipedia. At different Universities chemical engineering subjects are taught in different order, so the division into year 1 etc. doesn't help me much. I think we have to divide mass balances (which I think is a better term than material balances and for which you get much more hits using Google…) into integral balances and differential balances. I haven't written anything about integral balances (analysis of degrees of freedom, split conditions, etc. etc.) here. Couldn't we have one chapter Integral mass balances and one chapter Differential mass and energy balances? Saittam 14 Aug 2005

title: Talk:Material & Energy Balances


text:
Cookbook:Breakfast Waffles

| Breakfast Waffle Recipe

These basic breakfast waffles are simple and predictable to make. The batter can be made in about 15 minutes, so they are suitable as a last-minute addition to a breakfast. They are made fluffy by beating the egg whites separately and folding them in as the last step.

Ingredients

 * 3 eggs, separated
 * 1½ cups milk
 * ½ lb (about 1¾ cups) flour
 * 2 teaspoons baking powder
 * 1 tablespoon sugar
 * ½ teaspoon salt
 * ¼ cup vegetable oil

Procedure

 * 1) Mix egg yolks and milk.
 * 2) Add flour, baking powder, sugar, salt and mix well.
 * 3) Add the oil.
 * 4) Whip the egg whites until stiff and then fold into the batter.
 * 5) Preheat a waffle iron.
 * 6) Ladle a scoop of batter into the waffle iron, and cook until browned and cooked through.
 * 7) Remove waffle and repeat cooking process with remaining batter.

title: Cookbook:Breakfast Waffles


text:
Talk:Japanese/Lessons/Word list 1

Untitled
It would be great to have some pronounciation .mp3's here :D
 * yes, please do that if you find that it would be great :) --lastguru 01:13, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

The game of go is usually called いご（囲碁）in Japanese, not just ご (碁）. I recommend changing the vocab list.  ToothingLummox 05:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * OK --lastguru 10:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Choice of Vocab
I changed quite a few of the words (and incidentally found several errors, which I fixed). Here's how I chose the vocab:
 * kept the number of words the same (I hope)

 * you can change the word count, but ANY changes here must be ported back to the hiragana lists at once. --lastguru 10:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * kept words for every hiragana symbol (although I'm tempted to delete にょうかん (court lady) which seems like a silly word to learn.

 * court lady is an extremelysilly word to learn, but I have not able to find any other words that could replace it... --lastguru 10:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * focussed on having lots of nouns and adjectives from the JLPT Level 4 list. These will be the most useful for simple sentences.
 * made sure adjectives came in pairs (hot-cold, strong-weak, big-small, etc)
 * eliminated some words that I thought would not be productive vocabulary at first
 * not JLPT4: せっぷく(ritual disembowelment)、ち(blood)、りゅう(dragon)、（い）ご(go)、ぜん(Zen)、etc.

 * these were not taken out of nowhere... perhaps, we were unable to find any good JLPT4 words... but these are pretty popular and good words to know, please put at least some of them back :) --lastguru 10:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * JLPT4 but not good to memorize out of context: ああ(ah, oh, yes)、しかし(however)、おなじ(same)、etc

 * maybe... --lastguru 10:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

To do:
 * Fix word order (alphabetization). Sometimes it was wrong, especially the voiced sounds.

 * yes they might have gone out of sync --lastguru 10:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Further revisions? Reversions?

 * the thing is that this course is created for the Latvian otaku society to be used right now. Please note that reason for me to be hesitant to change something as the course is used by real persons, and if something changes, I need to notify them so that they could go back and recheck everything. What I did just yesterday, was to change the links I give when I release the pages (friday evening or saturday noon) to point to the revisions I approve. But thanks to you (many thanks for helping us!) I might make it a tradition to do a second release (bugfix release) a week after the first release of any page. --lastguru 10:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Make sure hiragana pages agree with new word lists.

-ToothingLummox 07:47, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Is all of the vocab supposed to be on the hiragana pages? I just noticed that the hiragana pages don't even have all the vocab from the previous vocab list. :Example: あたらしい

 * look at the ra group :) --lastguru 07:40, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

So the audience for the English language wikibook on Japanese is the "Latvian otaku society"? Well, at least it's defined now. That also explains some of the special-interest word choices. -ToothingLummox 01:22, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, there were some discussions about my decision to work on English language wikibook. The motivation was to create a course useful to other people, not just to the Latvian otaku society. The reason I pointed that out is that these people are learning from the course right now, it is not like creating a paper book which will be used only when complete, but rather like TV lessons that people are going through as they are appearing. --lastguru 07:40, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I apologize for any discontinuities that my editing introduces. However, I would suggest that on balance it's worth it. New vocab will have be introduced along the way anyway, so any missing vocab can be introduced then. ToothingLummox 11:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * It is better to have inconsistent editing, than none at all, and you are surely doing a good job correting our mistakes and improving the lessons. The local team working on the lessons had similar problems when working on their first pages, they've learned quickly, so will you, I hope. But as there is undoubtable difference in effectiveness of communication between local teamwork and discussions in the pages like this, that is why I kindly ask you to signup for Skype to fill the gap in communication. Another option would be taking out our discussions about the course to the japanese-wiki list (oh, just noticed that that you did join the list... I am sorry, seems that I had some troubles with my email filters so I did not notice your email, I will answer it later...). One thing though I wanted to state clear: the list and many of its members were actually originally working on another course (lets call it "the original course"); the course called "The New Thread" is a project I have started separately from the original course for the members of local otaku forum, and placed in this wiki so that wider community could benefit from and contribute to it. Now some of the original team are improving the new thread course, but the thing is, there are inconsistencies between conventions and guidelines of the original course and the new thread course. In your email you have pointed out ove of such, namely the pitch accent indication. It might have been a good intention to get it into the original course thread, but the new thread states clearly that "There will be no attempts to indicate pitch in this course" (from the introduction page). If you find any references to pitch accent in the new thread course, please report that to me, or delete them yourself. --lastguru 05:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Ah, yeah, ToothingLummox, why do you whing the romaji was missing on some of the earlier pages? It was not. Also I do not understand the motivation of changing, for example, onna to onnanoko and some other words. Do you want me to revert some of your changes? I have my reasons of making things as they are here because of the vision of how the course will be progress in future. We need to cooperate more closely, and discuss all the changes. Is it possible to reach you through Skype? --lastguru 07:59, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry about the romaji. On the あ and か pages I filled it in for all the words before I realized romaji was only being added for words containing unknown hiragana. On the other pages I supplied it only when it really was missing. I didn't replace おんな in the word list, but you're right, it seems to have disappeared from the あ hiragana page. Oops. Also, I was wondering whether you're planning to use おんなのひと when you get around to it, since it is more appropriate in normal neutral-polite conversation than just おんな. I noticed that it didn't make the word list, even though it could be formed from おんな and ひと.

 * I don't have skype, but I suppose I could get it if it becomes necessary. Do you have a syllabus or something? I've read the course outline but it's pretty vague. What exactly will be in the "basic structures" lessons (I did look at the unfinished lessons)?

 * The basic structure list is not ready yet. I will try to form some kind of preliminary list soon. --lastguru 05:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The order in which the verbs are being taught seems to imply that we won't have any negative sentences (based on 未然形) for a very long time. And so many important constructions (like anything requiring an auxiliary verb and probably the past tense) won't be available until the students learn 〜て in the advanced section!

 * It is supposed to be so. --lastguru 05:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Or take the 連用形 verb section. My understanding is that the 連用形 is just a base form of the verb. Which endings, if any, are you teaching? 〜ます? 〜たい? 〜はじめる？

 * There will not be many things told in the rentaikei section. Most probably, as we are already using it, there will only be a few sentences about it. Endings that require different verb form from rentaikei will not be mentioned in that section. The good example you have is ~masu, which will appear first in renyoukei section. --lastguru 05:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I was asking about the renyoukei, not the rentaikei. -ToothingLummox 06:09, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Oh, sorry. It will be explained that it is used for ~masu, ~tai, ~te (possibly, that form may be explained there), ~ta and word combinations (that includes the ~hajimeru). You don't have to think whether there will be a particular ending - the course is to go as deep as possible, so if something can be explained, it probably should be explained. And if something could have been explained but it is not, please report that, or add the information yourself. As the guidelines say, the course is not a fast way to learn the language, but rather a long one. --lastguru 11:09, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * ~te is also often explained from the rentaikei, and it could also be explained from the imperative, or for that matter, from just about any form. I understand that the course is "deep" as opposed to "horizontal" (I'm not sure that "deep" is a good idea), but there are still choices about when and how to introduce material. Have you thought about the dependencies? What needs to precede what?

 * yes, i have thought that dependencies will appear somedey :) ... I am still not sure whether to put that te form (you may see in the outline that it is placed after other verb forms; but here I just told you I want it in renyoukei). The motvation to put it in the renyoukei section is that it is formed from that form... I know I stopped on the basic structures page and I need to make a detailed planning further... will try to do that ASAP. --lastguru 14:02, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think -te should be taught from the renyoukei just because "it is formed from that form" historically. The sound changes are pretty severe. A good reason to teach it from renyoukei is that the students already know -masu and will use mixed -te and -masu sentences before learning rentaikei. A good reason to teach it from rentaikei is that that rentaikei is the form that appears in dictionaries- in other words, rentaikei is going to end up being the base form that students use most often. Another good reason to teach it from rentaikei is that -te and -ta (past tense) are basically the same. -ToothingLummox 07:19, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't know much on the subject, but perhaps we should teach a few words from renyoukei and show how they are related to rentaikei. We can then teach the rentaikei for for the remainder of the lessons. Sorry if this isn't possible or makes no sense; like I said, I don't know much on the subjec :) — Sik0fewl 16:59, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I think perhaps you and I are on slightly different wavelengths here. I have two books here (the popular A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar and A Dictionary of Intermediate Japanese Grammar) which contain nothing but grammar explanation- some 1300 pages of it. Exactly how detailed are you planning to get? -ToothingLummox 12:29, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I know several books on Russian, English and some other languages that are about that half long, but my understanding is that these books are mostly watery explanations on something should be understood intuitively. The things like, for example, ~hajimeru verb ending should not be explained separately - they need to be understood intuitively based on general principles of language. Just now you probably think I contradict myself... I am not. The course should not be converted to a 1300 page long grammar reference book (or more... you don't have "a dictionary of advanced japanese grammar"... :) ) because (a) nobody would read it and (b) I believe many concepts may be explained differently from how they are usually explained. It should answer the question "why?", not just list everything possible. I will think of better explanation later... I need the explanation myself :) --lastguru 14:02, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * And is there any intention to teach communicative (as opposed to grammatical skills) like requesting, suggesting, asking, arguing, inviting, praising, or getting someone to repeat themselves? Spoken contractions? Or what about situational skills, like making phone calls and ordering food?

 * If possible, no exceptions will be made to the sequentiality of the course. Communicative skills will only be given at the end of the grammar course, in the advanced section (or maybe additional section will be added after it). The course outline is not at all predefined for the rest of our lives, but rather my first iteration. --lastguru 05:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Given the order in which things are listed, it's not clear to me how anyone is going to be able to practice what they've learned. Especially when they seem to be given way too much information at the same time.

 * It must be possible for an average student to keep up with the course timeline. Any event of the course giving more information than may be understood should be pointed out and resolved. As for examples, the number of them will increase in time, as we will have something to give examples for at the learners' current level of understanding the language. --lastguru 05:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * It is very difficult (even for the students themselves) to judge whether they have been able to absorb the material. I have no doubt that they can read through a page or two of explanation every week, but have they really learned it? Have they gained any kind of fluency? For example, they have been given a lot of vocab, but have little opportunity to use it. Most of it isn't being used in the lessons. Nor are most of the honorifics. Nor most of the ko-so-a-do pronouns.  Of course, the students can always relearn the info when they need it. But doesn't that defeat the purpose? Meanwhile important structures are avoided. I suspect that the "deep" format of the course is in fundamentally in conflict with what the learner needs when learning a language.
 * Information overload?
 * the variety of ko-so-a-do pronouns. They should at least be separated as the honorifics were into "learn now" and "learn later."
 * the use of ko-so-a-do pronouns in discourse
 * the variety of honorifics, and especially the amount of detail given.
 * the many uses of various particles. And the more complete the explanation, the less useful the lesson becomes.
 * -ToothingLummox 06:09, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
 * What do the students hope to do with Japanese anyway? Read manga? Watch movies? Get kanji tattoos without embarassing themselves?

 * If they want to do the last, the have found a wrong course. As for the ultimate goal of the course, it is for students to be able to communicate freely. And that also include to be able to watch movies (including historical ones) and anime. And just to put things straight, preparing students to pass JLPT level 1 is not the goal of the course. It is pointed in the guidelines as an outcome, but not a goal. If necessary, topics that are not required for passing JLPT1 will be included here without hesitation. One old discussion even accused me in trying to make a kokugaku course... :) --lastguru 05:07, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

 * - ToothingLummox 11:34, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I will not be available during the next like 27 hours, after that I will try to answer important these questions. for now, please read this: http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Japanese:New_Thread_Guidelines --lastguru 11:45, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I've already read it (and edited it, too. Nothing is sacred!), but it's pretty vague. The lesson outline doesn't have enough detail. - ToothingLummox 14:29, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * You should ALWAYS have the romaji word right after the katakana/hiragana/kanji so the reader can be sure they are reading and pronouncing correctly. Learners of japanese have to practice sounding out and reading japanese just like we learned english in first grade by sounding out and reading the letters. This will help our reading proficiency by knowing that we are reading japanese correctly.

Regarding communication, it would be a good choice to use the mailing list whenever possible to discuss stuff like this. It's much more readable for long discussions like this and their are searchable archives that are very beneficial to new users who want to start contributing to this wikibook. – Sik0fewl 19:47, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

My friends and I am are MangaKa's. We go by the name Manga Dragon. We are designing a Manga but it doesn't have a name. P. S. Visit Dansol High School and meet us there. THE principal will announce that the company is needed. Can you give us unused Manga Names? Daragamer12 (discuss • contribs) 22:33, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

parts of speech
I just discovered that I miss the information about what part of speech each of these words is. I was trying to make up some examples, and noticed that there is no way students will differentiate between nouns like "kirei" and adjectives like "ookii". What do you think about this? Can somebody add this info here if you agree it is really needed? Or I am just a baka gaijin who fools himself into thinking that it is important? --lastguru 16:35, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think we want to add parts of speech info to every word on vocab lists. The part of speech is usually obvious from the English word anyway. Some books add（な）after na-adjectives like kirei (it's not really a noun). I think that works pretty well.

 * きれい（な）　　　　　pretty, clean

 * It's a little problematic for words like baka which are both nouns and na-adjectives. If you only want to use it as a noun, then don't add（な）.

 * Another solution is to separate vocab lists into different parts of speech, in other words have separate i-adjective, na-adjective, noun, etc. lists.

 * I also think that words like ue and naka are difficult. They are nouns in Japanese but resemble English prepositions. You could change them to 〜のうえに, I would probably just remove them from the vocab list and instead introduce them when teaching aru. Maybe we should create a small dictionary, separate from vocab lists, with all the words from all the lessons? A dictionary could contain more complete part of speech info.

 * I think a basic problem is that the students have been asked to memorize a lot of vocab that they don't know how to use. We could get away with it if we stuck to 〜masu and 〜desu, but even that is not a terriffic solution. I don't think that asking the students to memorize vocab from the hiragana lessons was a good idea.

 * ToothingLummox 18:01, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

FairyTail and Bleach
Best.... Mangas..... Ever 😊 Daragamer12 (discuss • contribs) 22:37, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Japanese/Lessons/Word list 1


text:
User talk:62.202.70.142

Book of the month
In order to vote for Book of the month/September 2005 voting you need a logged in user - otherwise cheating by the use if dynamic ip addresses can't be detected.

--Krischik 16:26, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:62.202.70.142


text:
Wikijunior:Solar System/Saturn/Rhea

How big is Rhea?
Rhea is 1530 km in diameter (the distance from one side to the other through the center). Rhea is relatively large when compared with the moons of other planets in the Solar System.

What is its surface like?
The surface of Rhea is heavily cratered and has bright wispy markings on its surface. The surface can be divided into two categories. The first area contains craters which are more than 40 km wide, while the second area contains craters smaller than this.

The leading hemisphere is heavily cratered and is the same brightness throughout. As on Callisto, the craters are eroded. On the trailing hemisphere there are bright swaths on a dark background and few visible craters. These bright swaths may be material from ice volcanoes early in Rhea's history when it was still liquid inside. However, recent observations of Dione, which has the same bright streaks, shows that these are in fact ice cliffs. Therefore, it can be assumed that the bright streaks on the Rhean surface are also ice cliffs. When Cassini does its flyby of Rhea on November 25, 2005, we will know for sure.

How long is a day on Rhea?
One day on Rhea is equal to four and a half days on Earth.

How long is its orbit around Saturn?
One orbit around Saturn also takes four and a half days. Rhea has synchronous rotation, meaning that it takes the same amount of time for it to complete one orbit as it does to complete one rotation on its axis. This also means that the same side of Rhea always faces Saturn.

What is it made of?
One third of Rhea's mass is rock, found at its core. The rest is water ice.

How much would Rhea's gravity pull on me?
If you stood on Rhea's surface, you would weigh less than you would on Pluto — which is about 6% of what you do on Earth.

Who is it named after?
Rhea is named after a Titaness in Greek mythology. The name was suggested by astromoner William Herschel in his 1847 publication Results of Astronomical Observations made at the Cape of Good Hope, in which he suggested the names of the Titans, sisters and brothers of Cronos (the Greek Saturn), be used. Before that, it, Tethys, Dione, and Iapetus were called Sidera Lodoicea ("the stars of Louis") to honour king Louis XIV.

How was it discovered?
Rhea was discovered by Giovanni Cassini on December 23, 1672.

Wikijunior Sonnensystem/ Saturn/ Rhea

title: Wikijunior:Solar System/Saturn/Rhea


text:
Using an Abacus/Basics

Types of Abacus
There are many sorts of abacuses from different times and places. In modern times, the ones most used are:
 * The Chinese abacus, the suanpan. It may have 7, 9, 11 or 13 rods. Each column has 2 upper beads (quinary) and 5 lower beads (unary), separated by a bar passing through the abacus.
 * The Japanese abacus, the soroban. 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29 or 31 rods. 1 quinary and 5 unary beads. Reference point.
 * The modern soroban (since 1922, gaining popularity from 1945 onward). 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29 or 31 rods. 1 quinary and 4 unary beads. Reference point.

The above is a Japanese Soroban with a zeroing mechanism. By pressing the button two levers push the top beads up, and the other beads down, resetting the abacus.

The reference points allow the user to choose one rod as the base rod that counts multiples of one. This is very useful when calculating with decimal numbers or with numbers that end with zero.

This course uses the modern soroban with as many rods as necessary for the examples.

Unary and Quinary Beads and Activation
The unary beads are the lower beads, and they represent one unit each. The quinary beads are the upper beads, and represent five units each. Beads are counted when they are pushed to the central bar and are then said to be activated.

Representing Numbers
The numbers from 0 to 9 are represented as follows:

title: Using an Abacus/Basics


text:
User talk:216.187.106.148

How To Use An Abacus
Hi there.

I see you have reverted my efforts to make this book conform to our naming policy. Is there some reason why you think that this policy should not apply to you? - Aya T C 18:29, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm very sorry. I am quite confused about naming policies, and I chose the hyphen system because it looks better than the slash. When I saw it had been changed I thought I must have made it that way in the beginning, and I corrected it. However, when making your changes you left one page with the other system, so it had to be changed for consistency. My apologies. - 216.187.106.148; 22 August 2005

title: User talk:216.187.106.148


text:
Introduction to Psychology/Learning

 * Learning
 * Law of Effect
 * Conditioning
 * Classical Conditioning
 * Stimulus
 * Pavlov's Experiment
 * Watson and Rayner's experiment with Classical Conditioning
 * Summarized version of Watson and Rayner's experiment.

 * Operant Conditioning
 * Behavior Modification

 * Observational Learning
 * Experiential Learning

Kolb's learning theory hypothesizes that there are 4 major learning styles: activist, reflector, theorist and pragmatist. Each style means that individuals have a preferred way of learning.

An activist prefers to learn by doing - getting involved in activities in a hands-on way. A reflector learns best by thinking about actions and considering questions that have been posed. A theorist is a person who prefers to learn by considering ideas, concepts, models and theories. A pragmatist learns best by considering how an idea, concept, or experience would work best when applied in a new or different situation.

Back to Table of Contents << Previous chapter||Next chapter >>

title: Introduction to Psychology/Learning


text:
Romanian/Lesson 4

Verbele - Verbs

 * a citi - to read
 * a scrie - to write
 * a rescrie - to rewrite
 * a povesti - to tell a story
 * a asculta - to listen
 * a minţi - to lie
 * a înţelege - to understand
 * a vedea - to see
 * a auzi - to hear
 * a crea - to create
 * a simţi - to feel
 * a atinge - to touch
 * a iubi - to (make) love
 * a urî - to hate
 * a vorbi - to talk
 * a striga - to shout
 * a râde - to laugh
 * a zâmbi - to smile
 * a plânge - to cry
 * a uita - to forget
 * a-şi aminti - to remember
 * a merge - to walk, to go
 * a urca - to climb
 * a coborî - to descend
 * a se aşeza - to sit down
 * a se ridica - to stand up
 * a se culca - to go to sleep
 * a dormi - to sleep
 * a se trezi - to wake up
 * a cădea - to fall
 * a fugi - to run
 * a încetini - to slow down
 * a accelera - to speed up
 * a sări - to jump
 * a mânca - to eat
 * a bea - to drink
 * a face - to make
 * a face un duş - to take a shower
 * a face de mâncare - to cook
 * a face patul - to make the bed
 * a spăla (ceva) - to wash (something)
 * a se spăla - to wash (himself/herself)
 * a curăţa - to clean/to scrub
 * a şterge - to clean up/to wipe/to erase
 * a păta - to stain/to soil
 * a murdări -to get dirty (something)
 * a fi - to be
 * a avea - to have

A fi and a avea are used as auxiliary verbs ("a avea" is conjugated a bit differently when used this way)

Se - is used as compound for transitive verbs

CONJUGARE - CONJUGATION
Four conjugations, according to the different terminations of the verbs:

First conjugation, with "-a" as a termination in the infinitive: There are two ways of conjugating verbs of this type, and there is no way of telling by looking at the infinitive which one it will be (it just needs to be memorized).

first way (shorter conjugation)
 * a cânta - to sing
 * eu cânt - I sing
 * tu cânţi - you sing
 * el/ea cântă - he/she/it sings
 * noi cântăm - we sing
 * voi cântaţi - you (pl) sing
 * ei/ele cântă - they sing

second way (longer conjugation)
 * a lucra - to work
 * eu lucrez - I work
 * tu lucrezi - you work
 * el/ea lucrează - he/she/it works
 * noi lucrăm - we work
 * voi lucraţi - you work
 * ei/ele lucrează - they work

Second conjugation, with "-ea" as a termination in the infinitive:
 * a tăcea - to be silent
 * eu tac - I am silent
 * tu taci - you are silent
 * el/ea tace - he/she/it is silent
 * noi tăcem - we are silent
 * voi tăceţi - you (pl) are silent
 * ei/ele tac - they are silent

Third conjugation, with "-e" as a termination in the infinitive:
 * a merge - to go
 * eu merg - I go
 * tu mergi - you go
 * el/ea merge - he/she/it goes
 * noi mergem - we go
 * voi mergeţi - you go
 * ei/ele merg - they go

Fourth conjugation, with "-i" as a termination in the infinitive: There are also two different ways to conjugate verbs of this type, and once again, there is no way to a priori tell which one to use. One must learn which pattern a particular verb uses (although one does get a "feel" for it after a while).

First way (shorter conjugation)
 * a fugi - to run
 * eu fug - I run
 * tu fugi - you run
 * el/ea fuge - he/she/it runs
 * noi fugim - we run
 * voi fugiţi - you (pl) run
 * ei/ele fug - they run

second way (longer conjugation)
 * a vorbi - to talk
 * eu vorbesc - I talk
 * tu vorbeşti - you talk
 * el/ea vorbeşte - he/she/it talks
 * noi vorbim - we talk
 * voi vorbiţi - you talk
 * ei/ele vorbesc - they talk

CONJUGATION OF THE IRREGULAR VERBS A FI (=to be) AND A AVEA (=to have)
 * a fi :
 * eu sunt - I am
 * tu eşti - you are
 * el/ea este - he/she/it is
 * noi suntem - we are
 * voi sunteţi - you are
 * ei/ele sunt - they are

 * a avea:
 * eu am - I have
 * tu ai - you have
 * el/ea are - he/she/it has
 * noi avem - we have
 * voi aveţi - you have
 * ei/ele au - they have

< Previous Lesson | Next Lesson >

title: Romanian/Lesson 4


text:
Jet Propulsion/History

Jet propulsion had its beginnings in the turbo superchargers devised by Dr. Sanford Moss in 1918. These were used to improve the performance of reciprocating engines at high altitude.

Frank Whittle received the patent in 1930 for a jet engine. Hans von Ohain received the German patent in 1935. The first jet aircraft was the flown in 1939 with a von Ohain engine producing 4.9kN of thrust.

The first American jet was the Bell P-59 Airacomet flown in 1942.

The first combat jet was the Gloster Meteor which entered service with 616 Squadron Royal Air Force in May 1944. They were initially deployed against V1 flying bombs and specifically prohibited from flying over Germany. The germans also had a jet fighter in operational service before the end of the war the. A large number of these were built toward the end of the war but supply of engines was so limited that less than 30 were in service at any one time.

The first American civil jet engine was the certified in 1949. The first civil jet aircraft was the flown in 1949. Three of the nine initially built exploded because of fatigue problems in the pressurised fuselage.

The first civil American jet was the flown in 1954, powered by the JT3C turbojet.

The first high bypass turbofan was the used on the  which first flew in 1968 and paved the way for the engines used in the 747 and other widebody aircraft in use today.

title: Jet Propulsion/History


text:
Jet Propulsion/Engine ratings

Engines are certified to deliver standard thrusts depending upon flight conditions. Thrust is typically measured in kN or lbs. A 'rating' is a predefined power setting that the pilot can select which may be appropriate for particular flight conditions. Rating terminology differs between civil and military aircraft, reflecting the different requirements of these types of aviation.

Civil Aircraft Ratings
The following ratings are typical of commercial airliners. The aircraft/engine manufacturer will have to declare two principal ratings to the certifying authorities, since these define the safe limits of operation of the engine/aircraft - these are the Maximum Take-Off (MTO) rating, and the Maximum Continuous Thrust (MCT or MCN) rating.

Maximum Takeoff thrust (MTO)
This is the maximum thrust that the engine can deliver for 5 minutes in the take-off envelope of the aircraft. Peak thrust is usually achieved when the engine is static, however the most demanding condition for a modern turbofan engine is end-of-runway or lift-off conditions, typically at about 0.25Mn. This condition usually generates the highest stresses and temperatures in the engine, hence use of this rating is only permitted for up to 5 minutes of operation.

It is used, as the name suggests, for take-off when the aircraft is at its heaviest and has to be accelerated to take-off speed in a finite runway distance. The higher the thrust available from the engine, the shorter the runway can be, or the greater the aircraft payload can be. This affects which airports an aircraft can be operated from, and the economics of operation. As an alternative to payload, a higher thrust rating allows more fuel load to be carried into the air, so extending range of operation. These trade-offs between available thrust, runway length, aircraft weight and range may need to be assessed for each flight, and is part of a commercial pilot's preparation prior to take-off. An aircraft may take-off with less than maximum take-off thrust to reduce wear on the engine and extend its life. This is usually termed a 'reduced thrust' take-off, and is used to reduce engine maintenance costs.

It is a condition of certification that an aircraft should be able to take-off if one engine fails at the most critical point in the take-off run, when it is going too fast to be able to come to a safe stop in the remaining runway. In the case of twin engine aircraft, they have to be capable of taking off on one engine, so that in normal operation 'de-rate' is usually applied as an excess of thrust is available.

If an engine exceeds its 'redline' speeds or temperatures when running at MTO thrust, it is no longer considered airworthy.

Sometimes referred to as 'TOGA' thrust, short for take-off/go-around.

Maximum Continuous thrust (MCT)
Outside the MTO flight envelope, the MCT rating defines the maximum thrust that can be demanded by the pilot from the engine. As such, it has particular significance with respect to engine failure in flight, as the aircraft will have to proceed to its destination or nearest diversion airport at max continuous thrust. If the engine cannot achieve this thrust level whilst staying within its operating limits for engine speed and temperature, (the 'amber line'), it is no longer considered airworthy.

Maximum Climb thrust (MCL)
This is the thrust rating the manufacturer recommends be used during the climb phase of a typical flight. It may be the same as max continuous thrust, and usually is for a three or four engined aircraft. The top of the climb phase is typically the most challenging condition for a turbofan engine outside the take-off regime, and is a critical design requirement. De-rate can be applied to MCL thrust to extend engine life, but at the cost of a slower time to climb and slightly increased trip fuel consumption.

Maximum Cruise thrust (MCR)
Sometimes defined, but not a particularly useful rating since in cruise the pilot/autopilot will use the thrust required to maintain constant altitude and air speed to meet with air traffic control requirements.

Flight Idle
The idle rating is the minimum thrust that can be used whilst the aircraft is in flight. It is largely defined by the requirement to keep the engine running, possibly supplying secondary services to the aircraft such as hydraulic and electrical power, and, especially at high altitude, to supply passenger air at a minimum pressure. The flight idle rating is important in that the lower it is, the quicker the aircraft can descend (without going into a dive). It is often determined by stability considerations such as flutter and surge margin.

High or Approach idle
In the final phases of approach to landing it is important to be able to provide rapid response to throttle movements. This may require the engine to be running at a higher speed than flight idle to be able to provide rapid acceleration if required. There may be a maximum response time requirement to achieve 'TOGA' thrust if a landing is aborted.

Ground Idle
Used for maneuvering on the ground. Typically defined by the need to keep the engine running and supplying power and services to the aircraft. Generally, the lower this value the better, since brake wear is a significant factor in aircraft running/maintenance costs.

Example ratings
The figure below shows the typical behavior of a modern turbofan. The orange curves show maximum cruise thrust at altitude. The take-off thrust is about 25% higher than the cruise thrust at sea level since it is permitted for short durations only.

Military Ratings
Combat aircraft have very different requirements to civil aircraft, and different rating terminology is used, especially for aircraft using reheat or afterburning for thrust augmentation.

Military Thrust
Typically used to define the maximum available thrust without use of reheat. Sometime referred to as max 'dry' thrust.

title: Jet Propulsion/Engine ratings


text:
User:𐌼𐌰𐍂𐌽𐌰𐌽𐌴𐌻

cy:Defnyddiwr:Marnanel got:User:𐌼𐌰𐍂𐌽𐌰𐌽𐌴𐌻

title: User:𐌼𐌰𐍂𐌽𐌰𐌽𐌴𐌻


text:
Chess Opening Theory/1. a3

1. a3 · Anderssen's Opening
This opening move does little for development or control of the center. In some cases, White can transpose the game to an opening where 1. a3 might have been useful, but using a tempo on such a move already on move one seems premature. In fact, this opening is based on the idea that White is playing with the black pieces, but he has the move 1. a3 already played. If a game starts 1. a3 e5 2. e4 Nf6 3. Nc3, Black cannot proceed in Ruy Lopez-fashion, and if Black plays 3... Bc5, then 4. Nf3 puts Black into the Two Knights' Defence and White's a3 precludes many possibilities.

Named after the German chess player Adolf Anderssen, who played this opening a few times against Morphy, this is a prophylactic waiting move that allows Black to choose an opening down a tempo, should a3 be useful in such cases.

Black's responses
There are a variety of ways for Black to respond to this move, including:

 * 1... e5 may transpose into an English (1. c4 e5 2. a3), where a3 is a useful move for White. It covers and prepares b4, and allows White to set up a structure similar to that in the Najdorf or Kan for Black.
 * 1... d5 makes transpositions into the Polish Opening or a reversed Pirc highly likely, should White eventually play b4 or d3/g3.
 * 1... g6 may thwart White's plans if they planned to play b4 and Bb2 as the a1-h8 diagonal would be first occupied by a black Bg7 in that case, provided that Black fianchettos their bishop immediately.
 * 1... c5 may transpose into an a3 Sicilian, or White may play b4 and attack c5.
 * 1... Nf6 will likely transpose into other aforementioned lines.

Statistics
Approximate chances

White win 30%, Draw 39%, Black win 31%.

title: Chess Opening Theory/1. a3


text:
User talk:151.204.136.74

--Cspurrier 00:13, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:151.204.136.74