text:
Wikibooks talk:What is Wikijunior

Okay everybody. What is Wikijunior? --xixtas 19:37, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The cynic in me says that Wikijunior is the abandoned effort for fundraising by certain members of the WMF board of trustees in their attempt to try and kiss the behinds of a couple of wealthy benefactors who gave some money back elsewhen for a cool idea called "Wikijunior", but has since been taken over by Wikibookians and changed to their own devices and goals. The money collected was spent on some crazy party that seemed cool at the time, but nobody remembers what really happened.

 * A more sincere and apologetic response would be that Wikijunior represents an attempt to create books that are oriented toward children, with an eye toward creating high quality content over starting a whole bunch of random stubs that are half-started. The money raised in various fundraisers was used to finance the bandwidth and hosting costs of this project.

 * There are many good intentions with Wikijunior, but I would have to say that this project needs to find a new focus and goal in many ways. There is some incredible content that has been created under the "Wikijunior" brand, and it should also be noted that in many ways Wikijunior represents a completely seperate Wikimedia project that just happens to be using Wikibooks as an internet hosting service.

 * That so many of the Wikijunior books have also achieved "Book of the Month" status shows something of the quality that this content has already reached, and that there may be some merit to the slow growth development style. But this slow growth does have its own costs as well.

 * For where to take this page, that is a good question. I've been a long critic of Wikijunior being hosted on Wikibooks for the reason that such projects should be on something like the Incubator Wiki (that was finally created!)  Still, it is here on Wikibooks, and for now I can live with that.  There are areas of Wikijunior that need development and improvement, and this page may be a good place to start.  --Rob Horning 01:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Before I started this recent effort I thought long and hard about whether moving Wikijunior forward was worth the effort. My eyes are wide open. I have seen what I perceive to be substantial indifference to this project from every quarter. But I believe in the idea that quality free content for kids makes the world a better place. This project has made a start on 14 useful open-content titles for kids. That's nothing to sneeze at. I am an idealist at heart. After careful deliberation, I believe that Wikijunior can accomplish important things, and this is step one. The community needs to decide what Wikibooks Wikijunior should be. Step two we can figure out once we know the outcome of step one. --xixtas 03:44, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

 * As has been said elsewhere I don't do policy however to me Wikijunior is the flagship part of Wikibooks. It is tightly focused, well maintained and has good (generally consistent) contributors.  May not help you but my 0.02 anyway -- Herby  talk thyme 15:31, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Thank you Herby, that's a very nice thing to say. We do have some great contributors here who are not at all indifferent. Forest for the trees and all. -- xixtas talk 02:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

My stance is the following: I am a casual contributor to the wiki* projects and I have only recently started contributing to Wikijunior which is why I do not have strong sentiments towards the relationship of wikibooks and wikijunior. My general feeling, however, is that it is of mutual benefit (I for one thing have found my way to junior through books). Sboehringer 11:18, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, the policy is quite good. At the moment I don't see any ideas for improvements in it.

Speaking about Wikijunior - is there any sense in discussing here whether Wikijunior should be a part of Wikibooks? Such things are always decided on Meta Wiki. My personal view is that there is no reason for separating Wikijunior from Wikibooks. When Wikijunior and Wikibooks exist on the same wiki, there is a greater chance that users of one get involved in another. As a significantly smaller wikiprojekt, Wikijunior would only benefit from larger community of Wikibooks. Splitting projects is always an inconvenience: you have to register on another project and learn how to deal with a new community. Keeping dividing projects into small ones is a road to nowhere for me. --Derbeth talk 20:11, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't see any great advantage to splitting the projects apart. Personally I don't have the time or energy to launch a wikiproject. We do need to launch a separate child's portal that will be unlike anything else on any other mediawiki project (so far as I know), but I think we can do that and continue developing content here. -- xixtas talk 02:40, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

I like the proposed policy and believe that it pretty much encompasses the aims and spirit of the Wikijunior Project. If i may make a suggestion, though only a little one, could we change any instance of the word 'kid' to 'child' and 'kids' to 'children'. Just for consistencies sake and no other. However I am impressed by the policy proposed here. And i agree with you there Xixtas, we need to work on a portal for accessing the Wikjunior projects for children to use, something simple but striking. Urbane  (Talk)   (Contributions)  17:32, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

To my mind "kids" and "children" are synonyms and that change doesn't change the meaning of the policy in any meaningful way. Go ahead and change it. If you want to note that you specifically favor that revision then you could just include the number of the revision you favor in your comments. I don't think anyone would object to such a change. -- xixtas talk 03:14, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Clarify "Kid friendly"
I think we should clarify the "kid friendly" part of this policy to show explicitly that WJ books are censored by the community for the protection of minors. Alternatively, this could be an addition to the bottom of the page or something. If we do say that WJ is censored, however, we have to make it clear that the censoring process is not immediate, nor is it a guarantee or a statement of liability. --Whiteknight (Page) (Talk) 17:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree something needs to change if WJ is intended to be censored. I'm not so sure if a liability statement is needed specifically for WJ. I think the general disclaimer, and other disclaimers apply to WJ as much as it does to the rest of Wikibooks. I think if a statement about censoring WJ is added it also needs to be clear on what types of censoring is appropriate or not, or how its decided whether its appropriate to censor something. I'm in favor of adding it as an addition to the bottom of the page rather then changing the meaning of kid-friendly. --dark lama  18:09, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

 * I think that we may be getting hung up on the word "censored". The objective is to create kid friendly content (in every sense.) This means content that is inappropriate for kids should not be included and must be removed. What is inappropriate? well, offensive racist or intolerant hate speech, gratuitous or prurient sexual content, gratuitous violence, instructions for doing or making things which are very dangerous or widely illegal... Those are three off the top of my head. I'm not sure how much of this isn't already covered by WB:NPOV and the stipulation that Wikibooks doesn't allow fiction. I don't object to adding a stipulation that Wikijunior is censored (meaning doesn't allow certain types of content) for the protection of minors but I'm not convinced that it's necessary. Is there really confusion about this? -- xixtas talk 00:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

 * Well after your crude statement on VfD about censorship, and trying to put a stop to any suggestion of it being otherwise, yes I think clarification is needed. Different people have different views on whats appropriate for children or whats kid-friendly. I think kid-friendly basically says to write in a way that is understandable for children and will be enjoyed by children. The same issues of being dangerous and illegal that apply to Wikibooks as whole apply to children books, even more so because you not only have different laws which don't apply everywhere, but you also have different cultures and views on parenting. Children can be exposed to all the things you used as examples and may be something that some parents might feel ought to be discussed in a book here for children to read, rather then simply ignored or censored, and may be perfectly legal to do. --dark lama  01:02, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't understand where you're coming from at all. So if someone starts a "Wikijunior Illustrated Guide to Sexual Positions" we shouldn't even be allowed to discuss whether it's appropriate? Because you assumed (incorrectly) that the phrase "kid friendly" only applied to style issues and not content? (even though content is discussed in the second sentence following that bullet point.) Again, I don't understand it. I still don't see the value in adding more legalistic verbiage to this policy. -- xixtas talk 02:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

 * Just to be absolutely clear, the policy already says that content in Wikijunior should be kid friendly. It's like you're not recognizing that it already says that. -- xixtas talk 04:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Relationship with Wikibooks
I disagree that a sub-project of Wikibooks should be able override the project-wide policy. If that's desired, split the project out like was done with Wikiversity. A more restrictive policy for a sub-project could be appropriate, but a less restrictive policy I feel goes against WB:INCUBATOR (though citing that wouldn't be relevant if we've already established that project-wide policies can be ignored). The policy's already been formulated, but I thought I'd put my opinion out there. -- Adrignola talk contribs 14:31, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Wikijunior was started by a grant from the Beck Foundation, and was never intended to be a subproject. Wikijunior has its own domain name (http://www.wikijunior.org) which unfortunately redirects to Wikijunior. This is unfortunate because Wikijunior is not limited to English Wikibooks nor Wikibooks in general. Wikijunior exists on some language editions of Wikinews too for example. Wikijunior, like Wikiversity, predated the WB:INCUBATOR rule, and Wikimedia wide policy about incubations. Wikijunior is presumably an exception to the rules because of its history. I believe Wikijunior is a bit stuck. I believe it was intended to be moved as a separate project at some point and I'm not sure why that hasn't happened yet. I see Wikijunior as being an entirely independent project that unfortunately is still here. I must admit I have been inclined to enforce Wikibooks' rules on Wikijunior too, if only to try to force progression towards its intended independence. --dark lama  15:26, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Wikijunior is most naturally a subproject of Wikibooks, so that whatever the specific historical events that led it here, this is always where it would tend to settle. Wikijunior and Wikibooks both benefit form the association.  Their natural contributor bases blend seamlessly — there is no distinct line between them — and separating the projects would only create an artificial barrier to contributors roaming freely between, thereby reducing overall level of contribution on both sides of the artificial line.  That would destroy Wikijunior outright, and Wikibooks would have to invent a subproject as an outlet for the energies that its contributors want to direct toward a younger target audience.  And probably the first step of that would be to transwiki to this hypothetical Wikibooks subproject the books from the defunct separate project Wikijunior (much like the gradual absorption of simple Wikibooks that's going on now).  Leaving us all back pretty much where we are now, except for the lost time and effort spent getting there.

 * Concerning the relationship between policies in mainspace and Wikijunior. I, at least, have never thought of Wikijunior as exempt from any of the Wikibooks policies; rather I see a few of those policies (and only a few of them) as being sufficiently articulated that they can accommodate variations in circumstances, including the circumstances of Wikijunior.  The policies have somewhat fractal boundaries anyway, with various specific kinds of works allowed or disallowed for specific practical reasons (the prohibition against computer game walkthroughs springs to mind), so I see nothing extraordinary about provisions for Wikijunior.  That doesn't mean everything is as well phrased as it could be.  The wording on this page could be taken to suggest that Wikijunior is a law unto unto itself (which I think it neither is nor should be).  If I had more time right now (maybe later), I'd go through the policies carefully to see that each one actually mentions the nuances for Wikijunior that, I'm claiming, are really integral to those policies rather than overriding them.  --Pi zero (talk) 19:28, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I disagree. Wikijunior is not naturally a subproject of Wikibooks. For example, Wikjunior is also intended to include a published magazine with articles of interest for children, and news stories revolving around current events in the world written by and for children. A magazine is not a book, and news stories are also not a book. Which is probably why Wikijunior expands across multiple wikimedia projects. Wikijunior's scope is broader than Wikibooks just like Wikiversity.
 * I think most policies were written without Wikijunior in mind, precisely because they were never intended to apply to Wikijunior. Wikijunior needs its own independent community with its only independent policies. I think Wikibooks is more likely to crush, limit, and restrict Wikijunior, rather than allowing Wikijunior to mature and grow to its intended purpose. --dark lama  12:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I'll amend my position; I think most of the details of what I said earlier are not so much refuted as placed into a larger context that I was failing to take into account. I have admittedly tended to simplify my view of Wikijunior (validly for some purposes, but not for this one) by dismissing the whole magazine-and-whatnot as grandiose plans that clearly won't ever happen.  It may be more accurate to say that they won't ever happen as long as Wikijunior is a wholly owned subsidiary (so to speak) of Wikibooks.  I stand by most of my earlier claims, given the current strong barriers between projects.  As things are, separating WJ from WB would annihilate Wikijunior and create a Wikijunior-shaped hole in Wikibooks coverage.  As long as Wikijunior is here, the magazine isn't going to happen, and conversely, if the magazine were to happen, Wikijunior shouldn't be here.  As long as Wikijunior is here, I believe it is (recalling Adrignola's original question) appropriate and sufficient to view Wikijunior as a special case in the Wikibooks policies rather than an exception to them.

 * The difficulty is that right now the barriers between projects are too high. If we had integrated watchlists, Wikijunior and Wikibooks could be separated without diminishing either project (though there's no doubt which project can least afford to be diminished) — although, if we had integrated watchlists, it would also cease to be a binary decision between keeping Wikijunior here and making it a separate project.  Conceivably, the best solution would then be to keep the Wikijunior books here, and make the other components of Wikijunior a separate project.  Once the inter-project barriers come down, the workable possibilities expand vastly.

 * In the past I've always been very skeptical about the usefulness of integrated watchlists, but I seem to have rather suddenly become a believer. --Pi zero (talk) 16:20, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

 * An aside, there is a discussion on Wikipedia at this moment on integrated watchlists for trans-wiki collaboration. – Adrignola talk contribs 18:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I must admit I often find myself swaying back and forth between the bigger, the smaller, and the current picture of Wikijunior. I don't know if Wikijunior would be annihilated by becoming a separate project or not, I imagine that concern may have been raised for Wikiversity in the past as well. Creating a coverage hole is mainly why the situation is unfortunate. One possible solution to the coverage problem might be to allow some overlap. Wikibooks could have educational textbooks in the main namespace without any kind of organization other than by subject, and as is already the case, provide no assurance of appropriateness for children. Wikijunior could than be a lot like Wikisource in hosting more or less static texts. Wikijunior could host static texts of children's works from the other projects which have undergone a review by Wikijunior contributors. Wikijunior could also allow contributing to children's works in cases where there is no other place where the work is allowed, which could include things like the coloring book. Anyways that is one possible solution for Wikijunior as a separate project.
 * Oh BTW, I meant that Wikijunior is an exception in the context of the rules regarding incubation. This policy is also an exception to Wikibooks' policies when there are contradictions. Most other things apply because Wikijunior hasn't made any other policies yet. I believe the deletion policy still applies to Wikijunior, for the most part for example. I think spam, nonsense, and copyright violations in Wikijunior can be deleted, while the general guideline about deleting modules that will never become educational doesn't apply because Wikijunior doesn't require books to be educational. I hope that clarifies my thinking some. --dark lama  16:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

title: Wikibooks talk:What is Wikijunior


text:
Modern Media Hebrew Corpus/Nominal Phrase

 * /Nominal-Subject+Nominal-Predicate/
 * /Nominal-Subject+Copula+Nominal-Predicate/
 * /Nominal-Subject+Adjectival-Predicate/
 * /Nominal-Subject+Copula+Adjectival-Predicate/
 * /Nominal-Subject+Location-Predicate/
 * /Nominal-Subject+Infinitive/
 * /Nominal-Subject+Copula+Infinitive/
 * /There-is+Nominal-Subject/

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


text:
Flute/Introduction to Intervals and Scale building

Intervals
Interval-the distance between two notes

Intervals are an important part of music. Knowing them can make music easier, especially when learning scales. Firstly, intervals are the space between two notes on a staff. There are two kinds of intervals: melodic and harmonic. Melodic intervals are the intervals between two notes that are played at separate times. Harmonic intervals are the intervals between two notes that are played at the same time.

Unison comes from two Latin words, unus meaning one, and son meaning sound. Unison is when two notes play the same note. If you sit next to someone, and you both play C, you are in unison.

Minor seconds (m2) are one semi-tone (or half-step) apart. If you have a piano, two keys that are directly next to each other are a minor second apart. It is important to remember that B and C, as well as E and F, are minor seconds apart. This interval is considered the most disonant (lit. Bad sounding) interval. Major seconds (M2) are two half-steps apart, or one whole step.

Minor thirds (m3) are three half-steps apart, or a one-and-a-half step. In chords, this is what makes a minor triad "minor." Major thirds (M3) are two whole steps apart. In chords, this is what makes a major triad "major."

Perfect fourths are is a one-and-half step and a whole step apart (5 half-steps). This is very common in chant because of its unique sound. the first two notes in the wedding march are a perfect fourth apart. Tritones are three whole steps apart. This is a very uncommon interval, so practice it a lot. This will pay off in the future. Perfect fifths are seven half steps apart. Again, this is a very common interval in chant, and has a haunting sound.

Minor sixths are eight half-steps apart. If you've ever hear "The Entertainer" this interval is used. Major sixths are nine half-steps apart. There is a group of chords called sixth chords, which feature this interval. In The Phantom of the Opera, this interval is used in the chords the organ plays.

'Minor sevenths are ten half-steps apart. Minor sevenths are combined with minor triads to produce a brighter chord. Major sevenths are eleven half-steps apart. Major sevenths are combined with major triads to produce a "jazzy" chord.

Octaves are twelve half-steps apart.

There are two more concepts that are useful. Dimished and Augmented intervals. Diminished intervals are lowwered by one half step. Augmented intervals are hightened by one half step (e.g. Augmented unison is the "same" interval as a minor second).

At this point, melodic intervals are more important than harmonic intervals. However, if you ever want write music, direct an ensemble or play polyphonic instruments, harmonic intervals will become important.

Intervals in scales
Scales are built from intervals. There are two paterns you should memorize for building scales. The first is for major scales: base, major second, major third, perfect fourth, perfect fifth, major sixth, major seventh, octave. For example C major scale is C, D (major second), E (major third), F (perfect fourth), G (perfect fifth), A (major sixth), B (major seventh), C (octave). The second pattern is for minor scales, and is as follows: Base, major second, minor third, perfect fourth, perfect fifth, minor sixth, minor seventh, octave. for example, C minor is: C, D (major second), Eb (minor third), F (perfect fourth), G (perfect fifth), Ab (minor sixth), Bb (minor seventh), C octave.

Exercises

 * Use the patterns you used to create these scales

 * 1) F major
 * 2) D minor
 * 3) B major
 * 4) Ab minor
 * 5) A major
 * 6) F minor

Answers

 * Scales

 * F, G, A, Bb, C, D, E, F
 * D, E, F, G, A, Bb, C, D
 * B, C#, D#, E, F#, G#, A#, B
 * Ab, Bb, Cb, Db, Eb, Fb, Gb, Ab
 * A, B, C#, D, E, F#, G#, A
 * F, G, Ab, Bb, C, Db, Eb, F


text:
Cookbook:Royal Icing

| Dessert

Royal icing is a type of icing that dries to a hard sheen.

Ingredients

 * 2 large egg whites
 * ⅛ teaspoon cream of tartar
 * 2 ½ cups (300 g / 11 oz) confectioners' sugar
 * Liquid or paste food coloring

Procedure

 * 1) In the bowl of a stand mixer fitted with the whisk attachment, beat the egg whites on low for about 1 minute until they become loose.
 * 2) Add the cream of tartar and continue mixing on low until the whites become frothy, about 2 minutes.
 * 3) Gradually add the confectioners' sugar with the mixer on low.
 * 4) Continue to mix until the icing holds a stiff peak and is dull in appearance, about 2 minutes. The icing is ready to use for piping lines.

Notes, tips, and variations

 * If concerned about foodborne illness, use pasteurized eggs.
 * If desired, divide the icing among smaller bowls and add coloring(s).
 * To store icing for later use:
 * 1) Clean the inner sides of the bowl or container to remove any drips.
 * 2) Place a dampened paper towel directly on the surface of the icing and then cover the bowl very tightly with plastic wrap.
 * 3) Refrigerate up to 5 days.

Uses

 * Use on top of gingerbread or any other cookies.
 * For flooding (filling in an icing outline), add a small amount of water to the frosting and mix until the icing reaches a looser consistency.

title: Cookbook:Royal Icing


text:
ERP Internals/Glossary/Sales Order

An order received from a customer that has not yet been invoiced. The interval between receiving the order and invoicing it can vary from minutes to, in some industries, months.

title: ERP Internals/Glossary/Sales Order


text:
ERP Internals/Data Tables/Sales Order

This data consists of the following three tables:
 * Header
 * Line
 * Sales

title: ERP Internals/Data Tables/Sales Order


text:
ERP Internals/Data Tables/Sales Order/Sales

This table contains one or more records for every sales order. Typically, there is one record for every line on every order.

Used by: Sales Order

Key: Customer Number, Sales Order Number, Sales Representative Number

Fields:
 * Sales Order Number
 * Invoice Number
 * Sales Representative Number
 * Sales Contract Number
 * Amount
 * General Ledger Account Number


text:
ERP Internals/Data Tables/Sales Order/Header

This table contains one record for each invoice. This table layout is almost identical to the Accounts Receivable Invoice Header

Used by: Accounts Receivable, Order Entry/Invoicing, Time Billing, Service Management

Key: Sales Order Number

Fields:
 * Sales Order Number
 * Customer Number
 * Invoice Type
 * Invoice Date
 * Terms
 * FOB
 * Ship Via
 * Bill To
 * Ship To
 * Price List
 * Invoice Amount
 * Tax Amount
 * Freight Amount
 * Currency
 * Purchase Order
 * Status
 * Hold Date
 * Hold Authorization (User and Date/Time, encrypted)
 * Hold Type
 * Comment (unique to this invoice, prints on invoice)
 * General Ledger Account Number (Invoice)
 * General Ledger Account Number (Tax)
 * General Ledger Account Number (Freight)
 * Posted to General Ledger Date/Time


text:
ERP Internals/Data Tables/Sales Order/Line

This table contains one record for every line on every sales order. The table layout is virtually identical to the Accounts Receivable Invoice Detail.

Used by: Accounts Receivable, Order Entry/Invoicing, Time Billing, Service Management

Key: Sales Order Number, Line Number

Fields:
 * Sales Order Number
 * Line Number (a unique number assigned by the ERP package)
 * Item Number
 * Description (this can be multi-line)
 * Quantity
 * Back Order
 * UOM
 * Price
 * Tax Code
 * Tax Amount
 * Extended Amount (Price x Quantity - Tax)
 * General Ledger Account Number (Sales)


text:
ERP Internals/Glossary/Analytics

Programs that analyze the enterprises's data and present it in a form that facilitates better and faster decisions. Contrast with Business Intelligence.

title: ERP Internals/Glossary/Analytics


text:
ERP Internals/Glossary/Business Intelligence

A broad term referring to the gathering, analyzing and formatting of enterprise data to facilitate better and faster decisions. BI is equivalent to the earlier term "decision support system". Although there is much overlap between Analytics and BI, BI is considered the more general, comprehensive term.


text:
User:Drboisclair

Welcome to my user page. Please leave messages on my talk/dicussion page.

title: User:Drboisclair


text:
User talk:Drboisclair

Please leave messages for me below:

title: User talk:Drboisclair


text:
User:Etherior~enwikibooks

I'm just waiting to fill this page.

title: User:Etherior~enwikibooks


text:
Cookbook:Gingerbread Cookies Frosted with Royal Icing

| American cuisine | Vegetarian Cuisine | Holiday Recipes | Dessert

Ingredients

 * Flourless cooking spray
 * 3¾ cups (500 g / 1.1 lb) all-purpose flour, plus extra for dusting
 * 2 teaspoons baking soda
 * 1½ teaspoons ground ginger
 * 1½ teaspoons ground allspice
 * 1 teaspoon salt
 * 1 stick (120 g / 4.2 oz) unsalted butter, at room temperature
 * ¾ cup (150 g / 5.3 oz) tightly packed dark brown sugar
 * ½ cup (150 g / 5.3 oz) honey
 * 2 large eggs
 * Royal icing

Procedure

 * 1) Preheat oven to 375 F.
 * 2) Lightly spray cookie sheets with cooking spray or line with parchment paper.
 * 3) Sift together the flour, baking soda, ginger, allspice, and salt. Set aside.
 * 4) In a stand mixer fitted with the paddle attachment, cream together the butter, brown sugar, and honey on medium speed, about 2 minutes.
 * 5) Add the eggs and mix until smooth and light, another 2–3 minutes.
 * 6) Add the sifted dry ingredients and mix on low until the dough is evenly mixed.
 * 7) Turn the dough out on a lightly-floured work surface.
 * 8) Pat into an even disk.
 * 9) Cover with plastic wrap and chill until firm, about 20–30 minutes.
 * 10) Roll out the dough to a 0.25 in thickness.
 * 11) Use 5.5 in cookie cutters to cut out cookies.
 * 12) Transfer cookies to prepared cookie sheets, spacing them about an inch apart.
 * 13) Bake the cookie until they are firm, about 10–14 minutes, depending on size.
 * 14) Transfer the cookies to wire racks and let cool completely before decorating, if desired.
 * 15) Bake the remaining dough in batches, as directed.
 * 16) Frost with royal icing.


text:
Materials in Electronics

This book is about the properties of materials at the most fundamental level, with a particular bias on the application of these properties to electronic systems. This book forms the basis of the book on Semiconductors. This book starts from considering the electron as a particle in a material, and progresses to the properties of conductive and semiconductive materials.

Section 1: Charge Carriers

 * The Electron
 * Electrons in Conductors
 * The Hole

Section 2: Wave-Particle Duality and Implications

 * Wave-Particle Duality
 * Schrödinger's Equation
 * Confined Particles
 * /The Hydrogen Atom/

Section 3: Crystals and Energy Bands
Elektroniikan materiaalit

title: Materials in Electronics


text:
Materials in Electronics/The Electron

This page introduces the basic properties of the electron, the most important particle in electronic physics. This page introduces only what is necessary for the rest of this book to build on. for more detailed information, see the suggested further reading at the end of the page.

The Electron
The electron is a subatomic particle with a negative charge, equal to –1.60217646×10-19 C. Current, or the rate of flow of charge, is defined such that one coulomb, so 1/–1.60217646×10-19, or 6.24150974×1018 electrons flowing past a point per second give a current of one ampere. The charge on an electron is often given as -e. note that charge is always considered positive, so the charge of an electron is always negative.

The electron has a mass of 9.10938188×10-31 kg, or about 1/1840 that of a proton. The mass of an electron is often written as me.

When working, these values can usually be safely approximated to:

 * -e = -1.60×10-19 C
 * me = 9.11×10-31kg

title: Materials in Electronics/The Electron


text:
Cookbook:Soaking Beans

Ingredients

 * Dry Beans
 * Water
 * Baking Soda (if needed, see below)

Procedure
To soak beans, add 3 or 4 cups potable (drinking) water per half pound, then boil 2 minutes, then set aside for an hour. Alternately (and more often done) let stand in same amount of water overnight. After either method, drain and rinse beans, then proceed cooking per recipe.

Tips, Notes, and Variations

 * As beans are a natural product, pick over beans, discarding any stones, dirt particles, or discolored beans before soaking or cooking.
 * If you have hard water in your area, adding ⅛ teaspoon baking soda will reduce the cooking time.
 * Split peas and lentils are an exception to this method as they do not require soaking.

title: Cookbook:Soaking Beans


text:
Talk:Arimaa/Lone Elephant Attacks/Objectives and Risks

The diagram at the bottom of the page "The dual lone elephant game after 9s" needs modification as there are three dogs and two camels on the gold side, an impossibility.
 * I fixed the diagram. Thanks for the tipoff.  --Fritzlein 22:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)


text:
User:Acolb001

Humane Education: Creating a Compassionate Classroom

By Amy L. McNally

With the increased trend to establish standards of learning in the state of Virginia, we are moving towards a higher level of expected knowledge from students in the public school system. I commend our state for creating a uniform standard of high-quality education that targets all students in the school system regardless of learning ability. However, while we are standardizing the subjects taught, we have moved away from lessons that are peppered with messages relating to morality and compassion.

This is not an issue of religion in the classroom. This is an issue of teaching our children compassion, empathy, and tolerance through Humane Education.

Humane Education

Humane Education promotes a compassionate attitude towards people, animals, and the environment. While most parents and teachers have been teaching children humane principles for centuries, only a century ago did they have formalized programs designed for this purpose. (Ascione, 2003). Only now is the concept of Humane Education beginning to be considered by educators as an important facet of American Education.

Humane Education teaches living ethically and peacefully by creating a curriculum with important information, inspiration, and methods for creating a safe world for all. (wikipedia 2007). Often, educators achieve a compassionate classroom by infusing the required SOL objectives with humane education principles. For example, according to the eighth grade Virginia’s Standard of Learning, students are responsible for conducting an interview. They also need to be able to write in different forms such as: informative, persuasive, and cause and effect. A teacher who subscribes to the thought that Humane Education is important for a well-rounded student may assign the student to interview an individual that works with animals or relies on animals for their work. This could include police officers that use dogs or mounted police, veterinarians, animal shelter employees, dog trainers, even people who rely on dogs for sight. Once they gather their information, they could present the close relationship that these people have with the animals that they encounter by writing an informative essay.

The Link Most educators are very aware of the link between violence upon animals and violence against people. There is a great deal of research correlating the two. The “Boston Strangler’ was reported to have shot at dogs and cats as a child, Jeffrey Dahmer is said to have impaled dogs’ and cats’ heads on sticks. (Beirne, 1995) While it is not assumed that if a curriculum of Humane Education were deeply ingrained in their formal education, they wouldn’t have committed such horrific acts; however, the principle of children having a decreased tolerance for cruelty certainly could only benefit the child and the society to which they live.

Effects Measuring the effects of Humane Education has been a bit difficult for educators. First, it is important that the children assessed represent a cross section of people representing the ethnic, economic, and cultural diversity present in the United States. Then, it is important to evaluate the quality of Humane Education that is provided. It is necessary to conduct longitudinal studies that follow children who are taught the principles of compassion through Humane Education in an attempt to determine the program’s level of effectiveness. Humane Education “should also address general issues of moral education that are related to social problems like child maltreatment and delinquency.” (Angel, 1884)

T.A. Fitzgerald compared school-based interventions in fifth and sixth grade classrooms. The four conditions were: 1. repeated treatment where a humane educator presents lessons over a two month period 2. intensive treatment where the information is all given in one lengthy lesson 3. light treatment which provided reading material without any instruction 4. a control group where no humane education was provided

All groups were pre and post tested and his findings were that a focused classroom presentation by a master teacher would greatly affect the children’s humane attitudes. (Fitzgerald, 1981)

Malcarne also conducted studies to determine whether humane education was valuable in the classroom. He assessed a small group of 33 students. They were all in third and fourth grade. What he looked at was the value of role play in creating empathy relating to human distress and mistreatment and animal abuse and distress. His study strongly correlated the relationship between human empathy and animal empathy. (1991)

Conclusion

The phrase, “It takes a village to raise a child” is a sentiment that many people strongly hold. While we are moving away from infringing on people’s rights to educate their children with their own belief systems, I think it is imperative that we do not altogether abandon the mission to educate our children on basic humane principles. In a world that is so politically correct, many educators worry about what little discretion they have regarding what is taught in the classroom. Just because Humane Education isn’t explicitly listed in the Virginia’s Standards of Learning at the moment, doesn’t invalidate the benefits that our children receive by having exposure to this particular area of education. I for one believe that raising children to have a decreased tolerance for cruelty while fostering an increased capacity for compassion is a ideology that will make the world a better place for generations to come. Hopefully the educators that subscribe to the school of thought that Humane Education is mutually beneficial to both the children and to the society that they will become an active part in later years will pioneer legislation that not only permits humane principles being taught but requires it.

Multiple Choice Questions

1. When did the first formalized Humane Education program emerge? a. a decade ago b. a century ago c. this year d. none of the above

2. There is a strong link between what two following: a. violence upon animals and violence upon people b. humane education and violence c. violence upon animals without humane education d. none of the above

3. Which of the following statement is true? a. Humane education can be measured b. Humane education can not be measured c. Humane education has not yet been measured d. Humane education can and has been assessed

4. Which of the following principles are fundamental in Humane Education? a. tolerance b. empathy c. compassion d. all of the above

5. What findings did Malcarne uncover about Humane Education? a.  There is not a relationship between human empathy and animal empathy b. There is a relationship between human empathy and animal empathy c. Animal empathy in important for a child’s development d. None of the above

Essay Question:

What is Humane Education and do you believe that it should be incorporated into the Virginia’s Standard of Learning? Why or Why not?

Sample Response:

Humane education is a broad term that incorporates the principles of empathy, compassion, and tolerance. Its objectives are to create people who value people, animals, and the environment. This can be done in a variety of different ways such as informative lectures, role playing, and videos designed to create an awareness for all living things. In theory, this also will make students more open to cultural and economic diversity by forging an unconditional acceptance for all things living.

With a decreased tolerance for cruelty, a student may report another student who is abusing animals. Since there is a proven link between animal abuse and violent crimes, perhaps this initial report may help direct a student to proper resources before their crimes become even more heinous.

Without wanting to sound “tree-hugger-esque” I believe firmly in freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom to hold any beliefs as long as they don’t infringe upon the rights of others. That being said, I don’t think there is a single soul that would not benefit from our future leaders being shaped with lessons that are layered with principles of human morality.

title: User:Acolb001


text:
Materials in Electronics/Electrons in Conductors

Current as a Flow of Electrons
Current is defined as the flow of (positive) charge past a point per unit time:

 * $$I=\frac{Q}{t}$$

where
 * I is current, in amperes
 * Q is charge, in coulombs
 * t is time, in seconds

Remember that since electrons hold a negative charge, a flow of electrons is in the opposite direction to the conventional current, I. In the diagram below, the conventional current flows from right to left in the conductive material (grey). The electron flow produces a current in the same direction, but the particles themselves are moving the other way, from left to right.

Electrons in a Vacuum
Consider an electron gun that produces a stream of electrons which are accelerated using a potential difference as below:

The kinetic energy of an electron from this electron gun is given by

 * $$T=\frac 1 2 m_e v^2$$

where
 * T is the kinetic energy in J
 * me is the mass of an electron in kg
 * v is the velocity of the electron in m s-1

Now, this is equal to the energy provided to the electron by the electric field, E, which is given by

 * $$T=QV \,$$

where
 * t is the energy in J
 * Q is the charge in C
 * V is the voltage between the plates

Since Q=-e, we can write

 * $$\frac 1 2 m_e v^2=eV$$

 * $$v = \sqrt $$

Electrons in a Resistive Medium
This subsection will derive the drift velocity of an electron in a resistive medium, the conductivity (and therefore also resistivity) and provide a demonstration of the validity of Ohm's Law. It will also introduce mobility.

When electrons flow in a resistive medium, they collide with and scatter off the atoms that make up the medium:

These constant collisions means that, averaged over a length of time, the electrons do not accelerate because every time they collide the velocity is "reset" to, on average, zero. They travel instead at an average velocity, the drift velocity, vd. We shall now derive the value of the drift velocity.

An electric field, E is set up across the medium by the applied voltage, V. This field is given by:

 * $$E=\frac V L$$

From Newton's Second Law, we can say that the acceleration, af, of the electron (when not in collision) due to the field is given by

 * $$a_f=\frac {F }{m_e},$$

where F is the force exerted by the electric field. This is given by $$F=QE$$. This gives:

 * $$a_f=-\frac{eE}{m_e}$$

The negative sign comes about because of the negative charge on the electron.

Every time the electron collides, it velocity returns to, on average, zero. Call the time between collisions τ. This means that the acceleration due to the collisions, ac is given by the change in velocity over τ. Since the electron can be said to be always travelling at the drift velocity (the average velocity), we have

 * $$a_c=\frac{-v_d}{\tau}$$

Since the electron travels at a net constant velocity, the acceleration due to the field and the acceleration due the collisions sum to zero:

 * $$a_f+a_c=0 \,$$

So,

 * $$-\frac{eE}{m_e}=\frac{v_d}{\tau}$$

 * $$v_d=-\frac{e \tau}{m_e}E$$

We now introduce a new term, electron mobility, which is the velocity of the charge carrier per unit field. This has the symbol μe and is given by

 * $$\mu_e=\frac{v_d}{E}=-\frac{e \tau}{m_e}$$

Now, consider the equation

 * $$I=nAv_dq \,$$

where
 * n is the charge carrier density in m-3
 * a is the cross sectional area in m2

Substituting for vd and q, we get

 * $$I=-enA\frac{-e \tau E}{m_e}$$

Substituting E=V/l,

 * $$I=\frac{n A e^2 \tau}{m_e} \frac{V}{l}$$

Rearranging for convenience,

 * $$I=\frac{n e^2 \tau}{m_e} \frac{A}{l} V$$

We now have current, I as a function of the voltage, V and constants. Now, consider the definition of conductivity, σ:

 * $$\sigma=\frac {Il}{VA}$$

Substituting for I, and simplifying

 * $$\sigma=\frac{ne^2 \tau}{m_e}$$

 * $$\sigma=\mu_e n e \,$$

Also, we can demonstrate Ohm's Law from here. Note that

 * $$I=\frac{n e^2 \tau}{m_e} \frac{A}{l} V$$

can be written as

 * $$V=IR \,$$

where

 * $$\frac 1 R = \frac{n e^2 \tau}{m_e} \frac{A}{l}$$

This serves as a proof that in a conductor, so long as none of the other parameters change, voltage is proportional to current.


text:
User talk:24.178.252.47

Xania talk 00:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:24.178.252.47


text:
ERP Internals/Glossary/Available to Promise

The amount of an inventory item that has not yet be committed to customers.


text:
Radiation Oncology/SCLC/PCI

Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation (PCI)

Natural History

 * Risk of brain mets at 2 years is clinically ~50%, and ~80% in autopsy series.

 * Wisconsin, 1981 (1974–1979) PMID 6268295 -- "Risk of brain metastasis from small cell carcinoma of the lung related to length of survival and prophylactic irradiation." (Komaki R, Cancer Treat Rep. 1981 Sep-Oct;65(9-10):811-4.)
 * Retrospective. 131 patients, 57 patients +PCI, 74 patients -PCI. Different periods of observation
 * Calculated clinical failure: 12 months: +PCI 11% vs. -PCI 28%; 24 months +PCI 11% vs. -PCI 58% (SS)
 * 1979 PMID 227582 -- "CNS metastases in small cell bronchogenic carcinoma: increasing frequency and changing pattern with lengthening survival." (Nugent JL, Cancer. 1979 Nov;44(5):1885-93.)
 * Autopsy series: 2-year CNS mets in 80% patients

Treatment Overview

 * PCI was first proposed in 1973 due to high rate of developing brain mets, and their unsatisfactory control with whole brain RT
 * Two meta-analyses showed benefit in terms of brain mets incidence (50% reduction) and survival (26% improvement) at 3 years
 * PCI is currently recommended for patients with limited disease SCLC, who have complete response to systemic chemotherapy
 * EORTC 08993 showed improved brain met control, improved DFS and OS in extensive stage disease patients with any response to chemotherapy
 * RT dose 25/10 is standard (RTOG 0212) for limited stage, though 24-36 given in 2-3 Gy/day is used; RT dose 20/5 was used in extensive stage EORTC trial showing survival benefit
 * Acute radiation toxicity is usually mild, and resolves within few months. Data on long-term neurotoxicity is lacking
 * Concomittant chemotherapy can increase neurotoxicity, and should be avoided.
 * PCI should start as soon after completion of induction chemo as feasible based on meta-analysis results

Meta-Analysis
 * Brussels, 2001 (Belgium) PMID 11432756 -- "Prophylactic cranial irradiation in small cell lung cancer: a systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis." (Meert AP, BMC Cancer. 2001;1:5. Epub 2001 Jun 19.)
 * Meta-analysis. 12 randomized trials with 1547 patients, assigned to +/- PCI. (5 trials PCI initially with induction chemo, 2 trials PCI at end of induction chemo without checking response, 5 trials with CR only)
 * Outcome: decrease in brain mets incidence HR 0.48 (SS) for all pts +PCI, improvement in OS HR 0.82 (SS) only for +PCI pts in CR
 * Toxicity: long-term neurotoxicity not well described
 * Conclusion: PCI can be recommended for patients with SCLC and CR documented by brain scan
 * Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Overview Collaborative Group; 1999 PMID 10441603 -- "Prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission. Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation Overview Collaborative Group." (Auperin A, N Engl J Med. 1999 Aug 12;341(7):476-84.)
 * Meta-analysis. Individual data of 987 patients from 7 randomized trials. Patients with complete remission. Extensive disease in 12-17%.
 * Outcome: 3-year OS PCI+ 21% vs. PCI- 15% (absolute benefit 5%, SS). 3-year LC 33% vs. 59% (SS). DFS also improved
 * RT dose: larger doses (8 Gy, 24-25 Gy, 30 Gy, 36-40 Gy) led to greater decrease in risk of mets, but no impact on survival
 * Timing: decreased risk of mets with earlier administration after induction chemo
 * Conclusion: PCI improves overall survival, DFS and control of brain metastases
 * Critique: 4/7 trials had <100 patients, ~14% had extensive disease, dose-fractionation not uniform

Randomized Trials
 * EORTC 08993/22993 (2001–2006)
 * Randomized. 286 patients. Extensive stage SCLC and any response to 4-6 cycles of chemo. No brain imaging was required prior to randomization but rather screened for symptoms of brain mets. Treated with 1) PCI (20/5-30/12) vs. 2) no PCI.
 * 1-year; 2007 PMID 17699816 — "Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation in Extensive Small-Cell Lung Cancer." Slotman B et al. N Engl J Med. 2007 Aug 16;357(7):664-72.
 * 1-year outcome: decreased symptomatic brain mets: PCI+ 15% vs. PCI- 40% (SS), improved OS PCI+ 27% vs. PCI- 13% (SS); extracranial progression of 90%
 * Toxicity: PCI side effects, but clinically not significant
 * RT dose: 60% received 20/5 with impressive benefit. Given short survival, authors suggest shorter courses
 * Conclusion: PCI reduces risk of symptomatic brain mets, and improves DFS and OS in ED SCLC
 * Critique:  Brain imaging not required prior to randomization or with followup.  Therefore, patients may have had subclinical brain mets (that would have been seen on MRI) in the radiation group and extensive stage group.   Applicability of this study to MRI negative extensive stage patients is difficult to interpret.  NCCN has PCI with extensive stage with response to chemotherapy and good PS as category 1.
 * QoL; 2008 PMID 19047288 -- "Prophylactic Cranial Irradiation in Extensive Disease Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Short-Term Health-Related Quality of Life and Patient Reported Symptoms--Results of an International Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial by the EORTC Radiation Oncology and Lung Cancer Groups." (Slotman BJ, J Clin Oncol. 2008 Dec 1. [Epub ahead of print])
 * Planned QoL analysis (C30 questionnaire and Brain Cancer module). Compliance 94% at baseline, 60% at 6 weeks, 55% at 3 months. 3-month cut-off used for short-term HRQOL
 * Outcome: Mean global health status score higher in no PCI group at 6 weeks (SS) and 3 months (p=0.06). Mean score for hair loss and fatigue worse with PCI (SS), trend to worsening with other symptoms (e.g. appetite, constipation, N/V, social functioning, H/A, motor dysfunction, and leg weakness). Severe HRQOL worsening PCI 35% vs. no PCI 22% (SS).
 * Conclusion: PCI should be offered for survival benefit, but patients should be informed of potential adverse effects from PCI
 * Gustave-Roussy PCI-88, 1998 (France) PMID 9857997 -- "Controlled clinical trial of prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission." (Laplanche A, Lung Cancer. 1998 Sep;21(3):193-201.)
 * Randomized multi-institutional. 211 patients with SCLC in CR (goal 1100 patients). PCI protocol at discretion of each center (but RT 24-30 Gy, dose <=3 Gy, in <3 weeks). Mean F/U 5 years. Closed prematurely because results of PCI-85 convinced them to offer PCI to everyone.
 * 4-year OS: +PCI 22% vs. -PCI 16% (NS)
 * 4-year brain mets: +PCI 44% vs. -PCI 51% (NS)
 * UKCCCR/EORTC, 1997 PMID 9470828 -- "Prophylactic cranial irradiation is indicated following complete response to induction therapy in small cell lung cancer: results of a multicentre randomised trial. United Kingdom Coordinating Committee for Cancer Research (UKCCCR) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)" (Gregor A, Eur J Cancer. 1997 Oct;33(11):1752-8.)
 * Randomized. 314 patients. Limited stage SCLC with CR. Randomized to +PCI (36/18, 24/12, 30/10, 8/1, others as per treating MD) or -PCI
 * Brain mets: +PCI better with HR 0.44. DFS +PCI with HR 0.75. RT dose 24/12 same as -PCI, but higher doses better.
 * OS: no difference
 * Toxicity: Impairment in both groups before PCI, additional impairment at 6 months and 1 year, but no difference between +PCI and -PCI
 * Conclusion: PCI should be offered for CR. Dose should probably be >24/12
 * RTOG Abstract, 1996 -- "A randomized phase III study of prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) vs. observation (OBS) in patients (Pts) with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) achieving a complete response: Final report of an incomplete trial by the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group." (Wagner Jr H, Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1996;15:876. (Abstract 1120).)
 * Randomized, stopped early. Median F/U 1.5 years
 * Brain mets: +PCI 19% vs. -PCI 53%; Median OS: +PCI 3.9 months vs. -PCI 6.5 months (NS)
 * Gustave-Roussy PCI-85 (1985–1993) -- PCI 24/8 vs Observation
 * Randomized. 294 patients with SCLC, in CR after initial therapy. Limited (~80%) or extensive stage eligible. Arm 1) PCI 24/8 vs Arm 2) observation. Extensive neuropsych testing. Primary endpoint occurrence of brain mets
 * 1995 PMID 7707405 -- "Prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission." (Arriagada R, J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995 Feb 1;87(3):183-90.)
 * Outcome: 2-year isolated brain failure PCI+ 19% vs PCI- 45% 19% (SS); Development of brain mets 40% vs 67% (SS). 98% of brain mets in first 2 years. 2-year OS: PCI + 29% vs PCI- 21% (NS)
 * Toxicity: No difference on neuropsychological function or CT scan
 * Conclusion: PCI in patients with CR decreases risk of brain mets, potential effect on OS should be tested with higher power
 * Okayama, 1993 (Japan) (1981–1986) PMID 8069603 -- "Comparative study of prophylactic cranial irradiation in patients with small cell lung cancer achieving a complete response: a long-term follow-up result." (Ohonoshi T, Lung Cancer. 1993 Oct;10(1-2):47-54.)
 * Randomized. 46 patients with CR, +/- PCI. Median F/U 8.5 years
 * Brain relapse: +PCI 22% vs. -PCI 52% (SS). Sole brain met: +PCI 4% vs. -PCI 17% (NS).
 * 5-year OS: +PCI 22% vs. -PCI 13% (NS)
 * Toxicity: late neurotoxicity infrequent; only 1 mild deterioration in PCI group

Other Reports
 * Miami, 2001 PMID 11404503 -- "Twice-daily prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with limited disease small-cell lung cancer with complete response to chemotherapy and consolidative radiotherapy: report of a single institutional phase II trial." (Wolfson AH, Am J Clin Oncol. 2001 Jun;24(3):290-5.)
 * Phase II. 27 patients with LD-SCLC and CR offered PCI 30-36 Gy in 1.5 Gy BID. 15 patients accepted, 12 patients declined. Median F/U 20 months
 * 2-year DFS: +PCI 54% vs. -PCI 0% (SS). 2-year OS: +PCI 62% vs. -PCI 23% (SS)
 * Toxicity: No difference
 * 1973 PMID 4354042 -- "Should initial treatment of small cell carcinoma include systemic chemotherapy and brain irradiation?" (Hansen HH, Cancer Chemother Rep 3. 1973 Mar;4(2):239-41.)
 * Original suggestion for PCI

PCI dose regimens

 * There is insufficient data to make a recommendation
 * Common fractionation scheme is 25/10 (this is also the "standard" arm in ongoing RTOG and EORTC trials)
 * There is a suggestion that 30-36 Gy in 2-3 Gy/fx or BED equivalent produces good response (although RTOG 02-12 suggesting no benefit to increased dose)
 * Doses below 24/12 are not effective
 * Results of RTOG/EORTC studies should provide clarification; in abstract publication (ASCO 2008) 25/10 appears comparable in brain control but with better overall survival over higher doses

 * Intergroup PCI99-01 / EORTC 00223-08004 / RTOG 02-12 (1999–2005)
 * Randomized. 720 pts with L-SCLC, in CR after chemo+thoracic RT. Arm 1) PCI with standard dose 25/10 vs Arm 2) PCI with high dose (36/18 QD or 36/24 1.5 Gy BID). All had brain imaging at baseline. Primary endpoint incidence of brain mets at 2 years
 * 2009 PMID 19386548 -- "Standard-dose versus higher-dose prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in patients with limited-stage small-cell lung cancer in complete remission after chemotherapy and thoracic radiotherapy (PCI 99-01, EORTC 22003-08004, RTOG 0212, and IFCT 99-01): a randomised clinical trial." (Le Pechoux C, Lancet Oncol. 2009 Apr 20. [Epub ahead of print]). Median F/U 39 months
 * Outcome: 2-year incidence of brain mets standard 29% vs. high dose 23% (NS). 2-year OS 42% vs. 37% (p=0.05)
 * Toxicity: fatigue 30/34%, headaches 24/28%, N/V 23/28%
 * Conclusion: No significant reduction of brain mets after higher dose PCI, but significant increase in mortality. PCI at 25/10 should remain standard of care
 * Saskatchewan, 2003 (Canada) PMID 12788167 -- "Twenty-year follow-up study of long-term survival of limited-stage small-cell lung cancer and overview of prognostic and treatment factors." (Tai P, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003 Jul 1;56(3):626-33.)
 * Retrospective. Registry review, 1417 SCLC, 244 limited stage.
 * 10-year cause-specific survival: 15%
 * PCI: no difference in dosing schedule (range from 15/10 to 33/12)
 * Gliwice, 1998 (Poland) PMID 9531363 -- "Dose-response relationship for prophylactic cranial irradiation in small cell lung cancer." (Suwinski R, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998 Mar 1;40(4):797-806.)
 * Meta-analysis. Analysis of brain relapse as a function of dose and time interval to PCI. "Early" PCI <60 days of primary treatment, "Late" PCI >60 days from treatment
 * Early PCI: no dose effect, no threshold dose. Late PCI: dose threshold ~15-20 Gy
 * Conclusion: For high probability of eliminating relapse, required dose 30-35 Gy in 2 Gy/fx
 * Wisconsin, 1985 (1974–1984) PMID 4083270 -- "What is the lowest effective biologic dose for prophylactic cranial irradiation?" (Komaki R, Am J Clin Oncol. 1985 Dec;8(6):523-7.)
 * Retrospective. 327 patients treated with chemo (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and/or MTX). PCI during first week after diagnosis, concurrent with chemo #1.
 * Probability of brain mets at 1 year: similar for 25/10 or 30/10, ~10%.
 * Toxicity: No clinically apparent late neurotoxicity

Neuro-toxicity

 * There are concerns about neurotoxicity of PCI
 * There is significant neurotoxicity present in patients completing induction chemotherapy, prior to PCI
 * Data from randomized PCI trials is not well reported, but the neurotoxicity appears comparable with or without PCI
 * Ongoing RTOG and EORTC trials will hopefully provide more information

 * Mayo, 2004 PMID 15328816 -- "Cognitive dysfunction in patients with small-cell lung cancer: incidence, causes, and suggestions on management." (Kanard A, J Support Oncol. 2004 Mar-Apr;2(2):127-32; discussion 133–5, 138–40.)
 * Review. Cognitive dysfunction prevalence 15-90%
 * Edinburgh, 1997 PMID 9470828 -- "Prophylactic cranial irradiation is indicated following complete response to induction therapy in small cell lung cancer: results of a multicentre randomised trial. United Kingdom Coordinating Committee for Cancer Research (UKCCCR) and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)" (Gregor A, Eur J Cancer. 1997 Oct;33(11):1752-8.)
 * See above for details. Randomized. 314 patients. Limited stage SCLC with CR. Randomized to +PCI (36/18, 24/12, 30/10, 8/1) or -PCI
 * Toxicity: Impairment in both groups before PCI, additional impairment at 6 months and 1 year, but no difference between +PCI and -PCI
 * Gustave-Roussy PCI-85, 1995 (France) PMID 7707405 -- "Prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer in complete remission." (Arriagada R, J Natl Cancer Inst. 1995 Feb 1;87(3):183-90.)
 * See above for details. Randomized. 294 patients with SCLC in CR. Treated with PCI to 24/8 observation. Extensive neuropsych testing.
 * 2-year toxicity: no difference. Abnormality on CT scan comparable (+PCI 27% vs. -PCI 21%, NS)
 * MD Anderson, 1995 PMID 7642416 -- "Evaluation of cognitive function in patients with limited small cell lung cancer prior to and shortly following prophylactic cranial irradiation." (Komaki R, Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995 Aug 30;33(1):179-82.)
 * Prospective. 30 patients with limited SCLC, CR to chemotherapy + thoracic RT/resection. Neuropsychological tests prior to PCI. 9 patients had prior neurologic history, 21 patients were "normal". 11 patients had post-PCI testing 6–20 months later
 * Initial eval: 29/30 (97%) had cognitive dysfunction prior to PCI. Mostly verbal memory, frontal lobe dysfunction, fine motor coordination. Of normal patients, 20/21 had impairment
 * Post-PCI eval: no significant difference
 * Edinburgh, 1994 (UK) PMID 7654431 -- "Neurological and cognitive impairment in long-term survivors of small cell lung cancer." (Cull A, Eur J Cancer. 1994;30A(8):1067-74.)
 * Retrospective. 64 patients in remission >= 2 years, 52 with PCI, recalled for assessment
 * General function: 95% status <=1, 9/37 neuro exams abnormal
 * Neuropsychometric testing: 80% impaired on at least one exam, 54% impaired on two or more exams. Significant dysfunction. No conclusion about PCI, since few patients did not receive it
 * Dose-response: 8/1 less impaired than higher dose in multiple fractions

Decision Analysis

 * MD Anderson, 2006 PMID 16877726 -- "Decision analysis for prophylactic cranial irradiation for patients with small-cell lung cancer." (Lee JJ, J Clin Oncol. 2006 Aug 1;24(22):3597-603.)
 * Evaluation of risk/benefits of PCI for limited stage SCLC (QALE = quality-adjusted life expectancy), by varying survival rates and neurotoxicity (NT). Neurotoxicity not well reported, so modeled "mild" or "moderate"
 * Baseline: 5-year OS +PCI 26% (from Turrisi PMID 9920950), 5-year OS -PCI 22% (estimated equivalent). If mild NT, QALE +PCI 4.31 vs. -PCI 3.7 (SS). If moderate NT, QALE +PCI 4.2 vs -PCI 3.7 (SS).
 * If hypothetically improved survival: 5-year OS +PCI 40%, -PCI 36%. +PCI still better for mild/moderate NT, but not worth it for severe NT
 * Conclusion: At current OS, with mild/moderate neurotoxicity, PCI is worthwhile. As OS improves, impact of neurotoxicity becomes more important, but PCI still worthwhile if mild neurotoxicity

To Be Categorized

 * Abstract — "Is prophylactic cranial irradiation indicated in small-cell lung cancer?" Fleck et al. J Clin Oncol. 1990 Feb;8(2):209-14.
 * Commentary. "Brain irradiation and systemic chemotherapy for small-cell lung cancer: Dangerous Liaisons?" Turrisi. J Clin Oncol. 1990 Feb;8(2):196-9.
 * Mayo retrospective study. 45 Gy in 15 fractions, split course. 43 patients. All patients alive at 5 years had received PCI.
 * Bonner, NCCTG. Abstract, not yet published. BID TRT with daily chemotherapy (etoposide and cisplatin), with PCI given in 3rd-4th week, and TRT started 4th-5th week. No difference in cognitive ability or quality of life.  Local control no better than conventional treatment, but 5year OS 24%, MS 20 months.
 * Abstract Full Text — "Phase II trial of up-front accelerated thoracic radiotherapy combined with chemotherapy and optional up-front prophylactic cranial irradiation in limited small-cell lung cancer. Groupe d'Oncologie Thoracique des Regions Alpines." Hugli et al. J Clin Oncol. 2000 Apr;18(8):1662-7.
 * Swiss study. PCI given during 1st cycle.
 * Meta Analysis, 17 trials. Rate of brain mets, 60% vs 40%. Slight survival advantage. Subgroup analysis showed no difference between dose fractionation schemes.

title: Radiation Oncology/SCLC/PCI


text:
Cookbook:Rice with Black Beans (Arroz con Frijoles Negros)

| Cuban Cuisine

Arroz con frijoles negros (rice with black beans) is one of the many rice and bean dishes that are extremely popular throughout Latin America, especially in the Caribbean. Most people serve meat or fish with rice and beans. However, it also works well as a vegetarian or vegan main course.

Below is the Cuban version of this dish.

Ingredients

 * 1 lb (500 g) dried black beans
 * 1 large green pepper, cut in half with seeds and stem removed
 * ⅓ cup olive oil
 * 1 large onion, chopped
 * 4 cloves of garlic, smashed and chopped
 * 1 large green pepper, seeds and stem removed, then chopped
 * 4 tsp salt
 * ½ tsp pepper
 * 1 tsp oregano
 * 1 bay leaf
 * 2 tbsp sugar (or ½ packet of low-calorie sweetener)
 * 2 tbsp cider vinegar
 * 2 tbsp dry white wine (cooking wine or dry sherry is fine)
 * Olive oil (see below for quantities)
 * 2 cups converted rice

Preparation

 * 1) The night before you plan to cook, wash the beans and soak them in a large pot with 10 cups of water and one half of a green pepper.
 * 2) The next day, cook them in the same water until they are softer (a low boil, stirring occasionally, about an hour).
 * 3) In a frying pan, heat two tablespoons of oil and sauté the chopped onion, garlic, and green pepper (this is called a sofrito) until soft (about 5–10 minutes).
 * 4) Take a cup of the soft black beans in some liquid and put in a blender. Liquefy the beans. Add this to the frying pan and mix the bean liquid with the sofrito. Then, add the contents of the frying pan to the big pot of beans. Add salt, pepper, oregano, bay leaf, and sugar.
 * 5) Boil about another hour, stirring occasionally. Add vinegar and cooking wine.
 * 6) Boil for about another hour to thicken. Add the 2 tablespoons olive oil and serve.
 * 7) In another large sauce pan, combine rice, 4½ cups water, and 2 tablespoons olive oil.
 * 8) Bring to a boil then reduce to simmer for about 20 minutes.
 * 9) Fluff the rice with a fork once the water has evaporated.

Serving

 * First option: place a serving of rice on each plate with a ladle full of beans on top. This is the most common method.
 * Second option: place a serving of rice on each plate and a small side bowl holding a serving of beans for each diner.
 * Third option: place a serving of rice on each plate and place the beans in a large serving bowl in the middle of the table.
 * Encourage your guests to thoroughly mix their individual servings of rice and beans.

Notes, tips, and variations

 * If the beans are too watery, boil until the right consistency. They keep for about a week in the refrigerator, and they freeze well.


text:
Materials in Electronics/The Hole

The hole is a carrier of positive charge. It is named "hole" because it equivalent to an empty space in the lattice of the conductor where an electron could be. It has the same charge as the electron, but positive. Therefore, the holes move in the same direction as conventional current:

Holes do, however, have a different mass, and a different time between colllions and therefore a different mobility, called the hole mobility, μh. This is given by:

 * $$\mu_h=\frac{e \tau_h}{m_h}$$

To properly model current flow, we should take both electron and hole flow into account:

 * $$\sigma= e \left(n \mu_e + p \mu_h \right) $$

where
 * n is the electron density in m-3
 * p is the hole density in m-3

 * $$\sigma = n{{e^2 \tau _e } \over {m_e }} + p{{e^2 \tau _h } \over {m_h }}$$

where
 * τe is the electron scatering time in s
 * τh is the electron scatering time in s
 * mh is the mass of a hole in kg

title: Materials in Electronics/The Hole


text:
Introduction to Chemical Engineering Processes/How to use the mass balance

A Typical Type of Problem
Most problems you will face are significantly more complicated than the previous problem and the following one. In the engineering world, problems are presented as so-called "word problems", in which a system is described and the problem must be set up and solved (if possible) from the description. This section will attempt to illustrate through example, step by step, some common techniques and pitfalls in setting up mass balances. Some of the steps may seem somewhat excessive at this point, but if you follow them carefully on this relatively simple problem, you will certainly have an easier time following later steps.

Single Component in Multiple Processes: a Steam Process
Note that one way to define efficiency is in terms of conversion, which is intended here:

Step 1: Draw a Flowchart
The problem as it stands contains an awful lot of text, but it won't mean much until you draw what is given to you. First, ask yourself, what processes are in use in this problem? Make a list of the processes in the problem:

 * 1) Evaporator (A)
 * 2) Heat Exchanger (B)
 * 3) Turbine    (C)

Once you have a list of all the processes, you need to find out how they are connected (it'll tell you something like "the vapor stream enters a turbine"). Draw a basic sketch of the processes and their connections, and label the processes. It should look something like this:

Remember, we don't care what the actual processes look like, or how they're designed. At this point, we only really label what they are so that we can go back to the problem and know which process they're talking about.

Once all your processes are connected, find any streams that are not yet accounted for. In this case, we have not drawn the feed stream into the evaporator, the waste stream from the evaporator, or the exit streams from the turbine and heat exchanger.

The third step is to Label all your flows. Label them with any information you are given. Any information you are not given, and even information you are given should be given a different variable. It is usually easiest to give them the same variable as is found in the equation you will be using (for example, if you have an unknown flow rate, call it $$ \dot{m} $$ so it remains clear what the unknown value is physically. Give each a different subscript corresponding to the number of the feed stream (such as $$ \dot{m_1} $$ for the feed stream that you call "stream 1"). Make sure you include all units on the given values!

In the example problem, the flowchart I drew with all flows labeled looked like this:

Notice that for one of the streams, a volume flow rate is given rather than a mass flow rate, so it is labeled as such. This is very important, so that you avoid using a value in an equation that isn't valid (for example, there's no such thing as "conservation of volume" for most cases)!

The final step in drawing the flowchart is to write down any additional given information in terms of the variables you have defined. In this problem, the density of the water in the vapor stream is given, so write this on the side for future reference.

Carefully drawn flowcharts and diagrams are half of the key to solving any mass balance, or really a lot of other types of engineering problems. They are just as important as having the right units to getting the right answer.

Step 2: Make sure your units are consistent
The second step is to make sure all your units are consistent and, if not, to convert everything so that it is. In this case, since the principle that we'll need to use to solve for the flow rate of the waste stream ($$ \dot{m_3} $$) is conservation of mass, everything will need to be on a mass-flow basis, and also in the same mass-flow units.

In this problem, since two of our flow rates are given in metric units (though one is a volumetric flow rate rather than a mass flow rate, so we'll need to change that) and only one in English units, it would save time and minimize mistakes to convert $$ \dot{V_2} $$ and $$ \dot{m_5} $$ to kg/s.

From the previous section, the equation relating volumetric flowrate to mass flow rate is:

$$ \dot{V}_i*{\rho}_i = \dot{m}_i $$

Therefore, we need the density of water vapor in order to calculate the mass flow rate from the volumetric flow rate. Since the density is provided in the problem statement (if it wasn't, we'd need to calculate it with methods described later), the mass flow rate can be calculated:

$$ \dot{V_2} = \frac{4*10^6 \mbox{ L}}{1\mbox{ min}}*\frac{1\mbox{ m}^3}{1000\mbox{ L}}*\frac{1\mbox{ min}}{60 \mbox{ s}} = 66.67 \frac{m^3}{s} $$

$$ \rho_2 = 4 \frac{g}{m^3} * \frac{1\mbox{ kg}}{1000\mbox{ g}} = 0.004 \frac{kg}{m^3} $$

$$ \dot{m}_2 = 66.67\frac{m^3}{s} * 0.004 \frac{kg}{m^3} = 0.2666 \frac{kg}{s} $$

Note that since the density of a gas is so small, a huge volumetric flow rate is necessary to achieve any significant mass flow rate. This is fairly typical and is a practical problem when dealing with gas-phase processes.

The mass flow rate $$ \dot{m_5} $$ can be changed in a similar manner, but since it is already in terms of mass (or weight technically), we don't need to apply a density:

$$ \dot{m_5} = 1500\frac{lb}{hr} * \frac{1kg}{2.2lb} * \frac{1hr}{3600s} = 0.1893 \frac{kg}{s} $$

Now that everything is in the same system of units, we can proceed to the next step.

Step 3: Relate your variables
Since we have the mass flow rate of the vapor stream we can calculate the efficiency of the evaporator directly:

$$ efficiency = \frac{\dot{m}_2}{\dot{m}_1} = \frac{0.2666 \frac{kg}{s}}{0.5 \frac{kg}{s}} = 53.3\% $$

Finding $$ \dot{m_4} $$, as asked for in the problem, will be somewhat more difficult. One place to start is to write the mass balance on the evaporator, since that will certainly contain the unknown we seek. Assuming that the process is steady state we can write:

$$ In - Out = 0 $$

$$ \dot{m}_1 - \dot{m}_2 - \dot{m}_4 - \dot{m}_6 = 0 $$

Problem: we don't know $$ \dot{m}_6 $$ so with only this equation we cannot solve for $$ \dot{m}_4 $$. Have no fear, however, because there is another way to figure out what $$ \dot{m}_6 $$ is... can you figure it out? Try to do so before you move on.

So you want to check your guess? Alright then read on.
The way to find $$ \dot{m}_6 $$ is to do a mass balance on the heat exchanger, because the mass balance for the heat exchanger is simply:

$$ \dot{m}_6 - \dot{m}_5 = 0 $$

Since we know $$ \dot{m}_5 $$ we can calculate $$ \dot{m}_6 $$ and thus the waste stream flowrate $$\dot{m}_4 $$.

Step 4: Calculate your unknowns.
Carrying out the plan on this problem:

$$ \dot{m}_6 - 0.1893\frac{kg}{s} = 0 $$

$$ \dot{m}_6 = 0.1893 \frac{kg}{s} $$

Hence, from the mass balances on the evaporator:

$$ \dot{m}_4 = \dot{m}_1 - \dot{m}_2 - \dot{m}_6 = (0.5 - 0.2666 - 0.1893)\frac{kg}{s} = 0.0441 \frac{kg}{s} $$

So the final answers are:

Step 5: Check your work.
Ask: Do these answers make sense? Check for things like negative flow rates, efficiencies higher than 100%, or other physically impossible happenings; if something like this happens (and it will), you did something wrong. Is your exit rate higher than the total inlet rate (since no water is created in the processes, it is impossible for this to occur)?

In this case, the values make physical sense, so they may be right. It's always good to go back and check the math and the setup to make sure you didn't forget to convert any units or anything like that.


text:
IB Biology Practical Investigations

Topics
Core

Statistical Analysis

/Cells/ (including option C)

/The Chemistry of Life/ (including AHL/ option C)

/Genetics/ (including AHL)

/Ecology and Evolution/ (including options D and G)

/Human Health and Physiology/ (including AHL)

Additional Higher Level

/Plant Science/

Options

/Human Nutrition and Health/(SL)

/Physiology of Exercise/(SL)

/Neurobiology and Behaviour/

/Microbes and Biotechnology/

/Further Human Physiology/ (HL)

Assessment Criteria
The new subject guide contains significant changes in internal assessment procedures and criteria.

To make sure you have the right subject guide, please go to the OCC Biology Section.

title: IB Biology Practical Investigations


text:
Cookbook:Marinated Cucumbers and Onions

This is a nice, light, cooling salad or side dish to have during the hot summer months.

Ingredients

 * 2 cucumbers
 * 1 white onion
 * 2 cups (480 ml) distilled white vinegar
 * 2 teaspoons (10 ml) vegetable oil
 * 1 teaspoon (5 ml) sugar
 * 1 teaspoon (5 ml) salt

Procedure

 * 1) Mix vinegar, oil, salt and sugar for the marinade.
 * 2) Trim the ends from the cucumbers, peel them, and slice them.
 * 3) Peel the onion and slice it as thinly as possible.
 * 4) Pour the marinade over the cucumbers and onions and mix well.
 * 5) Let it sit in a cool place or refrigerator for at least two hours, stirring occasionally.
 * 6) Serve in a bowl, marinade and all, using salad tongs or a slotted spoon to dish out servings.

Notes, tips, and variations

 * Any light salad oil may be used. Avoid olive oil, as it congeals when refrigerated.
 * The cucumber to onion ratio should be from 2:1 to 2.5:1.
 * There should be just a hint of oil in the marinade and just enough sugar to take the edge off of the vinegar's tartness.
 * For crisper pickles add a spoonful of oregano.

title: Cookbook:Marinated Cucumbers and Onions


text:
IB Biology Practical Investigations/Cells

TEACHING IDEAS
''Practical investigations or activities included in this section are intended as a teaching resource rather than an assessment tool. Although all practical course recorded may be counted on the form 4/PSOW, these activities are probably not suitable for assessment of the IA criteria.''

Cell Structure and Cell Theory

Microscopy, Measurements and Scales

Membranes
 * /Diffusion and Osmosis Magic Show/

Mitosis

I have been very happy with the book Biology with Vernier using the same brand data loggers. The book comes with a CD with teacher and student notes for the labs and are in word document so it's easy to edit them to make them OK for the IB Internal Assessment (namely not giving the students too much info). The students get reasonable results and can do DCP and CE labs with the results.

ASSESSMENT IDEAS
'''These ideas are included as a starting point for teachers planning investigations in this topic. Investigations included here are not endorsed by the IBO and may not match the criteria precisely. Please exercise caution and judgement when selecting IA topics for submission.'''

CRITERIA FOR FIRST EXAMS MAY 2009

Design

Data Collection and Processing
 * /Population growth of yeast cells/

Conclusion and Evaluation
 * /Population growth of yeast cells/

RECOMMENDED TEXTS: CELLS

 * Further Investigations in Biology (Vol 1): Cells and Biochemistry. Billiet, P. et al. IBID Press, 2002. ISBN 1 876659 068

RECOMMENDED WEBSITES

 * Wikibook: Cell Biology

 * Cells Alive! Very visual website

OTHER RECOMMENDED RESOURCES

 * 'A Stem Cell Story' (DVD - 15mins). Eurostemcell, 2005. Available from http://www.eurostemcell.org


text:
User talk:Davidsgrll

Regarding your images uploaded under fair use
Note that fair use is not a license to use images; it is a part of copyright law which recognizes that we can use images without permission of the copyright owner in certain circumstances. You must justify on the image description page why the image is usable under the legal doctrine of fair use. Statements like "went onto photobucket.com It's a cartoon that everyone has access to that is related to education," "got this from yahoo where everyone can access," or "i got this from yahoo.com" are not justification for uploading images to Wikibooks for use under fair use.

Furthermore, when you upload an image to Wikibooks and later decide that you do not want to use it on Wikibooks, please tag it with {{delete}}. To do that, go to the image description page, click "edit this page," and type the characters  Please consider doing that on Image:Teachers.jpg and Image:Abr1237l.jpg if you do not intend to use them anymore.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me here or at my talk page. --Iamunknown 05:35, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Davidsgrll


text:
IB Biology Practical Investigations/Cells/Population growth of yeast cells

Background information for teachers
(This practical is placed here more as a bookmark than as a real example of work. I am still testing out this wiki idea. Steve).

This simple practical is good in the early stages of the DP Bio course as an introduction to the IA methods and write-up procedure. Students are given a culture of yeast cells in sugar and water, a microscope and a haemocytometer. The method is given to them, so it is not suitable for Planning (a) or Planning (b).

Instructions
AIM: To produce a population growth curve of yeast cells in liquid nutrient medium.

MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT:
 * Activated yeast culture
 * Microscope and haemocytometer
 * Incubator
 * Dropping pipettes, distilled water, 1 x 100ml beaker.

METHOD IN BRIEF:
 * Instruct students in use of the haemocytometer and calculations required.
 * Cell counts are made on a daily basis for 1 week, and recorded on a population growth curve.

Teachers' Reflections
''Having tried this practical a number of times, I have found it useful for diagnosing new DP students' lab skills, approaches to the write-up procedure and graph-drawing skills. Naturally, as a first 'assessed' practical, it wouldn't normally be considered for moderation, though in some cases it has been completed to a high standard.''    Steve


text:
User:Motterj

About Me

 * Name: Jay Mottern
 * Location: Seattle, Washington
 * Age: 49
 * Occupation: computer support technician
 * Hobbies: DJing on Internet radio stations, web portal design, electronic voice phenomenon research and experimentation

title: User:Motterj


text:
This Quantum World/Appendix/Relativity

The ABCs of relativity
See also the Wikibook Special relativity that contains an in-depth text on this subject.

The principle of relativity
If we use an inertial system (a.k.a. inertial coordinate system, inertial frame of reference, or inertial reference frame), then the components $$x,y,z$$ of the position of any freely moving classical object ("point mass") change by equal amounts $$\Delta x,\Delta y,\Delta z$$ in equal time intervals $$\Delta t.$$ Evidently, if $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ is an inertial frame then so is a reference frame $$\mathcal{F}_2$$ that is, relative to $$\mathcal{F}_1,$$

 * 1) shifted ("translated") in space by any distance and/or in any direction,
 * 2) translated in time by any interval,
 * 3) rotated by any angle about any axis, and/or
 * 4) moving with any constant velocity.

The principle of relativity states that all inertial systems are "created equal": the laws of physics are the same as long as they are formulated with respect to an inertial frame — no matter which. (Describing the same physical event or state of affairs using different inertial systems is like saying the same thing in different languages.) The first three items tell us that one inertial frame is as good as any other frame as long as the other frame differs by a shift of the coordinate origin in space and/or time and/or by a rotation of the spatial coordinate axes. What matters in physics are relative positions (the positions of objects relative to each other), relative times (the times of events relative to each other), and relative orientations (the orientations of objects relative to each other), inasmuch as these are unaffected by translations in space and/or time and by rotations of the spatial axes. In the physical world, there are no absolute positions, absolute times, or absolute orientations.

The fourth item tells us, in addition, that one inertial frame is as good as any other frame as long as the two frames move with a constant velocity relative to each other. What matters are relative velocities (the velocities of objects relative to each other), inasmuch as these are unaffected by a coordinate boost — the switch from an inertial frame $$\mathcal{F}$$ to a frame moving with a constant velocity relative to $$\mathcal{F}.$$ In the physical world, there are no absolute velocities and, in particular, there is no absolute rest.

It stands to reason. For one thing, positions are properties of objects, not things that exist even when they are not "occupied" or possessed. For another, the positions of objects are defined relative to the positions of other objects. In a universe containing a single object, there is no position that one could attribute to that object. By the same token, all physically meaningful times are the times of physical events, and they too are relatively defined, as the times between events. In a universe containing a single event, there is not time that one could attribute to that event. But if positions and times are relatively defined, then so are velocities.

That there is no such thing as absolute rest has not always been as obvious as it should have been. Two ideas were responsible for the erroneous notion that there is a special class of inertial frames defining "rest" in an absolute sense: the idea that electromagnetic effects are transmitted by waves, and the idea that these waves require a physical medium (dubbed "ether") for their propagation. If there were such a medium, one could define absolute rest as equivalent to being at rest with respect to it.

title: This Quantum World/Appendix/Relativity


text:
Muggles' Guide to Harry Potter/Magic/Diffindo

Overview
Diffindo is a destructive spell. It can be used to make seams rip and books separate from their bindings; its effects can be reversed by the Reparo charm.

Extended Description
Harry first uses this spell in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire to separate Cedric Diggory from a clutch of his friends, by causing the seam on his bag to split. Cedric has to stop to collect his books, which gives Harry a chance to speak to him privately.

In Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Harry uses this spell to keep his copy of the Half-Blood Prince's Potions book. When his own copy of the book arrives from Flourish and Blotts, Harry uses the Diffindo charm to separate the covers from the text of both his new book and the Prince's book, swaps covers, and then uses Reparo to repair both. In this way he can return a book to Professor Slughorn that looks like the one he borrowed, but keep the incredibly useful marginal notes of the Prince.

Analysis
Hermione is, of course, scandalized at any use of magic for destructive purposes; in particular, when this spell is used on a book, she is horrified.


text:
This Quantum World/Appendix/Relativity/Lorentz transformations

Lorentz transformations (general form)
We want to express the coordinates $$t$$ and $$\mathbf{r}=(x,y,z)$$ of an inertial frame $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ in terms of the coordinates $$t'$$ and $$\mathbf{r}'=(x',y',z')$$ of another inertial frame $$\mathcal{F}_2.$$ We will assume that the two frames meet the following conditions:

 * 1) their spacetime coordinate origins coincide ($$t'{=}0,\mathbf{r}'{=}0$$ mark the same spacetime location as $$t{=}0,\mathbf{r}{=}0$$),
 * 2) their space axes are parallel, and
 * 3) $$\mathcal{F}_2$$ moves with a constant velocity $$\mathbf{w}$$ relative to $$\mathcal{F}_1.$$

What we know at this point is that whatever moves with a constant velocity in $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ will do so in $$\mathcal{F}_2.$$ It follows that the transformation $$t,\mathbf{r}\rightarrow t',\mathbf{r}'$$ maps straight lines in $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ onto straight lines in $$\mathcal{F}_2.$$ Coordinate lines of $$\mathcal{F}_1,$$ in particular, will be mapped onto straight lines in $$\mathcal{F}_2.$$ This tells us that the dashed coordinates are linear combinations of the undashed ones,

t'=A\,t+\mathbf{B}\cdot\mathbf{r},\qquad \mathbf{r}'=C\,\mathbf{r}+(\mathbf{D}\cdot\mathbf{r})\mathbf{w}+\,t.$$

We also know that the transformation from $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ to $$\mathcal{F}_2$$ can only depend on $$\mathbf{w},$$ so $$A,$$ $$\mathbf{B},$$ $$C,$$ and $$\mathbf{D}$$ are functions of $$\mathbf{w}.$$ Our task is to find these functions. The real-valued functions $$A$$ and $$C$$ actually can depend only on $$w=|\mathbf{w}|={}_+\sqrt{\mathbf{w}\cdot\mathbf{w}},$$ so $$A=a(w)$$ and $$C=c(w).$$ A vector function depending only on $$\mathbf{w}$$ must be parallel (or antiparallel) to $$\mathbf{w},$$ and its magnitude must be a function of $$w.$$ We can therefore write $$\mathbf{B}=b(w)\,\mathbf{w},$$ $$\mathbf{D}=[d(w)/w^2]\mathbf{w},$$ and $$=e(w)\,\mathbf{w}.$$ (It will become clear in a moment why the factor $$w^{-2}$$ is included in the definition of $$\mathbf{D}.$$) So,

t'=a(w)\,t+b(w)\,\mathbf{w}\cdot\mathbf{r},\qquad \mathbf{r}'=\displaystyle c(w)\,\mathbf{r}+ d(w){\mathbf{w}\cdot\mathbf{r}\over w^2}\mathbf{w}+e(w)\,\mathbf{w}\,t.$$

Let's set $$\mathbf{r}$$ equal to $$\mathbf{w} t.$$ This implies that $$\mathbf{r}'=(c+d+e)\mathbf{w} t.$$ As we are looking at the trajectory of an object at rest in $$\mathcal{F}_2,$$ $$\mathbf{r}'$$ must be constant. Hence,

c+d+e=0.$$

Let's write down the inverse transformation. Since $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ moves with velocity $$-\mathbf{w}$$ relative to $$\mathcal{F}_2,$$ it is

t=a(w)\,t'-b(w)\,\mathbf{w}\cdot\mathbf{r}',\qquad \mathbf{r}=\displaystyle c(w)\,\mathbf{r}'+ d(w){\mathbf{w}\cdot\mathbf{r}'\over w^2}\mathbf{w}-e(w)\,\mathbf{w}\,t'.$$

To make life easier for us, we now chose the space axes so that $$\mathbf{w}=(w,0,0).$$ Then the above two (mutually inverse) transformations simplify to

t'=at+bwx,\quad x'=cx+dx+ewt,\quad y'=cy,\quad z'=cz,$$

t=at'-bwx',\quad x=cx'+dx'-ewt',\quad y=cy',\quad z=cz'.$$

Plugging the first transformation into the second, we obtain

t=a(at+bwx)-bw(cx+dx+ewt)=(a^2-bew^2)t+(abw-bcw-bdw)x,$$

x=c(cx+dx+ewt)+d(cx+dx+ewt)-ew(at+bwx)$$
 * $$=(c^2+2cd+d^2-bew^2)x+(cew+dew-aew)t,$$

y=c^2y,$$

z=c^2z.$$

The first of these equations tells us that

a^2-bew^2=1$$ and  $$abw-bcw-bdw=0.$$

The second tells us that

c^2+2cd+d^2-bew^2=1$$ and  $$cew+dew-aew=0.$$

Combining $$abw-bcw-bdw=0$$ with $$c+d+e=0$$ (and taking into account that $$w\neq0$$), we obtain $$b(a+e)=0.$$

Using $$c+d+e=0$$ to eliminate $$d,$$ we obtain $$e^2-bew^2=1$$ and $$e(a+e)=0.$$

Since the first of the last two equations implies that $$e\neq0,$$ we gather from the second that $$e=-a.$$

$$y=c^2y$$ tells us that $$c^2=1.$$ $$c$$ must, in fact, be equal to 1, since we have assumed that the space axes of the two frames a parallel (rather than antiparallel).

With $$c=1$$ and $$e=-a,$$ $$c+d+e=0$$ yields $$d=a-1.$$ Upon solving $$e^2-bew^2=1$$ for $$b,$$ we are left with expressions for $$b, c, d,$$ and $$e$$ depending solely on $$a$$:

b={1-a^2\over aw^2},\quad c=1,\quad d=a-1,\quad e=-a.$$

Quite an improvement!

To find the remaining function $$a(w),$$ we consider a third inertial frame $$\mathcal{F}_3,$$ which moves with velocity $$\mathbf{v}=(v,0,0)$$ relative to $$\mathcal{F}_2. $$ Combining the transformation from $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ to $$\mathcal{F}_2,$$

t'=a(w)\,t+{1-a^2(w)\over a(w)\,w}x,\qquad x'=a(w)\,x-a(w)\,wt,$$

with the transformation from $$\mathcal{F}_2$$ to $$\mathcal{F}_3,$$

t=a(v)\,t'+\frac{1-a^2(v)}{a(v)\,v}x',\qquad x=a(v)\,x'-a(v)\,vt',$$

we obtain the transformation from $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ to $$\mathcal{F}_3$$:

t''=a(v)\left[a(w)\,t+{1-a^2(w)\over a(w)\,w}x\right]+{1-a^2(v)\over a(v)\,v} \Bigl[a(w)\,x-a(w)\,wt\Bigr]$$

=\underbrace{\left[a(v)\,a(w)-{1-a^2(v)\over a(v)\,v}a(w)\,w\right]}_{\textstyle\star}t+ \Bigl[\dots\Bigr]\,x,$$

x''=a(v)\Bigl[a(w)\,x-a(w)\,wt\Bigr]-a(v)\,v\left[a(w)\,t+{1-a^2(w)\over a(w)\,w}x\right]$$

=\underbrace{\left[a(v)\,a(w)-a(v)\,v{1-a^2(w)\over a(w)\,w}\right]}_{\textstyle\star\,\star}x-\Bigl[\dots\Bigr]\,t.$$

The direct transformation from $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ to $$\mathcal{F}_3$$ must have the same form as the transformations from $$\mathcal{F}_1$$ to $$\mathcal{F}_2$$ and from $$\mathcal{F}_2$$ to $$\mathcal{F}_3$$, namely

t=\underbrace{a(u)}_{\textstyle\star}t+{1-a^2(u)\over a(u)\,u}\,x,\qquad x=\underbrace{a(u)}_{\textstyle\star\,\star}x-a(u)\,ut,$$

where $$u$$ is the speed of $$\mathcal{F}_3$$ relative to $$\mathcal{F}_1.$$ Comparison of the coefficients marked with stars yields two expressions for $$a(u),$$ which of course must be equal:

a(v)\,a(w)-{1-a^2(v)\over a(v)\,v}a(w)\,w=a(v)\,a(w)-a(v)\,v{1-a^2(w)\over a(w)\,w}.$$

It follows that $$\bigl[1-a^2(v)\bigr]\,a^2(w)w^2=\bigl[1-a^2(w)\bigr]\,a^2(v)v^2,$$ and this tells us that

K={1-a^2(w)\over a^2(w)\,w^2}={1-a^2(v)\over a^2(v)\,v^2}$$

is a universal constant. Solving the first equality for $$a(w),$$ we obtain

a(w)=1/\sqrt{1+Kw^2}.$$

This allows us to cast the transformation

t'=at+bwx,\quad x'=cx+dx+ewt,\quad y'=cy,\quad z'=cz,$$

into the form

t'={t+Kwx\over\sqrt{1+Kw^2}},\quad x'={x-wt\over\sqrt{1+Kw^2}},\quad y'=y,\quad z'=z.$$

Trumpets, please! We have managed to reduce five unknown functions to a single constant.


text:
Talk:Information and Communication Technologies for Poverty Alleviation/For Further Reading

Missing the reference for Schmandt. et al, 1990.


text:
Make

make is a utility for building applications. This tutorial will teach you how to use this utility with Makefiles. This tutorial is primarily focused on GNU make.

Hand compilation
Before we start talking about "make", let's first describe the build process used long ago: "hand compilation", aka "manual build". That processes isn't too bad if you only have one or two source files. A simple compilation process would be by typing the following code by hand: For beginners, this might take a while to get used to. As an alternative, using make the command would be: Both commands will do the same thing - take the file.cpp source file, compile it and then link it into an executable. But where the problem comes in is where the user has to use more than one source file, or is dependent on libraries. Making an SDL application might consist of something like this: This is getting harder to remember, isn't it? Let's add some optimisation: Do you really want to type that whole command line every time you make the tiniest edit to your source files? This is where make comes in - it will save your time!

Basics
A make file works as a simple dependency tree - it compiles the stuff that is outdated and then links your software together. You will have to specify the compilation options, but they will not be as tough on you anymore. A simple makefile for compiling your application:

Makefile To compile your application, you may do: or: Well, you may now ask, how much of use is this? I can make a shell script for this myself! So lets now work on multiple files and object files - your application is big enough to be linked now: it contains five files.

The Test Case
Globally, there are three functions present: int main; (file1.cpp) void file2function(std::string from); (file2.cpp) void file3function(std::string from); (file3.cpp) File2 and file3 have their header files, so they could be inter-linked. The actual application will look like this:

file1.cpp

file2.h

file2.cpp

file3.h

file3.cpp

So, how would I link this all up? Well, the most basic way is to do it all by hand: However, make would offer a simpler way, Makefile:

Makefile

Pretty different, eh? There's a different approach to do this, which is what makes make so good:

Makefile

How easy is it to expand now? Just add a file to the OBJS list and you're done!

This is a complete makefile that handles the complete process of converting several source files (and creating a bunch of ".o" files as an intermediate step) into the final "file1" executable.

Good programmers put human-readable comments (lines starting with the "#" character) in the makefile to describe why the makefile was written and what make is intended to do with this makefile (which, alas, is not always what actually happens).

Long Lines
Some statements in a makefile can be very long. To make them easier to read, some programmers break up long statements into several shorter, easier-to-read physical lines. Many consoles displayed 80 characters across, which is the threshold some programmers use for breaking up lines and comments.

In short, a programmer may decide it looks nicer to writes several short physical lines that together compose one statement, like this:

Rather than the same statement, crammed into a single physical line:

Make Clean
When you type "make clean" from the command prompt, "make" deletes all the files that you specified were easily replaceable files—i.e., the intermediate and output files generated from your irreplaceable hand-written source files.

To tell "make" that some file is an easily replaceable file, add it to the "rm" line of the "clean" section of your makefile, and that file will be deleted *every* time you type "make clean" at the command prompt. (If you don't already have a "clean" section in your makefile, add a section to the end of your makefile that looks like the following):

In this example, we've told "make" that all intermediate object files ("*.o") and the final executable ("file") are safe-to-delete, easily regenerated files. Typically people (or automake scripts) set up the clean step to delete every target in the makefile.

Typically a programmer periodically runs " ", then archives *every* file in the directory, and then runs "make" to regenerate every file. Then he tests the program executable, confident that the program he is testing can be easily regenerated entirely from the files in the archive.

make check
Many makefiles include a " " target that performs self-tests (if any). (The  target is usually a synonym for  ).

To support test-first programming and regression tests, " " just runs the tests, it doesn't rebuild the program; but often  first re-builds the program and then also runs "make check".

Variables
"make" accepts three ways of setting variables.
 * Recursively expanded variables are defined by using . This means if one variable 'y' contains references to another variable 'x', and 'x' changes after the 'y' being defined, 'y' will include the change made to 'x'.

 * Simply expanded variables are defined by using . This means if one variable 'x' contains references to another variable 'y', the 'y' variable will be scanned for once and for all.

 * If you just want to make sure a variable is set, you can use . If the variable is already set, then the definition will not be run; if not, then 'variable' will be set as 'value'.

File Names With Special Characters
Many programmers recommend not creating files with spaces or dollar signs in them, in order to avoid the 'spaces in file names' error in "make" and many other utilities.

If you must deal with a file that has spaces or dollar signs in the file name (such as the file "my $0.02 program.c"), sometimes you can escape the literal name of the file with double slashes and double dollar signs—in the Makefile, that filename can be represented as "my\\ $$0.02\\ program.c".

Alas, the double-slash escape doesn't work when "make" works with lists of files (which are internally represented as space-separated filenames). One work-around is to refer to that file name using a space-free representation like "my+$$0.02+program.c", then later in the make file use the $(subst) function to convert that space-free representation back to the actual on-disk file name. Alas, this work-around can't handle filenames that include both spaces and plus-signs.

Perhaps it's simplest to avoid filenames with spaces in them as inputs or outputs of "make".

Name of the makefile
When creating a new makefile, give it the literal name " " (8 characters, no extension).

In principle, you could create a makefile with some other name, such as  or  , which (like ) are automatically found by the GNU version of the   utility, or some other name that you pass to the make utility with the  option.

Example makefiles

 * /Examples/

Books and manuals

 * GNU Make documentation
 * FreeBSD make manual page
 * Microsoft NMAKE reference
 * GNU make Standard Library.
 * Managing Projects with GNU make.

Tutorials

 * The GNU C Programming Tutorial - Writing a makefile
 * Makefile Tutorial: How To Write A Makefile
 * OPUS Makefile Tutorial
 * Makefile Tutorial for C, gcc, & gmake
 * Using NMake

Articles

 * "Ask Mr. Make" series of article about GNU Make
 * What is wrong with make?
 * What’s Wrong With GNU make?
 * Peter Miller. "Recursive Make Considered Harmful". (was Recursive Make Considered Harmful)
 * Advanced Auto-Dependency Generation.
 * "Kleknev: a coarse-grained profiler for build systems". Sometimes "make" is used to build extremely large, complicated systems; the Kleknev system helps people figure out what items are eating the most time during that build process.

C/Więcej o kompilowaniu

title: Make


text: Template:Lowercase title

title: Template:Lowercase title