text:
Harmonic analysis

Harmonic analysis is a branch of mathematics concerned with investigating the connections between a function and its representation in frequency. The frequency representation is found by using the Fourier transform for functions on the real line or by Fourier series for periodic functions. Generalizing these transforms to other domains is generally called Fourier analysis, although the term is sometimes used interchangeably with harmonic analysis. Harmonic analysis has become a vast subject with applications in areas as diverse as number theory, representation theory, signal processing, quantum mechanics, tidal analysis and neuroscience.

The term "harmonics" originated as the Ancient Greek word harmonikos, meaning "skilled in music". In physical eigenvalue problems, it began to mean waves whose frequencies are integer multiples of one another, as are the frequencies of the harmonics of music notes. Still, the term has been generalized beyond its original meaning.

Classical Harmonic Analysis
Historically Harmonic functions were the solutions of Laplace's equation, this concept was extended first to special functions, then to general elliptic operators and nowadays harmonic functions are considered as a generalization of periodic functions on function spaces defined on a manifold, for example as solutions of general, not necessarly elliptic, partial differential equations including some boundary conditions that may drive their symmetry or periodicity.

Fourier Analysis
The classical Fourier transform on Rn is still an area of ongoing research, particularly concerning Fourier transformation on more general objects such as tempered distributions. For instance, if we impose some requirements on a distribution f, we can attempt to translate these requirements into the Fourier transform of f. The Paley–Wiener theorem is an example. The Paley–Wiener theorem immediately implies that if f is a nonzero distribution of compact support (these include functions of compact support), then its Fourier transform is never compactly supported (i.e., if a signal is limited in one domain, it is unlimited in the other). This is an elementary form of an uncertainty principle in a harmonic-analysis setting.

Fourier series can be conveniently studied in the context of Hilbert spaces, which provides a connection between harmonic analysis and functional analysis. There are four versions of the Fourier transform, dependent on the spaces that are mapped by the transformation:
 * Discrete/periodic–discrete/periodic: discrete Fourier transform
 * Continuous/periodic–discrete/aperiodic: Fourier series
 * Discrete/aperiodic–continuous/periodic: discrete-time Fourier transform
 * Continuous/aperiodic–continuous/aperiodic: Fourier transform

Abstract harmonic analysis
Abstract harmonic analysis is primarily concerned with how real or complex-valued functions (often on very general domains) can be studied using symmetries such as translations or rotations (for instance via the Fourier transform and its relatives); this field is of course related to real-variable harmonic analysis, but is perhaps closer in spirit to representation theory and functional analysis.

One of the most modern branches of harmonic analysis, having its roots in the mid-20th century, is analysis on topological groups. The core motivating ideas are the various Fourier transforms, which can be generalized to a transform of functions defined on Hausdorff locally compact topological groups.

One of the major results in the theory of functions on abelian locally compact groups is called Pontryagin duality. Harmonic analysis studies the properties of that duality. Different generalization of Fourier transforms attempts to extend those features to different settings, for instance, first to the case of general abelian topological groups and second to the case of non-abelian Lie groups.

Harmonic analysis is closely related to the theory of unitary group representations for general non-abelian locally compact groups. For compact groups, the Peter–Weyl theorem explains how one may get harmonics by choosing one irreducible representation out of each equivalence class of representations. This choice of harmonics enjoys some of the valuable properties of the classical Fourier transform in terms of carrying convolutions to pointwise products or otherwise showing a certain understanding of the underlying group structure. See also: Non-commutative harmonic analysis.

If the group is neither abelian nor compact, no general satisfactory theory is currently known ("satisfactory" means at least as strong as the Plancherel theorem). However, many specific cases have been analyzed, for example, SLn. In this case, representations in infinite dimensions play a crucial role.

Applied harmonic analysis

Many applications of harmonic analysis in science and engineering begin with the idea or hypothesis that a phenomenon or signal is composed of a sum of individual oscillatory components. Ocean tides and vibrating strings are common and simple examples. The theoretical approach often tries to describe the system by a differential equation or system of equations to predict the essential features, including the amplitude, frequency, and phases of the oscillatory components. The specific equations depend on the field, but theories generally try to select equations that represent significant principles that are applicable.

The experimental approach is usually to acquire data that accurately quantifies the phenomenon. For example, in a study of tides, the experimentalist would acquire samples of water depth as a function of time at closely enough spaced intervals to see each oscillation and over a long enough duration that multiple oscillatory periods are likely included. In a study on vibrating strings, it is common for the experimentalist to acquire a sound waveform sampled at a rate at least twice that of the highest frequency expected and for a duration many times the period of the lowest frequency expected.

For example, the top signal at the right is a sound waveform of a bass guitar playing an open string corresponding to an A note with a fundamental frequency of 55 Hz. The waveform appears oscillatory, but it is more complex than a simple sine wave, indicating the presence of additional waves. The different wave components contributing to the sound can be revealed by applying a mathematical analysis technique known as the Fourier transform, shown in the lower figure. There is a prominent peak at 55 Hz, but other peaks at 110 Hz, 165 Hz, and at other frequencies corresponding to integer multiples of 55 Hz. In this case, 55 Hz is identified as the fundamental frequency of the string vibration, and the integer multiples are known as harmonics.

Other branches

 * Study of the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the Laplacian on domains, manifolds, and (to a lesser extent) graphs is also considered a branch of harmonic analysis. See, e.g., hearing the shape of a drum.
 * Harmonic analysis on Euclidean spaces deals with properties of the Fourier transform on Rn that have no analog on general groups. For example, the fact that the Fourier transform is rotation-invariant. Decomposing the Fourier transform into its radial and spherical components leads to topics such as Bessel functions and spherical harmonics.
 * Harmonic analysis on tube domains is concerned with generalizing properties of Hardy spaces to higher dimensions.
 * Automorphic forms are generalized harmonic functions, with respect to a symmetry group. They are an old and at the same time active area of development in harmonic analysis due to their connections to the Langlands program.
 * Non linear harmonic analysis is the use of harmonic and functional analysis tools and techniques to study nonlinear systems. This includes both problems with infinite degrees of freedom and also non linear operators and equations.

title: Harmonic analysis


text:
Home run

In baseball, a home run (abbreviated HR) is scored when the ball is hit in such a way that the batter is able to circle the bases and reach home plate safely in one play without any errors being committed by the defensive team. A home run is usually achieved by hitting the ball over the outfield fence between the foul poles (or hitting either foul pole) without the ball touching the field.

Inside-the-park home runs where the batter reaches home safely while the baseball is in play on the field are infrequent. In very rare cases, a fielder attempting to catch a ball in flight may misplay it and knock it over the outfield fence, resulting in a home run.

An official scorer will credit the batter with a hit, a run scored, and a run batted in (RBI), as well as an RBI for each runner on base. The pitcher is recorded as having given up a hit and a run, with additional runs charged for each base-runner that scores.

Home runs are among the most popular aspects of baseball and, as a result, prolific home run hitters are usually the most popular among fans and consequently the highest paid by teams—hence the old saying, "Home run hitters drive Cadillacs, and singles hitters drive Fords" (coined, circa 1948, by veteran pitcher Fritz Ostermueller, by way of mentoring his young teammate, Ralph Kiner).

Nicknames for a home run include "homer", "round tripper", "four-bagger", "big fly", "goner" "dinger", "long ball", "jack", "shot"/"moon shot", "bomb", "tater", and "blast", while a player hitting a home run may be said to have "gone deep" or "gone yard".

Out of the park
A home run is most often scored when the ball is hit over the outfield wall between the foul poles (in fair territory) before it touches the ground (in flight), and without being caught or deflected back onto the field by a fielder. A batted ball is also a home run if it touches either a foul pole or its attached screen before touching the ground, as the foul poles are by definition in fair territory. Additionally, many major-league ballparks have ground rules stating that a batted ball in flight that strikes a specified location or fixed object is a home run; this usually applies to objects that are beyond the outfield wall but are located such that it may be difficult for the umpire to judge.

In professional baseball, a batted ball that goes over the outfield wall after touching the ground (i.e. a ball that bounces over the outfield wall) becomes an automatic double. This is colloquially referred to as a "ground rule double" even though it is uniform across all of Major League Baseball, per MLB rules 5.05(a)(6) through 5.05(a)(9).

A fielder is allowed to reach over the wall to try to catch the ball as long as his feet are on or over the field during the attempt, and if the fielder successfully catches the ball while it is in flight the batter is out, even if the ball had already passed the vertical plane of the wall. However, since the fielder is not part of the field, a ball that bounces off a fielder (including his glove) and over the wall without touching the ground is still a home run. A fielder may not deliberately throw his glove, cap, or any other equipment or apparel to stop or deflect a fair ball, and an umpire may award a home run to the batter if a fielder does so on a ball that, in the umpire's judgment, would have otherwise been a home run (this is rare in modern professional baseball).

A home run accomplished in any of the above manners is an automatic home run. The ball is dead, even if it rebounds back onto the field (e.g., from striking a foul pole), and the batter and any preceding runners cannot be put out at any time while running the bases. However, if one or more runners fail to touch a base or one runner passes another before reaching home plate, that runner or runners can be called out on appeal, though in the case of not touching a base a runner can go back and touch it if doing so will not cause them to be passed by another preceding runner and they have not yet touched the next base (or home plate in the case of missing third base). This stipulation is in Approved Ruling (2) of Rule 7.10(b).

Inside-the-park home run
An inside-the-park home run is a rare play in which a batter rounds all four bases for a home run without the baseball leaving the field of play. Unlike with an outside-the-park home run, the batter-runner and all preceding runners are liable to be put out by the defensive team at any time while running the bases. This can only happen if the ball does not leave the ballfield.

In the early days of baseball, outfields were much more spacious, reducing the likelihood of an over-the-fence home run, while increasing the likelihood of an inside-the-park home run, as a ball getting past an outfielder had more distance that it could roll before a fielder could track it down.

Modern outfields are much less spacious and more uniformly designed than in the game's early days. Therefore, inside-the-park home runs are now rare. They usually occur when a fast runner hits the ball deep into the outfield and the ball bounces in an unexpected direction away from the nearest outfielder (e.g., off a divot in the field or off the outfield wall), the nearest outfielder is injured on the play and cannot get to the ball, or an outfielder misjudges the flight of the ball in a way that he cannot quickly recover from the mistake (e.g., by diving and missing). The speed of the runner is crucial as even triples are relatively rare in most modern ballparks.

If any defensive play on an inside-the-park home run is labeled an error by the official scorer, a home run is not scored. Instead, it is scored as a single, double, or triple, and the batter-runner and any applicable preceding runners are said to have taken all additional bases on error. All runs scored on such a play, however, still count.

An example of an unexpected bounce occurred during the 2007 Major League Baseball All-Star Game at AT&T Park in San Francisco on July 10, 2007. Ichiro Suzuki of the American League team hit a fly ball that caromed off the right-center field wall in the opposite direction from where National League right fielder Ken Griffey Jr. was expecting it to go. By the time the ball was relayed, Ichiro had already crossed the plate standing up. This was the first inside-the-park home run in All-Star Game history, and led to Suzuki being named the game's Most Valuable Player.

Number of runs batted in
Home runs are often characterized by the number of runners on base at the time. A home run hit with the bases empty is never called a "one-run homer", but rather a solo home run, solo homer, or "solo shot". With one runner on base, two runs score (the base-runner and the batter) and thus the home run is often called a two-run homer or two-run shot. Similarly, a home run with two runners on base is a three-run homer or three-run shot.

The term "four-run homer" is never used. Instead, it's called a "grand slam". Hitting a grand slam is the best possible result for the batter's turn at bat and the worst possible result for the pitcher and his team.

Grand slam
A grand slam occurs when the bases are "loaded" (that is, there are base runners standing at first, second, and third base) and the batter hits a home run. According to The Dickson Baseball Dictionary, the term originated in the card game of contract bridge. An inside-the-park grand slam is a grand slam that is also an inside-the-park home run, a home run without the ball leaving the field, and it is very rare, due to the relative rarity of loading the bases along with the significant rarity (nowadays) of inside-the-park home runs.

On July 25, 1956, Roberto Clemente became the only MLB player to have ever scored a walk-off inside-the-park grand slam in a 9–8 Pittsburgh Pirates win over the Chicago Cubs, at Forbes Field.

On April 23, 1999, Fernando Tatís made history by hitting two grand slams in one inning, both against Chan Ho Park of the Los Angeles Dodgers. With this feat, Tatís also set a Major League record with 8 RBI in one inning.

On July 29, 2003, against the Texas Rangers, Bill Mueller of the Boston Red Sox became the only player in major league history to hit two grand slams in one game from opposite sides of the plate; he hit three home runs in that game, and his two grand slams were in consecutive at-bats.

On August 25, 2011, the New York Yankees became the first team to hit three grand slams in one game vs the Oakland A's. The Yankees eventually won the game 22–9, after trailing 7–1.

Specific situation home runs
These types of home runs are characterized by the specific game situation in which they occur, and can theoretically occur on either an outside-the-park or inside-the-park home run.

Walk-off home run
A walk-off home run is a home run hit by the home team in the bottom of the ninth inning, any extra inning, or other scheduled final inning, which gives the home team the lead and thereby ends the game. The term is attributed to Hall of Fame relief pitcher Dennis Eckersley, so named because after the run is scored, the losing team has to "walk off" the field.

Two World Series have ended via the "walk-off" home run. The first was the 1960 World Series when Bill Mazeroski of the Pittsburgh Pirates hit a ninth inning solo home run in the seventh game of the series off New York Yankees pitcher Ralph Terry to give the Pirates the World Championship. The second time was the 1993 World Series when Joe Carter of the Toronto Blue Jays hit a ninth inning three-run home run off Philadelphia Phillies pitcher Mitch Williams in Game 6 of the series, to help the Toronto Blue Jays capture their second World Series Championship in a row.

Such a home run can also be called a "sudden death" or "sudden victory" home run. That usage has lessened as "walk-off home run" has gained favor. Along with Mazeroski's 1960 shot, the most famous walk-off or sudden-death home run would most likely be the "Shot Heard 'Round the World" hit by Bobby Thomson to win the 1951 National League pennant for the New York Giants, along with many other game-ending home runs that famously ended some of the most important and suspenseful baseball games.

A walk-off home run over the fence is an exception to baseball's one-run rule. Normally if the home team is tied or behind in the ninth or extra innings, the game ends as soon as the home team scores enough run to achieve a lead. If the home team has two outs in the inning, and the game is tied, the game will officially end either the moment the batter successfully reaches first base or the moment the runner touches home plate—whichever happens last. However, this is superseded by the "ground rule", which provides automatic doubles (when a ball-in-play hits the ground first then leaves the playing field) and home runs (when a ball-in-play leaves the playing field without ever touching the ground). In the latter case, all base runners including the batter are allowed to cross the plate.

Leadoff home run
A leadoff home run is a home run hit by the first batter of a team, the leadoff hitter of the first inning of the game. In MLB (major league Baseball), Rickey Henderson holds the career record with 81 lead-off home runs. Craig Biggio holds the National League career record with 53, fourth overall to Henderson, George Springer with 55, and Alfonso Soriano with 54. As of 2023, George Springer holds the career record among active players, with 55 leadoff home runs, which also ranks him second all-time.

In 1996, Brady Anderson set a Major League record by hitting a lead-off home run in four consecutive games.

Back-to-back
When consecutive batters hit home runs, it's referred to as back-to-back home runs. The home runs are still considered back-to-back even if the batters hit their home runs off different pitchers. A third batter hitting a home run is commonly referred to as back-to-back-to-back.

Four home runs in a row has only occurred eleven times in Major League Baseball history. Following convention, this is called back-to-back-to-back-to-back. The most recent occurrence was on July 2, 2022, when the St. Louis Cardinals hit four in a row against the Philadelphia Phillies. Nolan Arenado, Nolan Gorman, Juan Yepez, and Dylan Carlson hit consecutive home runs during the first inning off starting pitcher Kyle Gibson.

On June 9, 2019, the Washington Nationals hit four in a row against the San Diego Padres in Petco Park as Howie Kendrick, Trea Turner, Adam Eaton and Anthony Rendon homered off pitcher Craig Stammen. Stammen became the fifth pitcher to surrender back-to-back-to-back-to-back home runs, following Paul Foytack on July 31, 1963, Chase Wright on April 22, 2007, Dave Bush on August 10, 2010, and Michael Blazek on July 27, 2017.

On August 14, 2008, the Chicago White Sox defeated the Kansas City Royals 9–2. In this game, Jim Thome, Paul Konerko, Alexei Ramírez, and Juan Uribe hit back-to-back-to-back-to-back home runs in that order. Thome, Konerko, and Ramirez hit their home runs against Joel Peralta, while Uribe did it off Rob Tejeda.

On April 22, 2007, the Boston Red Sox were trailing the New York Yankees 3–0 when Manny Ramirez, J. D. Drew, Mike Lowell and Jason Varitek hit consecutive home runs to put them up 4–3. They eventually went on to win the game 7–6 after a three-run home run by Mike Lowell in the bottom of the seventh inning. On September 18, 2006, trailing 9–5 to the San Diego Padres in the ninth inning, Jeff Kent, J. D. Drew, Russell Martin, and Marlon Anderson of the Los Angeles Dodgers hit back-to-back-to-back-to-back home runs to tie the game. After giving up a run in the top of the tenth, the Dodgers won the game in the bottom of the tenth, on a walk-off two-run home run by Nomar Garciaparra. J. D. Drew has been part of two different sets of back-to-back-to-back-to-back home runs. In both occurrences, his home run was the second of the four.

On September 30, 1997, in the sixth inning of Game One of the American League Division Series between the New York Yankees and Cleveland Indians, Tim Raines, Derek Jeter and Paul O'Neill hit back-to-back-to-back home runs for the Yankees. Raines' home run tied the game. New York went on to win 8–6. This was the first occurrence of three home runs in a row ever in postseason play. The Boston Red Sox repeated the feat in Game Four of the 2007 American League Championship Series, also against the Indians. The Indians returned the favor in Game One of the 2016 American League Division Series.

Twice in MLB history have two brothers hit back-to-back home runs. On April 23, 2013, brothers Melvin Upton Jr. (formerly B.J. Upton) and Justin Upton hit back-to-back home runs. The first time was on September 15, 1938, when Lloyd Waner and Paul Waner performed the feat.

Simple back-to-back home runs are a relatively frequent occurrence. If a pitcher gives up a home run, he might have his concentration broken and might alter his normal approach in an attempt to "make up for it" by striking out the next batter with some fastballs. Sometimes the next batter will be expecting that and will capitalize on it. A notable back-to-back home run of that type in World Series play involved "Babe Ruth's called shot" in 1932, which was accompanied by various Ruthian theatrics, yet the pitcher, Charlie Root, was allowed to stay in the game. He delivered just one more pitch, which Lou Gehrig drilled out of the park for a back-to-back shot, after which Root was removed from the game.

In Game 3 of the 1976 NLCS, George Foster and Johnny Bench hit back-to-back home runs in the last of the ninth off Ron Reed to tie the game. The Series-winning run was scored later in the inning.

Another notable pair of back-to-back home runs occurred on September 14, 1990, when Ken Griffey Sr. and Ken Griffey Jr. hit back-to-back home runs, off Kirk McCaskill, the only father-and-son duo to do so in Major League history.

On May 2, 2002, Bret Boone and Mike Cameron of the Seattle Mariners hit back-to-back home runs off starter Jon Rauch in the first inning of a game against the Chicago White Sox. The Mariners batted around in the inning, and Boone and Cameron came up to bat against reliever Jim Parque with two outs, again hitting back-to-back home runs and becoming the only pair of teammates to hit back-to-back home runs twice in the same inning.

On June 19, 2012, José Bautista and Colby Rasmus hit back-to-back home runs and back-to-back-to-back home runs with Edwin Encarnación for a lead change in each instance.

On July 23, 2017, Whit Merrifield, Jorge Bonifacio, and Eric Hosmer of the Kansas City Royals hit back-to-back-to-back home runs in the fourth inning against the Chicago White Sox. The Royals went on to win the game 5–4.

On June 20, 2018, George Springer, Alex Bregman, and José Altuve of the Houston Astros hit back-to-back-to-back home runs in the sixth inning against the Tampa Bay Rays. The Astros went on to win the game 5–1.

On April 3, 2018, the St. Louis Cardinals began the game against the Milwaukee Brewers with back-to-back home runs from Dexter Fowler and Tommy Pham. Then in the bottom of the ninth, with two outs and the Cardinals leading 4–3, Christian Yelich homered to tie the game; and Ryan Braun hit the next pitch for a walk-off home run. This is the only major league game to begin and end with back-to-back home runs.

On May 5, 2019, Eugenio Suarez, Jesse Winker and Derek Dietrich of the Cincinnati Reds, hit back-to-back-to-back home runs on three straight pitches against Jeff Samardzija of the San Francisco Giants in the bottom of the first inning.

On October 30, 2021, Dansby Swanson and Jorge Soler hit back-to-back home runs for the Atlanta Braves off Houston Astros pitcher Cristian Javier to give the Braves a 3–2 lead in the bottom of the seventh in Game 4 of the World Series.

Consecutive home runs by one batter
The record for consecutive home runs by a batter under any circumstances is four. Of the sixteen players (through 2012) who have hit four in one game, six have hit them consecutively. Twenty-eight other batters have hit four consecutive across two games.

Bases on balls do not count as at-bats, and Ted Williams holds the record for consecutive home runs across the most games, four in four games played, during September 17–22, 1957, for the Red Sox. Williams hit a pinch-hit home run on the 17th; walked as a pinch-hitter on the 18th; there was no game on the 19th; hit another pinch-homer on the 20th; homered and then was lifted for a pinch-runner after at least one walk, on the 21st; and homered after at least one walk on the 22nd. All in all, he had four walks interspersed among his four homers.

In World Series play, Reggie Jackson hit a record three in one Series game, the final game (Game 6) in 1977. But those three were a part of a much more impressive feat. He walked on four pitches in the second inning of game 6. Then he hit his three home runs on the first pitch of his next three at bats, off three different pitchers (4th inning: Hooten; 5th inning: Sosa; 8th inning: Hough). He had also hit one in his last at bat of the previous game, giving him four home runs on four consecutive swings. The four in a row set the record for consecutive homers across two Series games.

In Game 3 of the World Series in 2011, Albert Pujols hit three home runs to tie the record with Babe Ruth and Reggie Jackson. The St. Louis Cardinals went on to win the World Series in Game 7 at Busch Stadium. In Game 1 of the World Series in 2012, Pablo Sandoval of the San Francisco Giants hit three home runs on his first three at-bats of the Series.

Nomar Garciaparra holds the record for consecutive home runs in the shortest time in terms of innings: three home runs in two innings, on July 23, 2002, for the Boston Red Sox.

Home run cycle
An offshoot of hitting for the cycle, a "home run cycle" is when a player hits a solo home run, two-run home run, three-run home run, and grand slam all in one game. This is an extremely rare feat, as it requires the batter not only to hit four home runs in the game, but also to hit the home runs with a specific number of runners already on base. This is largely dependent on circumstances outside of the player's control, such as teammates' ability to get on base, and the order in which the player comes to bat in any particular inning. A further variant of the home run cycle would be the "natural home run cycle", should a batter hit the home runs in the specific order listed above.

A home run cycle has never occurred in MLB, which has only had 18 instances of a player hitting four home runs in a game. Though multiple home run cycles have been recorded in collegiate baseball, there have been two known home run cycles in a professional baseball game: one belongs to Tyrone Horne, playing for the Arkansas Travelers in a Double-A level Minor League Baseball game against the San Antonio Missions on July 27, 1998, and the other was accomplished by Chandler Redmond of the Springfield Cardinals, of the Texas League in a game against the Amarillo Sod Poodles on August 10, 2022.

Major league players have come close to hitting a home run cycle, a notable example being Scooter Gennett of the Cincinnati Reds on June 6, 2017, when he hit four home runs against the St. Louis Cardinals. He hit a grand slam in the third inning, a two-run home run in the fourth inning, a solo home run in the sixth inning, and a two-run home run in the eighth inning. He had an opportunity for a three-run home run in the first inning, but drove in one run with a single in that at bat.

History
In the early days of the game, when the ball was less lively and the ballparks generally had very large outfields, most home runs were of the inside-the-park variety. The first home run ever hit in the National League was by Ross Barnes of the Chicago White Stockings (now known as the Chicago Cubs), in 1876. The home "run" was literally descriptive. Home runs over the fence were rare, and only in ballparks where a fence was fairly close. Hitters were discouraged from trying to hit home runs, with the conventional wisdom being that if they tried to do so they would simply fly out. This was a serious concern in the 19th century, because in baseball's early days a ball caught after one bounce was still an out. The emphasis was on place-hitting and what is now called "manufacturing runs" or "small ball".

The home run's place in baseball changed dramatically when the live-ball era began after World War I. First, the materials and manufacturing processes improved significantly, making the now-mass-produced, cork-centered ball somewhat more lively. Batters such as Babe Ruth and Rogers Hornsby took full advantage of rules changes that were instituted during the 1920s, particularly prohibition of the spitball, and the requirement that balls be replaced when worn or dirty. These changes resulted in the baseball being easier to see and hit, and easier to hit out of the park. Meanwhile, as the game's popularity boomed, more outfield seating was built, shrinking the size of the outfield and increasing the chances of a long fly ball resulting in a home run. The teams with the sluggers, typified by the New York Yankees, became the championship teams, and other teams had to change their focus from the "inside game" to the "power game" in order to keep up.

Before, Major League Baseball considered a fair ball that bounced over an outfield fence to be a home run. The rule was changed to require the ball to clear the fence on the fly, and balls that reached the seats on a bounce became automatic doubles (often referred to as a ground rule double). The last "bounce" home run in MLB was hit by Al López of the Brooklyn Robins on September 12, 1930, at Ebbets Field. A carryover of the old rule is that if a player deflects a ball over the outfield fence in fair territory without it touching the ground, it is a home run, per MLB rule 5.05(a)(9). Additionally, MLB rule 5.05(a)(5) still stipulates that a ball hit over a fence in fair territory that is less than 250 ft from home plate "shall entitle the batter to advance to second base only", as some early ballparks had short dimensions.

Also until circa 1931, the ball had to go not only over the fence in fair territory, but it had to land in the bleachers in fair territory or still be visibly fair when disappearing from view. The rule stipulated "fair when last seen" by the umpires. Photos from that era in ballparks, such as the Polo Grounds and Yankee Stadium, show ropes strung from the foul poles to the back of the bleachers, or a second "foul pole" at the back of the bleachers, in a straight line with the foul line, as a visual aid for the umpire. Ballparks still use a visual aid much like the ropes; a net or screen attached to the foul poles on the fair side has replaced ropes. As with American football, where a touchdown once required a literal "touch down" of the ball in the end zone but now only requires the "breaking of the [vertical] plane" of the goal line, in baseball the ball need only "break the plane" of the fence in fair territory (unless the ball is caught by a player who is in play, in which case the batter is called out).

Babe Ruth's 60th home run in 1927 was somewhat controversial, because it landed barely in fair territory in the stands down the right field line. Ruth lost a number of home runs in his career due to the when-last-seen rule. Bill Jenkinson, in The Year Babe Ruth Hit 104 Home Runs, estimates that Ruth lost at least 50 and as many as 78 in his career due to this rule.

Further, the rules once stipulated that an over-the-fence home run in a sudden-victory situation would only count for as many bases as was necessary to "force" the winning run home. For example, if a team trailed by two runs with the bases loaded, and the batter hit a fair ball over the fence, it only counted as a triple, because the runner immediately ahead of him had technically already scored the game-winning run. That rule was changed in the 1920s as home runs became increasingly frequent and popular. Babe Ruth's career total of 714 would have been one higher had that rule not been in effect in the early part of his career.

In the 2020s, it has become increasingly popular for Major League teams to celebrate home runs using some sort of prop. For example, allowing the player to wear or hold an item, such as a hat, helmet, jacket, sword, or trident.

Records
Major League Baseball keeps running totals of all-time home runs by the team, including teams no longer active (before 1900) as well as by individual players. Gary Sheffield hit the 250,000th home run in all of MLB history with a grand slam on September 8, 2008. Sheffield had hit the MLB's 249,999th home run against Gio González in his previous at-bat.

The all-time, verified professional baseball record for career home runs for one player, excluding the U.S. Negro leagues during the era of segregation, is held by Sadaharu Oh. Oh spent his entire career playing for the Yomiuri Giants in Japan's Nippon Professional Baseball, later managing the Giants, the Fukuoka SoftBank Hawks and the 2006 World Baseball Classic Japanese team. Oh holds the all-time home run world record, having hit 868 home runs in his career.

In Major League Baseball, the career record is 762, held by Barry Bonds, who broke Hank Aaron's record on August 7, 2007, when he hit his 756th home run at AT&T Park off pitcher Mike Bacsik. Only eight other major league players have hit as many as 600: Hank Aaron (755), Babe Ruth (714), Albert Pujols (703), Alex Rodriguez (696), Willie Mays (660), Ken Griffey Jr. (630), Jim Thome (612), and Sammy Sosa (609). Giancarlo Stanton holds the record for currently active MLB players with 402 as of the end of the 2023 season.

The single season record is 73, set by Barry Bonds in 2001. Other notable single season records were achieved by Babe Ruth who hit 60 in 1927, Roger Maris, with 61 home runs in 1961, Aaron Judge, with 62 home runs in 2022, and Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire, who hit 66 and 70 respectively, in 1998.

Negro league slugger Josh Gibson's Baseball Hall of Fame plaque says he hit "almost 800" home runs in his career. The Guinness Book of World Records lists Gibson's lifetime home run total at 800. Ken Burns' award-winning series, Baseball, states that his actual total may have been as high as 950. Gibson's true total is not known, in part due to inconsistent record keeping in the Negro leagues. The 1993 edition of the MacMillan Baseball Encyclopedia attempted to compile a set of Negro league records, and subsequent work has expanded on that effort. Those records demonstrate that Gibson and Ruth were of comparable power. The 1993 book had Gibson hitting 146 home runs in the 501 "official" Negro league games they were able to account for in his 17-year career, about one home run every 3.4 games. Babe Ruth, in 22 seasons (several of them in the dead-ball era), hit 714 in 2503 games, or one home run every 3.5 games. The large gap in the numbers for Gibson reflect the fact that Negro league clubs played relatively far fewer league games and many more "barnstorming" or exhibition games during the course of a season, than did the major league clubs of that era.

Other legendary home run hitters include Jimmie Foxx, Mel Ott, Ted Williams, Mickey Mantle (who on September 10, 1960, mythically hit "the longest home run ever" at an estimated distance of 643 ft, although this was measured after the ball stopped rolling ), Reggie Jackson, Harmon Killebrew, Ernie Banks, Mike Schmidt, Dave Kingman, Sammy Sosa (who hit 60 or more home runs in a season three times), Ken Griffey Jr. and Eddie Mathews. In 1987, Joey Meyer of the minor league Denver Zephyrs hit the longest verifiable home run in professional baseball history. The home run was measured at a distance of 582 ft and was hit inside Denver's Mile High Stadium. On May 6, 1964, Chicago White Sox outfielder Dave Nicholson hit a home run officially measured at 573 feet that either bounced atop the left-field roof of Comiskey Park or entirely cleared it. Major League Baseball's longest verifiable home run distance is about 575 ft, by Babe Ruth, to straightaway center field at Tiger Stadium (then called Navin Field and before the double-deck), which landed nearly across the intersection of Trumbull and Cherry.

The location of where Hank Aaron's record 755th home run landed has been monumented in Milwaukee. The spot sits outside American Family Field, where the Milwaukee Brewers currently play. Similarly, the point where Aaron's 715th home run landed, upon breaking Ruth's career record in 1974, is marked in the Turner Field parking lot. A red-painted seat in Fenway Park marks the landing place of the 502-ft home run Ted Williams hit in 1946, the longest measured home run in Fenway's history; a red stadium seat mounted on the wall of the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minnesota, marks the landing spot of Harmon Killebrew's record 520-foot shot in old Metropolitan Stadium.

May 2019 saw 1,135 MLB home runs, the highest ever number of home runs in a single month in Major League Baseball history. During this month, 44.5% of all runs scored were the result of a home run, breaking the previous record of 42.3%.

In postseason play, the most home runs hit by a player for a career is Manny Ramirez, who hit 29. Jose Altuve (23), Bernie Williams (22), Derek Jeter (20), and Kyle Schwarber (20) are the only other players to hit twenty postseason home runs. Rounding out the top ten as of the end of the 2021 season is Albert Pujols (19), George Springer (19), Carlos Correa (18), Reggie Jackson (18), Mickey Mantle (18, all in the World Series), and Nelson Cruz (18). As for most home runs in one postseason, Randy Arozarena holds the record with ten, done in the 2020 postseason.

Instant replay
Replays "to get the call right" have been used extremely sporadically in the past, but the use of instant replay to determine "boundary calls"—home runs and foul balls—was not officially allowed until 2008.

In a game on May 31, 1999, involving the St. Louis Cardinals and Florida Marlins, a hit by Cliff Floyd of the Marlins was initially ruled a double, then a home run, then was changed back to a double when umpire Frank Pulli decided to review video of the play. The Marlins protested that video replay was not allowed, but while the National League office agreed that replay was not to be used in future games, it declined the protest on the grounds it was a judgment call, and the play stood.

In November 2007, the general managers of Major League Baseball voted in favor of implementing instant replay reviews on boundary home run calls. The proposal limited the use of instant replay to determining whether a boundary/home run call is:
 * A fair (home run) or foul ball
 * A live ball (ball hit a fence and rebounded onto the field), ground rule double (ball hit a fence before leaving the field), or home run (ball hit some object beyond the fence while in flight)
 * Spectator interference or home run (spectator touched the ball after it broke the plane of the fence).

On August 28, 2008, instant replay review became available in MLB for reviewing calls in accordance with the above proposal. It was first utilized on September 3, 2008, in a game between the New York Yankees and the Tampa Bay Rays at Tropicana Field. Alex Rodriguez of the Yankees hit what appeared to be a home run, but the ball hit a catwalk behind the foul pole. It was at first called a home run, until Tampa Bay manager Joe Maddon argued the call, and the umpires decided to review the play. After 2 minutes and 15 seconds, the umpires came back and ruled it a home run.

About two weeks later, on September 19, also at Tropicana Field, a boundary call was overturned for the first time. In this case, Carlos Peña of the Rays was given a ground rule double in a game against the Minnesota Twins after an umpire believed a fan reached into the field of play to catch a fly ball in right field. The umpires reviewed the play, determined the fan did not reach over the fence, and reversed the call, awarding Peña a home run.

Aside from the two aforementioned reviews at Tampa Bay, the replay was used four more times in the 2008 MLB regular season: twice at Houston, once at Seattle, and once at San Francisco. The San Francisco incident is perhaps the most unusual. Bengie Molina, the Giants' catcher, hit what was first called a single. Molina then was replaced in the game by Emmanuel Burriss, a pinch-runner, before the umpires re-evaluated the call and ruled it a home run. In this instance though, Molina was not allowed to return to the game to complete the run, as he had already been replaced. Molina was credited with the home run, and two RBIs, but not for the run scored which went to Burriss instead.

On October 31, 2009, in the fourth inning of Game 3 of the World Series, Alex Rodriguez hit a long fly ball that hit a camera protruding over the wall and into the field of play in deep right field. The ball ricocheted off the camera and re-entered the field, initially ruled a double. However, after the umpires consulted with each other after watching the instant replay, the hit was ruled a home run, marking the first time an instant replay home run was hit in a playoff game.

Career achievements

 * List of Major League Baseball players with 20 doubles, 20 triples, and 20 home runs in the same season
 * 500 home run club
 * List of Major League Baseball all-time leaders in home runs by pitchers
 * List of Major League Baseball career home run leaders
 * List of Major League Baseball players with a home run in their final major league at bat
 * List of Major League Baseball players with a home run in their first major league at bat

Other sports

 * Six (cricket)
 * Wiffle ball

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

title: Home run


text:
Harappa

Harappa  is an archaeological site in Punjab, Pakistan, about 24 km west of Sahiwal. The Bronze Age Harappan civilisation, now more often called the Indus Valley Civilisation, is named after the site, which takes its name from a modern village near the former course of the Ravi River, which now runs 8 km to the north. The core of the Harappan civilisation extended over a large area, from Gujarat in the south, across Sindh and Rajasthan and extending into Punjab and Haryana. Numerous sites have been found outside the core area, including some as far east as Uttar Pradesh and as far west as Sutkagen-dor on the Makran coast of Balochistan, not far from Iran.

The site of the ancient city contains the ruins of a Bronze Age fortified city, which was part of the Harappan civilisation centred in Sindh and the Punjab, and then the Cemetery H culture. The city is believed to have had as many as 23,500 residents and occupied about 150 ha with clay brick houses at its greatest extent during the Mature Harappan phase (2600 BCE – 1900 BCE), which is considered large for its time. Per archaeological convention of naming a previously unknown civilisation by its first excavated site, the Indus Valley Civilisation is also called the Harappan Civilisation.

The ancient city of Harappa was heavily damaged under British and French rule, when bricks from the ruins were used as track ballast in the construction of the Lahore–Multan Railway. The current village of Harappa is less than 1 km from the ancient site. Although modern Harappa has a legacy railway station from the British Raj period, it is a small crossroads town of 15,000 people today. In 2005, a controversial amusement park scheme at the site was abandoned when builders unearthed many archaeological artefacts during the early stages of building work.

History
The Harappan Civilization has its earliest roots in cultures such as that of Mehrgarh, approximately 6000 BCE. The two greatest cities, Mohenjo-daro and Harappa, emerged c. 2600 BCE along the Indus River valley in Punjab and Sindh. The civilization, with a possible writing system, urban centres, drainage infrastructure and diversified social and economic system, was rediscovered in the 1920s also after excavations at Mohenjo-daro in Sindh near Larkana, and Harappan cities, in west Punjab south of Lahore. A number of other sites stretching from the Himalayan foothills in the east Punjab, India in the west, to Gujarat in the south and east, and to Pakistani Balochistan in the west have also been discovered and studied. Although the archaeological site at Harappa was damaged in 1857 when engineers constructing the Lahore-Multan railroad used brick from the Harappa ruins for track ballast, an abundance of artefacts have nevertheless been found.

Because of the reduced sea-levels, certain regions in the late Harappan period were abandoned . Towards its end, the Harappan civilization lost features such as writing and hydraulic engineering. As a result, the Ganges Valley settlement gained prominence and Ganges' cities developed.

The earliest recognisably Harappan sites date to 3500 BCE. This early phase lasts till around 2600 BCE. The civilization's mature phase lasted from 2600 BCE to 2000 BCE. This is when the great cities were at their height. Then, from around 2000 BCE, there was a steady disintegration that lasted till 1400 BCE – what is usually called Late Harappan. There is no sign that the Harappan cities were laid waste by invaders. The evidence strongly points to natural causes. A number of studies show that the area which is today the Thar Desert was once far wetter and that the climate gradually became drier.

Culture and economy
The Indus Valley civilization was basically an urban culture sustained by surplus agricultural production and commerce, the latter including trade with Elam and Sumer in southern Mesopotamia. Both Mohenjo-daro and Harappa are generally characterised as having "differentiated living quarters, flat-roofed brick houses, and fortified administrative or religious centers." Although such similarities have given rise to arguments for the existence of a standardised system of urban layout and planning, the similarities are largely due to the presence of a semi-orthogonal type of civic layout, and a comparison of the layouts of Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa shows that they are in fact, arranged in a quite dissimilar fashion.

The weights and measures of the Indus Valley Civilisation, on the other hand, were highly standardised, and conform to a set scale of gradations. Distinctive seals were used, among other applications, perhaps for the identification of property and shipment of goods. Although copper and bronze were in use, iron was not yet employed. "Cotton was woven and dyed for clothing; wheat, rice, and a variety of vegetables and fruits were cultivated; and a number of animals, including the humped bull, was domesticated," as well as "fowl for fighting". Wheel-made pottery—some of it adorned with animal and geometric motifs—has been found in profusion at all the major Indus sites. A centralised administration for each city, though not the whole civilisation, has been inferred from the revealed cultural uniformity; however, it remains uncertain whether authority lay with a commercial oligarchy. Harappans had many trade routes along the Indus River that went as far as the Persian Gulf, Mesopotamia, and Egypt. Some of the most valuable things traded were carnelian and lapis lazuli.

What is clear is that Harappan society was not entirely peaceful, with the human skeletal remains demonstrating some of the highest rates of injury (15.5%) found in South Asian prehistory. Examinations of Harappan skeletons have often found wounds that are likely to have been inflicted in battle. Paleopathological analysis demonstrated that leprosy and tuberculosis were present at Harappa, with the highest prevalence of both disease and trauma present in the skeletons from Area G (an ossuary located south-east of the city walls). Furthermore, rates of craniofacial trauma and infection increased through time demonstrating that the civilisation collapsed amid illness and injury. The bioarchaeologists who examined the remains have suggested that the combined evidence for differences in mortuary treatment and epidemiology indicate that some individuals and communities at Harappa were excluded from access to basic resources like health and safety.

Trade
The Harappans had traded with ancient Mesopotamia, especially Elam, among other areas. Cotton textiles and agricultural products were the primary trading objects. The Harappan merchants also had procurement colonies in Mesopotamia as well, which served as trading centres. They also traded extensively with people living in southern India, near modern-day Karnataka, to procure gold and copper from them.

Archaeology
The excavators of the site have proposed the following chronology of Harappa's occupation:
 * 1) Ravi Aspect of the Hakra phase, c. 3300 – 2800 BCE.
 * 2) Kot Dijian (Early Harappan) phase, c. 2800 – 2600 BCE.
 * 3) Harappan Phase, c. 2600 – 1900 BCE.
 * 4) Transitional Phase, c. 1900 – 1800 BCE.
 * 5) Late Harappan Phase, c. 1800 – 1300 BCE.

Period 1 occupation was thought to be around 7 to 10 hectares, but following excavations and findings of pottery in Mound E, along with previously found Mound AB pottery, suggest Ravi/Hakra phase would have been extended, together in both mounds, to 25 hectares.

Period 2, Kot Diji phase, was extended in the same two mounds, AB and E, covering over 27 hectares.

In Period 3, Harappa phase, the settlement reached 150 hectares.

By far the most exquisite and obscure artefacts unearthed to date are the small, square steatite (soapstone) seals engraved with human or animal motifs. A large number of seals have been found at such sites as Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa. Many bear pictographic inscriptions generally thought to be a form of writing or script. Despite the efforts of philologists from all parts of the world, and despite the use of modern cryptographic analysis, the signs remain undeciphered. It is also unknown if they reflect proto-Dravidian or other non-Vedic language(s). The ascribing of Indus Valley Civilisation iconography and epigraphy to historically known cultures is extremely problematic, in part due to the rather tenuous archaeological evidence for such claims, as well as the projection of modern South Asian political concerns onto the archaeological record of the area. This is especially evident in the radically varying interpretations of the Harappan material culture, as seen from both Pakistan- and India-based scholars.

In February 2006 a school teacher in the village of Sembian-Kandiyur in Tamil Nadu discovered a stone celt (tool) with an inscription estimated to be up to 3,500 years old. Indian epigraphist Iravatham Mahadevan postulated that the four signs were in the Indus script and called the find "the greatest archaeological discovery of a century in Tamil Nadu". Based on this evidence, he went on to suggest that the language used in the Indus Valley was of Dravidian origin. However, the absence of a Bronze Age in South India, contrasted with the knowledge of bronze making techniques in the Indus Valley cultures, calls into question the validity of this hypothesis.

The area of the late Harappan period consisted of the areas of the Daimabad, Maharashtra, and Badakshan regions of Afghanistan. The area covered by this civilisation would have been very large with a distance of around 1500 mi.

Symbols similar to Indus script
Clay and stone tablets unearthed at Harappa, which were carbon-dated 3300–3200 BCE., contain trident-shaped and plant-like markings. "It is a big question as to if we can call what we have found true writing, but we have found symbols that have similarities to what became Indus script" said Dr. Richard Meadow of Harvard University, Director of the Harappa Archeological Research Project. These primitive symbols are placed slightly earlier than the primitive writing of the Sumerians of Mesopotamia, dated c.3100 BCE. These markings have similarities to what later became Indus Script which has not been completely deciphered yet.

title: Harappa


text:
Talk:Hate site

Complete re-write
I have completely deleted and re-written this article, and I hope I have reached NPOV. Originally, I meant to create it as a /temp page, but it saved to the main article. I will re-add the cleanup tag, as my version still requires improvement. Autopilots 22:36, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Should we be linking to hate sites? If someone is looking for examples he can more than easily find them by himself. -- WojPob

 * In my view, linking to sites on this page is actually POV itself. [[User:Computerjoe|Compu ]][[WP:CVU|te ]] r Jo  e 20:31, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm going to have to say I agree. While it is obvious the KKK is pro-hate, a member of the KKK might not think that.

 * We should link to them as an example to the reader, and we should state that they are examples --mexaguil 00:00, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Since this is such a controversial topic, we as "NPOVians" can not judge what sites are "hate sites"  and those that are not. As neutral observers, we can only report on which sites are "claimed to be" promoting hate, and not pass judgment.

Personally, I deplore sites like Stormfront, though I am appreciative that they have an "opposing viewpoint" section, and as a proponent of free-speech, I will defend their right to say what they do. (Also, I like their fitness tips, on their fitness related sub-forum) The external links sections is composed of "claims," specifically, the words "said to," which imply impartiality. I therefore vote that the neutrality tag be removed from the external links. That said, the article as a whole, as I have written it, is inferior to wikipedia standards, and is in severe need of peer review. Autopilots 09:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

the article tries to avoid describing with any detail

Tags
This page is currently nothing more than a POV rant as to how to deal with hate sites. I've put it on Pages Needing Attention.

Hate Site
Question - Only white hate groups have been listed isn't there Black hate groups also in United States? Some Blacks hate whites and so do Hispanics but I don't see those sites listed.152.163.101.6 04:22, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Only three of the most notorious sites are listed. We could list the Nation of Islam, which many consider to be a hate group, but I don't want to get into a battle over who is and is not a hate group. -- Mwalcoff 23:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Welcome to my life. I've been meaning to overhaul this article for a long time. However, this is such a controversial topic, my own bias opinion gets in the way everytime I want to edit it. What I think this article really needs is avowed racists (this declaration is in itself POV, though I'm willing to risk that on a talk page) to edit the article, starting an edit war, as I believe an edit war between -us and them- could substantially help this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Autopilots (talk • contribs)  05:08, June 1, 2006

Another hate site to be added to the list.
Hello, this is a funny hate site about turks and sometimes about jews.

http://www.ian.cc/inicio.php

It's written in Spanish, my language. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.136.154.175 (talk) 20:48, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Definition
Hey,

I'm having trouble rewriting the definition of this article to make sense and would like some help. In order to prevent any bias, I would like to propose a completely hypothetical and unrealistic (and therefore bias-free) thought experiment in order to come to a conclusion about the best wording.

Imagine if you could, a set of people who concieve a group of words as gibberish, while another set considers them to be perfectly intelligable. Niether group is right or wrong; the first uses the term gibberwocky to refer to it; the second group, the term Languish. If we had an article on gibberwocky, that stated it's objective form as such: "Gibberwocky is language percieved to be gibberish", would we then word the article Gibberworky website, "A Gibberwocky website is a website that uses gibberwocky", even if it is a site created by the second group? This seems somewhat silly when I word it like this, but adding the term percieve to the website article also seems redundant given the definition. Any thoughts?

I apoliogise if people think I am joking, but I am quite serious. I asked 3 other Wikipedians in person and all I got was biased responses about hate speech, so consider purely the hypothetical, because it's language here, and not the topics that are important. - Jimmi Hugh (talk) 17:39, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hate site


text:
Hendecasyllable

In poetry, a hendecasyllable (sometimes hendecasyllabic) is a line of eleven syllables. The term may refer to several different poetic meters, the older of which are quantitative and used chiefly in classical (Ancient Greek and Latin) poetry, and the newer of which are syllabic or accentual-syllabic and used in medieval and modern poetry.

Classical
In classical poetry, "hendecasyllable" or "hendecasyllabic" may refer to any of three distinct 11-syllable Aeolic meters, used first in Ancient Greece and later, with little modification, by Roman poets.

Aeolic meters are characterized by an Aeolic base  followed by a choriamb  ; where   = a long syllable,   = a short syllable, and   = an anceps, that is, a syllable either long or short. The three Aeolic hendecasyllables (with base and choriamb in bold) are:

Phalaecian hendecasyllable
(hendecasyllabus phalaecius):

× × – u u – u – u – –

This line is named after Phalaecus, a minor poet probably of the 4th century BC, who used it in epigrams; though he did not invent it, since it had earlier been used by Sappho and Anacreon.

The Phalaecian hendecasyllable was a favorite of Catullus; it was also very frequently used by Martial. An example from Catullus is the first poem in his collection (with formal equivalent, substituting English stress for Latin length):

The aeolic base (i.e., the first two syllables of the line) with  is by far the most common in Catullus, and in later poets such as Statius and Martial was the only one used, but occasionally Catullus uses   or   as in lines 2 and 4 above. There is usually a caesura in the line after the 5th or 6th syllable.

In the first part of his poetry collection, Catullus uses the Phalaecian hendecasyllable as given above in 41 poems. In addition, in two of his poems (55 and 58b) Catullus uses a variation of the metre, in which the 4th and 5th syllables can sometimes be contracted into a single long syllable. In poem 55 there are twelve decasyllables and ten normal lines:

Poem 58b is thought by some scholars to be a fragment which was formerly part of this one; although others think it an independent poem.

Alcaic hendecasyllable
(hendecasyllabus alcaicus): × – u – × – u u – u – Here the Aeolic base is truncated to a single anceps. This meter typically appears as the first two lines of an Alcaic stanza. (For an English example, see §English, below.)

Sapphic hendecasyllable
(hendecasyllabus sapphicus): – u – × – u u – u – – Again, the Aeolic base is truncated. This meter typically appears as the first three lines of a Sapphic stanza, though it was also sometimes used in stichic verse, for example by Seneca and Boethius. Sappho wrote many of the stanzas subsequently named after her, for example (with formal equivalent, substituting English stress for Greek length):

Italian
The hendecasyllable (endecasillabo) is the principal metre in Italian poetry. Its defining feature is a constant stress on the tenth syllable, so that the number of syllables in the verse may vary, equaling eleven in the usual case where the final word is stressed on the penultimate syllable. The verse also has a stress preceding the caesura, on either the fourth or sixth syllable. The first case is called endecasillabo a minore, or lesser hendecasyllable, and has the first hemistich equivalent to a quinario; the second is called endecasillabo a maiore, or greater hendecasyllable, and has a settenario as the first hemistich.

There is a strong tendency for hendecasyllabic lines to end with feminine rhymes (causing the total number of syllables to be eleven, hence the name), but ten-syllable lines ("Ciò che 'n grembo a Benaco star non può") and twelve-syllable lines ("Ergasto mio, perché solingo e tacito") are encountered as well. Lines of ten or twelve syllables are more common in rhymed verse; versi sciolti, which rely more heavily on a pleasant rhythm for effect, tend toward a stricter eleven-syllable format. As a novelty, lines longer than twelve syllables can be created by the use of certain verb forms and affixed enclitic pronouns ("Ottima è l'acqua; ma le piante abbeverinosene.").

Additional accents beyond the two mandatory ones provide rhythmic variation and allow the poet to express thematic effects. A line in which accents fall consistently on even-numbered syllables ("Al còr gentìl rempàira sèmpre amóre") is called iambic (giambico) and may be a greater or lesser hendecasyllable. This line is the simplest, commonest and most musical but may become repetitive, especially in longer works. Lesser hendecasyllables often have an accent on the seventh syllable ("fàtta di giòco in figùra d'amóre"). Such a line is called dactylic (dattilico) and its less pronounced rhythm is considered particularly appropriate for representing dialogue. Another kind of greater hendecasyllable has an accent on the third syllable ("Se Mercé fosse amìca a' miei disìri") and is known as anapestic (anapestico). This sort of line has a crescendo effect and gives the poem a sense of speed and fluidity.

It is considered improper for the lesser hendecasyllable to use a word accented on its antepenultimate syllable (parola sdrucciola) for its mid-line stress. A line like "Più non sfavìllano quegli òcchi néri", which delays the caesura until after the sixth syllable, is not considered a valid hendecasyllable.

Most classical Italian poems are composed in hendecasyllables, including the major works of Dante, Francesco Petrarca, Ludovico Ariosto, and Torquato Tasso. The rhyme systems used include terza rima, ottava, sonnet and canzone, and some verse forms use a mixture of hendecasyllables and shorter lines. From the early 16th century onward, hendecasyllables are often used without a strict system, with few or no rhymes, both in poetry and in drama. This is known as verso sciolto. An early example is Le Api ("the bees") by Giovanni di Bernardo Rucellai, written around 1517 and published in 1525 (with formal equivalent paraphrase which mirrors the original's syllabic counts, varied caesurae, and line- and hemistich-final stress profiles):

Like other early Italian-language tragedies, the Sophonisba of Gian Giorgio Trissino (1515) is in blank hendecasyllables. Later examples can be found in the Canti of Giacomo Leopardi, where hendecasyllables are alternated with settenari.

Polish
The hendecasyllabic metre (jedenastozgłoskowiec) was very popular in Polish poetry, especially in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, owing to strong Italian literary influence. It was used by Jan Kochanowski, Piotr Kochanowski (who translated Jerusalem Delivered by Torquato Tasso), Sebastian Grabowiecki, Wespazjan Kochowski and Stanisław Herakliusz Lubomirski. The greatest Polish Romantic poet, Adam Mickiewicz, set his poem Grażyna in this measure. The Polish hendecasyllable is widely used when translating English blank verse.

The eleven-syllable line is normally a line of 5+6 syllables with medial caesura, primary stresses on the fourth and tenth syllables, and feminine endings on both half-lines. Although the form can accommodate a fully iambic line, there is no such tendency in practice, word stresses falling variously on any of the initial syllables of each half-line. o o o S s | o o o o S s o=any syllable, S=stressed syllable, s=unstressed syllable

A popular form of Polish literature that employs the hendecasyllable is the Sapphic stanza: 11/11/11/5.

The Polish hendecasyllable is often combined with an 8-syllable line: 11a/8b/11a/8b. Such a stanza was used by Mickiewicz in his ballads, as in the following example (with formal equivalent paraphrase):

Portuguese
The hendecasyllable (hendecassílabo) is a common meter in Portuguese poetry. The best-known Portuguese poem composed in hendecasyllables is Luís de Camões' Lusiads, which begins as follows:

In Portuguese, the hendecasyllable meter is often called "decasyllable" (decassílabo), even when the work in question uses overwhelmingly feminine rhymes (as is the case with the Lusiads). This is due to Portuguese prosody considering verses to end at the last stressed syllable, thus the aforementioned verses are effectively decasyllabic according to Portuguese scansion.

Spanish
The hendecasyllable (endecasílabo) is less pervasive in Spanish poetry than in Italian or Portuguese, but it is commonly used with Italianate verse forms like sonnets and ottava rima (as found, for example, in Alonso de Ercilla's epic La Araucana).

Spanish dramatists often use hendecasyllables in tandem with shorter lines like heptasyllables, as can be seen in Rosaura's opening speech from Calderón's La vida es sueño:

English
The term "hendecasyllable" most often refers to an imitation of Greek or Latin metrical lines, notably by Alfred Tennyson, Swinburne, and Robert Frost ("For Once Then Something"). Contemporary American poets Annie Finch ("Lucid Waking") and Patricia Smith ("The Reemergence of the Noose") have published recent examples. In English, which lacks phonemic length, poets typically substitute stressed syllables for long, and unstressed syllables for short. Tennyson, however, attempted to maintain the quantitative features of the meter (while supporting them with concurrent stress) in his Alcaic stanzas, the first two lines of which are Alcaic hendecasyllables: O mighty-mouth'd inventor of harmonies, O skill'd to sing of Time or Eternity, God-gifted organ-voice of England, Milton, a name to resound for ages;

— Tennyson: "Milton", lines 1-4

Occasionally "hendecasyllable" is used to denote a line of iambic pentameter with a feminine ending, as in the first line of John Keats's Endymion: "A thing of beauty is a joy for ever".

Italian texts

 * Raffaele Spongano, Nozioni ed esempi di metrica italiana, Bologna, R. Pàtron, 1966
 * Angelo Marchese, Dizionario di retorica e di stilistica, Milano, Mondadori, 1978
 * Mario Pazzaglia, Manuale di metrica italiana, Firenze, Sansoni, 1990

Polish texts

 * Wiktor Jarosław Darasz, Mały przewodnik po wierszu polskim, Kraków 2003.

Hendecasyllabi

title: Hendecasyllable


text:
Talk:HavenCo

It should be noted that this article appears to have been written by someone with the same Wikipedia user name as one of the people named in the article.

One might speculate on how long HavenCo could resist an attack from a nation state or its police force, or how robust its communications to the Net are against attack.

One might also speculate what form a sting operation by a nation state against prospective data haven users would take.

The Anome

- Feel free to speculate on such things and add them to the article!

(I am CTO of HavenCo, but I think the HavenCo article is relatively unbiased; no one else posted anything yet, though)

Our policy has always been "we can destroy stuff before it is captured, and will do so". We have sufficient security/military/etc. to protect equipment from our own staff, and from invasion. We certainly can't defend against destruction. Our communications are relatively robust (terminating in many countries), but even someone like AboveNet could be flooded off the net for a few weeks with enough effort. Our security is sufficient to delay capture long enough to destroy things (which in most cases just means shutting off power; disks are encrypted, and boot codes require positive cooperation and can be destroyed with a single switch)

We also do tamper-resistant hardware for our more security-conscious customers -- even I can't compromise it. Even if the hardware fell into "enemy" hands for months, it would be in my opinion impossible to recover data. As for being a sting -- sure. Crypto AG is a better example. We deal with this issue by not requiring *any* information from customers; leave a bag of cash in a locker at an airport, anonymous-remail me the code, I'll pick it up, and then put a server online, using factory-standard tamper-resistance, which can be remotely verified. We *could* be a sting, but we work to make sure stuff is provably secure even from ourselves, so even if I worked for the CIA or MI6, customers could trust our security due to faith in mathematics and physics. I'd have *more* trust in HavenCo if it were MI6/CIA, as then you'd know for sure it was being operated professionally. Most of our customers are casinos and backups anyway, and don't really care about security from intelligence agencies.

I'll include some comments on this (including links to Crypto AG and a brief article on it) if you don't.

-

So, you are saying that you have direct undersea fibre connectivity to many countries?

Please explain 'factory-standard tamper-resistance'.

The Anome

--

Wireless, satellite, etc. to many countries, yes. Fiber is planned but expensive to go to many countries. Also we handle layer-3 (IP) in more countries than layer-2, using encrypted tunnels.

We have metal-enclosed coprocessors (486, crypto coprocessor, storage) inside sealed PCI cards which zeroize themselves if they detect any attempt at tampering. People run security-critical parts of their application on those, random other stuff outside. So even if you break into the machine, all the critical data is on this card (which is really a separate computer), which runs a special-purpose OS, has been audited, etc.

Costs range from ~$8 (iButton) to ~$50k (Compaq Atalla); IBM 4758-002 is in my opinion the best. There was recently found a vulnerability with one of the libraries, but it's not one we use. The hardware itself is very secure.

--

You mean Michael Bond and Richard Clayton's attack at http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rnc1/descrack/ ?

Looking at the IBM documentation on the 4758, it is clear that the hardware's security hinges on the user trusting IBM (for example, only they should know the root certificate for the 4758). But if you are a sting operation, IBM will surely have cooperated with those parties? And this same would be true of any US or UK sourced security hardware, such as the iButton or the Compaq.

The Anome

-- Yes, that research.

You can do "cut and choose" verification on the hardware, and you can run your own software inside a module. IBM doesn't have the ability to *change* the machines once they're released, only to certify fraudulent ones, so you can buy a thousand, open 999 to verify there is no backdoor, load your software into one, and then ship it, knowing it hasn't been tampered with.

Also there are non-US/UK manufacturers of such devices, and the technology to make such a device is not *that* impossible. Plus, you could do secret-sharing across multiple manufacturers, if you cared, at multiple sites.

But most people have no reason to be so paranoid. The people involved with HavenCo have some pre-HavenCo notoriety beforehand, but I suppose you could claim I was recruited by when I was 10 years old and raised to run a sting operation :)

-

Surely that's the point. If I am not paranoid, I don't need an offshore data haven. I just trust secure processor hardware and mathematics in a number of Tier-1 secure colos in various jurisdictions. That gives me as much resilience and security as could normally be desired. If I want to go beyond this, I need to have my own physically secure premises and hire my own guard force.

If someone is paranoid enough to need a data haven, then they are presumably either If the former, no amount of security will satisfy them. If the latter, they will need to take precaustions that assume that serious resources will be brought to bear upon them - such as
 * mentally ill or
 * doing something that makes them reasonably expect to be subject to such attacks.
 * having a copy of the IBM 4758 root private key
 * bribing, threatening or simply employing third parties in a sting operation

The Anome

I'm not convinced that it's necessary to explore the demand for a data haven in this particular article; perhaps that would be better suited to an article on data havens in general. If you're right about no one wanting a data haven, Anome, then HavenCo will go under. Time will tell. But I'd like to focus more on HavenCo itself, its relationship to that odd little place called Sealand, and possible attacks and on HavenCo's setup. And avoiding turning the whole thing into an advertisement, of course. :) --Stephen Gilbert

I think this needs merging
With Sealand! Honestly, though the company is notable, I don't think its that important. - Ta bu shi da yu 11:22, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

No, it needs un-merging
HavenCo is distinct from Roughs Tower, Rough Sands and Fort Rough. The attempt to merge it all together is most likely being used to give the cachet of legitimacy to Bates's project. We should neither confer this legitimacy, nor endorse it. But we should not denounce it either. We should merely describe the history of it all. Uncle Ed July 8, 2005 18:49 (UTC)

This article is unnecessary duplication
This article is a verbatim copy of the HavenCo section of the Sealand article. There's no need for both of them.

Data_haven
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_haven says it is not hosted from Sealand anymore, so mention that, and also mention Data_haven. --User:Jidanni 2006-04-19

Registration history
Someone has an axe to grind on the registration issue. There was actually an Anguillan corporation established sometime in 1999 or early 2000, with the UK company in parallel (which was allowed to lapse). The UK company was started on the advice of some even less competent UK attorneys after we had problems doing banking using an Anguillan company.

The Anguillan company was moved to a Cyprus company at some point. The Cyprus company THEN I think failed to pay its registration/etc. fees and was stricken, after I left.

The article as it stands is somewhat misleading on this point.

I don't have documentation readily available; if someone wanted to check the Anguillan companies registrar, that would probably be a better source of info.

(we dropped the Anguillan company because the registration agents we were using were fucking incompetent and expensive; banking in Anguilla also was pretty much useless, as they didn't offer online banking. Cyprus was not really much better though)

-- User:rdl 2006-06-01.

The UK registration was dissolved on 12/04/2005.

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/0e0e7b4fe135f805a804985de7fd50f4/compdetails

This whole registration entry is needs to be cleared up.

Server Location and Cabling
Are the data servers actually located on Sealand? And if so, how is the bandwidth transferred from Sealand? Was a cable laid from the UK? Wireless? Satellite? --Dogbreathcanada 08:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

---

The servers are currently located in London.

Do a traceroute to e.g. www.cracks.am.

There are 3-5 customers currently online. (scan 217.64.35.0/24)

The recent fire at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/5110244.stm which shut down power did not affect the servers. Suspicious, that.

Ryan 15:48, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Status of HavenCo
I have tried numerious times to get a server at HavenCo. No one has ever responded to my (numerious) e-mails asking about it. I have dug around quite a little bit on the net, and have seen some stuff about things about HavenCo having more or less gone under, not hosting on Sealand anymore, etc. What is the status of HavenCo? I'd like to know both for my Wikipedia use and personally. Also, how does someone get ahold of the people over there? They dont check thier e-mail very often.

Broken link
The link to the DefCon presentation is broken... what should we do?

Also, someone really needs to follow up and find out what happened to HavenCo... if it's dead, that should be mentioned in the article. -- Skyfaller 23:45, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, it's "original research" so it can't quite be in the article, but I have a server there and it's still running. It did not go down during the fire. The data center wasn't affected (apparently...). Jebba 00:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Neal Stephenson
I don't think the Stephenson connection is all that coincidental- considering he knows a number of the Cypherpunks personally (see Ian Goldberg) and some of the principals were in the same social groups! brain 23:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

It does seem significant that HavenCo started in 2000, the year after Cryptonomicon was published. Jakesnake22 (talk) 06:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

HavenCo rumored to be down
According to http://securityandthe.net/2008/11/18/havenco-data-center-offline/ the main HavenCo website has been down for a while. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mavink (talk • contribs) 21:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

HavenCo gone?
The article begins, "HavenCo Limited is a legal data haven..." This is present tense, but I can find nothing that confirms the continued operation of HavenCo beyond 2008. Should this article not be updated to reflect that. If it were to return it is a fact that Chris Harrington and Ryan Lackey are owed significant funds and have capital available to stop any business. It is also relatively simple if you know how to put Sealand back in the sea. Would you want to invest in that? FergusV9S (talk) 04:28, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Great source
if you'd like to make this article decent, see this book. Doug Weller  talk 16:14, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

 * Thanks. Unfortunately, most of the section you linked to is unavailable for preview because of too many previews. But I'd be interested in reading it when the preview block goes away. -- The Anome (talk) 20:57, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Early logo
Would the article benefit from the addition of an early logo? I saved a logo from the Havenco web page back in the early 2000's, would this be of use to the article? It's the black/red cross version, not the platform logo from the later designs. I'm not sure about re-use rights, as the company was (I presume) based in the Sealand domain and may or may not have a reciprocal agreement with regard to image re-use in other countries. Mongoosander (talk) 21:04, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:HavenCo