text:
Frequency modulation synthesis

Frequency modulation synthesis (or FM synthesis) is a form of sound synthesis whereby the frequency of a waveform is changed by modulating its frequency with a modulator. The (instantaneous) frequency of an oscillator is altered in accordance with the amplitude of a modulating signal.

FM synthesis can create both harmonic and inharmonic sounds. To synthesize harmonic sounds, the modulating signal must have a harmonic relationship to the original carrier signal. As the amount of frequency modulation increases, the sound grows progressively complex. Through the use of modulators with frequencies that are non-integer multiples of the carrier signal (i.e. inharmonic), inharmonic bell-like and percussive spectra can be created.

Applications
FM synthesis using analog oscillators may result in pitch instability. However, FM synthesis can also be implemented digitally, which is more stable and became standard practice. Digital FM synthesis (equivalent to the phase modulation using the time integration of instantaneous frequency) was the basis of several musical instruments beginning as early as 1974. Yamaha built the first prototype digital synthesizer in 1974, based on FM synthesis, before commercially releasing the Yamaha GS-1 in 1980. The Synclavier I, manufactured by New England Digital Corporation beginning in 1978, included a digital FM synthesizer, using an FM synthesis algorithm licensed from Yamaha. Yamaha's groundbreaking Yamaha DX7 synthesizer, released in 1983, brought FM to the forefront of synthesis in the mid-1980s.

Amusement use: FM sound chips on PCs, arcades, game consoles, and mobile phones
FM synthesis also became the usual setting for games and software up until the mid-nineties. For IBM PC compatible systems, sound cards like the AdLib and Sound Blaster popularized Yamaha chips like the OPL2 and OPL3. Other computers such as the Sharp X68000 and MSX (Yamaha CX5M computer unit) use the OPM sound chip (which was also commonly used for arcade machines up to the mid-nineties) with later CX5M units using the OPP sound chip, and the NEC PC-88 and PC-98 computers use the OPN and OPNA. For arcade systems and game consoles, OPNB was used as main basic sound generator board in Taito's arcade boards (with a variant of the OPNB being used in the Taito Z System) and notably used in SNK's Neo Geo arcade (MVS) and home console (AES) machines. The related OPN2 was used in the Sega's Mega Drive (Genesis) and Fujitsu's FM Towns Marty as one of its sound generator chips. Throughout the 2000s, FM synthesis was also used on a wide range of phones to play ringtones and other sounds, typically in the Yamaha SMAF format.

Don Buchla (mid-1960s)
Don Buchla implemented FM on his instruments in the mid-1960s, prior to Chowning's patent. His 158, 258 and 259 dual oscillator modules had a specific FM control voltage input, and the model 208 (Music Easel) had a modulation oscillator hard-wired to allow FM as well as AM of the primary oscillator. These early applications used analog oscillators, and this capability was also followed by other modular synthesizers and portable synthesizers including Minimoog and ARP Odyssey.

John Chowning (late-1960s–1970s)

By the mid-20th century, frequency modulation (FM), a means of carrying sound, had been understood for decades and was being used to broadcast radio transmissions. FM synthesis was developed since 1967 at Stanford University, California, by John Chowning,. His  was licensed to Japanese company Yamaha in 1973. The implementation commercialized by Yamaha (US Patent 4018121 Apr 1977 or U.S. Patent 4,018,121 ),.

Expansions by Yamaha
Yamaha's engineers began adapting Chowning's algorithm for use in a commercial digital synthesizer, adding improvements such as the "key scaling" method, though it would take several years before Yamaha released their FM digital synthesizers. In the 1970s, Yamaha were granted a number of patents, under the company's former name "Nippon Gakki Seizo Kabushiki Kaisha", evolving Chowning's work. Yamaha built the first prototype FM digital synthesizer in 1974. Yamaha eventually commercialized FM synthesis technology with the Yamaha GS-1, the first FM digital synthesizer, released in 1980. FM synthesis was the basis of some of the early generations of digital synthesizers, most notably those from Yamaha, as well as New England Digital Corporation under license from Yamaha. Yamaha's DX7 synthesizer, released in 1983, was ubiquitous throughout the 1980s. Several other models by Yamaha provided variations and evolutions of FM synthesis during that decade.

Yamaha had patented its hardware implementation of FM in the 1970s, allowing it to nearly monopolize the market for FM technology until the mid-1990s.

Related development by Casio
Casio developed a related form of synthesis called phase distortion synthesis, used in its CZ range of synthesizers. It had a similar (but slightly differently derived) sound quality to the DX series.

Popularization after the expiration of patent
With the expiration of the Stanford University FM patent in 1995, digital FM synthesis can now be implemented freely by other manufacturers. The FM synthesis patent brought Stanford $20 million before it expired, making it (in 1994) "the second most lucrative licensing agreement in Stanford's history". FM today is mostly found in software-based synths such as FM8 by Native Instruments or Sytrus by Image-Line, but it has also been incorporated into the synthesis repertoire of some modern digital synthesizers, usually coexisting as an option alongside other methods of synthesis such as subtractive, sample-based synthesis, additive synthesis, and other techniques. The degree of complexity of the FM in such hardware synths may vary from simple 2-operator FM, to the highly flexible 6-operator engines of the Korg Kronos and Alesis Fusion, to creation of FM in extensively modular engines such as those in the latest synthesisers by Kurzweil Music Systems.

Realtime Convolution & Modulation (AFM + Sample) and Formant Shaping Synthesis
New hardware synths specifically marketed for their FM capabilities disappeared from the market after the release of the Yamaha SY99 and FS1R, and even those marketed their highly powerful FM abilities as counterparts to sample-based synthesis and formant synthesis respectively.

Combining sets of 8 FM operators with multi-spectral wave forms began in 1999 by Yamaha in the FS1R. The FS1R had 16 operators, 8 standard FM operators and 8 additional operators that used a noise source rather than an oscillator as its sound source. By adding in tuneable noise sources the FS1R could model the sounds produced in the human voice and in a wind instrument, along with making percussion instrument sounds. The FS1R also contained an additional wave form called the Formant wave form. Formants can be used to model resonating body instrument sounds like the cello, violin, acoustic guitar, bassoon, English horn, or human voice. Formants can even be found in the harmonic spectrum of several brass instruments.

Variable Phase Modulation, FM-X Synthesis, Altered FM, etc
In 2016, Korg released the Korg Volca FM, a, 3-voice, 6 operators FM iteration of the Korg Volca series of compact, affordable desktop modules,. More recently Korg released the opsix (2020) and opsix SE (2023) integrating 6 operators FM synthesis with subtractive, analogue modeling, additive, semi-modular  and Waveshaping. Yamaha released the Montage, which combines a 128-voice sample-based engine with a 128-voice FM engine. This iteration of FM is called FM-X, and features 8 operators; each operator has a choice of several basic wave forms, but each wave form has several parameters to adjust its spectrum. The Yamaha Montage was followed by the more affordable Yamaha MODX in 2018, with 64-voice, 8 operators FM-X architecture in addition to a 128-voice sample-based engine. Elektron in 2018 launched the Digitone, an 8-voice, 4 operators FM synth featuring Elektron's renowned sequence engine.

FM-X synthesis was introduced with the Yamaha Montage synthesizers in 2016. FM-X uses 8 operators. Each FM-X operator has a set of multi-spectral wave forms to choose from, which means each FM-X operator can be equivalent to a stack of 3 or 4 DX7 FM operators. The list of selectable wave forms includes sine waves, the All1 and All2 wave forms, the Odd1 and Odd2 wave forms, and the Res1 and Res2 wave forms. The sine wave selection works the same as the DX7 wave forms. The All1 and All2 wave forms are a saw-tooth wave form. The Odd1 and Odd2 wave forms are pulse or square waves. These two types of wave forms can be used to model the basic harmonic peaks in the bottom of the harmonic spectrum of most instruments. The Res1 and Res2 wave forms move the spectral peak to a specific harmonic and can be used to model either triangular or rounded groups of harmonics further up in the spectrum of an instrument. Combining an All1 or Odd1 wave form with multiple Res1 (or Res2) wave forms (and adjusting their amplitudes) can model the harmonic spectrum of an instrument or sound.

Spectral analysis
There are multiple variations of FM synthesis, including: etc.
 * Various operator arrangements (known as "FM Algorithms" in Yamaha terminology)
 * 2 operators
 * Serial FM (multiple stages)
 * Parallel FM (multiple modulators, multiple-carriers),
 * Mix of them
 * Various waveform of operators
 * Sinusoidal waveform
 * Other waveforms
 * Additional modulation
 * Linear FM
 * Exponential FM (preceded by the anti-logarithm conversion for CV/oct. interface of analog synthesizers)
 * Oscillator sync with FM

As the basic of these variations, we analyze the spectrum of 2 operators (linear FM synthesis using two sinusoidal operators) on the following.

2 operators
The spectrum generated by FM synthesis with one modulator is expressed as follows:

For modulation signal $$m(t) = B\,\sin(\omega_m t)\,$$, the carrier signal is:
 * $$\begin{align}

FM(t)	& \ =\ A\,\sin\left(\,\int_0^t \left(\omega_c + B\,\sin(\omega_m\,\tau)\right)d\tau\right) \\ & \ =\ A\,\sin\left(\omega_c\,t - \frac{B}{\omega_m}\left(\cos(\omega_m\,t) - 1\right)\right) \\ & \ =\ A\,\sin\left(\omega_c\,t + \frac{B}{\omega_m}\left(\sin(\omega_m\,t - \pi/2) + 1\right)\right) \\ \end{align}$$

If we were to ignore the constant phase terms on the carrier $$\phi_c = B/\omega_m\,$$ and the modulator $$\phi_m = - \pi/2\,$$, finally we would get the following expression, as seen on and :
 * $$\begin{align}

FM(t)	& \ \approx\ A\,\sin\left(\omega_c\,t + \beta\,\sin(\omega_m\,t)\right) \\ & \ =\ A\left( J_0(\beta) \sin(\omega_c\,t)	    + \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} J_n(\beta)\left[\,\sin((\omega_c+n\,\omega_m)\,t)\ +\ (-1)^{n}\sin((\omega_c-n\,\omega_m)\,t)\,\right] \right) \\ & \ =\ A\sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty} J_n(\beta)\,\sin((\omega_c+n\,\omega_m)\,t) \end{align}$$ where $$\omega_c\,,\,\omega_m\,$$ are angular frequencies ($$\,\omega = 2\pi f\,$$) of carrier and modulator, $$\beta = B / \omega_m\,$$ is frequency modulation index, and amplitudes $$J_n(\beta)\,$$ is $$n\,$$-th Bessel function of first kind, respectively.

title: Frequency modulation synthesis


text:
Font (disambiguation)

Font may refer to:

Typography

 * Typeface, a design of letters, numbers and other symbols, to be used in printing or for electronic display. Most typefaces include variations in size, weight, style, and so on. Each of these variations of the typeface is a font. Since the 1990s, many people outside the printing industry have used the word font as a synonym for typeface
 * Font, a particular size, weight and style of a typeface
 * Computer font, a digital file storing typeface/font data

Religion

 * Holy water font, a vessel for holy water, often seen at the entrance of a church
 * Baptismal font, a container for holy water used in the Christian ceremonial of baptism

People with the surname

 * Héctor Font (born 1984), Spanish footballer
 * Pedro Font (1737-1781), Franciscan missionary and diarist

Locations

 * Font, Switzerland, a municipality of the canton of Fribourg
 * Font Hill Beach, a beach on the south coast of Jamaica
 * La Font de la Figuera, a municipality in Spain
 * La Font de la Guatlla, a neighborhood in Barcelona, Spain
 * La Font d'En Carròs, a municipality in Spain
 * River Font, a river in Northumberland, England

Other

 * Fountain (archaic usage, also spelled fount)
 * Kerosene lamp font, the container at the base of an oil or kerosene lamp that holds the oil, also spelled fount

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

title: Font (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:Fetus

The topic of this article is ambiguous
The hatnote at the top of this article explains that this article is specifically about human fetuses. However, the lead section of this article seems to imply that the article is about both human and non-human fetuses, even though this contradicts the hatnote at the top of the page. Should this article be renamed to "Human fetus" so that this article's topic will be less ambiguous, and there will be no confusion about the scope of this article? Jarble (talk) 19:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * A brief mention/implication concerning non-humans, or even a few mentions/implications concerning non-humans, doesn't make humans any less this article's focus. But if you are that worried about such mentions/implications, which it appears that you are, one solution would be to alter the hatnote so that it uses the word "primarily," as in "This article is primarily about the stage of human development." What I think of such moves has already been stated in the discussion you started at the Pregnancy article. I've informed WP:MED of this fetus discussion. Flyer22 (talk) 02:21, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * wp:MOSMED skirts the issue somewhat by deferring to TA, but we are inconsistent about whether or not to give precedence of title to the human-focussed article over the more general alternative. Hence we have Human brain, Human heart, Human leg, Foot and Arm as human-focussed articles. These show various hatnotes as appropriate.LeadSongDog come howl!  13:58, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

 * I'm not seeing the problem, actually. The first sentence tells you what the word means.  Everything after that is about humans.  We don't need to absolutely exclude all mention of non-human fetuses to have people figure out the subject of the article.  In fact, a well-written article would include some comparative embryology.  Sure, you'll have to read a couple of sentences or glance at the table of contents to be absolutely certain that the article is about humans, but this isn't a serious problem.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, when I made my above comment, I was thinking the same thing about comparative anatomy, which MOSMED mentions. But "comparative embryology" is more accurate in this case. Flyer22 (talk) 18:57, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

 * I think I made some improvements here. If not, feel free. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:43, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

 * Not needed, per that edit summary, responses to Jarble above, and similar responses to Jarble any time Jarble wants an article to be less human-centric. Flyer22 (talk) 00:55, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

 * I also found the lead section pretty confusing. I'm inclined to agree with renaming based on MOS:PRECISION (particularly the part about "natural disambiguation"). I disagree that “fetus” is analogous to “pregnancy”. If someone said “let's talk about pregnancy”, I would assume they meant human pregnancy, but if someone said “let's talk about fetuses”, I would ask “Human fetuses?”. I've clarified the lead section, but still think a rename or merge should be considered. George Makepeace (talk) 23:12, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

 * Example of an article with an “Other species” section: Embryo George Makepeace (talk) 23:37, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Fetus (biology)
Very little content on page that is not covered on target page and would fit into an Other animals section Iztwoz (talk) 07:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Support meaning is the same in both cases. No need to separate articles - would benefit things by centralising information and reducing needless fragmentation. --Tom (LT) (talk) 07:46, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fetus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130601182944/http://pregnancyarchive.com/articles/insights-into-early-fetal-development/ to http://pregnancyarchive.com/articles/insights-into-early-fetal-development

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:15, 31 December 2016 (UTC)

Out of place file
Ought the file of fetus at gestational age 9 weeks be removed as this is a file of an embryo (7 weeks fertilisation age).--Iztwoz (talk) 21:45, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Removed

Fetere
I distinctly remember reading somewhere that the word fetus comes from the Latin word fetere, meaning to stink. I’m assuming this was wrong? 63.231.140.53 (talk) 20:07, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 6 December 2021
Some authors [39] argue that fetal pain

In the above quote from the fetal pain section, the space between "some authors" and the reference ought to be removed. 122.150.71.249 (talk) 06:14, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅  LakesideMiners Come Talk To Me! 14:52, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fetus


text:
Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel

Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel (22 July 1784 – 17 March 1846) was a German astronomer, mathematician, physicist, and geodesist. He was the first astronomer who determined reliable values for the distance from the sun to another star by the method of parallax. Certain important mathematical functions were named Bessel functions after Bessel's death, though they had originally been discovered by Daniel Bernoulli before being generalised by Bessel.

Life and family
Bessel was born in Minden, Westphalia, then capital of the Prussian administrative region Minden-Ravensberg, as second son of a civil servant into a large family. At the age of 14 he left the school, because he did not like the education in Latin language, and apprenticed in the import-export concern Kulenkamp at Bremen. The business's reliance on cargo ships led him to turn his mathematical skills to problems in navigation. This in turn led to an interest in astronomy as a way of determining longitude.

Bessel came to the attention of Heinrich Wilhelm Olbers, a practising physician of Bremen and well-known astronomer, by producing a refinement on the orbital calculations for Halley's Comet in 1804, using old observation data taken from Thomas Harriot and Nathaniel Torporley in 1607. Franz Xaver von Zach edited the results in his journal Monatliche Correspondenz.

Having finished his commercial education, Bessel left Kulenkamp in 1806 and became assistant at Johann Hieronymus Schröter's private observatory in Lilienthal near Bremen as successor of Karl Ludwig Harding. There he worked on James Bradley's stellar observation data to produce precise positions for some 3,222 stars.

Despite lacking any higher education, especially at university, Bessel was appointed director of the newly founded Königsberg Observatory by King Frederick William III of Prussia in January 1810, at the age of 25, and remained in that position until his death. Some elder professors of the Philosophical Faculty disputed Bessel's right to teach mathematics without any academic degree. Therefore he turned to his fellow Carl Friedrich Gauss, who provided the award of an honorary doctor degree from the University of Göttingen in March 1811. Both scientists were in correspondence from 1804 to 1843. In 1837 they got in quarrel about Gauss's habit of very slow publication.

In 1842 Bessel took part in the annual meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science in Manchester, accompanied by the geophysicist Georg Adolf Erman and the mathematician Carl Gustav Jacob Jacobi, where he gave a report on astronomical clocks.

Bessel married Johanna Hagen, the daughter of the chemist and pharmacist Karl Gottfried Hagen who was the uncle of the physician and biologist Hermann August Hagen and the hydraulic engineer Gotthilf Hagen, the latter also Bessel's student and assistant from 1816 to 1818. The physicist Franz Ernst Neumann, Bessel's close companion and colleague, was married to Johanna Hagen's sister Florentine. Neumann introduced Bessel's exacting methods of measurement and data reduction into his mathematico-physical seminar, which he co-directed with Carl Gustav Jacob Jacobi at Königsberg. These exacting methods had a lasting impact upon the work of Neumann's students and upon the Prussian conception of precision in measurement.

Bessel had two sons and three daughters. His elder son became an architect but died suddenly in 1840 aged 26; his younger son died shortly after birth. His eldest daughter, Marie, married the physicist Georg Adolf Erman, member of the scholar family Erman. One of their sons in turn was the renowned Egyptologist Adolf Erman. His third daughter Johanna married the politician Adolf Hermann Hagen; one of their sons was the physicist Ernst Bessel Hagen, and the mathematician Erich Bessel-Hagen was a grandson of them. Bessel was godfather of Adolf von Baeyer, son of his collaborator Johann Jacob Baeyer.

After several months of illness Bessel died in March 1846 at his observatory from retroperitoneal fibrosis.

Work
While the observatory was still in construction Bessel elaborated the Fundamenta Astronomiae based on Bradley's observations. As a preliminary result he produced tables of atmospheric refraction that won him the Lalande Prize from the French Academy of Sciences in 1811. The Königsberg Observatory began operation in 1813.

Starting in 1819, Bessel determined the position of over 50,000 stars with a meridian circle from Reichenbach, assisted by some of his qualified students. The most prominent of them was Friedrich Wilhelm Argelander, his successors were Otto August Rosenberger and August Ludwig Busch.

Bessel determined the first reliable value for the distance between a star and the solar system with a heliometer from  Fraunhofer using the method of stellar parallax. In 1838 he published a parallax of 0.314 arcseconds for 61 Cygni, which indicated that the star is 10.3 ly away. Compared with the current measurement of 11.4 ly, Bessel's figure had an error of 9.6%. Thanks to these results astronomers had not only enlarged the vision of the universe well beyond the cosmic magnitude, but after the discovery in 1728 by James Bradley of the aberration of light a second empirical evidence of the Earth's relative movement was produced. A short time later Friedrich Georg Wilhelm Struve and Thomas Henderson reported the parallaxes of Vega and Alpha Centauri.

Precise measurements with a new meridian circle from Adolf Repsold allowed Bessel to notice deviations in the motions of Sirius and Procyon, which must be caused by the gravitational attraction of unseen companions. His announcement of Sirius's "dark companion" in 1844 was the first correct claim of a previously unobserved companion by positional measurement, and eventually led to the discovery of Sirius B by Alvan Graham Clark in 1862, the first discovery of a white dwarf. John Martin Schaeberle discovered Procyon B in 1896.

Bessel was the first scientist who realized the effect later called personal equation, that several simultaneously observing persons determine slightly different values, especially recording the transit time of stars.

In 1824, Bessel developed a new method for calculating the circumstances of eclipses using the so-called Besselian elements. His method simplified the calculation to such an extent, without sacrificing accuracy, that it is still in use today.

On Bessel's proposal the Prussian Academy of Sciences started the edition of the Berliner Akademische Sternkarten (Berlin Academic Star Charts) in 1825 as an international project with Johann Franz Encke as executive editor. One unpublished new chart enabled Johann Gottfried Galle to find Neptune near the position calculated by Le Verrier in September 1846 at Berlin Observatory.

In the second decade of the 19th century, while studying the dynamics gravitational systems as multi-body problem, Bessel developed what are now known as Bessel functions. Critical for the solution of certain differential equations, these functions are used throughout both classical and quantum physics.

A correction term in the formula for the sample variance estimator is named in his honour. This is the use of the factor n − 1 in the denominator of the formula, rather than just n. This occurs when the sample mean rather than the population mean is used to centre the data and since the sample mean is a linear combination of the data the residual to the sample mean overcounts the number of degrees of freedom by the number of constraint equations — in this case one.

Like numerous astronomers of his time Bessel dealt on the field of geodesy, too, first theoretically, when he published a method for solving the main geodetic problem. In 1830 he got the royal order for the survey of East Prussia with the purpose to connect the yet existing Prussian and Russian triangulation networks. This work was carried out in cooperation with Johann Jacob Baeyer, then major of the Prussian army; the final report was published in 1838. He also obtained an estimate of increased accuracy for the Earth's ellipsoid, nowadays called the Bessel ellipsoid, based on several arc measurements.

Honors and prizes

 * Honorary doctor degree from the University of Göttingen in March 1811
 * Lalande Prize of the French Academy of Sciences in 1811 and 1816
 * Member of the Prussian Academy of Sciences in 1812
 * Member of the French Academy of Sciences in 1816
 * Foreign member of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences in 1823
 * Fellow of the Royal Society in 1825
 * Foreign Honorary Member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1832
 * Member of the Royal Institute of the Netherlands, predecessor of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1827
 * Member of the American Philosophical Society in 1840
 * Member of the National Academy of Science in Verona (1842),
 * Bessel won the Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society twice, in 1829 and 1841

Bessel was one of the first members of the Order Pour le Merite (Civil class) when it was established in 1842.

The first cosmic object named after Bessel is the largest crater in the Moon's Mare Serenitatis. The main-belt asteroid 1552 Bessel was named at the centenary of the parallaxe determination in 1938.

Geographical commemorations are two fjords in Greenland, Bessel Fjord, NE Greenland and Bessel Fjord, NW Greenland.

Xyletinus besseli a fossil beetle from the Eocene belonging to the family Ptinidae, found in the Baltic amber in Sambia, was named in his honour.

BeSSel, the Bar and Spiral Structure Legacy Survey, is named after him.

Publications

 * Latin

 * German

 * Vol. 1: I. Bewegungen der Körper im Sonnensystem. II. Sphärische Astronomie. Leipzig 1875
 * Vol. 2: III. Theorie der Instrumente. IV. Stellarastronomie. V. Mathematik. Leipzig 1876
 * Vol. 3: VI. Geodäsie. VII. Physik. VIII. Verschiedenes – Literatur. Leipzig 1876.
 * Vol. 1: I. Bewegungen der Körper im Sonnensystem. II. Sphärische Astronomie. Leipzig 1875
 * Vol. 2: III. Theorie der Instrumente. IV. Stellarastronomie. V. Mathematik. Leipzig 1876
 * Vol. 3: VI. Geodäsie. VII. Physik. VIII. Verschiedenes – Literatur. Leipzig 1876.
 * Vol. 1: I. Bewegungen der Körper im Sonnensystem. II. Sphärische Astronomie. Leipzig 1875
 * Vol. 2: III. Theorie der Instrumente. IV. Stellarastronomie. V. Mathematik. Leipzig 1876
 * Vol. 3: VI. Geodäsie. VII. Physik. VIII. Verschiedenes – Literatur. Leipzig 1876.
 * Vol. 1: I. Bewegungen der Körper im Sonnensystem. II. Sphärische Astronomie. Leipzig 1875
 * Vol. 2: III. Theorie der Instrumente. IV. Stellarastronomie. V. Mathematik. Leipzig 1876
 * Vol. 3: VI. Geodäsie. VII. Physik. VIII. Verschiedenes – Literatur. Leipzig 1876.
 * Vol. 3: VI. Geodäsie. VII. Physik. VIII. Verschiedenes – Literatur. Leipzig 1876.

 * Correspondence
 * Königlich Preußische Akademie der Wissenschaften, ed. (1880): Briefwechsel zwischen Gauss und Bessel. [Correspondence] Leipzig.

title: Friedrich Wilhelm Bessel


text:
Talk:Fossil record

I think "...  these artifacts and their placement in rock formations ...", artifacts in the orginal article sounds a bit man made, could anybody with an English mother tongue evaluate the original sentence, thanks.

I agree with the previous comment that creationist views, should go into the Creationism article

-- I think NPOV doesn't require 50% of the article to be about Creationism. Perhaps the creationist objections to the fossil record should go into the Creationism article. (They merit at least a link here, though.) --Ed Poor

Yes, there is currently far too much about creationism here - it's supposed to be an article about the fossil record, not about creationism. It also uses the term "Sudden Creationism", which you admitted that you made up. --Zundark, 2002 Jan 8

the following was removed from the page:

However, a few scientists and many non-scientists reject the authenticity of the fossil record, primarily on religious grounds. Those who accept ..., for example, completely reject the fossil record as evidence of evolution.

Not all Creationists reject the fossil record. The Intelligent Design theory, for example, embraces both the fossil record and natural selection, but says that speciation happens through God's intervention.

Therefore, the matter of the fossil record provides a clear but often overlooked distinction between the principal schools of thought within Creationism.

One does not have to be a creationist to wonder at the gaps in the fossil record. Where, for example, are the intermediate stages between horses and rhinos? We see a long distinguished fossil record for horses, and a long distinguished fossil record for rhinos, with probably dozens or hundreds of examples of either. But where are the missing links? It is just not mathematically probable that if we started with a 1,000,000 horses, 1,000,000 rhinos and 1,000,000 intermediates, we would have 100 horse fossils, 100 rhino fossils and 0 intermediate fossils. Nor does it seem tenable to me to argue that the transition took place so rapidly that the probability of a fossil's being left was 0. Nor is a macromutation credible. I am 100% atheist and can see no other possibility than that the theory of evolution is true, but I cannot accept it without reservation unless I hear a more reasonable explanation of the sketchy fossil record.

 * What on Earth are you talking about? Who ever said that there should be transitional fossils linking "horses" to "rhinos"? --JPotter 20:04, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Can a reasonably complete set of fossils of both horses and rhinos be provided that would take them both back to a common ancestor? Of course there should be a link, if they are both classed as perissodactyls?

 * Hopefully you can understand you've just answered your own question. --JPotter 23:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Edit conflict + can we talk about this?
I didn't intend to violate 3RR, but I made substantial edits I didn't want to lose after making my first revert. I guess they count as a second revert?

Anyway, I'm still hoping for discussion rather than large reversions. I think I saw something on a policy page or guideline which discourages undiscussed rv's. In any case, I won't revert again anytime soon. I'm waiting for the discussion! :-) --Wing Nut 17:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, we can talk about this. The C-E debate is not really of great import to the study of the fossil record. The converse, however, is somewhat true because the fossil record is quoted by creationists all the time as the extensive analysis in the scientific community that has occured regarding the fossil record is one of the bigger stumbling blocks for advocates of creation science and other anti-evolutionary ideas. However, this doesn't belong in this article which should be about the fossil record itself. --ScienceApologist 18:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand. Your edit summary began with rv POV pushing.

I thought POV pushing was defined as the act (or attempt or intent) to evade, circumvent and undermine Wikipedia's neutrality policy (Wikipedia:NPOV) by creating and editing articles so that they show only one point of view.

Did you mean to accuse me of attempting to evade NPOV? Or do you feel that in some accidental way perhaps my edits made the Fossil record article show only one POV? It's obviously just the opposite. I took a one-POV article and added another POV to it. Isn't this in accordance with NPOV? --Wing Nut

 * As it currently stands, there is a definitely POV slant held by creationist objections to science which states that there exists a controversy. Of course, what a "controversy" is cannot be easily determined, but the fact of the matter is that the point of view that a controversy exists is one that is entirely the purview of creationist who promote this as a backdoor attempt to get their ideas and evangelism heard (i.e. Teach the Controversy). This article as it currently stands is about the fossil record -- it isn't about the point of view that there is controversy about the fossil record with regards to a few vocal creationists. --ScienceApologist 18:26, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * These recent edits seem to be in violation of the undue weight provision of Wikipedia. JPotter 18:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Huh? Undue weight? More than 90% of the article is mainstream, and 10% is creationist and ID reaction to mainstream? How much weight is undue? 5%? 1%? (And where's the policy page, I guess I better study it.) --Wing Nut 18:43, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * In this case, I think 0% would be about right. In a scientific artcle, there is precisely no place for pseudoscience. Sorry. --Guinnog 18:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Here you go. I don't think any mention of creationism is allowed here. Maybe 1 sentence at the end that says YECs object to it. Also, the claim that IDists accept the fossil record is inaccurate. ID is a big tent, meaning there are a wide range of ideas under the ID camp. One very prominent IDsts, Steven C. Meyer, has said that the evolutionist doctrine of common descent is questionable. So the sentence about IDists accepting the fossil record has to go. Cheers. JPotter 18:48, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a reliable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each.

That would seem to justify the inclusion of the edits I made, rather than forbidding them. At the very least, the policy page Jason cited clears me of any wrong-doing. The question remaining is, "How much coverage should be given to Creationist and ID viewpoints on the fossil record?"

If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents;

I named Jonathan Wells as accepting the fossil record. Should we name yet another design theorist who opposes the fossil record?

These matters are important, because many people are unaware of which viewpoint adherents accept or reject the fossil record's authenticity. --Wing Nut 19:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The inclusion of pseudoscience in this article will be resisted by me. Take The Holocaust and see how much space "Holocaust denial" gets as a guide to how much space this should get in the article. --Guinnog 19:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Quoting:
 * Lee says: "General articles on biology, on the other hand, should simply treat evolution as uncontroversial, because no serious biologist disagrees, and failure to do so compromises understanding of the subject." I think this is wrong on two counts. First, while evolution is uncontroversial among serious biologists, it is controversial among an alarmingly large portion of the general public; you do them and yourselves no favors by ignoring this controversy.

The above quote is on a page linked from NPOV, which I thank ScienceApologist for showing me.

Likewise, it's wrong to hide the controversy over the authenticity or meaning of the fossil record. Not that it should by 50-50 (I have read 'undue weight'), but that Wikipedia ought not to conceal the fact that a substantial majority of people are rejecting science. --Wing Nut 19:26, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

And holocaust denial gets a subsection [] plus a link to an article of its own. --Wing Nut 19:27, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * It certainly does. And if you want to write a decent and verifiable article on those who support a pseudoscientific POV, be my guest. We can even link to it from this article if you like. I pointed you to the Holocaust article to show you due weight in action. It is, what, 1% of the article? That's how it should be. --Guinnog 19:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The holocaust has a much bigger article. I'm against promoting minority religious views in this article, which is about the science. We could include something along the following lines: The fossil record helped the development of the theory of evolution, though some Christians claim this is not the only way to explain the fossil record. Stephen B Streater 19:38, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The fossil record helped the development of the theory of evolution, though some Christian fundamentalists claim this is not the only way to explain the fossil record? --Guinnog 19:39, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Sounds good. Some suggests fewer than half. Do you have a cite for this? I thought all Christian Fundamentalists who have a view thought this. Stephen B Streater 20:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, but creationists are not a significant minority among scientists. That's the point, that in science articles, we use the scientific community for sourcing. Consider this. I subscribe to several peer reviewed journal in an effort to aid the citing of sources in my editing here. Neither in the journal Science, nor in Nature are there any peer reviewed papers doubting the varacity of the fossil record or calling it into question. Zero. That says to me that in the scientific community the creationist ideas about the fossil record are not even a significant minority. Check out dinosaur to see how we resolved a similar conflict there. JPotter 22:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Excellent! So we get:

Religious views
Various religious groups have views about fossils that differ from those held by scientists. While many mainstream scientists respect these views as faith positions, they argue that religiously-inspired interpretations of fossils do not withstand serious scientific scrutiny.

--Guinnog 22:16, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

 * How do we know many mainstream scientists respect? It sounds like weasel words to me. Stephen B Streater 06:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

True. How about:

Various religious groups have views about fossils that differ from those held by scientists. Mainstream scientists argue that as faith positions, these religiously-inspired interpretations of fossils do not withstand serious scientific scrutiny.

 * Better, but still slightly POV to me. How about: Various religious groups have alternative explanations of the fossil record that stem from attempts to fit the experimental evidence to their religious texts. Stephen B Streater 06:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Nearly. We need to be clear that this position has no credibility with scientists. --Guinnog 06:53, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * OK. How about:  These explanations are not consistent with the wide body of scientific theories such as biology and geology, which explains why scientists don't believe them. Stephen B Streater 07:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Or: These explanations are not consistent with the wide body of scientific theories from fields such as biology and geology. Some creationists believe the Earth was created with the illusion of age - ie is consistent with any scientific theory. We should allow for these somehow eg creationism is not believed because it is unnecessary perhaps. Stephen B Streater 07:07, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi, could your explanation clarify that creationism is a doctrine associate with Abrahamic religions and the texts in question are the Hebrew Bible and Quran. 80.189.176.148 19:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Possibly: "Various religious groups within the Abrahamic tradition have developed creationist theories, which attempt to reconcile their interpretation of the Hebrew Bible or Quran to scientific evidence."

 * ""Various religious groups within the Abrahamic tradition have developed creationist theories, whose attempts to reconcile their interpretation of the Hebrew Bible or Quran run counter to scientific evidence."? --Guinnog 12:14, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

"

Edit wars
Could persons who consider that creationism is not sufficiently notable to be mentioned, indicate their reasoning, instead of starting an edit war. 80.189.215.95 13:44, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I see only one edit warrior. Creationism has its own raft of articles, why does it need linking from here? Seems a ploy by POV pushers to maximize exposure. Still hold the added bit is irrelevant to the subject. And the absurd holocast denial bit in your edit summary was ridiculous. Also, why not get a user name, I dislike talking to an ip address. --Vsmith 17:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Clearly, this page shows the proposed wording was developed by more than one person. Also, I was using a metaphor already in use. If you look at my edits to Pacificism, I am not a Jew, Christian or Muslim, let alone a creationist. My initial comment was to avoid phrases such as "sacred texts", which are inappropriate. Creationism is based on Genesis in the Hebrew Bible and the Quoran, not the sacred text of any other religion. Your editted version is too vague and the second sentence is emotive and unencyclopedic. 80.189.8.190 18:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC) That said, I followed your advice and got a user name. Addhoc 21:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

carbon 14
The section listing the radiometric methods ends with carbon 14 and a caveat about the length of time carbon 14 is useful. While this is true, a quick reading may give the false impression that all the dating methods are thus limited. Either we should remove that bit or add the dates that each of the methods cover. Nowimnthing 15:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Removed same. --Vsmith 17:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

merge
has anyone brought up merging this with Fossil? I think it would probably benefit both pages. Nowimnthing 15:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I would support a merge. --Vsmith 17:19, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Agree as well, a merge would help both articles. JPotter 17:34, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Would greatly enhance the fossil article. Aeon  Insane Ward  12:46, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Three days, 6 people in support (here and at fossil), no oppostion, I think I will go ahead and do the merge. It may need quite a bit of cleanup after so feel free to give me a hand. Nowimnthing 22:46, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Mainstream science vs scientific
Some things which are not mainstream science are nevertheless not inconsistent with science itself. Any claim that creationism is inconsistent with the evidence in the fossil record is hard to justify as some creationist theories are consistent with the fossil record eg God made it look like it was old. The reason these theories are rejected by scientists is that they are untestable, invoke an unnecessary unexplained phenomenon (God), and make no useful predictions which can be tested ie not because they are inconsistent with experiments. Stephen B Streater 16:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fossil record


text:
FSB

FSB may refer to:

Organizations

 * Federal Security Service, the principal security agency of the Russian Federation.

Banking and finance

 * Federal savings bank, a class of bank in the United States
 * Federation of Small Businesses, a British lobbying group
 * Financial Services Board (South Africa), a financial regulatory authority
 * Financial Stability Board, an international group of financial authorities
 * First Somali Bank, a bank headquartered in Mogadishu, Somalia
 * Swedbank, formerly FöreningsSparbanken, a retail banking group

Computing

 * Fast syndrome-based hash, cryptographic hash functions
 * Front-side bus, a computer communication interface

Schools

 * Farmer School of Business, at Miami University in the U.S. state of Ohio
 * Friends School of Baltimore, a Quaker institution in Baltimore
 * Fuqua School of Business, at Duke University in the U.S. state of North Carolina

Other

 * FSB (band), a Bulgarian band
 * Bolivian Socialist Falange (Spanish: Falange Socialista Boliviana), a Bolivian political party
 * Brinjal fruit and shoot borer (Leucinodes orbonalis), a moth species
 * Fellow of the Society of Biology, U.K.
 * Fire support base, a temporary military encampment
 * Forward support battalion, predecessor of brigade support battalion
 * Fishbourne railway station, in England
 * Fortune Small Business, a defunct magazine
 * Trade Union Social Citizens List (Danish: Faglig Social Borgerliste), a Danish political group

title: FSB