text:
Laboratory

A laboratory is a construct you create so as to produce reproducible measurements.

Virtual Astronomical Observatory
"In order that the [Virtual Astronomical Observatory] VAO would be seen as an entity that is of and for the research community, a dedicated not-for-profit company was established to manage the governance and business functions."

"The U.S. Virtual Astronomical Observatory (VAO; http://www.us-vao.org/) [...] goal is to enable new science through efficient integration of distributed multi-wavelength data."

Automated telescopes
The top image at right shows the cupola or dome open with the automated telescopes visible of one of the Okno towers.

The Russian Okno system, four towers are at left, is an optoelectronic system for monitoring and surveillance of space objects integrated to the KRONA system of space recognition.

The installation, at lower right, is located in the mountains near Dushanbe, Tajikistan and Nurek Dam at an altitude of 2,200 meters, approximately latitude 38.280833 ° N longitude 69.224722 ° E.

It is a unique facility equipped with telescopes and radar control capable of tracking space objects orbiting the Earth at an altitude of 2,000 to 40,000 km.

The Okno system is fully automated, performs autonomous control sessions in real time and can only work at night, the role of the center is particularly important in emergency situations, such as a loss of communications with an artificial satellite.

At lower left is an image of the US counterpart, the Ground-based Electro-Optical Deep Space Surveillance (GEODSS) base at Diego Garcia, British Indian Ocean Territory latitude 7.41173°S and longitude 72.45222°E.

Cosmic rays
The Fred Lawrence Whipple Observatory is an astronomical observatory owned and operated by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) [with r]esearch activities [that] include imaging and spectroscopy of extragalactic, stellar, and planetary bodies, as well as gamma-ray and cosmic-ray astronomy.

The Pierre Auger Observatory is an international cosmic ray observatory designed to detect ultra-high-energy cosmic rays: single sub-atomic particles (protons or atomic nuclei) with energies beyond 1020 [electronvolt] eV (about the energy of a tennis ball traveling at 80 km/h). These high energy particles have an estimated arrival rate of just 1 per km2 per century, therefore the Auger Observatory has created a detection area the size of Rhode Island — over 3,000 km2 (1,200 sq mi) — in order to record a large number of these events. It is located in western Argentina's Mendoza Province, in one of the South American Pampas.

The basic set-up consists of 1600 water tanks (water Cherenkov Detectors, similar to the Haverah Park experiment) distributed over 3,000 square kilometres (1,200 sq mi), along with four atmospheric fluorescence detectors (similar to the High Resolution Fly's Eye) overseeing the surface array.

Observation platforms
Both astronomers and the general public who enjoy and support most astronomical observatories take advantage of observation platforms.

"The 300 square meters sized observation platform [at the Munich Public Observatory shown at right] is located at an altitude of 35 meters above street level and provides a splendid view over the city of [Munich] and the Alps. Two telescope domes [and] two smaller huts, housing the large telescopes are located here. In addition to these the visitors can use a series of smaller, portable telescopes."

An airborne observatory is an airplane or balloon with an astronomical telescope. By carrying the telescope high, the telescope can avoid cloud cover, pollution, and carry out observations in the infrared spectrum, above water vapor in the atmosphere which absorbs infrared radiation.

The Gerard P. Kuiper Airborne Observatory (KAO) was a national facility operated by NASA to support research in infrared astronomy. The observation platform was a highly modified C-141A jet transport aircraft with a range of 6,000 nautical miles (11,000 km), capable of conducting research operations up to 48,000 feet (14 km). The KAO was based at the Ames Research Center, NAS Moffett Field, in Sunnyvale, California. It began operation in 1974 as a replacement for an earlier aircraft, the Galileo Observatory, a converted Convair CV-990 (N711NA).

The Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy (SOFIA) ... is based on a Boeing 747SP wide-body aircraft that has been modified to include a large door in the aft fuselage that can be opened in flight to allow a 2.5 meter diameter reflecting telescope access to the sky. This telescope is designed for infrared astronomy observations in the stratosphere at altitudes of about 41,000 feet (about 12 km). SOFIA's flight capability allows it to rise above almost all of the water vapor in the Earth's atmosphere, which blocks some infrared wavelengths from reaching the ground. At the aircraft's cruising altitude, 85% of the full infrared range will be available. The aircraft can also travel to almost any point on the Earth's surface, allowing observation from the northern and southern hemispheres.

Theoretical laboratory
Def. "a room, building or institution equipped for scientific research, experimentation or analysis" is called a laboratory.

Conditions
Laboratory conditions are often expressed in terms of standard temperature and pressure.

Standard condition for temperature and pressure are standard sets of conditions for experimental measurements established to allow comparisons to be made between different sets of data. The most used standards are those of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), although these are not universally accepted standards. Other organizations have established a variety of alternative definitions for their standard reference conditions.

In chemistry, IUPAC established standard temperature and pressure (informally abbreviated as STP) as a temperature of 273.15 K (0 °C, 32 °F) and an absolute pressure of 100 kPa (14.504 psi, 0.986 atm, 1 bar), An unofficial, but commonly used standard is standard ambient temperature and pressure (SATP) as a temperature of 298.15 K (25 °C, 77 °F) and an absolute pressure of 100 kPa (14.504 psi, 0.986 atm). The STP and the SATP should not be confused with the standard state commonly used in thermodynamic evaluations of the Gibbs free energy of a reaction.

"Standard conditions for gases: Temperature, 273.15 K [...] and pressure of 105 pascals. The previous standard absolute pressure of 1 atm (equivalent to 1.01325 × 105 Pa) was changed to 100 kPa in 1982. IUPAC recommends that the former pressure should be discontinued."

NIST uses a temperature of 20 °C (293.15 K, 68 °F) and an absolute pressure of 101.325 kPa (14.696 psi, 1 atm). The International Standard Metric Conditions for natural gas and similar fluids are 288.15 K (59.00 °F, 15.00 °C) and 101.325 kPa.

Warm rooms
“With the increasing use of computers and CCD cameras, it is very advantageous to incorporate a 'warm room' into the observatory structure to keep the computer warmer than ambient air in cool seasons.”

Observation rooms
On the right is an image of the observation room for the 150-Foot Solar Tower Observatory on Mt. Wilson.

Domes
Most optical telescopes are housed within a dome or similar structure, to protect the delicate instruments from the elements. Telescope domes have a slit or other opening in the roof that can be opened during observing, and closed when the telescope is not in use. In most cases, the entire upper portion of the telescope dome can be rotated to allow the instrument to observe different sections of the night sky.

The domes of observatories, such as in the image at right, and the objects inside used to observe and control these observatories are made of chemicals.

Control rooms
Def. a room serving as the centre of monitoring a building, controlling an operation etc is called a control room.

Conference rooms
The Munich Public Observatory "50 square meters sized conference room is equipped for multi-purpose use with a variable number of seats and a bar. We use it for seminars and as a lounge for our club members."

Lecture rooms
The Munich Public Observatory "lecture room has 64 seats and a wide range of equipment for presentations: Slide-, video-, LCD- and overhead-projectors and a large screen with the dimension of 3 x 2.5 m. Lectures can be transmitted to our conference room."

Equatorial rooms
An equatorial room, in astronomical observatories, is the room which contains an equatorial mounted telescope. It is usually referred to in observatory buildings that contain more than one type of instrument: for example buildings with an "equatorial room" containing an equatorial telescope and a "transit room" containing a transit telescope. Equatorial rooms tend to be large circular rooms to accommodate all the range of motion of a long telescope on an equatorial mount and are usually topped with a dome to keep out the weather.

Outbuildings
The shapes and sizes, as well as functions, of particular observatories have changed over time.

An instrument, or a collection of them, with outbuildings for such things as control centres, data reduction centers, and maintenance are called observatories, such as radio observatories.

Measurements
Def. any act of quantifying relative to a standard is called a measurement.

Libraries
"The Astronomy Library supports programs of study in both astronomy and astrophysics and is used by the Astronomy Department, the Center for Space Physics and the Institute for Astrophysical Research. Named for Professor Michael D. Papagiannis in recognition of his 30 years of service to Boston University, this collection includes books in all areas of the field, current journals, and a comprehensive collection of sky atlases and maps."

The image on the right shows reading tables and a portion of the stacks. The images on the left and center show the main reading rooms of the Cambridge Observatory Library and Van Vleck Observatory Library of Wesleyan University, respectively.

Stairwells
The staircase or stairwell to an observation platform or a telescope provides an excellent spiral wall to exhibit images and photographs from completed and ongoing research.

At right is the spiral staircase to the old viewing room of the United States Naval Observatory.

Left is the staircase for the observation platform at the Munich Public Observatory.

Machine shops
"Our objective is to design, build, and maintain the highest quality research and teaching instruments, while always keeping finished cost to a minimum and safety to a maximum."

"I asked him where he had it made, he said he made it himself, & when I asked him where he got his tools said he made them himself & laughing added if I had staid for other people to make my tools & things for me... I had never made any thing..."

Exhibition halls
"There is a scaled model of the solar system in the 40 square meters sized exhibition hall [of the Munich Public Observatory]. A mini-planetarium demonstrates the orbits of Earth and Moon. With our spatial model the positions of the stars in the universe can be easily understood. Astronomical information is shown on large boards."

Planetaria
"In [the Munich Public Observatory] planetarium with 32 seats a Zeiss projector creates an impressive view of the night sky, independent of the weather or time of day, which in nature could only be seen under the best weather conditions. The constellations and the movement of the sun, moon and planets can be clearly demonstrated and these important aspects of the science of astronomy can be easily explained."

At left is the exterior structure for the Minsk planetarium.

Hypotheses

 * 1) A laboratory can be set up in virtual space to test reality for reproducibility.

title: Laboratory


text:
User:Jenny O/The Social Self

The social self
The human self is social. It is not a fixed entity and is context dependent. The self was once seen as a static one dimensional, single faceted entity but is now considered as a dynamic, multidimensional, multifaceted construct.

However, I had a lot of trouble trying to figure out how all the concepts relating to 'the self' fit together. I found the chapter in the textbook most confusing (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008, pp. 69-113). However, after reviewing the content with a fellow student, thinking more about the concepts, and doing some further reading, I think I have managed to get my head around it.

Fiske’s (2004) chapter ‘The self: Social to the core’ (e-reserve) was particularly helpful in putting these concepts into perspective, especially in linking them to the introductory framework presented in the textbook and lectures. She presented her discussion in terms of conceptual and operational definitions of the self:

The conceptual definition of the self
These are the psychological conceptions of the self and potential domains of study. On a conceptual level the self has four dimensions:

 * Inner self: Thoughts, feelings, attitudes & abilities.
 * Physical self (material self): Body & possessions. Loss or threat results in emotional reaction
 * Interpersonal self (social self): Interaction with others. Includes roles (expected behaviour in socially defined positions).
 * Societal self: Social identity at a cultural level. (Not face-to-face interaction). One’s concept of gender, age, ethnicity, religion etc.

The operational definition of the self
This is how psychologists define the self so it can be measured (research). Fiske (2004) suggests the self can be considered in the affective, behavioural and cognitive domains (ABC Triad). Each domain is driven by a motive and is represented by a major concept, components of which are measured. For example:
 * Affective self
 * Motive: To self-enhance
 * e.g. Self-esteem (Self-liking)
 * Possible measures: Scales of self-esteem e.g. performance, social regard, appearance

 * Behavioural self
 * Motive: To belong (gain acceptance)
 * e.g. Self-presentation (Conveying impressions, identities, images to others)
 * Possible measures: Public Vs anonymous behaviour, response to public embarrassment

 * Cognitive self
 * Motive: To understand (How people come to know themselves)
 * e.g. Self-concept (Achieved through self-perception, introspection, social comparison, social feedback)
 * Possible measures: “Who am I?” test, measures of self-schema

Defining the self from conceptual and operational viewpoints was most helpful to me. This enabled me to put this information into some sense of order, and then better understand the concepts and how they fit together.

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

title: User:Jenny O/The Social Self


text:
User:Jenny O/The Self in Action: Behavioural Control

The Self in Action: Behavioural Control
Human behaviour is differentiated from the behaviour of other animals by the meaning we assign to our actions. While this meaning can arise from our affective and cognitive ‘inner processes’, it is ultimately shaped by culture. For example, cultural norms form the basis of rules and laws in a society and thus determine acceptable behaviour. Higher levels of meaning are abstract and emotional, and lower levels more concrete. Thus, it follows that we would move toward lower levels of meaning for problem solving and effective coping.

Our goals, percieved freedom and choice influence our behaviour:

Goals
Goals provide humans with direction or purpose; meeting goals can fulfill our physical or psychological needs, and the extent to which we achieve our goals may serve some self-evaluative function (Deckers, 2005). For example, self-esteem might be measured by the extent to which we fulfill an academic goal or compare ourselves to the achievement of others. Ultimately our goals will be defined by what we value in our society. One would expect that a personal goal set in an individualist culture would differ from a personal goal set in a collectivist culture. Similarly, differences in goal setting, attainment and value would be found in a Western versus Eastern society, or a hunting/gathering versus an agricultural community.

Freedom to act
Free will can be considered as the capacity of “rational agents to exercise control over their actions and decisions” (Wikipedia). It is a contentious issue in psychology. I do not profess to understand the philosophical basis of free will. However, I originally believed humans did exercise free will, but I am unable to even identify an adequate example to support it! So, the concept presented in the textbook, that we are more-or-less free, has some appeal. Human freedom is a relative concept to the extent that it must depend on the context in which it is experienced. However, the degree to which we perceive ourselves to be free, specifically influences behaviours such as decision-making and self-regulation. For example, both the Self-determination Theory (perceived level of autonomy & intrinsic motivation) and the Panic Button Effect (a perceived escape), presented in the textbook, relate to one’s perceived control over his or her behaviour. Whether or not we institute control, we are generally happier, healthier and less stressed when we believe we have it.

Choice
Choice is also a very interesting subject. The textbook reports that people want more choices, but it seems that is not always beneficial. This is clearly articulated in this online presentation based on the book: The paradox of choice: Why more is less (2004) by an American psychologist Barry Schwartz. Schwartz argues that the vast array of choice available in consumer-driven affluent western societies is psychologically damaging. Paradoxically we are paralysed, rather than liberated, by too many options and less satisfied as more options lead to inflated expectations that can’t be met.

When making choices humans use a number of strategies in an attempt to minimise regret and maximise certainty. These include:

 * Risk aversion (Emphasis on avoiding a loss)
 * Temporal discounting (Perfer an immediate small reward to a larger delayed reward)
 * The certainty effect (Emphasis on definite outcomes rather than probabilities)
 * Keeping options open or postponing a decision
 * Choose to doing nothing (the omission bias or the default option)
 * Maintain the status quo (status quo bias)

However, as Schwartz suggests, there must be point at which these processes fail. That seems to be the case in highly affluent consumer-driven Western societies where an overwhelming number of options is creating psychological unease. While these societies probably need less choice, I expect there are many others that need more.

Reactance
I found the concept of reactance particularly interesting and wondered if it is a common occurrence. Reactance describes the negative feeling experienced when one’s behavioural freedom is restricted or removed (e.g., limiting someone's choice). Reactance Theory (Brehn, 1966) attempts to explain reactance and its consequenses: increasing the attractiveness of the restricted option, initiating processes to reassert one’s freedom, and feeling or acting aggressively toward the perpetrator. I can imagine it could be common in children but it does not seem to be a particularly reasonable adult response. The following statement appeared when I searched Google for the term "reactance": “You want reactance? Shop on e-Bay! That would probably 'sum it up' for a lot of people in our consumer-driven culture.

Self-regulation
Self-regulation (or self-control) is the capacity for the self to regulate thoughts, emotions, impulses, desires and task performance (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). I believe that self-regulation is probably the most important human attribute allowing us to live as social and cultural beings. You would expect that a significant lack of self-regulation would be instrumental in anti-social behaviour and the disorders of impulsiveness such as kleptomania, pyromania and pathological gambling. Without the capacity to self-regulate, humans would live in anarchy. The textbook suggests that effective self-regulation depends on using standards (derived from culture), monitoring (through self-awareness) and willpower. I thought it was interesting that willpower is depleted by other self-regulation tasks rather than factors such as fatigue, emotion or attitude, but also that exercising willpower can result in its enhancement.

Irrationality and self-destruction
Inevitably, humans also have the capacity to behave irrationally and to engage in self-defeating behaviours (e.g., self-handicapping, procrastination, avoiding pleasurable experiences, engaging in risky health practices or damaging relationships). These behaviours are often associated with enduring the bad while seeking the good, using counterproductive strategies, or both. The textbook contends that this is contrary to the view that the self is mostly adaptive, rational and self-benefiting. However, an Australian social researcher, Hugh Mackay suggests that we should not expect to humans behave rationally, and indeed we may be pleasantly surprised with our renewed view of the world if we didn’t.


text:
User talk:Fabien Basmaison

 Hello Fabien Basmaison, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random random project.
 * Browse everything on Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! Jtneill - Talk - c 04:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

 Hello , we are the Baah and Bahh twins and we'd both like to welcome you to Wikiversity. While you sit back and explore Wikiversity, enjoy some of our fresh goat milk. You can help us learn by creating new learning resources or help us by improving the guided tours and other exploration tools. We look forward to seeing you around. Baaaahbye for now.

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:36, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Fabien Basmaison


text:
User:Jenny O/Social Thinking

Social thinking (Social cognition)

Social cognition refers the cognitive processes that accompany and mediate social behaviour in social contexts. Humans have developed a range of cognitive processes that enable us to live as social and cultural beings. Generally, we prefer to act as cognitive misers to conserve cognitive effort. This is achieved by using automatic (unconscious) processes that provide rapid, effortless, best-guess results, by using organized patterns of scripts, schemas, stereotypes, heuristics, and attributions. In contrast, our goals, motives and needs direct conscious, effortful and deliberate social cognition.

Attributions
Attributions refer to the inferences we make about the cause of our own behaviour or the behaviour of others. These causes are usually attributed to internal factors such as personality traits, general character or disposition, or external factors arising from the situation or context. Making attributions enables us to predict and influence behaviour, which is another method by which humans create a sense of control.

However, in our quest for efficiency in cognitive thought we tend to limit our accuracy. Accordingly we incur a number of cognitive errors and biases. One example is the self-serving bias. This bias occurs when we attribute personal successes and the failings of others to internal attributions (dispositional attribution), and personal failings and the success of others to external attributions (situational attributions). Thus, individuals tend to take the merit for success and blame the failings on other factors. For example, a student who is given a poor grade for his essay will attribute blame to the marker who, “Did not understand my argument”. However, when he receives a good mark in an exam the cause is wholly attributed to his outstanding intelligence. This bias has significant implications for the self, particularly in terms of promoting self-enhancement (maintaining self-esteem) and monitoring self-presentation.

Beliefs
I am often intrigued by peoples’ beliefs: how they develop and how steadfastly they can be maintained whether they are seemingly rational or irrational. According to the textbook automatic cognition enables us to automatically believe what we are told (acting as cognitive misers), but this can be overridden by conscious cognitive processes.Central to the notion of a belief is an element of judgement - the believer deems something to be true. Even when our beliefs are discredited we tend to maintain them (i.e., belief perseverance). This is similar to confirmation bias, a situation where we seek out or interpret information that supports our beliefs, and discredit information that does not support our beliefs. It is possible that this reflects our need to defend the personal and public self.

Human belief plays an interesting role in coping, or how people deal with trauma and return to effective functioning. In most social environments humans generally assume that the world is benevolent, fair and just, and see themselves as 'good'. These beliefs can be challenged when one is exposed to crime or trauma. Following such an experience some people are able to cope by re-establishing a sense of control (e.g., by finding an explanation or using self-blame). Coping can also be facilitated by: re-evaluating a trauma using downward comparison, restoring self-esteem and one’s belief in control, and effecting positive changes from the trauma (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). An remarkable example of coping can be seen in the manner in which Ingrid Poulson is dealing with the murder of her father and two small children, by her estranged husband.

Attitudes
Attitudes are evaluative responses to an attitude object (e.g., people, objects or issues). Like other cognitive processes, attitudes help us to assimilate a wide range of information and make sense of our world. They differ from beliefs as they relate more to feelings than knowledge. The affective nature of attitudes provide useful cognitve shortcuts for making choices and decisions (e.g., liking or disliking something simplifies a choice). Attitudes are formed, and can be altered, through processes such as mere exposure, classical or operant conditioning and social learning.

While some sources suggest attitudes incorporate all domains of the ABC triad (affect, behaviour and cognition), it is possible to hold an attitude that is not expressed in one’s behaviour. Generally, attitudes are not good predictors of behaviour. For example, one might express concern about global pollution but fail to recycle waste at home. Similarly, people may be concerned about road safety but continue to drive irresponsibly. I often get the sense that there is a difference between what someone does or says and what he or she might really think. However, it also makes sense that we would behave in this way to consciously or unconsciously regulate aspects our personal and private self.

Dual attitudes arise when one holds conflicting implicit (unconscious, automatic) and explicit (conscious, controlled) attitudes about the same attitude object. It can be difficult to express implicit attitudes, as we may be unaware of them or unwilling to express them. I thought it is interesting that implicit attitudes can be measured using the Implicit Association Test. This cognitive test uses reaction time measures to determine differences in explicit and implicit attitudes to stigmatised groups. For example, I did the racial attitudes task and was pleasantly surprised that my results reflected my self-perceptions, but I wondered how different my results would be if I lived in a different environment (e.g., an region of high racial tension).

I also though attitude polarisation was also an interesting phenomenon: We tend toward more extreme attitudes if we focus on them. This is more likely with strong initial attitudes. There is also a tendency to use confirmation and in-group biases in the process. Early research in this area focused on attitudes toward the death penalty. However, I expect this also be well illustrated by people’s attitudes toward other emotive issues such as politics, religion and race.

Consistency
Humans desire consistency in their attitudes, beliefs and behaviours. The textbook provides an example of this in the stance taken by Dr Kevorkian, who steadfastly maintained his commitment to assisted suicide. I expect this desire is an essential component of the social self and how we operate in affective, behavioural and cognitive domains. Cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957) is a state of psychological discomfort resulting from a cognitive inconsistency, that is played out between one's attitude and behaviour. Generally, we are more reluctant to change behaviour than our attitudes. Cognitive dissonance theory proposes that we attempt to resolve inconsistency by either changing our attitudes, or aligning our attitudes and behaviour though rationalisation. Choice plays an important role in this process. If there is no choice offered there is no need to rationalise your actions, as the lack of choice can be held responsible. It seems that cognitive consistency is important for self-enhancement and self-presentation, and ultimately achieving social acceptance. Human desire for consistency is universal (possibly biological) and enhanced by learning and socialisation. There are so many examples of people’s desire for consistency (and attempting to maintain a good self-image), particularly in public life. One example is the way politicians adhere to and endlessly support seemingly irrational decisions (e.g., the US withdrawal from Rwanda during the 1994 genocide and later justifications – failing to acknowledge that genocide had taken place or rationalising their actions based on lack of US interest in the country). Similarly, I am reminded of a documentary that outlined the very public legal battle a family endured against a medical practitioner. At the birth of their severely deformed and very ill child, the attending doctor decided to actively 'save' the baby against the family’s wishes. It struck me that the ensuing battle between the family and the doctor was based on the doctor’s desire to maintain consistency in his attitudes, beliefs and behaviours. He would not back down, despite the incredible amount of evidence suggesting he should. If this doctor was experiencing cognitive dissonance he certainly chose to align his attitudes with his behaviour, and rationalised his actions by asserting his position as a doctor whose role, he believed, was to preserve life at all cost.

Social Influence & Persuasion
Beyond the passive, internal processes of social cognition are those active (conscious) processes of social influence used to change the attitudes, behaviour or beliefs of a group or individual. I imagine that social influence can be used in both positive (e.g., to shape socially acceptable behaviours – the socialisation of children) and negative ways (e.g., to manipulate others – through propaganda).

Social influence usually results in conformity, as failure to conform can result in social rejection, alienation and ostracism (Wikipedia). There are two types of this social influence: normative (going along with the crowd to be liked or accepted) and informational (going along with the crowd because you think the crowd knows more). Normative social influence is demonstrated in the classic experiments of Solomon Asch (1955), showing individuals following the crowd even when the crowd was obviously wrong. I wondered whether this would still apply as these experiments were done many years ago and I expected that we might have changed, at least socially (see Advances in Psychology).This does not seem to be the case (see Conformity: Replication exercise). Our tendency to conform appears to be an enduring attribute. Interestingly, in reading for my essay, cross-cultural social psychologists suggest the conformity found in Asch's experiments is not necessarily universal, citing experiments in which German and Japanese participants were less conformist, than North Americans. They suggest this might be due a high affiliation to specific social groups found in German and Japanese cultures, and less loyalty to a group of strangers in a laboratory.

James also cleverly demonstrated our level of social conformity (normative social influence) in the lecture (Week 3) where he continued to talk on social conformity for almost 15 minutes overtime, we all dutifully sat there listening and no one spoke up!

Persuasion is a type of social influence, used to change a person’s attitude or behaviour. The degree to which we are influenced by persuasion depends on aspects of the message source (credability, likability), content (emotion vs reason, mode of presentation) and audience (intelligence, required cognitive effort, age, cultural and context), and indeed our physical, cognitive and social capacity to resist persuasion.

It seems that persuasion plays an important role in our social and cultural exsitence. It can influence our personal interactions with others (e.g., assisting children to make good decisions); how we work together in a group or the workplace; what we buy, do and seek (e.g., advertising), and can shape many social norms. For instance, we are bombarded with messages through the mass media suggesting how we should think, feel and behave. As a result, many people in our society are afflicted by psychological disturbances about issues such as what we value (e.g., affluenza) or how we should look (e.g., a recent study found the psychological impact of 'appearance medicine shows' (reality television) has accounted for a 15% increase in cosmetic and weight reduction surgery from 2006 - 2007 [The Canberra Times, 1 September 2008]). Indeed, not all social influences are negative, but it is easy to see how these powerful cognitive processes can be used to manipulate behaviour.

title: User:Jenny O/Social Thinking


text:
User:Jenny O/Aggression

Aggression
Additional resource: Aggression keywords Aggression is an interesting and complex concept. It is important to note that aggression is a behaviour, it is not an affective or cognitive process, it involves an intent to harm (i.e., actual harm does not have to occur) and the victim wants to avoid that harm. Violence is a form of aggression with the intent of causing extreme harm (such as severe injury or death). Thus, all violence constitutes aggression, but not all aggression constitutes violence. Humans and animals perpetrate aggression as a social act, but human aggression can be restrained by cultural influences. Accordingly, aggression may be considered as social or antisocial behaviour depending on the context.

Both instinct and learning are thought to contribute to aggression in humans. Humans are believed to have innate aggressive impulses that developed during the course of evolution. From an evolutionary perspective (e.g., Lorenz) there are several benefits to aggression in animals and indeed humans who have evolved to live as social and cultural beings. These are: protection, defense for young, dispersion of individuals to decrease competition for resources, structuring animal society and establishing bonds.

According to Bandura's Social Learning Theory we can learn aggressive behaviours through processes such as modeling (see observational learning & Bandura’s classic Bobo doll study). However, and maybe more importantly, we are also able to learn to constrain (or encourage) aggression through cultural learning and socialisation.

A range of factors contributes to aggression and arise from inner, interpersonal and external sources:

 * Inner factors
 * Personality (Type A, ‘Big 5’: agreeableness & emotional stability, hostile attribution)
 * Cognitive biases (Hostile attribution, perception & expectation biases)
 * Frustration (Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis)
 * Unpleasant moods
 * Believing aggression placates anger (not anger per se)
 * Excitation transfer (misattribution of arousal)
 * Perpetrator’s gain < victim’s loss (magnitude gap)
 * Combined biological and social/cultural factors
 * Social immaturity (high rates in toddlers)
 * Gender/hormones (higher in young men)
 * Selfishness or narcissism
 * Disinhibition, wounded pride, lack of self-control

 * Interpersonal factors
 * Direct provocation or humiliation
 * Influence
 * Strong desire for reward
 * Perceived success of attainment
 * Disregard for morality or risk
 * Proximity to others (kin, relationships e.g., domestic violence, sibling aggression)

 * External factors
 * Relative deprivation (feeling disadvantaged relative to others)
 * Cues (e.g. weapons effect)
 * Mass media
 * Chemical influences (testosterone, serotonin, alcohol, nutrition)
 * Social & cultural norms (e.g. running amok)
 * Unpleasant environments:
 * Hot weather, odours, noise, crowding
 * Crowd behaviour: deindividuation, disinhibition
 * Emergent Norm Theory (crowd lacks clear norms: often results in antisocial behaviour)
 * Social Identity Theory (social identity derived from a group)

There are many aspects of human psyche (arising from one’s self-concept, self-esteem, self-presentation: e.g., conscience, self-control) and culture (e.g., rules, laws, mores) that enable us to restrain aggression. Although the sophisticated human brain and our ability to develop and engage in culture can distinguish us from other animals, it does not necessarily protect us from our own stupidity. Quite paradoxically, there are also aspects of our psyche and culture that clearly facilitate aggression. Unfortunately, as the textbook reminds us, it is only humans who have tools to increase aggression (weapons), kill for ideas (religion, honour, political ideals), engage in war, and develop substances (alcohol and other drugs) that increase aggression and violence.

title: User:Jenny O/Aggression


text:
User:Jenny O/Prejudice

Prejudice
Additional resource: Prejudice keywords

Intergroup relations are fundamental to human existence. According to the textbook humans have a natural tendency to align themselves with similar others and guard against those who are different. As a consequence humans are prone to prejudge and categorise others, giving rise to prejudice. Prejudice is the affective component of intergroup relations and refers to a negative feeling toward an individual based on his or her membership of a particular group (e.g., racism is a prejudicial attitude toward a person of a particular race). Common prejudices mainly arise from overt characteristics such as race, gender or age. Prejudice is often perpetrated against stigmatised groups such as those with a mental illness, those who are overweight, are poor or physically handicapped. The behavioural component of intergroup relations, discrimination, is the unequal treatment of others based on group membership, and stereotyping refers to the cognitive process of believing groups have certain traits (e.g., Asian students are good at maths, all Arabs are terrorists, all Australians are “yobbos”). Interestingly, the content of some stereotypes can be accurate, but they can also be inaccurate and used as overgeneralisations.

Prejudice is a universal phenomenon, however, its content depends on the context (e.g., the system of apartheid or legalised racial segregation in South Africa 1948 –1990 vs. the racial anti-discrimination laws of Australia introduced in 1975). As seen in aggression, culture and learning can be used to constrain or promote prejudice. Modern Western society has deemed the judgement of others based on group membership, rather than individual characteristics, as morally wrong, socially unacceptable and in some cases illegal. Indeed, in Australia it is illegal to discriminate against others in public life (e.g., in employment, access to housing, education etc.) based on a person’s age, race, sex or disability (see Anti-discrimination). Prejudice still plays a significant role in our society, despite these and a number of other social and cultural mechanisms implemented to discourage prejudice in Australia (e.g., embracing multiculturalism, encouraging political correctness, government, community and school awareness programs [e.g., Racism no Way]) Prejudice devalues the identity of its targets. Stereotyping, stigmatising and vilifying others creates self-fulfilling and self-defeating prophecies in those targets, and only serves to segregate groups and communities. Baumeister and Bushman (2008) assure us that humans, endowed with a sophisticated mind and ability to live as cultural beings, are able to rise above our innate antagonistic tendencies to live harmoniously with others. Indeed, this can occur but they also confirm that this human progress is "incomplete and imperfect". This was clearly demonstrated in Rwanda.

title: User:Jenny O/Prejudice


text:
User:Jenny O/Ghosts of Rwanda

Ghosts of Rwanda
Ghosts of Rwanda is a film documenting the 1994 Rwandan Genocide. (Source: Ghosts of Rwanda transcript)

The genocide depicted in this film provides a devastating example of the malevolent capabilities of human beings. It also exemplifies the strength of our beliefs, the relevance of personal, social and cultural restraint, and the power of groups. Fortunately, this documentary also exemplifies some of the many benevolent capabilities of humans.

Malevolence
The systematic slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Rwandan Tutsis by the dominant Hutu majority demonstrates prejudice, discrimination and racism in the extreme. The Tutsis were targeted because of their ethnic group membership. The aggression and violence waged against the Tutsis was deliberate, instrumental and extremely hostile. It was based on the development of in-groups and out-groups and inciting crowd behaviour.

The Hutu extremists used a number of strategies to undermine peacekeeping forces and the Tutsi to amass support for their slaughter:

Attaining and manipulating power through aggression and violence, for example:
 * Supporting a paramilitary youth movement (Interahamwe) (higher rates of aggression in young men)
 * Systematically undermining political, military and peacekeeping power within Rwanda:
 * Killing Rwanda president and moderate Prime Minister: seizing government control
 * Killing Hutu moderates and Tutsi leaders
 * Releasing black peacekeepers (Ghanaian) and killing white peacekeepers (Belgian)
 * Destabilising UN presence (e.g., Belgium withdrew after peacekeepers killed, other nations followed by withdrawing their citizens)
 * Providing Hutus with weapons (weapons effect)
 * Fuelling violence with alcohol

Using social influence and persuasion to create wounded pride to: establish crowd behaviour (engendering deindividuation and disinhibition); induce conformity and possibly diffusion of responsibility, and to engender lack of self-control, for example:
 * Extremist radio station broadcast messages:
 * Persuading Hutus to “eliminate their Tutsi neighbours”
 * “All Tutsis will perish. They will disappear from the earth. Slowly, slowly, slowly, we will kill them like rats”
 * Exploited the Rwandan “culture of obedience” by telling Hutus that Tutsis wanted to enslave them
 * Used propaganda to "remind Hutus that the Tutsis had ruled them for centuries, often treating them with disdain”
 * Extremist Hutus referred to Tutsi survivors as "those not finished off"

Manipulating social and cultural controls (see Ghosts of Rwanda Discussion), and attempting to externally justify or rationalise behaviour, for example:
 * Violence and aggression perpetrated against ordinary men, women and children
 * Violent attacks take place or threaten churches, an orphanage, peacekeepers, UN representatives and aid workers
 * (e.g., “Rwandan troops had stopped a Red Cross ambulance and killed six patients”)

 * The killing of a possible in-group member Captain Mbaye Diagne of Senegal.. “an unarmed, black U.N. observer, renowned for his ability to charm his way past the killers”
 * Attempting to maintain self-image or possibly exercising cognitive consistency: Hutus allowing the Red Cross safe passage across Rwanda after being embarrassed when the Red Cross chose to publicise the massacre across the Western world.
 * Attributing external causes to behaviour (self-serving bias), rationalising one’s actions or diffusion of responsibility:

Simultaneously, groups of white troops, journalists, expatriates and some aid workers demonstrated gross acts of racism and discrimination against the black people of Rwanda as they assisted other white people or their kin and fled the country:

The outside world (particularly the UN and USA) abandoned the country and a handful of foreigners (diplomats, aid workers and UN representatives) elected to stay and protect the Rwandans or smuggle them out of the country. The US in particular rationalised their actions by failing to define the incident as a genocide and explaning that the US had no 'interests' in Rwanda and therefore no incentive to stay.

Benevolence
Additional resource: Prosocial behaviour keywords

Those who stayed to assist the Rwandan people clearly demonstrated a high level of prosocial behaviour. Depending on the context, conformity and obedience can be considered as prosocial or anti-social acts. In this extreme context it was the lack of conformity and disregard for orders to abandon Rwanda that deemed these acts prosocial. Many of those who stayed did so without the support of their organisations or governments, and at great risk to themselves and others. However, these few people managed to save hundreds and possibly thousands of lives. The actions of those foreigners who stayed may have been motivated by empathy (empathy-altruism hypothesis), but did not involve reciprocity, kin selection or egotistic helping. Indeed their motives are seemingly altruistic.

title: User:Jenny O/Ghosts of Rwanda


text:
Lunar Boom Town/Basic needs

Food - Could potentially be grown in green houses, or all imported...

Shelter - This needs to be pressurized properly and structurally stable

Water - People need to drink water after all.

title: Lunar Boom Town/Basic needs


text:
User:Eml4500.f08.ateam.shah/Week 2

Lecture 3

Continuation from Lecture 2: Global Force Displacement relationship

The FD Relation:

\begin{bmatrix} k_{11} & k_{12} & k_{13} & k_{14} & k_{15} & k_{16}\\ k_{21} & k_{22} & k_{23} & k_{24} & k_{25} & k_{26}\\ k_{31} & k_{32} & k_{33} & k_{34} & k_{35} & k_{36}\\ k_{41} & k_{42} & k_{43} & k_{44} & k_{45} & k_{46}\\ k_{51} & k_{52} & k_{53} & k_{54} & k_{55} & k_{56}\\ k_{61} & k_{62} & k_{63} & k_{64} & k_{65} & k_{66}\\ \end{bmatrix}

\begin{bmatrix} d_{1}\\ d_{2}\\ d_{3}\\ d_{4}\\ d_{5}\\ d_{6}\\ \end{bmatrix} =

\begin{bmatrix} F_{1}\\ F_{2}\\ F_{3}\\ F_{4}\\ F_{5}\\ F_{6}\\ \end{bmatrix}

$$

In compact notation the above listed FD relationship equation simplifies to:

$$[ K_{ij} ] \cdot { d_{j} } = { F_{i} }$$

The K-spring factor is a 6x6 matrix, where as the d and F matrix are composed of a 6x1 matrix.

 * $$\sum_{j=1}^6 F_{i} = K_{ij} \cdot d_j $$

 * K = global stiffness matrix.
 * d = global displacement matrix.
 * F = global force matrix.
 * k = elemental stiffness matrix.
 * f = elemental force matrix.

How to go from an elemental matrix to a global matrix? The matrix has to go through an assembly process to go form an elemental matrix to a global matrix.

Identify the correspondence between elemental displacement dof's and global displacement dof's.

Global level:

{d1, d2, ............, d6}

Elemental level:

* Element 1:{d(1)1, d(1)2, d(1)3, d(1)4} * Element 2:{d(2)1, d(2)2, d(2)3, d(2)4}

Identification global-local dof:

Node 2 d2 = d2(1) d3 = d3(1) = d1(2) d4 = d4(1) = d2(3) Node 3 d5 = d3(2) d6 = d4(2)

Conceptual step of assembly: (topology of K)

The colored portion in the figure above represents the overlap between the two elemental matrices of K.

Matlab HW

% Two bar truss example clear all; e = [3 5]; A = [1 2]; P = 7; L=[4 2]; alpha = pi/3; beta = pi/4;

nodes = [0, 0; L(1)*cos(pi/2-alpha), L(1)*sin(pi/2-alpha); L(1)*cos(pi/2-alpha)+L(2)*sin(beta),L(1)*sin(pi/2-alpha)-L(2)*cos(beta)];

dof=2*length(nodes);

conn=[1,2; 2,3]; lmm = [1, 2, 3, 4; 3, 4, 5, 6]; elems=size(lmm,1); K=zeros(dof); R = zeros(dof,1); debc = [1, 2, 5, 6]; ebcVals = zeros(length(debc),1);

%load vector R = zeros(dof,1); R(4) = P;

% Assemble global stiffness matrix K=zeros(dof); for i=1:elems lm=lmm(i,:); con=conn(i,:); k_local=e(i)*A(i)/L(i)*[1 -1; -1 1] k=PlaneTrussElement(e(i), A(i), nodes(con,:)) K(lm, lm) = K(lm, lm) + k; end K R % Nodal solution and reactions [d, reactions] = NodalSoln(K, R, debc, ebcVals) results=[]; for i=1:elems results = [results; PlaneTrussResults(e, A, ... nodes(conn(i,:),:), d(lmm(i,:)))]; end format short g results

k_local =

0.75       -0.75        -0.75         0.75

k =

0.5625     0.32476      -0.5625     -0.32476      0.32476       0.1875     -0.32476      -0.1875      -0.5625     -0.32476       0.5625      0.32476     -0.32476      -0.1875      0.32476       0.1875

k_local =

5   -5    -5     5

k =

2.5        -2.5         -2.5          2.5         -2.5          2.5          2.5         -2.5         -2.5          2.5          2.5         -2.5          2.5         -2.5         -2.5          2.5

K =

0.5625     0.32476      -0.5625     -0.32476            0            0      0.32476       0.1875     -0.32476      -0.1875            0            0      -0.5625     -0.32476       3.0625      -2.1752         -2.5          2.5     -0.32476      -0.1875      -2.1752       2.6875          2.5         -2.5            0            0         -2.5          2.5          2.5         -2.5            0            0          2.5         -2.5         -2.5          2.5

R =

0    0     0     7     0     0

d =

0           0        4.352       6.1271            0            0

reactions =

-4.4378     -2.5622       4.4378      -4.4378

results =

1.7081      5.1244       8.5406       5.1244       17.081       0.6276       1.8828        3.138       1.8828        6.276

title: User:Eml4500.f08.ateam.shah/Week 2


text: File:Image 1.JPG

title: File:Image 1.JPG


title: File:Lect3-equ2.JPG


title: File:Lect3-equ1.JPG


title: File:Lect3-equ3.JPG


title: File:Lect3-equ4.JPG


text:
User:Eml4500.f08.ateam.nobrega/week 2

Lecture 3

Continuation from Lecture 2: Global Force Displacement relationship

In compact notation the above listed FD relationship equation simplifies to:

$$[ Kij ]$$*$${ dj }$$ = $${ Fi }$$

The K-spring factor is a 6x6 matrix, where as the d and F matrix are composed of a 6x1 matrix.

The capital letter K represents the global stiffness matrix. d is the global displacement matrix. The capital letter F represents the global force matrix.

The letter k represents the elemental stiffness matrix. The letter f represents the elemental force matrix.

How to go from an elemental matrix to a global matrix? The matrix has to go through an assembly process to go form an elemental matrix to a global matrix.

Identify the correspondence between elemental displacement dof's and global displacement dof's.

Global level:

{d1, d2, ............, d6}

Elemental level:

* Element 1:{d(1)1, d(1)2, d(1)3, d(1)4} * Element 2:{d(2)1, d(2)2, d(2)3, d(2)4}

Identification global-local dof:

Node 2 d2 = d2(1) d3 = d3(1) = d1(2) d4 = d4(1) = d2(3) Node 3 d5 = d3(2) d6 = d4(2)

Conceptual step of assembly: (topology of K)

The colored portion in the figure above represents the overlap between the two elemental matrices of K.

title: User:Eml4500.f08.ateam.nobrega/week 2


text:
User talk:Jdt011

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 10:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

 Hello Jdt011, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random random project.
 * Browse everything on Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 10:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jdt011


text:
User talk:Raghavendrante

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals in mechanical engineering. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 11:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

 Hello Raghavendran te, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random random project.
 * Browse everything on Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 11:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:41, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Raghavendrante


text:
User talk:Airforcenurse1

Hello, welcome around here. I hope we can help you succeed in your learning goals in regards to nursing. Below more info about Wikiversity, Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 11:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

 Hello Airforcenurse1, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random random project.
 * Browse everything on Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 11:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Airforcenurse1


text:
User:Eml4500.f08/MIT's OpenCourseWare course(s)

MIT's OpenCourseWare

1.050 Solid Mechanics Fall 2004, Civil Engineering. Textbook: Engineering Mechanics for Structures, written by Professor Louis Bucciarelli in 2002. Book, Chap 5.2, Indeterminate Systems (pdf) Book, Chap 10.3, Matrix Analysis of Frame Structures (pdf)

16.901 Computational Methods in Aerospace Engineering Spring 2005, Aeronautics and Astronautics. Lecture notes: Finite element method: Lect 11-14.

22.00J / 1.021J / 2.030J / 3.021J / 10.333J / 18.361J / HST.558J Introduction to Modeling and Simulation Spring 2006: Advanced.


text:
User:Eas4200c.f08/MIT's OpenCourseWare course(s)

MIT's OpenCourseWare

16.20 Structural Mechanics Fall 2002, Aeronautics and Astronautics. Lecture notes: Motivation: Design considerations, Units 1-2. Elasticity: Units 3-9. Torsion: Units 10-12. Beam bending: Units 13-14. Shear, torsion, bending of shell beams (e.g., wings): Unit 15. Buckling: Units 16-18. Dynamics, vibration, influence coefficients: Units 19-23.


text:
Wikiversity:Candidates for Custodianship/Ottava Rima

I nominate User:Ottava Rima for custodianship. Ottava Rima is a relatively new Wikiversity participant, but has a long history of constructive editing at Wikipedia. I have full confidence that Ottava Rima will continue to demonstrate high standards Wikiversity scholarship far into the future. In the past, I have mentored other custodians who had little interest in page deletion and blocking users; Ottava Rima is another of these gentle souls. However, he is willing to block vandals and delete pages created by vandals. Mainly, I expect Ottava Rima will function as a scholar and a moderator of disputes. Ottava Rima has experience working in heated topic areas at Wikipedia, and that experience will enrich Wikiversity. Also, I hope that some day Ottava Rima will become a Referee, a position he is also highly qualified for. --JWSchmidt 01:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Ottava Rima, accept/decline nomination below. If you accept, please tell us a little about yourself:

 * Accept. Now, a little about me. Most of my work here has been off of the pages. Mostly, I have been helping people edit, craft, and understand how their language may be viewed by others. I have kept it off the board and to emails or other types of equipment for only logistical reasons. I have been here for a while mostly as an observer, then as a full member when I was able to figure out the universal account set up. I was asked to come over to help with ethical problems, and mostly with how people interact with others. I have a background in mediating and ethics in real life and online. I try not to take "sides" but to help each side understand the other, and try to tone down the language between parties. I try to be welcoming and forgiving. I feel that blocks should only be given to clear cases of vandalism and a complete inability to contribute. Sometimes, I believe that members should be temporarily blocked when a situation has become excessive, but I believe that the best way to approach this is not in a unilateral way, but through discussing with the individual first. I strongly believe that all people can be brought to understand each other, as I believe that empathy is what makes us human. I also believe that when one understands another, there is less desire for strong incivility. Our core desire should be discussion, and we should try to respect each other at all times even if we oppose each other philosophically. If there is anything else, please feel free to ask. If you need to know my personal identity, and my background (especially my educational achievements), please feel free to email me. Ottava Rima 01:35, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Questions for the Candidate
Is this thing on? Salmon of Doubt 01:21, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Questions from Dark Mage
Since you're new to wikiversity, and have been with us for some time, what is your purpose for being here - we run things differently on this site than our Wikipedia Counterpart. Have you had experience on other wiki-sites expect for wikipedia like you've mentioned, if so and if you had run into problems on occasions how have you handled them was it through civility or uncivil responses e.t.c. Do you have experience with using the Mediawiki feature which anyone can access if they've got Custodian rights, also how active will you be with us - is it semi-active or fully-active. DarkMage 14:21, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I am an "academic" in real life. Although I am primarily a researcher, it is almost impossible to work in higher levels of academia without having exposure to teaching and education. My focus is on Literature (primary - 18th/19th century British, secondary - classical, political, religious). I also work with ethics, and I have an ethics column in which I relate morality to current topics. As such, I was approached to weigh in on a few topics, and I have stuck around because I feel that I could help people come together and broker peace.
 * For my other experiences - on Wikipedia, I originally had a problem with reverts. I didn't understand the nature of reverts at first, and even though I didn't "breach" the 3RR rule, I didn't realize that there was still a disruption. After running afoul of a few issues, I have since corrected and have developed personal guidelines to ensure that my intentions and actions cannot be mistaken, and these guidelines help me to listen to others and understand their views for the betterment of the project. I believe that all parts of Wikimedia and its sister projects are best served by a willingness to communicate and a willingness to listen. I have since adjusted my efforts (in combination with my own imposed guideline of no longer reverting, but approaching an individual and trying to discuss the issue) and have spent a lot of time contributing content to the encyclopedia, along with commons and Wikisource. I have also helped clean up disruptive bot spam on both.
 * Now, because of this, it changes my view on the "tools". I believe that people should be talked to directly, and that blocking involves having to talk to the individual throughout. I believe that tools should be used on rare occasions and primarily in clear cut cases of vandalism, important moves, page deletions, etc. I believe that blocking of regular users should involve communication not only with the users, but with the community. I do not like the idea of a unilateral decision, but I will not blame anyone who blocks unilaterally as long as they are willing to discuss it later, at least to the point that the block user can understand why they were blocked and how they can avoid it in the future.
 * I plan to be fully active on Wikiversity and behind the scenes in discussion and how people interact with others. Although I am not opposed to "gnome work" (and I have cleaned up a lot of bot spam before on various projects), I believe that I can best contribute in the user matters - i.e. problems between users and community wide issues. Although I am preparing to put together a reading group and to share in my knowledge, I also hope to use such projects to give people who are normally at conflicts with each other to have time to work with another in a neutral, safe environment in which they can discuss an issue without worrying about problems or conflicts.
 * I hope that I will make it clear to the community that I am open for everyone to talk to, to express their views and opinions, and that I will not judge them, but instead help them try to understand others, and to understand how they can communicate with others to express their feelings. Ottava Rima 15:56, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Very well, thanks for answering my comment - Good luck with the Probationary period. DarkMage  16:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Custodians willing to mentor

 * I will mentor on one condition: 1) you will leave an edit on my user talk page giving me clear authority during your probationary period to ask a steward to revoke your tools without discussion. If I have to do so, I will provide a full explanation to you. --JWSchmidt 01:54, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * A number of mentors have offered themselves as replacements. Ottava - when you're ready to switch mentors, please state your choice below. No hurry. --McCormack 08:18, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Candidate, please indicate here if you accept one of the above custodian mentors:

 * I accept JWSchmidt's kind offer. I have made a statement on his talk page granting him permission to revoke my tools. I also welcome any questions above, and I would be happy to provide any answers. Ottava Rima 02:49, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

 * ✅, welcome aboard! --SB_Johnny talk 10:24, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Stewards, please note this

 * I would like to accept McCormack's kind offer, and also open myself up to other custodians who want to offer me advice, point out things, or just generally discuss. I don't want to make it seem like I will only listen to one person. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 23:30, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Ottava Rima
Ottava's probationary period will end in a couple days, but I think he's quite ready to receive confirmation as a full custodian. He has shown himself to be both trustworthy and considerate, keeping his cool under circumstances where that can be a bit difficult :-). I think Ottava will be of great help to us as we continue to build our community and our Wikiversity. --SB_Johnny talk 14:30, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Accept/decline the nomination
Can I skip ahead and jump straight to steward? lol. I would definitely accept. Otherwise, it would be hard to do the Recent Changes sweeps. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 15:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Voting for full custodianship
Please enter vote and a brief comment here.

 * Ottava Rima seems to have kept his cool and maintained a positive, collaborative, custodial focus during the probationary period. -- Jtneill - Talk - c 02:49, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Full support - Ottava has been consistently positive and level-headed during a difficult period for Wikiversity. Cormaggio talk 10:19, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * --mikeu talk 11:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * He has demonstrated that he has a steady hand, despite the probationary period occuring during rocky times. John Vandenberg (chat) 00:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep up the good work -- Thuvack | talk 08:08, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


text: User:Knopfkind

title: User:Knopfkind


text:
User talk:Knopfkind

 Hello Knopfkind, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random random project.
 * Browse everything on Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.

And don't forget to explore Wikiversity with the links to your left. Be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage, and see you around Wikiversity! --HappyCamper 16:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Knopfkind


text:
Wikiversity:Colloquium/JonAwbrey Thread

JA: What are we going to do about the illiterati among us who do not know the meanings of simple English words? For instance, "consensus", just for a timely starter. What is the duty of the English Wikiversity in this regard? Any ideas? JonAwbrey 19:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure has this something to do with this: meta:Talk:Spam blacklist ? Erkan Yilmaz uses the Chat (try) 19:58, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

JA: That is a timely example, but the problem is widespread and serious. Moreover, I fear that the Wikipedia Movement is partly responsible for the prevailing mis-education with respect to the meanings of many critical concepts that eventually-educated people need to function as good citizens and effective scholars in the more civilized and intellectually demanding quarters of modern society, or post*modern society if you prefer. So I believe it is incumbent on those who would any brand of 'versity make to address this ever more pressing problem in generic and practical terms. JonAwbrey 20:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't mean to interject, but could we raise the level of civility here? AdvThanksance. Salmon of Doubt 20:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

JA: Interjections are permitted, but now we have two words whose meanings are currently in doubt, and I know the list is capable of almost indefinite extension, but let's not byte off more than we can chew in one or two or three sittings. JonAwbrey 20:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Let me put it this way. Do not accuse people who disagree with you about things of not knowning the meaning of simple English words. It is rude and incivil. Thank you for your compliance. Salmon of Doubt 20:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

 * "Any ideas?" As usual, my first impulse is to start some Wikiversity learning projects that will allow us to explore these matters. How many learning projects would we need to start in order to fully explore all of these topics? In addition to those projects, we will need another project that will be dedicated to exploration of the reality of censorship originating at Meta and directed at Wikiversity. --JWSchmidt 20:39, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

JA: Laß uns rechnen : the count so far:

Censorship

 * The suppression of speech by an empowered individual. Salmon of Doubt 20:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Civility

 * Behavior that is conducive to positive social interactions. Salmon of Doubt 21:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Consensus

 * An agreement by all or substantially all of the good faith parties in interest to take or not take a proposed action. Salmon of Doubt 21:00, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Good Faith

 * Honest. Salmon of Doubt 21:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Truth
No one has used that word so far. Salmon of Doubt 21:26, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

JA: I think we will find that its meaning is implicated in the meaning of the word honest. Or maybe they implicate each other to some degree. We'll see. May be. JonAwbrey 22:14, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Re*Mediate Topics
NB. The (*) above is a Kleene star. JonAwbrey 05:16, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Autonomy

 * What does the ArchiveBot have against Autonomy? JonAwbrey 02:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Independence

 * What does the ArchiveBot have against Independence? JonAwbrey 02:40, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Sovereignty

 * What does Jon Awbrey have against the ArchiveBot? (No really, I'm curious to know where the ArchiveBot came into all this.)  The Jade Knight 04:09, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

JA: If you peruse recent history of this page, you will see that ArchiveBot has twice deleted the Autonomy and Independence subsections. At first I thought it might be because they were empty of sub-text(?), but then I thought it might be the lack of signatures beneath. But then why did it leave the Sovereignty subsection? Is the ArchiveBot evil? — or merely subtle? JonAwbrey 04:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Ability, Behaviour, Calling, Contribution, Duty, Habit, Limitation, Tiresomeness
I don't think Wikiversity has any particular "duty" when it comes to your behavior on other projects. Nor is Wikiversity the complaints department of the wikimedian community. And you may find your ability to contribute here rather limited if you make a habit of starting sarcastically titled discussions (e.g., "Remedial English Education Programme (REEP)") on our main community discussion page. --SB_Johnny talk 22:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Second that! Please start a project in the main namespace instead of using Colloquium for all this stuff. Its getting tiresome. Countrymike 03:54, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Absolutely - this is appalling. JonAwbrey, if you want to make a specific critique of a given practice (including use of specific language), please do so up front, and in an appropriate manner. These kinds of sarcastic "learning resources" are completely toxic. Cormaggio talk 12:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree. The Jade Knight 12:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Personally, I am shocked by the fact that User:Mike.lifeguard has decided that he has the right to delete learning resources from Wikiversity, without discussion. I invited him to come to this page and explain his actions. He ignored my request (gee, can anyone name two other Wikiversity participants who refuse to discuss their outrageous behavior? Can anyone guess what my response will be?) User:Mike.lifeguard has claimed that a few people can get together at the Meta-wiki and decide what to delete from Wikiversity. This kind of censorship of our learning resources should be met with more speech. I support full discussion of this matter on this page for as long as it takes to make sure that User:Mike.lifeguard understands the full implications of his actions. "These kinds of sarcastic learning resources are completely toxic." <-- Personally, I think Cormaggio's attempts to limit community discussion of the behavior of User:Mike.lifeguard is "toxic". Given the nature of the provocation provided by User:Mike.lifeguard, the response by User:Jon Awbrey has been wholly appropriate. As always, any Wikiversity participant who is not interested in a particular Colloquium thread can ignore it. I don't understand why any Wikiversity participant would want to ignore an attempt to limit free speech or respond to such an attempt by further efforts to limit free speech....in this case, speech that is in essence a protest against restrictions on free speech....but then, I have lived for 50 years in a country where free speech is protected by law, so I have an obvious bias. --JWSchmidt 12:54, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I also agree with your comments about Mike.lifeguard's edit's without discussion. I disagree with your labeling of Cormaggio's comment.  I do agree that this may be an appropriate place to discuss it.  However, I do agree with Cormaggio that the manner in which this was posted here was (as I would put it), "less than ideal".  The Jade Knight 12:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * And of course, it is the heart and soul of Wikiversity, as a project devoted to learning, to tell a new participant that since their editing is "less than ideal" they should stop subjecting us to their garbage. --JWSchmidt 13:09, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I want a pony. (I feel intellectually challenged.)  The Jade Knight 13:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * "intellectually challenged" <-- gee, I'm bored today, let me see, I'll make fun of the struggle for free speech....and where is that book I wanted to burn the other day? Maybe destroying some Wikiversity learning resources will bring a warm and scholarly feeling to my heart..... "straw man" <-- I have an endless number of ways to say "I want a pony"....this is how I show my willingness to engage in open and scholarly discussions. --JWSchmidt 14:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Please tell us when you're done intellectually challenging me with straw men. The Jade Knight 14:02, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh, and please don't edit my text on talk pages. You can do that with your own.  The Jade Knight 14:04, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Please tell me what you view as "straw men". "don't edit my text on talk pages" <-- You edited my talk page post, I just returned the favor. And since you want to start a culture of making requests of other talk page participants, please add edit summaries to your edits. --JWSchmidt 14:10, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you'll find a pretty decent explanation of what a straw man is here. And I didn't edit your text; I simply had originally misplaced that image, and replaced it in front of my edit, where it should have been.  Finally, I am simply asking that you not assign to me that which is not mine.  If you want to say something, say it yourself, and don't put it in my mouth.  The Jade Knight 14:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I was not asking for your definition of "straw men". I'd like you to explain in detail what "straw men" you see at Wikiversity. "don't put it in my mouth" <-- yet you feel free to claim that "straw men" are in my mouth. Please explain why you can do it but I can't. --JWSchmidt 15:10, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Cormaggio pointed out one, your discussion of "garbage" is another and your comments about "intellectually challenged" and "I want a pony" are also both straw men. But if you would have looked at the explanation of what a straw man is, this would have been obvious, IMO.  The Jade Knight 01:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

 * John, I wasn't aware of the context of Jon's contribution here - I was referring to the sarcastic tone of his contribution, not the actions of Mike.lifeguard (which I agree were overly heavy-handed). The sarcastic tone is what I was labelling as "toxic" - and echoes recent activity that you know I am disturbed by. It is a complete strawman to insinuate that I was acting to limit discussion and free speech. What I do want to limit is the toxic, sarcastic, aggressive culture that we're seeing more and more of these days - and which you are very much contributing to, I'm very saddened to say. Cormaggio talk 15:09, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for making clear that distinction. "aggressive culture" <-- I think we need to have a careful discussion of what the correct response is for scholars when they see a pagan walk into their cathedral of learning. I grew up in an academic culture where the scholars defended the cathedral against desecration. At the same time, I welcome pagans who are not committing acts of desecration and I stand ready to collaborate with them in an exchange of experiences. This is a wiki. Wikiversity has a well-defined and WMF-approved mission. I think we must use that mission as a guide for helping us define what constitutes desecration. When I see editors at Wikiversity who I feel are working against the Wikiversity mission then I step forward to remind them what Wikiversity is. Most people read about the mission and then either adapt their behavior to the Mission or they walk away and join a different community that is more suited to their interests. A few editors sneer at the Wikiversity Mission and then the fun begins. In your view, my defense of the cathedral is too aggressive. Fine. I'd like to hear your suggestions for how to less aggressively defend Wikiversity....as long as your plan does not involve some version of "let the pagans burn down the cathedral". --JWSchmidt 15:37, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * So, who are the pagans, JWSchmidt? Are they anything like barbarians?  The Jade Knight 01:09, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * In the analogy I was using, above, a pagan is anyone from outside of a cultural tradition that holds a cathedral to have a sacred aspect which can be desecrated. The analogy is to new Wikiversity participants who arrive here and have never heard about the mission of this wiki. The other day I mentioned barbarians in the context of invaders who would attack a city such as Durrës during the period of history when the Roman Empire was falling apart. --JWSchmidt 01:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * So desu ne… The Jade Knight 08:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

As you'll all be aware, I don't consider myself part of this community, nor am I considered as such by the community as a whole (correct me if I'm wrong).

I believe my recent edits here seem heavy-handed due to a lack of communication. While there has been an extensive and wide-ranging discussion at meta about Jon's userpages across many wikis (which is why the topic is being discussed there), it has suffered from a lack of participation from dissenting voices. While the overwhelming consensus (including those users currently involved at Meta, but many elsewhere as well) is currently that the self-promotion is a problem, I have consistently tried to avoid blacklisting the domains because they do have legitimate uses. Such uses should be in the content namespaces, and incorporated in such a way so as to avoid any self-promotional effects. How that should be done is not something I feel comfortable dealing with, as I'm not part of this community. I'd urge anyone concerned about censorship in this case (which is not only incorrect but also highly insulting) to explore such reasonable alternatives to self-promotion and blacklisting (two opposite and undesirable ends of a spectrum) rather than levelling rather unhelpful accusations against fellow Wikimedians - please try to find a useful middle-ground. – Mike.lifeguard | @meta 18:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Duality of Observation and Participation
JA: I'll leave it to Moulton to tell you a tale or zing you a zong about the formal duality between observation and participation in systems theory, but as a newcomer I think I will shift to the observer foot for a while. I have in the past spent months and months working on articles for the English Wikipedia, only to see it all get "terminated with x-treme prejudice", as they say in the spy novels. Younguns, of coarse, have no sympathy with that, but time grows more precious for us Olduns with every passing day, so I'm not going to invest a lot of time here if all my piety and wit gets fingered for x-ecution — maybe not 2day, maybe not 2morrow, but soon, and you know the reset. Just by way of redundancy — "Redundancy Is The Essence Of Information", as you may know or may not know — and just in case the Immortal Akashic Record (IAR) of our discussions suddenly disapparates, I may start a simulcast over at the Deathly Hollows, but only if it looks worth the candle, if only I get the time. JonAwbrey 14:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

 * No one that I'm aware of actually supports deleting learning content that individuals are actively working on at Wikiversity, except, perhaps, a few individuals which would like to remove particularly controversial content here, but they're in a minority. You just upset a few users with the tone of your addition here, not, I don't think, with the idea behind it.  Of course, others are welcome to correct me if I'm wrong.  The Jade Knight 14:27, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

 * If you think Jon Awbrey zings off-key, wait 'til you get an earful of my atrocious Mu-Sick-All Offalings. —Moulton 15:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Sealed and Delivered, His Scrivener, JonAwbrey 04:22, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Definition By Example
Exercise for the Reader —

 * 1) Reading Part. This Post at The Wikipedia Review is my current report on the recent activities of Mike Lifeguard and other Meta-Moguls that led me to believe that maybe, just maybe, what we've got here is a failure to communicate.
 * 2) Thinking Part. How do the various elements of conduct detailed in the indicated case history illustrate the critical concepts listed above?

But hey, it's Saturday! — Answers not due till Monday morning (UTC), so enjoy your weekend! JonAwbrey 07:14, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

title: Wikiversity:Colloquium/JonAwbrey Thread