text:
Talk:Electronvolt

Comments
Temperature 	eV/kB 	1.1604505(20)×10^5 K is definitely wrong by a factor of 10! As one learns early on in the physics course at university KB * room temperature ≈ 1/40 eV! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nayano2 (talk • contribs) 19:48, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Decay width is used several times on this page but never explained. Arlesterc 21:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

 * It looks like decay width is used only once in the article, and is defined in terms of the mean lifetime immediately. I italicized the term in the article just to make it clear that it's a newly introduced term. HEL 22:49, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I think maybe it would be worthwhile to add conversions between the electronvolt and other major physics units, as in High Energy physics energy is used to measure just about everything including, distances masses, times, etc. Lyuokdea 15:10 July 21, 2005 (US Central)

 * Rather silly question. How many significant digits do we want for unit relations? For example, the most accurate value known for the relation in this article is 1 eV = 1.602 176 462(63) x 10-19 J, where the number in parenthesis is the uncertainty of the last two digits.

 * Why not give that value then? I would prefer a clearer term than "uncertainty" though. Do they mean standard error? AxelBoldt

 * Yes, estimated standard deviation. The most recent recommended values are the "1998 CODATA recommended values". Their values and uncertainties can be found in http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Constants AstroNomer

 * I appologize for my mistake in editing, I wasn't thinking, and I assumed that you meant joules even though it said eV. Jedi Dan 17:43 Apr 23, 2003(UTC)

 * "Electron volt" yields 44,000 Google hits, "electronvolt" 1650. Is most of the world wrong? Is there an authoritative source for the correct term? If it is "electronvolt", then we should move the page. Tannin 12:21 May 13, 2003 (UTC)

 * Authoritative source: NIST See: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/outside.html
 * Please move the page, I do not know how to do it. User:Vargenau

 * If NIST has gotten it wrong, then there is little hope for the rest of us! I'll move the page in a moment. This can be one more of those little things that we at Wikipedia have got right, even though the majority get it wrong. Given enough eyes to look for them, sooner or later there will be no more mistakes left here. Well spotted, Vargenau. Tannin

 * I just modified the units in the "As a unit of mass" section, the example refered to the mass of electron and positron with MeV units (energy) when it meant MeV/c2 (mass). 8/13/2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.136.39.153 (talk) 20:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Electronvolts and kinetic energy: Temperature of a particle
A single particle has no temperature, because temperature is a property of a body consisting of many particles. The average kinetic energy of particles of a gas is approximately $$ \overline{\mathrm{E_{kin}}} = \frac{f}{2} \cdot k_B \cdot \mathrm{T} $$. Where $$f$$ is the number of degrees of freedom of the gas particles and $$k_B$$ is the Boltzmann constant. For an ideal gas $$f$$ is 3. So the relation between average kinetic energy of the particles and the temperature of the gas is $$ \mathrm{T} = \overline{\mathrm{E_{kin}}} \cdot \frac{2}{f} \cdot \frac{1}{k_B} $$. In the case of an ideal gas the constant of proportionality is $$\frac{2}{3} \cdot 11605 \frac{K}{eV}$$. See also Maxwell-Boltzmann distribution equation (17). --Hardy 15:20, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Can someone more knowledgable than I implement the above correction (see last line of "Electronvolts and kinetic energy"). Thanks. Anthony Chivetta 06:12, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Hardy's right, but the standard Kelvin <-> eV conversion is defined to be like it is. - mako 09:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Help!
Hey, I'm getting ready for the SAT physics test, and I seem to be getting some strange info. about the eV. In my book, it says 1eV=1.6x10(-19) Joules, but then it says something about 1eV= 6.25x10(18)eV/Joules... Does anybody know what this is supposed to mean, and if so could they add it to the article? Thanks

1 eV = 1.6x10(-19) J, therefore 1 Joule = 6.25x10(18)eV. Hope that helps... I'm not sure what they mean by eV/J though as both eV and J are units of energy. The definition means that multiplying one eV by e, the charge on an electron (not the natural logarithmic e) gives you Joules. e = 1.6x10(-19) Coulombs. There. Clear as mud. MilleauRekiir 15:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I am trying to understand what is going on with the Large Hadron Collider. I saw something that said 1 tetraelectronvolt was equal to the energy of a flying mosquito. I don't have a realistic idea of how much energy that is. Is there a generally recognizable equivalent to how much energy is contained in a tetraelectronvolt?claimman75 (talk) 02:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Jev
I have never before heard anyone pronounce GeV as jev, I would say its commonly refered to G-E-V, at least Canadian particle physics curcits. As well, the proton is not a typical baryon, in fact it is probably the least typical of them all because it and the neutron are the only ones that don't decay. I would probably go a little further and say that no baryon can be seen as representative of them all, the only thing they all have in common is each having three quarks.--Jason

 * At RHIC everybody said "jev". It may be an American Midwest kind of thing, as my fusion professor, originally from Illinois, said "jev" and "jigawatts". From personal experience, it's much faster to say "jev" and "rick", as opposed to G-E-V and R-H-I-C, especially if you say them often. - mako 09:49, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

 * French speakers also pronounce "jev". Urhixidur 15:01, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

 * In England, we refer to both jay-eV and gee-eV (probably most common). I guess with Midwestern American, French, and Canadian collaborators, my research group has no hope of a standard pronounciation... MilleauRekiir 15:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

 * I've heard gee-ee-vee and jev used interchangeably. Also in use, but much less common is a monosyllabic pronunciation of TeV as "tev", as in Tevatron. (I've never actually heard RHIC spelled out. Also the only place I ever heard anyone pronounce gigawatt as jigawatt was in "Back to the Future"....) HEL 02:25, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I just added in the intro that 1.0 V = 1.0 J/C so that it is easier to understand where the electron volt gets its units of joules from. I hate it when Wikipedia writers make the descriptions so convoluted and hard to understand. The people who look at these articles are attempting to learn something about the subject... The way some of these articles are compiled makes it impossible to do so.

 * In the part of the United States where I come from, we say "jigawatts", "jigabytes", "jigohms", and "jigavolts" all the time. Personally, I don't see any reason for anyone to get argumentative about it and snapping off things like "I've never heard anyone say..." So what if you haven't? Are you the man who sings "I've been everywhere..." or are you Johnny Appleseed? 98.67.162.130 (talk) 21:07, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Errors in "Electronvolts and time" section
There are some errors in the Electronvolts and time section. First of all, expressing time and distance in inverse eV units is based on the usual "particle physics units" hbar = c = 1. Then time is hbar/E, not hbar/2E. Likewise, distance is hbar*c/E. It's true that eV units are used as an alternate way to express the lifetimes of unstable particles, in the form of the (total) width $$\Gamma=1/\tau$$ where $$\tau$$ is the lifetime (not the half-life). Also, what's an exotic kernel? HEL 00:30, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Here are the relevant numbers: Citation is K. Hagiwara et al, Review of Particle Physics, Phys. Rev. D66, 010001 (2002). The parentheses notation (26) means the uncertainty is plus or minus 26 in the last two digits quoted. fm is a Fermi or femtometer, 10-15 m. Also the lifetime $$\tau$$ is the thing that appears in the decay exponential, exp(-t/$$\tau$$). The half-life $$\tau_{1/2}$$ is related to the lifetime by $$ \tau_{1/2} = ln(2) \tau $$. (By the way, does anyone know how to get rid of those spurious dashes that sometimes follow math-mode expressions?) HEL 02:40, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
 * hbar = 6.582 118 89(26) x 10-22 MeV s
 * hbar c = 197.326 960 2(77) MeV fm

I rewrote this section. The old content is here: (forgot to sign comment - sorry! HEL 17:54, 9 October 2006 (UTC) )

Electronvolts and time
A very brief length of time can be measured with eV. The uncertainty principle gives $$ {\Delta}E \, \cdot \, {\Delta}t \ {\ge} \ \frac{\hbar}{2}$$. A time can correspond to an energy, and when the length of time is very brief (less than an attosecond), the measure is less significant for the observer if expressed in seconds. The conversion is carried out by :

$$\frac{\hbar}{2} \frac{1}{eV} = \frac {1.054\ 571\ 68\times10^{-34}\ \mbox{J}\cdot\mbox{s}}{2 \times 1.6022 \times 10^{-19} \mbox{J}} = 3.29101135938 \times10^{-16} \mbox{s}$$

This kind of length is encountered in half-lifes of exotic kernels. For example, the half-life of the 8C is 230keV (1.43×10-21 s).

How much is 1.0000 kg
one kilogram, or ten thousand kilograms? Im referring to this section 1.0000 kg = 89.876 PJ 194.145.96.51 (talk) 15:26, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

 * That would be 1 kg, as per:

$$E = mc^2 \longrightarrow{1\ \mbox{kg} \times{\left (2.998 \times{10^8} \right ) ^2} \mbox{m} \cdot \mbox{s}^2 = 89.88 \times 10^{15}\ \mbox{J}}$$ Eutactic (talk) 03:26, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Electron volt and Electronvolt
Nobody outside of a government building has ever, to my knowledge, called it an "electronvolt".Likebox (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I suspect a government conspiracy. Seriously though, I suggest that "electronvolt" is an acceptable/preferred spelling based on the observation that the IUPAC Gold Book/Green Book has an entry for "electronvolt" but none for "electron volt" (that I can find). IUPAC is, of course, an NGO. Eutactic (talk) 06:57, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I get your point -- but this is the worst sort of social engineering. Everybody spells it "electron volt", then one day, some bureaucrat wakes up and says, "gosh it makes more sense as electronvolt, really!", convinces his three officemates (who agree because they want to be able to say later -- hey, remember when I helped you out with "electronvolt"?). Then, next thing you know, all official documents say "electronvolt", then NGO's start copying it, etc., etc.
 * To prevent this sort of thing, I think that usage should be determined by google search. In this case, 115,000 hits for "electron volt", most of them "of the people" (or outside the US), and 32,000 hits for "electronvolt", mostly official looking.Likebox (talk) 18:29, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Obsolete J/eV value used almost throughout
Maybe back in 2002, the CODATA value was 1.602 176 53(14) J, but it's 2008 now, and the value is 1.602 176 487(40) J. Some of the equations need to be reworked because of this.

67.171.43.170 (talk) 23:10, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Aw, awww ...
In SI units, it is the number which measures the charge of the electron with the unit changed from C to J. Is this really a good thing to write it that way? This suggests the (unaware) reader, that you can simply exchange C with J. However, C is unit of Charge (coulomb), J is unit of work (joule). Any suggestions to word this better? -andy 92.229.100.244 (talk) 12:18, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Origin of the unit
I found that electron volt was first used in 1912 and in that time it was called "equivalent volt". Does anybody know who was the person to use it for the first time and in which publication did it appear? Thank you. Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 22:34, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Richard Feynman quote
Ummh, this seems to completely miss the point. You have to define a new unit cause you don't know the exact ratio of 1.0 eV to 1.0 J, and if you used the same unit of measure you would be asserting that you did. The electron-volt can be used when you know the number of electrons, through counting, but not exact conversions, which can be continually improved. Just like the Avogadro constant. Just look above at how the old number has become obsolete due to better measurements, this is the reason there has to be two different units. I propose that a quote that just tells people to accept things on faith, accept things because that's the way its done, should be removed, even if it is from a lecturer with lots of credibility. The quote really says nothing besides that the two units are measuring the same thing.Scientus (talk) 16:11, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Energy released by fusion seems wrong...
Could just be me, but the energy released from fusion seems like it should be much higher than quoted... it should be greater than fission... in the GeV range maybe? It says that fission produces more per particle than fusion, but fusion produces more energy per kilogram... just sounds like somebody's in the wrong order of magnitude? Does anyone have a source? Patricius12 (talk) 05:21, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

As a unit of energy
I find this section very confusing. "17.6 MeV: total energy released in fusion of deuterium and tritium to form helium-4 (also on average); this is 0.41 petajoule per kilogram of product produced, which is equivalent to the energy released in a 100-kiloton explosion of TNT." What the heck does that mean? Is 17.6 = to 100-kt of TNT? If not, why even mention TNT? If so, then how can one teraelectronvolt only been the same kinetic energy of a flying mosquito? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.68.138.99 (talk) 04:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

100-kt of TNT is equivalent to the energy released in fusion of tritium and deuterium, if in the process a kilogram of helium is produced. I agree it is a bit confusing. Terminus0 (talk) 18:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Exa=10^18, so 300 EeV=300,000 PeV = 300,000,000 TeV = 3x10^20 eV, while Peta = 10^15, so 600 PeV = 600,000 TeV = 6x10^17 eV. comment added by 78.159.199.31 (talk) 09:17, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Lightbulb
100 J is not 8000 TeV (or 8 PeV = 8*10^15 eV) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.92.76.143 (talk) 00:13, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 14:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Electron volt → Electronvolt —. It is the name used throughout all of science as far as I'm aware. All my textbooks, and all the journals I read, regardless of field (chemistry, thermodynamics, particle physics, solid state physics, ...) spell it that way. All other authoritative sources (such as BIPM, IUPAC, ...) also spell it that way. I don't ever recall seeing it spell "electron volt", other than in vulgarization articles found in magazines such as Popular Science from time to time. — Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 05:27, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Support move. M. L. McGlashan in "Physiochemical quantities and units" Pub. Royal Institute of Chemistry, 2nd Ed., 1971 has "electronvolt" and I am pretty sure later editions written by Ian Mills has it too. This is a very reputable source re units. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  05:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Hertz conversion seems wrong
I was trying to find the eV of a terahertz frequency signal. This led me to the NIST CODATA conversion factor and several examples   which seem to support using the Planck's constant h, not h/2pi, for the conversion factor. This makes sense to me in that the hertz here seem to be for the full revolution of a circle, not a unit length. I didn't want to mess with this article because I'm out of my expertise and I don't know if you have a different calculation more in mind, but that's the way I did it for the radio spectrum article to provide an eV reference. Wnt (talk) 19:37, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

Page Move
The rational for the previous move is incorrect. I am a physics student and all my textbooks and lecturers use electron Volt, not electronvolt. Electron Volt is clearly the most common term used by both physicists and the public at large. Unless anybody objects I will be moving this page. Electronvolt makes no sense linguistically either. The Proffesor (talk) 11:45, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

 * I agree. The term "electron volt" may be concatenated into a single word "electronvolt" by some people, but I've been working in semiconductor physics for well over thirty years, and this is not standard usage.  (I just grabbed a couple of reference books off my desk, and checked.  Nope, no "electronvolts.")  An electron volt is one electron times one volt; concatenating the two together is like expressing electrical energy in "kilowatthours" or torque in "Newtonmeters" or workforce in "manyears".   I don't know who voted on the previous "page move" vote, but it does not seem to reflect physics usage. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 16:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

 * My impression is that both are common, and a google search verifies this. Electron volt seems the more common, but BIPM uses electronvolt and American Physical Society seems to prefer electron-volt. Among the first 30 hits on a google search for electronvolt 6 uses electronvolt, 2 electron-volt and the rest electron volt. 89.253.103.60 (talk) 20:42, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

 * I will point out that the BIPM document linked is an English translation of a document in French. For all I know, electron-volt may be one work in French. Geoffrey.landis (talk) 20:40, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Velocity
I think this article would benefit from a section on converting eV to velocity, most especially in reference to a free electon.

KE = 1/2 m v^2 where the mass of an electon is  .511 MeV/c^2, and the kinetic energy of the electron is (just to make it easy) 511 eV, would result in a speed of

v = (2 KE/m) ^1/2  (with v in terms of c, the speed of light) = (2 511 eV/(511 * 10^3) ^1/2  = .04 times the speed of light

or, to put it in terms people have a gut feel for, = .04 c * (671 million miles per hour)

= 26 million miles per hour

Also, doing the same thing for higher energies, like 1MeV, which is a typical value for an emitted beta particle, which requires calculating it assuming relativistic speed, but is too hard for me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.38.229.40 (talk) 10:27, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

The name of the unit
The name of the unit must be electron-volt because those two (the charge on the electron and the volt) are multiplied together. This is just like the following: newton-meter, foot-pound, pound-foot, kilowatt-hour, and ampere-hour. If you have a hard time understanding the ampere-hour, this is a rating for storage batteries. At a fixed "bus voltage" at the output (set by the power electronics), volts times ampere-hours works out in energy, and if multiplied by 3600, the result works out in joules. The real job of a storage battery is to store energy, and then release it as required. The foot-pound is a unit of energy, but the pound-foot is a unit of torque. In the SI, energy is measured in joules, but the newton-meter is a unit of torque. The electron-volt (abbreviated eV) is a unit of energy. 98.67.162.130 (talk) 20:48, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

 * A foot-pound is a compound unit (the unit foot and the unit pound). An electron however, is a particle, not a unit. If you want to build the same etymology, it would be an elementary charge-volt. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 00:27, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

 * "Electron" in this case is a sort of unit (abbreviation of "electron charge"). On the other hand, "electron volt" means "volt of an electron", making no sense. — Mikhail Ryazanov (talk) 01:59, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 2

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Hot Stop talk-contribs 03:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

Electronvolt → Electron volt – Most commonly used term for this unit of energy. Apteva (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

 * Oppose – outdated/inapplicable data presented; recent standards bodies overwhelmingly use electronvolt. — Quondum 19:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose – NIST and BIPM seem to prefer electronvolt. Someone with spare time on their hands may want to take a survey of some current physics textbooks (e.g., the newest editions of Jackson, Griffiths, Halliday & Resnick, etc.) and maybe PRL to check what the actual usage is. If it turns out overwhelmingly to be electron volt then I'll change my vote. Zueignung (talk) 17:59, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * So far have not found even one textbook that uses electronvolt. Apteva (talk) 00:41, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose per reasons above. --Article editor (talk) 03:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

 * It is not our role to try to decide what something should be called, but only report what it is most commonly called. Apteva (talk) 17:51, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * A google ngram search should not be the sole basis for a move motivation, and the position is in any event marginal, and strongly influenced by exact choice of terms and filtering. There is a recent (2004) CIPM adoption of electronvolt, which seems to be reflected in a British English dominance. On matters such as this (unit names), the relevant standards bodies (e.g. CIPM, NIST, BIPM) must given a disproportionate weight, and my impression is that they overwhelmingly support "electronvolt"; scientific use may already have followed suit. "What it is commonly called" is the wrong criterion in a science-related context; it will be heavily weighted by history and informal uses. — Quondum 19:36, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Google Scholar says, "Did you mean: electron volt" And electron volt produces ten times as many results, even when restricted to 2013. The same is true for every other date range I tried, such as 2005–2006. Apteva (talk) 03:02, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Google scholar also shows that the more informal term "amp" dominates the formal name "ampere" twofold, and with a normal Google search it is tenfold. Perhaps we should rename that article too?  Also, Google Scholar is finding "electon-volt" to "electron volt", so the number of hit is the sum of the two in this case.  Google any of the names "CIPM", "BIPM", "NIST" in conjunction with either of the terms, and there is a tenfold predominance of "electronvolt". WP is not a dictionary; while one term is more frequently used than the other, there are reasons for not blindly following statistics when it comes to science. — Quondum 10:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Both NIST and BIPM seem to prefer electronvolt, with no space. Zueignung (talk) 17:49, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Mass-Energy equivalence
So first and foremost, this section begins by making the statement: "By mass–energy equivalence, the electronvolt is also a unit of mass." though it is true that energy and mass can be converted between eachother, mass units and energy units are not the same thing. You can never write "x electronvolts = y kilograms", It just doesn't work that way. Saying that electronvolts are a UNIT of mass is always wrong, saying mass can be expressed in terms of energy and energy can be (sort of) expressed in terms of mass is significantly more correct. The current wordage could prove to be misleading to readers who don't understand what is actually meant to be said.

Now, I don't think this section even really belongs in an article on a unit of measure, since it is something which pertains to energy in general and the units used have next to no relevance on the matter. In other words, talking about this does not tell someone anything more about electronvolts. If the statement about electronvolts also being a unit of mass were true, then that would be another matter altogether, but since it doesn't, I believe this section doesn't really add anything to the article. I could be in the minority with this opinion but thought I'd put it out there, since I don't really believe in unnecessary clutter. Ionic1337 (talk) 00:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Electronvolt. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20141209103804/http://www.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter4/table7.html to http://www.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter4/table7.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:56, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Silly noob Q
Shouldn't a mol (6.02 × 1023) of protons weigh about 1g? The units given show 10-36kg, which is a long way from 10-23. Or is this one of those "relativistic" things where once the electron joins the party and the proton is now a "nucleus", the mass changes?

Riventree (talk) 16:45, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, one mole of protons weighs about 1 gram. But what does an eV/c2 have to do with that? Double sharp (talk) 09:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Electronvolt. 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/20131205005843/http://cbst.ucdavis.edu/education/courses/winter-2006-IST8A/ist8a_2006_01_09light.pdf to http://cbst.ucdavis.edu/education/courses/winter-2006-IST8A/ist8a_2006_01_09light.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:33, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

They don't sell those [ incandescent light globes ] any more
energy consumed by a single 100-watt light bulb in one second

If this is what I think it is, in many countries they don't sell those any more, and it's not much of a relatable standard for our youngest readers. — MaxEnt 01:12, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Very true. The point has been made before but so far no one has come up with a simple example that younger readers can relate to. Be bold and propose something better. Dondervogel 2 (talk)

 * Maybe a portable domestic electric heater, or hair-dryer, or toaster. Basically something electrical that heats with a set power usage.  An advantage is that — like incandescent light globes — these are sold by power usage (input), not by performance (output), so increases in efficiency won't affect the calculation of power usage.  A disadvantage is that typical power ratings for these appliances would vary by country-by-country (depending on the domestic power supply), but it is worth considering.
 * Young folk will be familiar with things like mobile phones too, but they are not at all suitable because power draw varies depending on the model and how the device is being used at that moment, and because technology for these things is changing much faster/more than for electric heaters & related appliances.
 * —DIV (1.129.107.117 (talk) 03:53, 30 May 2019 (UTC))

Is it an "independent quantity"? Is it based on "the elementary charge"?
The article reads: "a unit of energy equal to exactly 1.602176634×10−19 joules (symbol J) in SI units." and "Like the elementary charge on which it is based, it is not an independent quantity".

Is the latter still correct, or only historically correct? J is a derived unit, but based upon N×m, and neither of these depend upon the electron's charge. —DIV (1.129.107.117 (talk) 03:43, 30 May 2019 (UTC))

Intro seems muddled
"In physics, an electronvolt (symbol eV, also written electron-volt and electron volt) is the amount of kinetic energy gained (or lost) by a single electron accelerating from rest through an electric potential difference of one volt in vacuum."

1. Is eV a unit? If so, that's probably the first fact that should be mentioned.

2. Presumably measurements using the unit eV can range over positive or negative values. Hence the unit must have a positive sense. So is the positive sense a gain of energy, or loss of energy? That determination may be complicated by the fact that the electron carries a negative charge. So eV = e x V might well be negative in terms of Joules, when V is positive.

3. Is it only the energy gained(/lost) when the electron is accelerated from rest? Or is it the gain(/loss) when moving through a 1V field, regardless of the starting velocity?

4. If we take the sentence literally to mean only starting from rest, then how does an electron at rest actually lose energy?

"When used as a unit of energy, the numerical value of 1 eV in joules (symbol J) is equivalent to the numerical value of the charge of an electron in coulombs (symbol C). Under the 2019 redefinition of the SI base units, this sets 1 eV equal to 1.602176634×10−19 J."

5. The preceding sentence told us that eV is an amount of energy. So why does this new sentence qualify "when used as a unit of energy". Does this suggest that eV is sometimes not a unit, or sometimes not a unit of energy?

6. Are there any circumstances where 1 eV expressed in Joules is not 1.602...x 10^-19?

7. What is even the point of "the numerical value of 1 eV in joules (symbol J) is equivalent to the numerical value of the charge of an electron in coulombs (symbol C)". That bunch of words is simply a complicated way of saying 1.602 x 10^-19 = 1 x 1.602 x 10^-19. Obviously the numerical value will be the same on both sides of the equation. Gwideman (talk) 08:20, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I fixed #4. The other points you raise merit discussion. Dondervogel 2 (talk) 10:10, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:39, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * International System of Units Logo.png

Reminders of Wikipedia guidance
Perusing the various foregoing comments, it seems pertinent to provide a reminder of two relevant sets of Wikipedia guidelines: —DIV (1.145.110.31 (talk) 04:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC))
 * 1) search engine tests have many limitations;
 * 2) article talk pages are only for discussing how to improve the article.

title: Talk:Electronvolt


text:
Talk:Triton

If somebody wants (I did it for vulcan) someone can use the link "Pages that link here" and correct the links to go directly to the desired page.

Already did. :) I note that there are a lot of astronomical pages that have since been split into astronomical and mythological pages, and others which probably should be. I might make a project of cleaning all that stuff up sometime, once Wikipedia's got its link database fixed. Bryan Derksen

Anyone who has a wish to make him/herself useful in this way is advised to check out Disambiguation pages with links, which contains a list of the most linked-to disambiguation pages. Andre Engels

The list of ships named "USS Triton" is now duplicated here and on USS Triton. I'm vaguely uneasy about this; they may go out of synch with each other in future edits. Perhaps USS Triton should be redirected to here? Bryan 22:55, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I was just thinking it would save people a step, but if you want to revert it, go ahead. The links to the three ships that have live pages presumably won't get broken. I trimmed the ship info, so if you make the redirect, the rest should be put here also. wwoods 01:16, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

ad Triton (>Enigma) It seems to me that theres a mistake, for 'triton' was the German name for the Code,the Allies called it 'SHARK' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.50.152.76 (talk) 12:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Newts
"Triton" is the word for "newt" in many languages and shows up the scientific names of many subtribes of newts, like Hypselotriton, Laotriton, Pachytriton, Paramesotriton, etc. Should this be added?

Cameron Nedland (talk) 16:57, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. – Uanfala (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Malware
How about the malware? https://www.technologyreview.com/search/?s=triton

Barely mentioned at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triconex#Triton_malware — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kdammers (talk • contribs)

 * Barely mentioned barely qualifies for an entry. I've added it. Seems like a likely search term. -- Fyrael (talk) 16:16, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Triton


text:
User:Elifant

Hello every artichokey one, and even if you are asparagussy, JOIN THE BOYCOTT! So, any ways my sister is dreamyshade, and her friend is scoobcraze. I wrote the article Hammurabi. My real name is Elisabeth Elin .....

Random Silliness: Artichokes, Telephony, Grasshoppers

I LOVE VEGGIES!

uh, lizzy...please um stay away, even if you are my sister... *cringes with embarassment* --Dreamyshade

title: User:Elifant


text:
Anna of Russia

Anna Ioannovna (Анна Иоанновна; 7 February 1693 – 28 October 1740), also russified as Anna Ivanovna and sometimes anglicized as Anne, served as regent of the duchy of Courland from 1711 until 1730 and then ruled as Empress of Russia from 1730 to 1740. Much of her administration was defined or heavily influenced by actions set in motion by her uncle, Peter the Great ((r. 1682 – 1725)), such as the lavish building projects in St. Petersburg, funding the Russian Academy of Science, and measures which generally favored the nobility, such as the repeal of a primogeniture law in 1730. In the West, Anna's reign was traditionally viewed as a continuation of the transition from the old Muscovy ways to the European court envisioned by Peter the Great. Within Russia, Anna's reign is often referred to as a "dark era".

Early life
Anna was born in Moscow as the daughter of Tsar Ivan V by his wife Praskovia Saltykova. Ivan V was co-ruler of Russia along with his younger half-brother Peter the Great, but he was mentally disabled and reportedly had limited capacity of administering the country effectively, and Peter effectively ruled alone. Ivan V died in February 1696, when Anna was only three years old, and her half-uncle became the sole ruler of Russia.

Although Anna was the fourth child of her parents, she had only one surviving elder sister, Catherine, and one younger sister, Praskovia. The three girls were raised in a disciplined and austere manner by their widowed mother, a stern lady of sterling character. Born into a family of relatively modest means, Praskovia Saltykova had been an exemplary wife to a mentally disabled man, and expected her daughters to live up to her own high standards of morality and virtue. Anna grew up within a milieu which cherished womanly virtue and domesticity above all else, and placed strong emphasis on thrift, charity and religious observances. Her education consisted of French, German, religious texts and folklore, leavened with some music and dancing. As she grew older, she developed into an obstinate girl, with a mean streak, earning her the nickname "Iv-anna the Terrible". Anna was famed for her big cheeks, "which, as shown in her portraits", says Thomas Carlyle, were "comparable to a Westphalian ham".

In time, her uncle Peter the Great ordered the family to move from Moscow to St. Petersburg. This meant a change of not just location but also society, and this had a significant effect on Anna. She greatly enjoyed the splendour of court and the lavishness of high society, which was very different from the austerity preferred by her mother.

Courland Regency
In 1710, Peter the Great arranged for the 17-year-old Anna to marry Frederick William, Duke of Courland, who was about the same age as her. Her wedding was held on a grand scale, as per her own inclinations, on 11 November 1710; and her uncle gave her a fabulous dowry of 200,000 roubles. At the feast which followed the wedding, two dwarfs performed a parody by jumping out of enormous pies and dancing on the tables.

The newly wedded couple spent several weeks in Russia before proceeding to Courland. Only twenty miles out of St. Petersburg, on the road to Courland, on 21 January 1711, Duke Frederick died. The cause of death was uncertain - it has been attributed variously to a chill or to the effects of alcohol.

After her husband died, Anna proceeded to Mitau (now known as Jelgava), the capital of Courland (now western Latvia) and ruled that province for almost twenty years, from 1711 to 1730. During this period, the Russian resident, Count Peter Bestuzhev, was her adviser (and sometimes lover). She never remarried after the death of her husband, but her enemies claimed she conducted a love affair with Duke Ernst Johann von Biron, a prominent courtier, for many years.

Accession
In 1730, Tsar Peter II (grandson of Anna's uncle Peter the Great) died childless at a young age. His death rendered extinct the male line of the Romanov dynasty, which had ruled Russia for over a century, since 1613. There were four possible candidates for the throne: the three surviving daughters of Ivan V, namely Catherine (born 1691), Anna herself (born 1693) and Praskovya (born 1694), and the sole surviving daughter of Peter the Great, Elizabeth (born 1709).

Ivan V had been the older brother of Peter the Great and co-ruler with him, and by that reckoning, his daughters may be considered to have the prior claim. However, if seen from the perspective that the successor should be the nearest kin of the most recent monarch, then the daughters of Peter the Great were nearer to the throne, because they were the aunts of the recently deceased Tsar Peter II. The dilemma was made greater because the daughters of Peter the Great had been born out of wedlock, and had been legitimized later by him, after he formally married their mother Catherine I, who had previously been a maid in his household. On the other hand, Praskovia Saltykova, the wife of Ivan V, had been a nobleman's daughter and a devoted wife and mother; moreover, she had been a lady greatly respected for her many virtues, not least her chastity. Finally, the Russian Supreme Privy Council led by Prince Dmitri Golitzyn selected Anna, the second daughter of Ivan V, to be the new Empress of Russia. She was selected in preference to her elder sister Catherine even though Catherine was at that time resident in Russia whereas Anna was not. There were some reasons for this: Anna was a childless widow and there was no immediate danger of an unknown foreigner wielding power in Russia; she also had some experience of government, because she had been administering her late husband's duchy of Courland for almost two decades. Catherine, on the other hand, was married to the Duke of Mecklenburg-Schwerin. She was now separated from him and living in Russia, which was in itself disgraceful; and whether her husband was present or absent, his existence could raise problems at her very coronation. His intervention in government affairs at some later point could hardly be prevented, especially since Catherine had a daughter by him. In that event, since he was ruling prince of ancient lineage with years of experience, he would not be as amenable to the council's advice as a Russian princess. Also, the fact that Catherine had a daughter already would provide a certainty of succession which the nobles perhaps preferred not to have.

The Supreme Privy Council preferred the childless and widowed Duchess of Courland. They hoped that she would feel indebted to the nobles and remain a figurehead at best, and malleable at worst. To make sure of that, the Council convinced Anna to sign a declaration of "Conditions" to her accession, modeled after a Swedish precedent, which stated that Anna was to govern according to their counsel and was not permitted to declare war, call for peace, impose new taxes or spend the revenue of the state without their consent. Without the consent of the council, she could not punish nobility without trial, make grants of estates or villages, appoint high officials, or promote anyone (foreign or Russian) to court office.

The deliberations of the council were held even as Peter II lay dying of smallpox during the winter of 1729–30. The document of "Conditions" was presented to Anna in January, and she signed the same on 18 January 1730, which was just around the time of his death. The ceremony of endorsement was held at her capital, Mitau in Courland (now known as Jelgava), and she then proceeded to the Russian capital. On 20 February 1730, shortly after her arrival, Empress Anna exercised her prerogative to do away with her predecessor's Privy Council and dissolved that body. The Supreme Privy Council which had stipulated those onerous "Conditions" had been composed largely of the families of the princes Dolgorouki and Galitzin. Within a matter of days, another faction rose at court which was opposed to the domination of these two families. On 7 March 1730, a group of people belonging to this faction (numbering between 150 and 800 people, depending on the source) arrived at the palace and petitioned the empress to repudiate the "Conditions" and assume the autocracy of her predecessors. Among those who urged Anna to do so was her elder sister Catherine. Anna duly repudiated the document of Conditions, and for good measure sent some of the framers of the document to the scaffold, and many others to Siberia. She then assumed autocratic powers and ruled as an absolute monarch, in the same fashion as her predecessors. On the night that Anna tore up the Conditions, an aurora borealis appeared in the sky, making the horizon "appear in all blood" in the words of one contemporary, which was widely taken to be a dark omen of what Anna's reign would be like.

Strong-willed and eccentric, Anna was known for her cruelty and vulgar sense of humor. She forced Prince Mikhail Alekseevich Golitsyn to become her court jester and had him married off to her unattractive Kalmyk maid Avdotya Buzheninova. To celebrate the wedding, the Empress had an ice palace measuring thirty-three feet high and eighty feet long built together with icy beds, steps, chairs, windows and even logs of ice in a fireplace of ice. Prince Golitsyn and his bride were placed in a cage atop an elephant and paraded through the streets to this structure, to spend their wedding night in the ice palace, despite it being an extremely cold night in the dead of winter. Empress Anna told the couple to make love and keep their bodies close if they did not wish to freeze to death. Eventually, the couple survived when the maid traded a pearl necklace for a sheepskin coat from one of the guards. An enthusiastic hunter, Anna always kept a rifle by her window so she could blast away at birds at all hours of the day whenever she felt the urge to hunt.

Empress of Russia
Anna continued to lavish architectural advances in St. Petersburg. She completed a waterway that began construction under Peter the Great and called for seafaring ships to accompany this new canal and continue naval expansion. Anna's lover Ernst Johann von Biron was a Baltic German and due to his influence Baltic Germans were favored with government offices, leading to the resentment of the ethnic Russian nobility, though the American historian Walter Moss cautioned that the popular image of the Bironovschina as one of total Baltic German domination of Russia is exaggerated.

Cadet Corps
Anna founded the Cadet Corps in 1731, one year after coming to the throne. The Cadet Corps was a group of young boys starting at the age of eight being trained for the military. It incorporated a very rigorous training program which included all the schooling necessary for someone to hold an important position in the military. As time went on, the program was improved upon by other emperors and empresses, such as Catherine the Great. These began to include the arts and sciences into cadets' schooling, alongside established studies of military topics.

Academy of Science
Anna continued to fund the Russian Academy of Science, started by Peter the Great. This school was designed to further the sciences in Russia, in order to help the country reach the level of the Western countries of that period. Some of the subjects taught were mathematics, astronomy, and botany. The Academy of Science was also responsible for many expeditions; a notable example was the Bering Sea Expedition. While attempting to determine if America and Asia had been at one point connected, Siberia and its people was also studied. These studies were referenced long after the expedition returned from Siberia. The academy suffered interference from outside parties. Frequently the government and the church would meddle with funding and experimentation, altering data to match their respective points of view. This school of science was very small, never exceeding a population of twelve students in the university and barely over a hundred in the secondary school. Still, it was a huge step forward for education in Russia. Many of the teachers and professors were imported from Germany, bringing a Western viewpoint to instruction students received. Some of the students taught by these German professors later became advisors or teachers to future leaders, such as Catherine the Great's tutor, Adodurov. During Anna's reign the Academy of Science began to include the Arts into the program, as there was no school for the arts yet, and the Empress was a firm supporter of the arts. Theatre, architecture, engraving, and journalism were all added to the curriculum. It was during this time the foundation of what is now the world-famous Russian Ballet was laid down.

The Secret Office of Investigation
Anna resurrected the Secret Office of Investigation, whose purpose was to punish those convicted of political crimes, although some cases were occasionally taken that were not of a political nature. It has been rumored since Anna's reign that Biron was the power behind the Secret Office of Investigation when in fact it was run by the senator A. I. Ushakov. The punishments meted out for the convicted were often very painful and disgusting. For example, some people that had supposedly been plotting against the government had their noses slit in addition to being beaten with the knout. Russian authorities listed a total of around 20,000 Russians—including some of the highest native nobility—who fell victim to Biron and Anna's police.

Office for the Affairs of New Converts
The government under Anna established an Office for the Affairs of New Converts in 1740 to expand the conversion to Orthodoxy. The office which was situated in the Bogoroditsky Monastery in Kazan was staffed by monks and aided by state authorities. Under the empress' decree, they presided under a huge increase in conversions, where converts were provided goods and cash in return for a "reward for accepting baptism". However, intimidation and violence also played a role in conversions, as a Chuvash petition described how the clergy "mercilessly beat them and baptized them against their will". In addition, hundreds of mosques were destroyed. By the 1750s, over 400,000 pagans and Muslims had converted.

Nobility
Anna gave many privileges to the nobility. In 1730 she ensured the repeal of Peter the Great's primogeniture law prohibiting the division of estates among heirs. Starting in 1731 landlords were made responsible for their serfs' taxes, which had the effect of tightening their economic bondage further. In 1736, the age for a noble to begin his compulsory service to the state changed to 20 with a 25-year service time. Anna and her government also determined that if a family had more than one son, one could now stay behind to run the family estate.

Westernization
Westernization continued after Peter the Great's reign in areas of prominent Western culture such as the Academy of Science, cadet corps education, and imperial culture including theater and opera. Although not at the fast-paced speed of Westernization under her Uncle Peter's reign, it is evident that a culture of the expansion of knowledge continued during Anna's rule and affected mostly the nobility. It is argued that this success in Westernization is due to the efforts of the German court nobility; the foreigners' impacts are viewed both positively and negatively.

Anna's reign was different from that of other imperial Russian rulers in one respect: her court was almost entirely made up of foreigners, the majority of whom were German. Some observers have argued that historians isolate her rule from Russian history due to their long-term prejudice towards Germans, towards whom Anna seems to have been sympathetic.

There is a lot of mention of Germans throughout the reign of Anna. For example, she often gave them ruling positions in her cabinet and other important decision-making positions. This was because she had very little trust in the Russians. It was because of this strong German influence in government that many Russians came to resent them.

The Imperial Theatre School, known as Vaganova Academy of Russian Ballet after 1957, was founded during Anna's reign on May 4, 1738. It was the first ballet school in Russia, as well as the second in the world. The school was established through the initiative of the French ballet master and teacher Jean-Baptiste Landé.

Foreign affairs
During Anna's reign Russia became involved in two major conflicts, the War of the Polish Succession (1733–1735) and another Turkish war. In the former, Russia worked with Austria to support Augustus II's son Augustus against the candidacy of Stanisław Leszczyński who was dependent on the French and amiable with Sweden and the Ottomans. Russia's involvement with the conflict was quickly over, however, and the Russo-Turkish War (1735–1739) was much more important.

In 1732 Nader Shah had forced Russia to return the lands in northern mainland Persia that had been taken during Peter the Great's Russo-Persian War; the Treaty of Resht furthermore permitted an alliance against the Ottoman Empire, the common enemy and, in any case, the provinces of Shirvan, Ghilan, and Mazanderan had been a net drain on the imperial treasury for the entirety of their occupation. Three years later, in 1735, conforming to the Treaty of Ganja, the remainder of the territories taken more than a decade earlier from Persia in the North Caucasus and South Caucasus were returned as well.

The war against the Turks took four and a half years, a hundred thousand men, and millions of rubles; its burdens caused great stress on the people of Russia, and it only gained Russia the city of Azov and its environs. Its effects, however, were greater than they first appeared. Osterman's policy of southern expansion prevailed over the 1711 Peace of Pruth signed by Peter the Great. Münnich had given Russia its first campaign against Turkey that had not ended in crushing disaster and dissipated the illusion of Ottoman invincibility. He had further shown that Russia's grenadiers and hussars could defeat twice their number of janissaries and spahis. The Tatar hordes of the Crimea had been exterminated and Russia's signal and unexpected successes greatly increased its prestige within Europe.

The Russians also established a protectorate over the khan of the Kirghiz, sending officers to assist his short-lived conquest of Khiva.

Two Chinese embassies to Anna's court, first at Moscow in 1731, then at St Petersburg the following year, were the only ones China dispatched to Europe through the 18th century. These embassies were unique also in that they represented the only occasions where officials of the Chinese Empire kowtowed before a foreign ruler.

Relationship with Biron
After being widowed just weeks following her wedding, Anna never remarried. As empress of Russia, she enjoyed the power she held over all men and may have thought that marriage would undermine her power and position. Nevertheless, Anna's reign is often referred to as "The Age of Biron" (Bironovschina), after her German lover Ernst Johann Biron. Historians concur that Biron not only had a strong influence on Anna's domestic and foreign policies, but also that at times he wielded power solely without reference to the Empress. Anna was attracted to Biron's personal charm and he proved to be a good companion to her, but his name became synonymous with cruelty and terror. In public perception these negative qualities became the hallmark of Anna's reign.

Death and succession
As her health declined Anna declared her grandnephew, Ivan VI, as her successor and appointed Biron as regent. This was an attempt to secure the line of her father, Ivan V, and exclude the descendants of Peter the Great from inheriting the throne. It was recorded that she had an ulcer on her kidneys, and she continued having attacks of gout; as her condition worsened, her health began to fail.

Anna died on 17 October 1740 at the age of 47 from a kidney stone that made for a slow and painful death. The tsaritsa's final words focused on Biron. Ivan VI was only a two-month-old baby at the time, and his mother, Anna Leopoldovna, was detested for her German counsellors and relations. As a consequence, shortly after Anna's death, Elizabeth Petrovna, legitimized daughter of Peter the Great, managed to gain the favor of the populace, locked Ivan VI in a dungeon, and exiled his mother. Anna was buried three months later on 15 January 1741, leaving behind uncertainty for the future of Russia.

Legacy
In the West, Anna's reign was traditionally viewed as a continuation of the transition from the old Muscovy ways to the European court envisioned by Peter the Great. Her government, on the whole, was prudent, beneficial and even glorious; but it was undoubtedly severe and became at last universally unpopular. Within Russia Anna's reign is often referred to as a "dark era". The issue with her reign derives from her personality flaws. Even considering the need of Russian rulers to avoid displays of weakness, Anna's rule involved questionable actions towards her subjects. She was known to enjoy hunting animals from the palace windows and, on more than a few occasions, humiliated individuals with disabilities. The issues of serfdom, peasant and lower class slavery, taxation, dishonesty, and rule through constant fear persisted in Russia during her rule. Her empire was described by Lefort, the Saxon minister, as being "comparable to a storm-threatened ship, manned by a pilot and crew who are all drunk or asleep. . . with no considerable future". Anna's war with Turkey, economic issues, and conspiracy revolving around her accession all bring to light an ominous glow of the empress' reign. She restored the court in St. Petersburg and brought Russia's political atmosphere back to where Peter the Great had intended, and its grandeur was almost unmatched in Europe or Asia; but such lavish court life was overshadowed by the thousands of men slaughtered in war.

title: Anna of Russia


text:
Talk:Intolerance

Ed, there are so many kinds of intolerance that I'm not sure you'll be able to get a coherent article out of it. Racial intolerance, religious intolerance (can find examples of all religions practicing it against others, along with examples of having it practiced against them), gender intolerance, sexual intolerance, yadda, yadda, yadda (and I'm sure an intolerance against the phrase "yadda, yadda, yadda"). In other words, I'm not sure the topic is focused enough to be a self contained Encyclopedic Article, maybe a disambiguating one... Rgamble

Sounds like you're not going to tolerate the intolerance page -- which proves my point, ha ha! User:Ed Poor

Additional note... A topic shouldn't be examples only. The history of the topic, the people involved, etc... Otherwise it's merely "What I have seen happen." That is not what I said, Ed. Do you really want a page that will have probably 2-3 pages worth of examples that have no real relation to each other? Rgamble

That would be intolerable. I'm going to call it quits for today. Erase it if you want. --Ed

Will let others decide what to do with it. Maybe it'll work as a 'disambiguating page' separating the kinds of intolerance, which in my mind isn't at all a bad thing. Apologies if you took offense, not my intention though admittedly I'm in a somewhat annoyed mood anyhow.. Which means.. I should head off too, and shall. Rgamble

I moved this from the main page:

Examples of intolerance in the U.S.:

The articulation of clear biblical principles with regard to homosexuality is stamped as homophobia — and condemned as soon as it is uttered. Any suggestion that the Bible teaches us how the two sexes should behave towards one another is countered with cries of 'You're imposing your morality!'

There is a great deal of religiously-motivated intolerance towards alternative lifestyles, including homosexuality, in the U.S.

I don't know what this is, but it is certainly not an encyclopedia article, not even a stub. To start with an example of intolerance of intolerance is more than ironic. I think no article is better than this one. AxelBoldt

This is certainly not an encyclopedia article, it's more of a dictionary definition. If Intolerance is not some sort of technical term in sociology, this page would be better off as a disambiguation page for the various forms of intolerance (lactose intolerance etc). Otherwise its just a bit of poor 'original research'. Ashmoo 5 July 2005 02:12 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus. JPG-GR (talk) 02:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

It is proposed to move this disambiguation page to the title Intolerance (disambiguation) so that the title Intolerance can be redirected to Toleration as the WP:D. A redirect hatnote would be added at the top of Toleration to link back to the disambig page for other meanings. Please comment below. --Russ (talk) 13:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Weak oppose at this stage. Despite the prefix, for most of the meanings listed in the dab page, tolerance is a term derived from the usage of intolerance in the specific subject area. Andrewa (talk) 15:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

title: Talk:Intolerance


text:
Gunderic

Gunderic (Gundericus; 379–428), King of Hasding Vandals (407-418), then King of Vandals and Alans (418–428), led the Hasding Vandals, a Germanic tribe originally residing near the Oder River, to take part in the barbarian invasions of the Western Roman Empire in the fifth century.

History
He was a son of King Godigisel, the Hasdingi's Vandal king when his people breached the Rhine river frontier of the Empire on the last day of 406. During that year, the Vandals had become heavily involved in a war with the Franks, who were already settled as allies of the Romans, and who attempted to keep the Vandals out. Godigisel was killed in the fighting and Gunderic succeeded him.

Gunderic and his people ultimately crossed the Pyrenees into the Iberian Peninsula in October 409. With the Hasdingi portion of the Vandals he established the Kingdom in the Roman province of Gallaecia (north-western Iberia). They were driven out by the Visigoths in 418 on the orders of the Romans (the Visigoths were recalled and settled as a reward for their service in Aquitania). In 418 Attaces, the king of the Alans, fell in battle against the Visigoths, who at the time were allies of Rome, in Hispania, and most of the surviving Alans appealed to Gunderic who accepted their request and thus became King of the Vandals and Alans. In 420 Comes Hispaniarum attacked the Vandals who had gone to war with the Sueves in Galicia where the tribes were confined after the Visigoths had severely defeated them in 418. The imperial vicar (head of a diocese) defeated Maximus, son of earlier usurper Gerontius (409), in 420–421, but it resulted in the Vandals moving south to Baetica. Conflicts with the Suebi drove him into Baetica in the south of Hispania, where he joined the surviving Silingi portion of the Vandals. The Vandals moved south to Baetica in 420–1. They defeated a Roman army, led by magister militum Castinus, outside the walls of Cordoba in 422. The Vandals attacked Mauretania Tingitana, the Balearics, and sacked Cartagena and Seville in 425. They did not remain in these cities. Gunderic re-took the city in 428. The Vandals departed Spain in 429 and for 10 years Roman Spain was intact except for Galicia under the control of the Sueves. Hydatius writes that in 428 Gunderic laid "hands on the church of that very city, by the will of God he was seized by a demon and died." It is unclear how Gunderic died, however it is theorized that Hydatius' writing was in reference to Gunderic's attempt to convert a Catholic church to an Arian church. The attempt was short-lived: not long after his attempt to seize the church in Hispalis, he unexpectedly died. After Gunderic died early in 428, the Vandals elected his half-brother Genseric as his successor, and Genseric left Iberia to the Visigoths in favor of invading Roman Africa.

title: Gunderic


text:
TLS

TLS may refer to:

Computing

 * Transport Layer Security, a cryptographic protocol for secure computer network communication
 * Thread level speculation, an optimisation on multiprocessor CPUs
 * Thread-local storage, a mechanism for allocating variables in computer science
 * Transparent LAN Service, a transparent data link connecting remote Ethernet networks

Media

 * Theaterlexikon der Schweiz, an encyclopedia about theatre in Switzerland
 * The Times Literary Supplement, a British weekly literary review
 * Town Life Stuff, one of The Sims 3 Stuff packs

Organisations

 * Telstra (ASX code), an Australian telecommunications and media company
 * Trans Link Systems B.V., a company delivering the OV-chipkaart system to public-transport operators in the Netherlands.
 * Transmitter Location Systems, a US satellite radio interference geolocation company

Education

 * The Lindsey School, a secondary school in Cleethorpes, North East Lincolnshire, England
 * Tallinn Law School, in Estonia
 * Torrey Life Science, a biology organization of the University of Connecticut, US
 * Trinity Law School, in Santa Ana, California, US
 * Trinity Lutheran School (disambiguation), several schools in the US
 * Tulane University Law School, in New Orleans, Louisiana, US

Science, medicine and technology

 * Thüringer Landessternwarte Tautenburg, the Karl Schwarzschild Observatory, in Tautenburg, Thuringia, Germany
 * Terrestrial laser scanning, a 3D laser scanning method
 * Total least squares, a statistical analysis
 * Translesion synthesis, a form of DNA repair
 * Transponder landing system, an airplane landing system
 * Tumor lysis syndrome, a group of metabolic complications that can occur after treatment of cancer
 * Tunable laser spectrometer, an instrument in the Mars rover suite Sample Analysis at Mars
 * Two-level system, a quantum system

Transport

 * Thorpe-le-Soken railway station, Tendring, England (National Rail station code)
 * Toulouse–Blagnac Airport (IATA code)

Other uses

 * East Timor (IOC code)

title: TLS


text:
Muggle

In J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter series, a Muggle is a person who lacks any sort of magical ability and was not born in a magical family. Muggles can also be described as people who do not have any magical blood inside them. It differs from the term Squib, which refers to a person with one or more magical parents yet without any magical power or ability, and from the term Muggle-born (or the derogatory and offensive term mudblood, which is used to imply the supposed impurity of Muggle blood), which refers to a person with magical abilities but with non-magical parents. Equivalent terms used by the in-universe magic community of the USA include No-Maj and No-Majs (short for "no magic"); French equivalents are Non-Magiques and No-Majes. Other terms are Can't-Spells and Non-Wizards.

Usage in Harry Potter
The term Muggle is sometimes used in a pejorative manner in the novels. Since Muggle refers to a person who is a member of the non-magical community, Muggles are simply ordinary human beings without any magical abilities and almost always with no awareness of the existence of magic. Witches and wizards with non-magical parents are called Muggle-borns. There have also been some children known to have been born to one magical and one non-magical parent. People of this mixed parentage are called half-bloods; magical people with any Muggle ancestry on the one side or the other are half-bloods as well. The most prominent Muggle-born in the Harry Potter series is Hermione Granger, who was born to Muggles of undisclosed names. Witches and wizards with all-magical heritage are called pure bloods.

In the Harry Potter novels, Muggles are often portrayed as foolish, sometimes befuddled characters, who are completely oblivious to the wizarding world that exists in their midst. If, by unfortunate means, Muggles do happen to observe the working of magic, the Ministry of Magic sends Obliviators to cast Memory Charms upon them, causing them to forget the event.

Some Muggles are aware of the wizarding world. These include Muggle parents of magical children, such as Hermione Granger's parents, the Muggle Prime Minister (and predecessors), the Dursley family (Harry Potter's unsupportive non-magical and only living relatives), and the non-magical spouses of some witches and wizards.

Rowling has created the word "Muggle" from "mug", an English term for someone who is easily fooled.

Notable Muggles

 * The Dursleys, Harry's maternal relatives with whom he lived for sixteen years
 * The Muggle Prime Minister
 * Frank Bryce, the Riddle family gardener
 * Tom Riddle Senior, Tom Riddle Jr.'s father
 * Thomas Riddle, Tom Riddle Sr.'s father and T. M. Riddle's grandfather
 * Mary Riddle, Thomas Riddle's wife
 * Tobias Snape, Severus Snape's father
 * Jacob Kowalski, Newt Scamander's No-Maj friend
 * Mary Lou Barebone, leader of the New Salem Philanthropic Society (or the "Second Salemers")

Other usages
The word muggle, or muggles, is now used in various contexts in which its meaning is similar to the sense in which it appears in the Harry Potter book series. Generally speaking, it is used by members of a group to describe those outside the group, comparable to civilian as used by military personnel. Whereas in the books muggle is consistently capitalized, in other uses it is often predominantly lowercase.

 * According to the BBC quiz show QI, in the episode "Hocus Pocus", muggle was a 1930s jazz slang word for someone who uses cannabis. "Muggles" is the title of a 1928 recording by Louis Armstrong and His Orchestra.
 * A muggle is, according to Abbott Walter Bower, the author of the Scotichronicon, "an Englishman's tail". In Alistair Moffat's book A History of the Borders from Early Times, it is stated that there was a widely held 13th-century belief amongst Scots that Englishmen had tails.
 * Ernest Bramah referred to "the artful Muggles" in a detective story published decades before the Potter books ("The Ghost at Massingham Mansions", in The Eyes of Max Carrados, Doran, New York, 1924).
 * Muggles is the name of a female character in the children's book The Gammage Cup by Carol Kendall published in 1959 by Harcourt, Brace & World.
 * Published in 1982, Roald Dahl's character the Big Friendly Giant uses the word "Muggled" while describing a good dream to the other main character, Sophie - “And the whole school is then cheering like mad and shouting bravo well done, and, for ever after that, even when you is getting your sums all gungswizzled and muggled up, Mr. Figgins is always giving you ten out of ten and writing Good Work Sophie in your exercise book.” – The BFG. Roald Dahl also names a family of monkeys "The Muggle-Wumps" in The Twits and other works.
 * Muggle was added to the Oxford English Dictionary in 2003, where it is said to refer to a person who is lacking a skill.
 * Muggle is used in informal English by members of small, specialised groups, usually those that consider their activities to either be analogous to or directly involve magic (such as within hacker culture; and pagans, magicians, Neopagans and Wiccans) to refer to those outside the group.
 * Muggle (or geomuggle) is used by geocachers to refer to those not involved in or aware of the sport of geocaching. A cache that has been tampered with by non-participants is said to be plundered or muggled.

Trademark lawsuit
Nancy Stouffer, author of The Legend of Rah and the Muggles (1984) accused Rowling of a trademark violation for the use of the term "muggles", as well as copyright violations for some similarities to her book. Rowling and Scholastic, her publisher, sued for declaratory judgment and won on a summary judgment motion, based on a lack of likelihood of confusion.

title: Muggle


text:
Talk:Muggle

Dictonary definition?
Excellent first article, Joe. Keep it up!

And, no, it's not too close to a dictionary definition. User:Ed Poor

Suit
When you mention that someone "was sued", please also mention the outcome of the suit. Was it dismissed as frivious by the judge? Settled out of court? Or what?

Anyone can sue. The question is whether their suit has merit in the eyes of the court (or jury). User:Ed Poor

Mudblood
I am reliably informed by someone who has actually read the books that the term "mudblood" can be applied to one whose parents are both muggles (e.g. Hermione Granger), and not just one who is of "mixed" parentage. Can someone who has read the books confirm this and correct the article? Thanks. -- Oliver Pereira 15:41 Nov 15, 2002 (UTC)

I've only ever seen Muggle-borns having been insaulted with that term. Keyblade Mage 05:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC) Keyblade Mage

Muggle predates Harry Potter
Muggle added to OED in 1993? Potter books printed starting 1997? Something seems wrong. Everyking 06:47, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

The term existed long before the Harry Potter books, but it's use in the books is likely the main reason why it's increased in use lately. This should be noted in the article, but I don't know it's true origin. OED doesn't either, just that it was introduced to English in 1205. Sun-Herald article on "muggle" lawsuit As the about link shows, it seems no one can claim rights to the term "muggle". Jobarts-Talk 05:10, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Muggle was also used to mean Marijuana in the american south in the early part of the 20th century. I'm tempted to add that fact to this page, but I suspect large numbers of kids go to this page, and I don't know how appropriate it is to talk about illegal narcotics on a page with a large number of kid-traffic.  No one can say if Rawlings was aware that "her" word predated her, and was used by people such as Louis Armstrong. Mainstreetmark 16:08, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * From the external link:
 * Besides dismissing her claims against Rowling, Schwartz was ordered to pay a $50,000 fine.
 * A tough justice system you've got there, when the judge is ordered to pay a fine to the defendant. And isn't Allen a male name anyway?   — J I P | Talk 10:19, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Schwartz (the judge) fined Stouffer (the defendant) $50,000 saying she "perpetuated a fraud" by doctoring documents submitted as evidence. I believe that fine went to the court not Rowling, Scholastic, and Time Warner (the claimants), although the articles I've read are not clear on that.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.143.60.37 (talk) 22:26, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

 * I think you should put the Marajuana bit in. Wikipedia is not censored. Leemorrison 21:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Klingon?
Pooto remember Harry Potter ever having been translated to Klingon. What's the entry for Klingon doing in the article then? — J I P | Talk 10:11, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

[[Media:kmv .com,]

It seems there has been severe vandilization of this article. I'll revert it. Lord of Light 13:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Bewitched
I saw an episode of the American tv show "Bewitched" and Samantha's mother Endora refers to some one as a "muggle". This was way before Harry Potter.
 * Please, if you remember, include a description of the episode so that someone with the DVDs can find the reference and add it to this article. Val42 04:16, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The episode is called "Three Wishes" and it's season 3, episode 2.

"Three Wishes" was episode 22, and does not contain that word. Endora clearly says "mortal" several times, but not "muggle".Klugerama (talk) 09:10, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm watching the episode on Antenna TV as I type this. It is:

"To Trick-or-Treat or Not to Trick-or-Treat" S06, E07 (First Aired: Oct. 30, 1969) Endora objects to Samantha's Halloween work for UNICEF. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.143.60.37 (talk) 05:14, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Muggles and ghosts
In the article you say that muggles can't see ghosts. All the students at Hogwarts can see the ghosts. Hermione talks to them. Muggles can't see Dementors.20.132.64.140 01:21, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

None of the students at Hogwarts are muggles, and several other students also talk to the ghosts. Am I missing something? Faithlessthewonderboy 23:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Witches and wizards (hogwarts students, for one) can see both dementors and ghosts, but it is not known if any other member of the magical community (E.G., goblins, elvs, hags, vampires, even squibs, ect.) can see them. It is known that muggles cannot see dementors, but it has never been stated, or even implied whether or not muggles can see ghosts or not. Keyblade Mage 05:20, 14 August 2007 (UTC) Keyblade Mage

Untermensch
Somebody edited out the term "human" in this article and replaced it with "untermensch," a Nazi racial term referring to "sub-humans." I think it's clear that in her books, J.K. Rowling is trying to get her readers to understand and identify with victims of racism, since, by definition, anybody reading the book is a "muggle."

Nonetheless, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it is not a forum for debate. See WP:NOT. Replacing the term "human" with "untermensch" turns a factually-based article into a commentary on the term "muggle" itself, which is not appropriate.--Mcattell 15:18, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Capitalization?
I don't have a Harry Potter book handy so I can't check myself. Should Muggle really be capitalized when it isn't the first word in a sentence? I see how it could be, but I also see how it could not, so can someone please check? We should probably do whatever Rowling does, in this and other HP-related articles. User: (talk • contribs • count) 19:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

In the middle of a sentince, capitalize it. Reference: DH, ch. Twenty Eight: The Missing mirror, page number 564, line 6 through line 7, sentince spoken by Aberforth Dumbeldore: "When my sister was six years old, she was attacked, set upon, by three Muggle boys." Then he goes on his story, but there's a reference for you. Keyblade Mage 05:31, 14 August 2007 (UTC)Keyblade Mage

Personal opinion
Hmm. I thought it was from mug-magic, le-less = short for magicless (people). User:Bojan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.111.197.54 (talk) 12:33, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Disambiguation
I tend to disagree with the recent incorporation of material from the disambiguation into this page. I think the link to the disambiguation at the top was a preferable solution. I think details of the usage of the term outside of Harry Potter is tangential to this article, while I don't see why someone looking to find out what Louis Armstrong was talking about needs to read through several screens of Harry Potter material before finding out Armstrong wasn't talking about anything to do with Harry Potter at all. Other thoughts? -- Infrogmation 13:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
 * My attention was directed to this issue by a comment made by Beardo on the Talk:Muggle (disambiguation) page. I agree that this is the type of thing that a disambiguation page is normally for.  However, these prior and subsequent usages of "muggle" provides context to the usage in the Harry Potter novels.  This shows that the term wasn't originated by J.K. Rowling, though I personally think that she developed it independently.  Most of the subsequent usages are derived from the Harry Potter context.  Splitting this context from the usage in Harry Potter serves to diminish the relevance of both parts.  The disambiguation page then becomes redundant.  That is why I changed Muggle (disambiguation) to a redirect. — Val42 20:31, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * If this article is going to cover all meanings of "Muggle" and "Muggles" rather than being Harry Potter specific, it certainly needs to be rewritten, as it starts out making the statement that it is a Harry Potter related term. Also, there are a few paragraphs discussing the Harry Potter universe use-- IMO enough for a seperate article-- rather than just a sentence or two as would more usually be found in a disambiguation. -- Infrogmation 21:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You've made your case. I've made my case.  Let's see what others think. — Val42 03:32, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

the etymological definition?
Who can tell me where this word come from? And as the article imply, the word Muggle was used prior to the Harry Potter series, then where? Dreamback1116 (talk) 03:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * mugglewumps is used in Scotland (where Rowling is from) to refer to an idiot. It is not hard to see where Rowling may have got the word muggle to refer to someone lacking talents the main characters have. My Dad has used this word since his childhood in the 50s but I unfortunately do not have written evidence for this. THough it can be noted that Rhold Dhal used muggle wump(s) as a monkey character (and his family) in several of his books - these obviousuly predate the Rowling books and as they are also childrens books it is likely she would have read them.

According to Merriam-Webster on british English mug may mean a gullible, foolish person. The `-le` is a noun-forming ending. Also their website had published thoughts on possible muggle etymology

Rowling wasn't the first to coin the word muggle. There is an earlier muggle that is no longer used: it was a synonym of sweetheart.

Oh the parting of vs twaine Hath causde me mickle paine, and I shall nere be married Vntill I see my muggle againe. —Thomas Middleton, Your Fiue Gallants As It Hath Beene Often In Action At The Black-Friers, 1608

We're not quite sure of where this muggle originated, because it was fairly informal—one 1622 treatise on domestic duties warns husbands against calling their wives by "names more befitting beasts then wiues, as Cole, Browne, Muggle, &c."—and it not particularly long-lived. It had passed out of use by the 1700s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.237.186.250 (talk) 18:35, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I come with this proposal to merge this article into Harry Potter universe as because this one is really short: it lacks of deep, encyclopedic analysis, of a large amount of reliable sources, and has lots of information from the Blood Purity section (i.e. an explanation of what is a half-blood or a muggle-born). All information concerning Muggles in HP can be merged into a section in the HP universe article, and the later usages can be moved to the disambiguation page. Thoughts? -- LøЯd  ۞pεth  00:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm mildly opposed to this merge, as this is, IMHO, one of those examples where a term from a work of fiction has entered the common lexicon (along the lines of d'oh!, though obviously not to that extent). faithless   (speak)  03:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Addressing the reader
The second sentence: If you are reading this page, then you are probably a muggle, and for that, I am very sorry for your misfortune.

Too lazy to fix it or dig through the guidelines right now, but isn't addressing the reader like this against the guidelines?

--Ben Atkin (talk) 01:15, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Obama?
Where does it state that Barack Obama is a Muggle? What has it got to do with Harry Potter anyway? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.4.49.101 (talk) 15:25, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia. Unless you have a reference from an embearded, new-England professor stating Obama is not a muggle, then we assume he is a muggle. 24.51.217.118 (talk) 07:58, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

William Shakespeare & old London
I know I've seen the word muggle at least once as a street name on an old map showing the location of the Globe Theater as it was in 1599, but I can't remember the source of the map. The first time I saw it I was in college, the second time I was watching a documentary on Shakespeare. 76.16.169.224 (talk) 02:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Definition of Muggles
According to the author, Terry Teachout in "Pops," a biography about Louis Armstrong, (p. 121) "the word muggles was one of the many synonyms for marijuana used by jazz musicians in the twenties."

In 1931, a song recorded by Armstrong of the same name, marijuana (muggles) was not illegal then. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.102.152.243 (talk) 18:35, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

 * This may be true, but it is not relevant to this article, which is about J. K. Rowling's kind of muggle. Maproom (talk) 21:18, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Muggle. 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/20061117103241/http://www.newwitch.com/archives/05/read/muggle.html to http://www.newwitch.com/archives/05/read/muggle.html

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) 14:55, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

I added
Category:Harry Potter characters. I think that appropriate on the grounds that in HP, “Muggle” refers to a specific class of character. Okay?--Solomonfromfinland (talk) 01:54, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Muggle


text:
Socrates of Constantinople

Socrates of Constantinople (c. 380 – after 439), also known as Socrates Scholasticus (Σωκράτης ὁ Σχολαστικός ), was a 5th-century Greek Christian church historian, a contemporary of Sozomen and Theodoret.

He is the author of a Historia Ecclesiastica ("Church History", Ἐκκλησιαστική Ἱστορία) which covers the history of late ancient Christianity during the years 305 to 439.

Life
He was born in Constantinople. Even in ancient times, nothing seems to have been known of his life except what can be gathered from notices in his Historia Ecclesiastica, which departed from its ostensible model, Eusebius of Caesarea, in emphasizing the place of the emperor in church affairs and in giving secular as well as church history.

Socrates' teachers, noted in his prefaces, were the grammarians Helladius and Ammonius, who came to Constantinople from Alexandria, where in 391 they had been involved in a violent revolt that culminated in the destruction of the Serapeum of Alexandria.

It is not proved that Socrates of Constantinople later profited from the teachings of the sophist Troilus. No certainty exists as to Socrates' precise vocation, though it may be inferred from his work that he was a layman.

In later years, he traveled and visited, among other places, Paphlagonia and Cyprus.

The Historia Ecclesiastica
The history covers the years 305 to 439, and experts believe it was finished in 439 or soon thereafter, and certainly during the lifetime of Emperor Theodosius II, i.e., before 450. The purpose of the history is to continue the work of Eusebius of Caesarea (1.1). It relates in simple Greek language what the Church experienced from the days of Constantine to the writer's time. Ecclesiastical dissensions occupy the foreground, for when the Church is at peace, there is nothing for the church historian to relate (7.48.7). In the preface to Book 5, Socrates defends dealing with Arianism and with political events in addition to writing about the church.

Socrates' account is in many respects well-balanced. He is careful not to use hyperbolic titles when referring to prominent personalities in the church and the government and he even criticizes Eusebius for his excessive praises to Emperor Constantine the Great in his Vita Constantini.

The Historia Ecclesiastica is one of the few sources of information about Hypatia, the female mathematician and philosopher of Alexandria, who was brutally murdered by a mob, allegedly by order of Patriarch Cyril of Alexandria. Socrates presents Hypatia's murder as entirely politically motivated and makes no mention of any role that Hypatia's neoplatonism might have played in her death, arguing instead that she was killed for supporting local prefect Orestes in his political struggle against Cyril. Socrates unequivocally condemns the actions of the mob, declaring, "Surely nothing can be farther from the spirit of Christianity than the allowance of massacres, fights, and transactions of that sort."

Socrates is often assumed to have been a follower of Novatianism, but this is based on the fact that he gives a lot of details about the Novatianists, and speaks of them in generous terms, as he does of Arians and other groups. He speaks of himself as belonging to the church.

Socrates asserts that he owed the impulse to write his work to a certain Theodorus, who is alluded to in the proemium to the second book as "a holy man of God" and seems therefore to have been a monk or one of the higher clergy. The contemporary historians Sozomen and Theodoret were combined with Socrates in a sixth-century compilation, which has obscured their differences until recently, when their individual portrayals of the series of Christian emperors were distinguished one from another and contrasted by Hartmut Leppin, Von Constantin dem Großen zu Theodosius II (Göttingen 1996).

Editions and translations
The Historia Ecclesiastica was first edited in Greek by Robert Estienne, on the basis of Codex Regius 1443 (Paris, 1544); a translation into Latin by Johannes Christophorson (1612) is important for its variant readings. The fundamental early modern edition, however, was produced by Henricus Valesius (Henri Valois) (Paris, 1668), who used the Codex Regius, a Codex Vaticanus, and a Codex Florentinus, and also employed the indirect tradition of Theodorus Lector (Codex Leonis Alladi).

The text was edited in Patrologia Graeca vol. 67 (online at documentacatholicaomnia.eu). The new critical edition of the text is edited by G. C. Hansen, and published in the series Die Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller (Berlin:Akademie Verlag) 1995. An English translation by A. C. Zenos was published in  Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Second Series, Vol. 2. Edited by Philip Schaff and Henry Wallace. (Buffalo, NY: Christian Literature Publishing Co., 1890.) (online editions: newadvent.org ccel.orgmunseys.com . More recently (2004-2007), Socrates' History has been published in four bilingual (Greek/Latin and French) volumes by Pierre Maraval in the Sources Chrétiennes collection.

title: Socrates of Constantinople


text:
User:Matusz

I have turned my attention to pl: mainly.

This is what Piotr Matuszewski have long chosen as his nickname.

welcome another wikipedian! There are seven Poles here now it seems :)) szopen

For us non-Poles, how do you pronounce Matusz?

I guess pronounciation would be something like matush. Matusz 16:53, 18 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I would suggest 'mah-toosh' :-) 217.98.8.52 20:15, 9 Dec 2003 (UTC)

da:Bruger:Matusz pl:Wikipedysta:Matusz

title: User:Matusz