text:
Codex Vaticanus

The Codex Vaticanus (The Vatican, Bibl. Vat., Vat. gr. 1209), designated by siglum B or 03 (in the Gregory-Aland numbering of New Testament manuscripts), δ 1 (in the von Soden numbering of New Testament manuscripts), is a Christian manuscript of a Greek Bible, containing the majority of the Greek Old Testament and the majority of the Greek New Testament. It is one of the four great uncial codices. Along with Codex Alexandrinus and Codex Sinaiticus, it is one of the earliest and most complete manuscripts of the Bible. Using the study of comparative writing styles (palaeography), it has been dated to the 4th century.

The manuscript became known to Western scholars as a result of correspondence between textual critic Desiderius Erasmus Roterodamus (known usually as Erasmus) and the prefects of the Vatican Library. Portions of the codex were collated by several scholars, but numerous errors were made during this process. The codex's relationship to the Latin Vulgate and the value Jerome placed on it is unclear. In the 19th century transcriptions of the full codex were completed. It was at that point that scholars became more familiar with the text and how it differed from the more common Textus Receptus (a critical edition of the Greek New Testament based on earlier editions by Erasmus).

Most current scholars consider Codex Vaticanus to be one of the most important Greek witnesses to the Greek text of the New Testament, followed by Codex Sinaiticus. Until the discovery by Tischendorf of Sinaiticus, Vaticanus was considered to be unrivalled. It was extensively used by textual critics Brooke F. Westcott and Fenton J. A. Hort in their edition of The New Testament in the Original Greek in 1881. The most widely sold editions of the Greek New Testament are largely based on the text of the Codex Vaticanus. Codex Vaticanus "is rightly considered to be the oldest extant copy of the Bible."

The codex is named after its place of conservation in the Vatican Library, where it has been kept since at least the 15th century.

Description
The manuscript is a codex (precursor to the modern book) in quarto volume, written on 759 leaves of fine and thin vellum (sized $$, although originally bigger), in uncial letters, arranged in quires of five sheets or ten leaves each, similar to Codex Marchalianus or Codex Rossanensis; but unlike Codex Sinaiticus which has an arrangement of four or three sheets. The number of the quires is often found in the margin. Originally it must have been composed of 830 parchment leaves, but it appears that 71 leaves have been lost. The Old Testament currently consists of 617 sheets and the New Testament of 142 sheets. The codex is written in three columns per page, with 40–44 lines per column, and 16–18 letters per line. In the poetical books of the Old Testament (OT) there are only two columns to a page. There are 44 lines in a column in the Pentateuch (first five books of the OT), Joshua, Judges, Ruth, and 1 Kings 1:1–19:11; in 2 Chronicles 10:16–26:13 there are 40 lines in a column; and in the New Testament always 42. The manuscript is one of the very few New Testament manuscripts to be written with three columns per page. The other two Greek codices written in that way are Uncial 048 and Uncial 053.

The Greek lettering in the codex is written continuously in small and neat letters. All the letters are equally distant from each other; no word is separated from the other, with each line appearing to be one long word. Punctuation is rare (accents and breathings have been added by a later hand) except for some blank spaces, diaeresis on initial iotas and upsilons, abbreviations of the nomina sacra (abbreviations of certain words and names considered sacred in Christianity) and markings of OT citations. The first letter of a new chapter sometimes protrudes a little from the column. The OT citations were marked by an inverted comma or diplai (>). There are no enlarged initials; no stops or accents; no divisions into chapters or sections such as are found in later manuscripts.

The text of the Gospels is not divided according to the Ammonian Sections with references to the Eusebian Canons, but is divided into peculiar numbered sections: Matthew has 170, Mark 61, Luke 152, and John 80. This system is only found in two other manuscripts: Codex Zacynthius and Minuscule 579. There are two system divisions in the Acts and the Catholic Epistles which differ from the Euthalian Apparatus. In Acts, these sections are 36 (the same system as Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Amiatinus, and Codex Fuldensis) and according to the other system 69 sections. The chapters in the Pauline epistles are numbered continuously as the Epistles were regarded as comprising one book.

Text-type
In the Old Testament, the type of text varies, with a received text in Ezekiel and a rejected one in the Book of Isaiah. In Judges the text differs substantially from that of the majority of manuscripts, but agrees with the Old Latin, Sahidic version and Cyril of Alexandria. In Job, it has the additional 400 half-verses from Theodotion, which are not in the Old Latin and Sahidic versions. The text of the Old Testament was considered by critics, such as Hort and Cornill, to be substantially that which underlies Origen's Hexapla edition, completed by him at Caesarea and issued as an independent work (apart from the other versions with which Origen associated it) by Eusebius and Pamphilus.

In the New Testament, the Greek text of the codex is considered a representative of the Alexandrian text-type. It has been found to agree very closely with the text of Bodmer in the Gospels of Luke and John. has been dated to the beginning of the 3rd century, and hence is at least 100 years older than the Codex Vaticanus itself. This is purported to demonstrate (by recourse to a postulated earlier exemplar from which both and B descend) that Vaticanus accurately reproduces an earlier text from these two biblical books, which reinforces the reputation the codex held amongst Biblical scholars. It also strongly suggests that it may have been copied in Egypt. In the Pauline epistles there is a distinctly Western element. Textual critic Kurt Aland placed it in Category I of his New Testament manuscript classification system. Category 1 manuscripts are described as "of a very special quality, i.e., manuscripts with a very high proportion of the early text, presumably the original text, which has not been preserved in its purity in any one manuscript."

Contents
The codex originally contained a virtually complete copy of the Greek Old Testament (known as the Septuagint / LXX), lacking only 1-4 Maccabees and the Prayer of Manasseh. The original 20 leaves containing Genesis 1:1–46:28a (31 leaves) and Psalm 105:27–137:6b have been lost. These were replaced by pages transcribed by a later hand in the 15th century. 2 Kings 2:5–7, 10-13 are also lost due to a tear to one of the pages. The order of the Old Testament books in the codex is as follows: Genesis to 2 Chronicles as normal; 1 Esdras; 2 Esdras (Ezra–Nehemiah); the Psalms; Proverbs; Ecclesiastes; Song of Songs; Job; Wisdom; Ecclesiasticus; Esther; Judith; Tobit; the minor prophets from Hosea to Malachi (but in the order: Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi); Isaiah; Jeremiah; Baruch; Lamentations and the Epistle of Jeremiah; Ezekiel and Daniel. This order differs from that followed in Codex Alexandrinus.

The extant New Testament portion contains the Gospels, Acts, the general epistles, the Pauline epistles, and the Epistle to the Hebrews (up to Hebrews 9:14, καθα[ριει); it is lacking 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, and Revelation. The missing part of Hebrews and Revelation were supplemented by a 15th-century minuscule hand (folios 760–768), and are catalogued separately as minuscule 1957. It is possible some apocryphal books from the New Testament were included at the end (as in codices Sinaiticus and Alexandrinus). It is also possible that Revelation was not included.

Non-included verses
The text of the New Testament lacks several passages:
 * Matthew 12:47
 * Matthew 16:2b–3
 * Mark 16:9–20 — The Book of Mark ends with verse 16:8.
 * (Christ's agony at Gethsemane)
 * (Pericope Adulterae)
 * Acts 8:37
 * (Pericope Adulterae)
 * Acts 8:37

 * Phrases not in Vaticanus but in later manuscripts include
 * Matthew 5:44
 * εὐλογεῖτε τοὺς καταρωμένους ὑμᾶς, καλῶς ποιεῖτε τοῖς μισοῦσιν ὑμᾶς (bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you)
 * omit - B ƒ$1$ k sy$s, c$ sa bo$pt$ mae
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts

 * Matthew 10:37
 * καὶ ὁ φιλῶν υἱὸν ἢ θυγατέρα ὑπὲρ ἐμὲ οὐκ ἔστιν μου ἄξιος (and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me)
 * omit - B* D
 * incl. - B$c$ Majority of manuscripts

 * ἢ τὴν μητέρα (αὐτοῦ) (or (his) mother)
 * omit - B D a e sy$c$ sa
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts

 * καὶ τὸ βάπτισμα ὂ ἐγὼ βαπτίζομαι βαπτισθήσεσθε (and be baptised with the baptism that I am baptised with)
 * omit - B D L Z Θ 085 ƒ$1$ ƒ$13$ it sy$s$ sy$c$ sa
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts

 * καὶ προσκολληθήσεται πρὸς τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ (and be joined to his wife)
 * omit - Sinaiticus Ψ 892 ℓ 48 syr$s$ go
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts

 * μη αποστερησης
 * omit - B* K W Δ Ψ ƒ$1$ ƒ$13$ 28 579 700 1010 1079 1242 1546 2148 ℓ 10 ℓ 950 ℓ 1642 ℓ 1761 sy$s$ arm geo
 * incl. - B$2$ Majority of manuscripts
 * incl. - B$1$ Majority of manuscripts

 * και ειπεν, Ουκ οιδατε ποιου πνευματος εστε υμεις; ο γαρ υιος του ανθρωπου ουκ ηλθεν ψυχας ανθρωπων απολεσαι αλλα σωσαι (and He said: "You do not know what manner of spirit you are of; for the Son of man came not to destroy men's lives but to save them)
 * omit - B C L Θ Ξ 33 700 892 1241 syr bo
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts

 * αλλα ρυσαι ημας απο του πονηρου (but deliver us from evil)
 * omit - B  L ƒ$s$ 700 vg sy$a$ sa bo arm geo
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts

 * ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς ἔλεγεν· Πάτερ, ἄφες αὐτοῖς· οὐ γὰρ οἴδασιν τί ποιοῦσιν (And Jesus said: Father forgive them, they know not what they do.)
 * omit - B $s$ D* W Θ 0124 1241 a d syr$mss$ sa bo
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts

Additions
Gospel of
 * ἄλλος δὲ λαβὼν λόγχην ἒνυξεν αὐτοῦ τὴν πλευράν, καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ὖδωρ καὶ αἳμα (and another took a spear, piercing His side, and out came water and blood - see )
 * incl. - B C L Γ 1010 1293 vg$mss$
 * omit - Majority of manuscripts

Some notable readings

 * υἱὸς Μανασση (son of Manasse) - B
 * υἱοῦ Μωυσῆ (son of Moses) - A
 * υἱοῦ Μωυσῆ (son of Moses) - A

 * Matthew 5:22
 * εικη (without cause)
 * omit - B  vg$13$ eth
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts

 * τη τριημερα (the third day) - B (singular reading)
 * τη τριτη ημερα (the third day) - Majority of manuscripts
 * τη τριτη ημερα (the third day) - Majority of manuscripts

 * ὁ ὕστερος (the last) - B (singular reading)
 * ὁ ἔσχατος (the last) - D Θ ƒ$s$ 700 it
 * ὁ πρῶτος (the first) - Majority of manuscripts
 * ὁ πρῶτος (the first) - Majority of manuscripts

 * ερημος (desert)
 * omit - B L ff2 sy$s, h, pal$ sa bo
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts
 * incl. - Majority of manuscripts

 * καὶ ἀνοίξας τὸ βιβλίον (and opened the book) - B A L W Ξ 33 892 1195 1241 ℓ 547 syr$c$ sa bo
 * καὶ ἀναπτύξας τὸ βιβλίον (and unrolled the book) - D$1$ K Δ Θ Π Ψ ƒ$13$ ƒ$2$ 28 565 700 1009 1010 Majority of manuscripts
 * καὶ ἀναπτύξας τὸ βιβλίον (and unrolled the book) - D$(vid)$ K Δ Θ Π Ψ ƒ$1$ ƒ$h(mg)$ 28 565 700 1009 1010 Majority of manuscripts

 * οὐκ ἔξεστιν (not lawful) - B Codex Nitriensis 700 lat sa bo arm geo
 * οὐκ ἔξεστιν ποιεῖν (not lawful to do) - Majority of manuscripts
 * οὐκ ἔξεστιν ποιεῖν (not lawful to do) - Majority of manuscripts

 * ολιγων δε χρεια εστιν η ενος (few things are needful, or only one) - B (singular reading; but see below)
 * ολιγων δε εστιν χρεια η ενος (few things are needful, or only one) -  C$1$ L 070$13$ ƒ$h(mg)$ 33 sy$1$ bo
 * ενος δε εστιν χρεια (one thing is needful) -  Majority of manuscripts
 * ενος δε εστιν χρεια (one thing is needful) -  Majority of manuscripts

 * δοξασον μου το ονομα (glorify my name) - B (singular reading)
 * δοξασον σου τον υιον (glorify Your Son)- L X ƒ$3$ ƒ$1$ 33 1241 vg sy$13$ bo
 * δοξασον σου το ονομα (glorify Your name) - Majority of manuscripts
 * δοξασον σου το ονομα (glorify Your name) - Majority of manuscripts

 * πατρος (the Father) - B $2$ C* D L ℓ 844 bo
 * θεου (God) - C$p$ W Ψ ƒ$(vid)$ ƒ$mss$ Majority of manuscripts
 * θεου (God) - C$h$ W Ψ ƒ$gr$ ƒ$2$ Majority of manuscripts

 * καυδα (name of island) - B $3$ 1175 lat vg sy$1$
 * Κλαυδα (name of island) - * A$d, g$ 33 81 614 945 1505 1739 vg$72$ sy$75$
 * Κλαυδην (name of island) - Majority of manuscripts
 * Κλαυδην (name of island) - Majority of manuscripts

 * δωροφορια - B D G⇭⇭⇭
 * διακονια - Majority of manuscripts
 * διακονια - Majority of manuscripts

 * αμαρτιαις (sins) - B (singular reading)
 * επιθυμιαις (desires) - Majority of manuscripts
 * επιθυμιαις (desires) - Majority of manuscripts

 * φανερων (revealing) - B (singular reading)
 * φερων (upholding) - Majority of manuscripts
 * φερων (upholding) - Majority of manuscripts

Provenance
The provenance and early history of the codex are uncertain; Rome (Hort), southern Italy, Alexandria (Kenyon,), and Caesarea (T. C. Skeat; Burkitt ) have been suggested as possible origins. Hort based his argument for Rome mainly on certain spellings of proper names, such as Ισακ and Ιστραηλ, which show a Western or Latin influence. A second argument was the chapter division in Acts, similar to the ones in Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, is not found in any other Greek manuscript, but is present in several manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate. Robinson cautiously suggests however, the system of chapter divisions was introduced into the Vulgate by Jerome himself, due to his studies at Caesarea. Hort also postulated the codex was copied from a manuscript whose line length was 12–14 letters per line, as when the codex's scribe made large omissions, they were typically 12–14 letters long.

Kenyon suggested the manuscript originated in Alexandria: "It is noteworthy that the section numeration of the Pauline Epistles in B shows that it was copied from a manuscript in which the Epistle to the Hebrews was placed between Galatians and Ephesians — an arrangement which elsewhere occurs only in the Sahidic version." Kenyon also suggested the order of the Pauline epistles indicates a connection with Egypt, and as in Codex Alexandrinus, the titles of some of the books contain letters of a distinctively Coptic character, particularly the Coptic mu (which was also frequently seen at the ends of lines where space has to be economized). According to Metzger, "the similarity of its text in significant portions of both Testaments with the Coptic versions and with Greek papyri, and the style of writing (notably the Coptic forms used in some of the titles) point rather to Egypt and Alexandria".

It has been postulated the codex was at one time in the possession of Cardinal Bessarion, because the minuscule supplement has a text similar to one of Bessarion's manuscripts. T. C. Skeat believed Bessarion's mentor, the patriarchal notary in Constantinople John Chortasmenos, had the book brought to Rome from Constantinople around the time of the fall of the Byzantine Empire. Paul Canart argued the decorative initials added to the manuscript in the Middle Ages are reminiscent of Constantinopolitan decoration found in the 10th century, but the poor execution gives the impression they were added in the 11th or 12th century, and likely not before the 12th century in light of the way they appear in connection with notes in a minuscule hand at the beginning of the book of Daniel. T. C. Skeat first argued that Codex Vaticanus was among the 50 Bibles that the Emperor Constantine I ordered Eusebius of Caesarea to produce.

The codex is generally assigned to the middle of the fourth century and considered contemporary or slightly earlier than Codex Sinaiticus, which can be dated with a reasonable degree of confidence between the early fourth century and the early fifth century.

Scribes and correctors
According to Tischendorf the manuscript was written by three scribes (A, B, C), two of whom appear to have written the Old Testament and one the entire New Testament. Tischendorf's view was accepted by Frederic G. Kenyon, but contested by T. C. Skeat, who examined the codex more thoroughly. Skeat and other paleographers contested Tischendorf's theory of a third (C) scribe, instead asserting two scribes worked on the Old Testament (A and B) and one of them (B) wrote the New Testament.

Scribe A wrote:
 * Genesis – 1 Kings (pages 41–334)
 * Psalms – Tobias (pages 625–944)

Scribe B wrote:
 * 1 Kings – 2 Esdra (pages 335–624)
 * Hosea – Daniel (pages 945–1234)
 * New Testament.

Two correctors have been suggested as working on the manuscript, one (B⇭⇭⇭) was contemporary with the scribes, the other (B⇭⇭⇭) worked in about the 10th or 11th century. The theory of a first corrector, B⇭⇭⇭, proposed by Tischendorf was rejected by later scholars. According to Tischendorf, one of the scribes is identical to (and may have been) one of the scribes of Codex Sinaiticus (scribe D), but there is insufficient evidence for his assertion. Skeat agreed that the writing style is very similar to that of Codex Sinaiticus, but there is not enough evidence to accept the scribes were identical: "the identity of the scribal tradition stands beyond dispute".

The original writing was retraced by a later scribe (usually dated to the 10th or 11th century), and the beauty of the original script was spoiled. Accents, breathing marks, and punctuation were added by a later hand. There are no enlarged initials, no divisions into chapters or sections such as are found in later manuscripts, but a different system of division peculiar to this manuscript. There are plenty itacistic faults, especially the interchange of ει for ι and αι for ε. The exchange of ο for ω is less frequent.

The manuscript contains unusual small horizontally aligned double dots (so called "distigmai", formerly called "umlauts") in the column margins and are scattered throughout the New Testament. There are 795 of these clearly seen in the text, and perhaps another 40 that are undetermined. The date of these markings are disputed among scholars. Two such distigmai can be seen in the left margin of the first column (top image). Tischendorf reflected upon their meaning, but without any resolution. He pointed on several places where these distigmai were used: at the ending of the Gospel of Mark, 1 Thess 2:14; 5:28; Heb 4:16; 8:1. The meaning of these distigmai was recognized in 1995 by Philip Payne. Payne discovered the first distigme while studying the section 1 Cor 14.34–35 of the codex. He suggested that distigmai indicate lines where another textual variant was known to the person who wrote the umlauts. Therefore, the distigmai mark places of textual uncertainty. The same distigmai were observed in Codex Fuldensis, especially in the section containing 1 Cor 14:34–35. The distigme of two codices indicate a variant of the Western manuscripts, which placed 1 Cor 14:34–35 after 1 Cor 14:40 (manuscripts: Claromontanus, Augiensis, Boernerianus, 88, it⇭⇭⇭, and some manuscripts of Vulgate).

On page 1512, next to Hebrews 1:3, the text contains a marginal note, ''"Fool and knave, leave the old reading and do not change it!" – "ἀμαθέστατε καὶ κακέ, ἄφες τὸν παλαιόν, μὴ μεταποίει"'' which may suggest unauthorised correcting was a recognized problem in scriptoriums.

In the Vatican Library
The manuscript is believed to have been housed in Caesarea in the 6th century, together with Codex Sinaiticus, as they have the same unique division of chapters in Acts. It came to Italy, probably from Constantinople, after the Council of Florence (1438–1445).

The manuscript has been housed in the Vatican Library (founded by Pope Nicholas V in 1448) for as long as it has been known, possibly appearing in the library's earliest catalog of 1475 (with shelf number 1209), but definitely appearing in the 1481 catalog. In the catalog from 1481 it was described as a "Biblia in tribus columnis ex membranis in rubeo" (three-column vellum Bible).

Collations
In the 16th century, Western scholars became aware of the manuscript as a consequence of the correspondence between Erasmus and the prefects of the Vatican Library, successively Paulus Bombasius, and Juan Ginés de Sepúlveda. In 1521, Bombasius was consulted by Erasmus as to whether the Codex Vaticanus contained the Comma Johanneum, and Bombasius supplied a transcript of 1 John 4:1–3 and 1 John 5:7–11 to show that it did not. Sepúlveda in 1533 cross-checked all places where Erasmus's New Testament (the Textus Receptus) differed from the Vulgate, and supplied Erasmus with 365 readings where the Codex Vaticanus supported the latter, although the list of these 365 readings has been lost. Consequently, the Codex Vaticanus acquired the reputation of being an old Greek manuscript that agreed with the Vulgate rather than with the Textus Receptus. Not until much later would scholars realise it conformed to a text that differed from both the Vulgate and the Textus Receptus – a text that could also be found in other known early Greek manuscripts, such as the Codex Regius (L), housed in the French Royal Library (now Bibliothèque nationale de France).

Giulio Bartolocci, librarian of the Vatican, produced a collation in 1669 which was not published; it was never used until a copy of it was found in the Royal Library at Paris by Scholz in 1819. This collation was imperfect and revised in 1862. Another collation was made in 1720 for Bentley by Mico, then revised by Rulotta, which was not published until 1799. Bentley was stirred by Mill's claim of 30,000 variants in the New Testament and he wanted to reconstruct the text of the New Testament in its early form. He felt that among the manuscripts of the New Testament, Codex Alexandrinus was "the oldest and best in the world". Bentley understood the necessity to use manuscripts if he were to reconstruct an older form than that apparent in Codex Alexandrinus. He assumed that by supplementing this manuscript with readings from other Greek manuscripts, and from the Latin Vulgate, he could triangulate back to a single recension which he presumed existed at the time of the First Council of Nicaea. He therefore required a collation from Vaticanus. The text of the collation was irreconcilable with Codex Alexandrinus and he abandoned the project.

A further collation was made by scholar Andrew Birch, who, in 1798, in Copenhagen, edited some textual variants of the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles, in 1800 for the Book of Revelation, in 1801 for the Gospels. They were incomplete and included together with the textual variants from the other manuscripts. Many of them were false. Andrew Birch reproached Mill and Wettstein, that they falso citatur Vaticanus (cite Vaticanus incorrectly), and gave as an example Luke 2:38 – Ισραηλ [Israel] instead of Ιερουσαλημ [Jerusalem]. The reading Ισραηλ could be found in the codex 130, housed at the Vatican Library, under shelf number Vat. gr. 359.

Before the 19th century, no scholar was allowed to study or edit the Codex Vaticanus, and scholars did not ascribe any value to it; in fact, it was suspected to have been interpolated by the Latin textual tradition. John Mill wrote in his Prolegomena (1707): "in Occidentalium gratiam a Latino scriba exaratum" (written by a Latin scribe for the western world). He did not believe there was value to having a collation for the manuscript. Wettstein would have liked to know the readings of the codex, but not because he thought that they could have been of any help to him for difficult textual decisions. According to him, this codex had no authority whatsoever (sed ut vel hoc constaret, Codicem nullus esse auctoris). In 1751 Wettstein produced the first list of the New Testament manuscripts, Codex Vaticanus received symbol B (because of its age) and took second position on this list (Alexandrinus received A, Ephraemi – C, Bezae – D, etc.) until the discovery of Codex Sinaiticus (designated by א).

Griesbach produced a list of nine manuscripts which were to be assigned to the Alexandrian text: C, L, K, 1, 13, 33, 69, 106, and 118. Codex Vaticanus was not in this list. In the second (1796) edition of his Greek NT, Griesbach added Codex Vaticanus as a witness to the Alexandrian text in Mark, Luke, and John. He still believed the first half of Matthew represented the Western text-type.

Editions of text of the codex
In 1799, as a result of the Treaty of Tolentino, the manuscript was sent to Paris as a victory trophy for Napoleon, but in 1815 it was returned to the Vatican Library. During that time, German scholar Johann Leonhard Hug (1765–1846) saw it in Paris. Together with other worthy treasures of the Vatican, Hug examined it, but he did not perceive the need of a new and full collation.

Cardinal Angelo Mai prepared the first typographical facsimile edition between 1828 and 1838, which did not appear until 1857, three years after his death, and which was considered unsatisfactory. It was issued in 5 volumes (1–4 volumes for the Old Testament, 5 volume for the New Testament). All lacunae of the codex were supplemented. Lacunae in the Acts and Pauline epistles were supplemented from the codex Vaticanus 1761, the whole text of Revelation from Vaticanus 2066, and the text of Mark 16:8–20 from Vaticanus Palatinus 220. Verses not included by codex as Matthew 12:47; Mark 15:28; Luke 22:43–44; 23:17.34; John 5:3.4; 7:53–8:11; 1 Peter 5:3; 1 John 5:7 were supplemented from popular Greek printed editions. The number of errors was extraordinarily high, and also no attention was paid to distinguish readings of the first hand versus correctors. There was no detailed examination of the manuscript's characteristics. As a consequence, this edition was deemed inadequate for critical purposes. An improved edition was published in 1859, which became the source of Bultmann's 1860 NT.

In 1843 Tischendorf was permitted to make a facsimile of a few verses, in 1844 Eduard de Muralt saw it, and in 1845 S. P. Tregelles was allowed to observe several points which Muralt had overlooked. He often saw the codex, but "it was under such restrictions that it was impossible to do more than examine particular readings". "They would not let me open it without searching my pockets, and depriving me of pen, ink, and paper; and at the same time two prelati kept me in constant conversation in Latin, and if I looked at a passage too long, they would snatch the book out of my hand". Tregelles left Rome after five months without accomplishing his purpose. During a large part of the 19th century, the authorities of the Vatican Library obstructed scholars who wished to study the codex in detail. Henry Alford in 1849 wrote: "It has never been published in facsimile (!) nor even thoroughly collated (!!)." Scrivener in 1861 commented: "Codex Vaticanus 1209 is probably the oldest large vellum manuscript in existence, and is the glory of the great Vatican Library in Rome. To these legitimate sources of deep interest must be added the almost romantic curiosity which has been excited by the jealous watchfulness of its official guardians, with whom an honest zeal for its safe preservation seems to have now degenerated into a species of capricious wilfulness, and who have shewn a strange incapacity for making themselves the proper use of a treasure they scarcely permit others more than to gaze upon". It (...) "is so jealously guarded by the Papal authorities that ordinary visitors see nothing of it but the red Morocco binding".

Thomas Law Montefiore (1862): "The history of the Codex Vaticanus B, No. 1209, is the history in miniature of Romish jealousy and exclusiveness." Burgon was permitted to examine the codex for an hour and a half in 1860, consulting 16 different passages. Burgon was a defender of the Traditional Text and for him Codex Vaticanus, as well as codices Sinaiticus and Bezae, were the most corrupt documents extant. He felt that each of these three codices "clearly exhibits a fabricated text – is the result of arbitrary and reckless recension." The two most widely respected of these three codices, א and B, he likens to the "two false witnesses" of Matthew 26:60.

In 1861, Henry Alford collated and verified doubtful passages (in several imperfect collations), which he published in facsimile editions complete with errors. Until he began his work he met unexpected hindrances. He received a special order from Cardinal Antonelli "per verificare", to verify passages, but this license was interpreted by the librarian to mean that he was to see the book, but not to use it. In 1862, secretary of Alford, Mr. Cure, continued Alford's work. For some reason which does not clearly appear, the authorities of the Vatican Library put continual obstacles in the way of all who wished to study it in detail, one of which was the Vatican Library was only opened for three hours a day. In 1867 Tischendorf published the text of the New Testament of the codex on the basis of Mai's edition. It was the "most perfect edition of the manuscript which had yet appeared".

In 1868–1881 C. Vercellone, Giuseppe Cozza-Luzi, and G. Sergio published an edition of the entire codex in 6 volumes (New Testament in volume V; Prolegomena in volume VI). A typographical facsimile appeared between 1868 and 1872. In 1889–1890 a photographic facsimile of the entire manuscript was made and published by Cozza-Luzi, in three volumes. Another facsimile of the New Testament text was published in 1904–1907 in Milan. As a result, the codex became widely available.

In 1999, the Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato in Rome (the Italian State Printing House and Mint) published a limited edition, full-color, exact scale facsimile of Codex Vaticanus. The facsimile reproduces the very form of the pages of the original manuscript, complete with the distinctive individual shape of each page, including holes in the vellum. It has an additional Prolegomena volume with gold and silver impressions of 74 pages.

, a digitised copy of the codex is available online from the Vatican Library.

Importance
Codex Vaticanus is considered as one of the most important manuscripts for the text of the Septuagint and Greek New Testament. It is a leading example of the Alexandrian text-type. It was used by Westcott and Hort in their edition, The New Testament in the Original Greek (1881), and it was the basis for their text. All critical editions of the New Testament published after Westcott and Hort were closer in the Gospels to the Codex Vaticanus text than to the Sinaiticus, with only the exception of Hermann von Soden's editions which are closer to Sinaiticus. All editions of Nestle-Aland remain close in textual character to the text of Westcott-Hort.

According to the commonly accepted opinion of the textual critics, it is the most important witness of the text of the Gospels, in the Acts and Catholic epistles, with a stature equal to Codex Sinaiticus, although in the Pauline epistles it includes Western readings and the value of the text is somewhat less than the Codex Sinaiticus. The manuscript is not complete. Aland notes: "B is by far the most significant of the uncials".

Other

For more bibliographies see: J. K. Elliott, A Bibliography of Greek New Testament Manuscripts (Cambridge University Press: 1989), pp. 34–36.

title: Codex Vaticanus


text:
SIP

SIP or sip may refer to:

Places

 * Šip (Pale), Bosnia and Herzegovina
 * Šip (Višegrad), Bosnia and Herzegovina
 * Novi Sip, Serbia
 * Simferopol International Airport (IATA: SIP), an airport in Crimea
 * Suzhou Industrial Park, in Suzhou, China

Business, finance, and economics

 * Safety improvement plan, a plan for improving safety
 * Sales incentive plan, a type of employee incentive program
 * Securities information processor, the part of public infrastructure for disseminating market data in the United States
 * Share Incentive Plan, a UK government approved employee plan
 * Systematic investment plan, an investment strategy

Communications and telephony

 * Session Initiation Protocol (SIP), a communications protocol for signaling and controlling multimedia communication sessions, including voice over IP

Networking

 * Service Improvement Plan, a former program to provide a defined level of basic telephone service to all Canadians
 * Standard Interchange Protocol, in library systems
 * System Information Packet, in the DMX512 standard for stage lighting control

Software

 * SIP (software), a tool which generates C++ interface code for the programming language Python
 * Scilab Image Processing, an image processing toolbox
 * Soft Input Panel, on-screen input method for devices without standard keyboards

 * Submission Information Packages, in the Open Archival Information System Reference Model; see Open Archival Information System
 * System Integrity Protection, a security feature of OS X El Capitan by Apple

Semiconductors

 * Semiconductor intellectual property, a business model for licensing intellectual property
 * Single in-line package, for packaging electronic components
 * System in package, chip technology, also known as a chip stack multi-chip module
 * Silicon photonics, silicon semiconductor used as an optical medium

Computing

 * Social information processing, an activity through which collective human actions organize knowledge
 * Supplementary Ideographic Plane, a range of ideographic characters in the Unicode standard
 * Stochastic Information Packet, an array of simulation realizations

Engineering

 * Second-order intercept point, a measure of linearity in amplifiers and mixers
 * Shelter Implementation Plan, will help contain and manage the consequences of the Chernobyl disaster
 * Signature image processing, in welding fault detection
 * Sputter ion pump, a type of vacuum pump
 * Standard inspection procedure, a process for checking compliance
 * Sterilization-in-place, in sanitation of food preparation equipment
 * Structural insulated panel, a composite building material

Enterprises

 * SIP Animation, originally Saban International Paris, France based TV production company
 * Società Italiana per l'Esercizio Telefonico (originally Società Idroelettrica Piemontese), the former name of Telecom Italia
 * Selznick International Pictures, a defunct film studio

Science and mathematics

 * Semi-infinite programming, a type of mathematical optimization problem
 * Spectral induced polarisation, in geophysics
 * Stable-isotope probing, used in molecular biology
 * Statistically improbable phrases, a system used to find unique phrases for use as keywords
 * Stochastic Information Packet, in probability management, a representation of the probability distribution of a variable
 * Strongly implicit procedure, an algorithm for solving a sparse linear system of equations
 * Structure-inducing probes, a peptide synthesis to stabilize long peptides

Other uses

 * "Sip", a song from Joeboy
 * Stranka Ivana Pernara, a Croatian political party
 * Shelter-in-place, an emergency procedure
 * Sip (kinship)
 * Sip or Zip, one of the 18 months of the Haab', a part of the Maya calendric system
 * SIP Grenade, self igniting phosphorus
 * The Society of International Photographers, a not-for-profit organization founded in 1936
 * Soviet Interview Project, a research project conducted in the early 1980s
 * Strangers in Paradise, an award-winning comic book
 * State Implementation Plan, a United States state plan for complying with the federal Clean Air Act
 * Sub-irrigated planter, a type of gardening container
 * Sip as in SipSipStefan
 * "Sip", a 2017 song by Chris Brown from Heartbreak on a Full Moon

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

title: SIP


text:
Phil Hartman

Philip Edward Hartman (September 24, 1948 – May 28, 1998) was a Canadian-born American comedian, actor, screenwriter, and graphic designer. Hartman was born in Brantford, Ontario, Canada, and his family moved to the United States when he was ten years old. After graduating from California State University, Northridge, with a degree in graphic arts, he designed album covers for bands including Poco and America. In 1975, Hartman joined the comedy group the Groundlings, where he helped Paul Reubens develop his character Pee-wee Herman. Hartman co-wrote the film Pee-wee's Big Adventure and made recurring appearances as Captain Carl on Reubens' show Pee-wee's Playhouse.

In 1986, Hartman joined the NBC sketch comedy show Saturday Night Live (SNL) as a cast member, and stayed for eight seasons until 1994. Nicknamed "Glue" for his ability to hold the show together and help other cast members, he won a Primetime Emmy Award for his SNL work in 1989. He also starred as Bill McNeal in the sitcom NewsRadio, voiced Lionel Hutz and Troy McClure on The Simpsons, and appeared in supporting roles in the films Houseguest, Sgt. Bilko, Jingle All the Way, and Small Soldiers.

After two divorces, Hartman married Brynn Omdahl in 1987, with whom he had two children. Their marriage was troubled due to Phil's busy work schedule and Brynn's drug and alcohol abuse. In 1998, while Phil was sleeping in his bed, Brynn shot and killed him, and later killed herself. In the weeks following his murder, Hartman was celebrated in a wave of tributes. Dan Snierson of Entertainment Weekly wrote that Hartman was "the last person you'd expect to read about in lurid headlines in your morning paper ... a decidedly regular guy, beloved by everyone he worked with". He was posthumously inducted into the Canada and Hollywood Walks of Fame in 2012 and 2014, respectively.

Early life
Phil Hartman was born Philip Edward Hartmann (later dropping one "n") on September 24, 1948, in Brantford, Ontario. He was the fourth of eight children of Doris Marguerite (née Wardell; July 17, 1919 – April 15, 2001) and Rupert Loebig Hartmann (November 8, 1914 – April 30, 1998), who sold building materials. The family was Catholic. As a child, Hartman found affection hard to earn: "I suppose I didn't get what I wanted out of my family life, so I started seeking love and attention elsewhere."

Hartman was ten years old when his family moved to the United States. They first lived in Lewiston, Maine, then Meriden, Connecticut, and then on the West Coast, where he attended Westchester High School and frequently acted as the class clown. After graduating, he studied art at Santa Monica City College, dropping out in 1969 to become a roadie with a rock band. He returned to school in 1972 to study graphic arts at California State University, Northridge. He developed and operated his own graphic art business, creating more than 40 album covers for bands including Poco and America, as well as advertising and the logo for Crosby, Stills & Nash. In the late 1970s, he made his first television appearance on an episode of The Dating Game, where he won.

Graphic Artist
Phil Hartman designed the logo for Crosby, Stills & Nash, along with more than 40 album covers for other popular bands including Poco, America, CSNY, FIRESIGN Theater and Seven.

The Groundlings and Pee-Wee Herman (1975–1985)
Working alone as a graphic artist, Hartman frequently amused himself with "flights of voice fantasies". In 1975, seeking a more social outlet for his talents, he began attending evening comedy classes by the California-based improvisational comedy group The Groundlings. While watching one of their performances, he impulsively decided to climb on stage and join the cast. His first onscreen appearance was in 1978's Stunt Rock, an Australian film directed in Los Angeles by Brian Trenchard-Smith. After several years of training, paying his way by redesigning the group's logo and merchandise, Hartman formally joined The Groundlings and by 1979 was one of the show's stars.

There Hartman befriended Paul Reubens, with whom he often collaborated on comedic material. Together they created the character Pee-wee Herman and developed The Pee-wee Herman Show, a live stage show that subsequently aired on HBO in 1981. Hartman played Captain Carl in the show, and reprised the role for the children's TV show Pee-wee's Playhouse. Reubens and Hartman made cameos in the 1980 film Cheech and Chong's Next Movie. Hartman co-wrote the script of the 1985 feature film Pee-wee's Big Adventure and had a cameo role as a reporter. He had considered quitting acting at the age of 36 due to the challenges of finding work; but the success of Pee-wee's Big Adventure changed his mind. After a creative disagreement with Reubens, he left the Pee-Wee Herman project to pursue other roles.

Hartman took more small roles in 1986 films such as Jumpin' Jack Flash and Three Amigos. He also worked as a voice actor in animated television programs, including The Smurfs, Challenge of the GoBots, The 13 Ghosts of Scooby-Doo, and in Dennis the Menace as Henry Mitchell and George Wilson and most of the adult male characters. After season 1, Hartman (who by this point had joined the cast of Saturday Night Live) was replaced by Maurice LaMarche. He developed a strong persona providing voice-overs for advertisements.

Saturday Night Live (1986–1994)
Hartman successfully auditioned to join NBC's variety show Saturday Night Live (SNL) in its 12th season, which began on October 11, 1986. He had been recommended for the show by fellow Groundlings and SNL cast members Jon Lovitz and Laraine Newman, as well as Jumpin' Jack Flash director Penny Marshall. He told the Los Angeles Times, "I wanted to do [SNL] because I wanted to get the exposure that would give me box-office credibility so I can write movies for myself." In his eight seasons with the show Hartman became known for his impressions, and performed as over 70 different characters. Hartman's original SNL characters include Eugene, the Anal Retentive Chef and Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer. His impressions include Frank Sinatra, Ronald Reagan, Ed McMahon, Barbara Bush, Charlton Heston, Kelsey Grammer, Michael Caine, Oliver Stone, Phil Donahue, Telly Savalas, Barry Humphries, Kirk Douglas and Bill Clinton—the latter considered his best-known impression.

Hartman first performed his Clinton impression on an episode of The Tonight Show. When he met Clinton in 1993, Hartman remarked, "I guess I owe you a few apologies", adding later that he "sometimes [felt] a twinge of guilt about [his Clinton impression]". Clinton showed good humor and sent Hartman a signed photo with the text: "You're not the president, but you play one on TV. And you're OK, mostly." Hartman copied the president's "post-nasal drip" and the "slight scratchiness" in his voice, as well as his open, "less intimidating" hand gestures. Hartman opted against wearing a larger prosthetic nose when portraying Clinton, as he thought it would be distracting. He instead wore a wig, dyed his eyebrows brighter, and used makeup to highlight his nose. In one of Hartman's sketches as Clinton, the president-elect visits a McDonald's restaurant and explains his economic policies and support for military intervention in Somalia by the metaphor of eating other customers' food. The writers told him that he was not eating enough during rehearsals for the sketch – by the end of the live performance, Hartman had eaten so much he could barely speak. At SNL, Hartman's nickname of "Glue" was coined by Adam Sandler according to Jay Mohr's book Gasping for Airtime. However, according to You Might Remember Me: The Life and Times of Phil Hartman by Mike Thomas, author and staff writer for the Chicago Sun-Times, the nickname was created by SNL cast member and Hartman's frequent on-screen collaborator Jan Hooks. Hartman was very helpful to other cast members. For example, he aided Hooks in overcoming her stage fright. SNL creator Lorne Michaels explained the name: "He kind of held the show together. He gave to everybody and demanded very little. He was very low-maintenance." Michaels also added that Hartman was "the least appreciated" cast member by commentators outside the show, and praised his ability "to do five or six parts in a show where you're playing support or you're doing remarkable character work". Hartman won the Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Writing for a Variety, Music or Comedy Program for SNL in 1989, sharing the award with the show's other writers. He was nominated in the same category in 1987, and individually in 1994 for Outstanding Individual Performance in a Variety or Music Program.

By 1993, almost every cast member who was there during Hartman's first year on SNL had left the show, including Jon Lovitz, Jan Hooks and Dana Carvey. Hartman said he felt "like an athlete who's watched all his World Series teammates get traded off into other directions ... It was hard to watch them leave because I sort of felt we were all part of the team that saved the show." This cast turnover contributed to his leaving the show in 1994. Hartman said he thought it was time to leave because the show was "getting less sophisticated" and his style of humor did not fit with the less intellectual comedy of newer cast members like Adam Sandler. Hartman had originally planned to leave the show in 1991, but Michaels persuaded him to stay to raise his profile; his portrayal of Clinton contributed to this goal. Jay Leno offered him the role of his sidekick on The Tonight Show but Hartman opted to stay on SNL. NBC persuaded him to stay on SNL by promising him his own comedy–variety show The Phil Show. He planned to "reinvent the variety form" with "a hybrid, very fast-paced, high energy [show] with sketches, impersonations, pet acts, and performers showcasing their talents". Hartman was to be the show's executive producer and head writer. Before production began, however, the network decided that variety shows were too unpopular and canceled the series. In a 1996 interview, Hartman noted he was glad, as he "would've been sweatin' blood each week trying to make it work". In 1998, he admitted he missed working on SNL, but had enjoyed the move from New York City to Southern California.

NewsRadio (1995–1998)
Hartman became one of the stars of the NBC sitcom NewsRadio in 1995, portraying radio news anchor Bill McNeal. He signed up after being attracted by the show's writing and use of an ensemble cast, and joked that he based McNeal on himself with "any ethics and character" removed. Hartman made roughly US$50000 1995 per episode of NewsRadio. Although the show was critically acclaimed, it was never a ratings hit and cancellation was a regular threat. After the completion of the fourth season, Hartman commented, "We seem to have limited appeal. We're on the edge here, not sure we're going to be picked up or not", but added he was "99 percent sure" the series would be renewed for a fifth season. Hartman had publicly lambasted NBC's decision to repeatedly move NewsRadio into different timeslots, but later regretted his comments, saying, "this is a sitcom, for crying out loud, not brain surgery". He also stated that if the sitcom were cancelled "it just will open up other opportunities for me". Although the show was renewed for a fifth season, Hartman was killed before production began. Ken Tucker praised Hartman's performance as McNeal: "A lesser performer ... would have played him as a variation on The Mary Tyler Moore Show's Ted Baxter, because that's what Bill was, on paper. But Hartman gave infinite variety to Bill's self-centeredness, turning him devious, cowardly, squeamish, and foolishly bold from week to week." Hartman was posthumously nominated for the Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series in 1998 for his work on NewsRadio. David Hyde Pierce won the award for his performance on Frasier.

The Simpsons (1991–1998)
Hartman provided the voices for numerous characters on the Fox animated series The Simpsons, appearing in 52 episodes. He made his first appearance in the second season episode "Bart Gets Hit by a Car". Although he was originally brought in for a one-time appearance, Hartman enjoyed working on The Simpsons and the staff wrote additional parts for him. He voiced the recurring characters Lionel Hutz and Troy McClure, as well as several background characters. His favorite part was that of McClure, and he often used this voice to entertain the audience between takes while taping episodes of NewsRadio. He remarked, "My favorite fans are Troy McClure fans." He added "It's the one thing that I do in my life that's almost an avocation. I do it for the pure love of it."

Hartman was popular among the staff of The Simpsons. Showrunners Bill Oakley and Josh Weinstein said they enjoyed his work, and used him as much as possible when working on the show. To give Hartman a larger role, they developed the episode "A Fish Called Selma", which focuses on Troy McClure and expands the character's backstory. The Simpsons creator Matt Groening said that he "took [Hartman] for granted because he nailed the joke every time", and that his voice acting could produce "the maximum amount of humor" with any line he was given. Before his death, Hartman had expressed an interest in making a live action film about Troy McClure. Many of The Simpsons production staff expressed enthusiasm for the project and offered to help. Hartman said he was "looking forward to [McClure's] live-action movie, publicizing his Betty Ford appearances", and "would love nothing more" than making a film and was prepared to buy the film rights himself in order to make it happen.

Other work
Hartman's first starring film role came in 1995's Houseguest, alongside Sinbad. Other films include Greedy, Coneheads, Sgt. Bilko, So I Married an Axe Murderer, CB4, Jingle All the Way, the English Disney/GKIDS dub of Kiki's Delivery Service, and Small Soldiers, the latter of which is his final theatrically released film. At the same time, he preferred working on television. His other television roles include appearances on episodes of The John Larroquette Show, The Dana Carvey Show, 3rd Rock from the Sun, and the HBO TV film The Second Civil War as the President of the United States. He made a considerable amount of money from television advertising, earning $300,000 for a series of four commercials for the soft drink Slice. He also appeared in advertisements for McDonald's (as Hugh McAttack) and 1-800-Collect (as Max Jerome).

Hartman wrote a number of screenplays that were never produced. In 1986, he began writing a screenplay for a film titled Mr. Fix-It, and completed the final draft in 1991. Robert Zemeckis was signed to produce the film, with Gil Bettman hired to direct. Hartman called it "a sort of a merger of horror and comedy, like Beetlejuice and Throw Momma From the Train", adding, "It's an American nightmare about a family torn asunder. They live next to a toxic dump site, their water supply is poisoned, the mother and son go insane and try to murder each other, the father's face is torn off in a terrible disfiguring accident in the first act. It's heavy stuff, but it's got a good message and a positive, upbeat ending." Zemeckis could not secure studio backing, however, and the project collapsed. Another film idea involving Hartman's Groundlings character Chick Hazard, Private Eye was also canceled. Hartman appeared on David Letterman's Late Night and Late Show 13 times between 1989 and 1996, where he can be heard speaking German fluently.

Style
In contrast to his real-life personality, which was described as "a regular guy and, by all accounts, one of show business's most low-key, decent people", Hartman often played seedy, vain or unpleasant characters as well as comedic villains. He described his standard character repertoire as the "jerky guy" and "the weasel parade", citing Lionel Hutz, Bill McNeal, Troy McClure, and Ted Maltin from Jingle All the Way as examples. Hartman enjoyed playing such roles because he "just want[ed] to be funny, and villains tend to be funny because their foibles are all there to see".

He often played supporting roles, rather than the lead part. He said: "[T]hroughout my career, I've never been a huge star, but I've made steady progress and that's the way I like it" and "It's fun coming in as the second or third lead. If the movie or TV show bombs, you aren't to blame." Hartman was considered a "utility player" on SNL with a "kind of Everyman quality" which enabled him to appear in the majority of sketches, often in very distinct roles. Jan Hooks stated of his work on SNL: "Phil never had an ounce of competition. He was a team player. It was a privilege for him, I believe, to play support and do it very well. He was never insulted, no matter how small the role may have been." He was disciplined in his performances, studying the scripts beforehand. Hooks added: "Phil knew how to listen. And he knew how to look you in the eye, and he knew the power of being able to lay back and let somebody else be funny, and then do the reactions. I think Phil was more of an actor than a comedian." Film critic Pauline Kael declared that "Phil Hartman and Jan Hooks on Saturday Night Live are two of the best comic actors I've ever seen."

Writer and acting coach Paul Ryan noted Hartman's work ethic with his impressions. He assembled a collection of video footage of the figure he was preparing to impersonate and watched this continually until he "completely embodied the person". Ryan concluded that "what made [Hartman's impressions] so funny and spot on was Phil's ability to add that perfect touch that only comes from trial and error and practicing in front of audiences and fellow actors." Hartman described this process as "technical". Journalist Lyle V. Harris said Hartman showed a "rare talent for morphing into... anybody he wanted to be".

Ken Tucker summarized Hartman's comedic style: "He could momentarily fool audiences into thinking he was the straight man, but then he'd cock an eyebrow and give his voice an ironic lilt that delivered a punchline like a fast slider—you barely saw it coming until you started laughing." Hartman claimed that he borrowed his style from actor Bill Murray: "He's been a great influence on me – when he did that smarmy thing in Ghostbusters, then the same sort of thing in Groundhog Day. I tried to imitate it. I couldn't. I wasn't good enough. But I discovered an element of something else, so in a sick kind of way I made myself a career by doing a bad imitation of another comic."

Personal life
Hartman married Gretchen Lewis in 1970 and they divorced in September 1972. He married real estate agent Lisa Strain in 1982, and their marriage lasted three years. Strain told People magazine that Hartman was reclusive off screen and "would disappear emotionally ... he'd be in his own world. That passivity made you crazy." In 1987, Hartman married former model and aspiring actress Brynn Omdahl (born Vicki Jo Omdahl, April 11, 1958 – May 28, 1998), having met her on a blind date the previous year. They had two children, Sean and Birgen Hartman. The marriage had difficulties; she was reportedly intimidated by his success and was frustrated that she could not find any on her own, although neither party wanted a divorce. She was reported to have been jealous and often verbally and/or physically abusive, even sending a letter to his ex-wife, threatening to "rip [Strain's] eyes out" if she spoke to him again. Hartman considered retiring to save the marriage.

Hartman tried to get Brynn acting roles, but she became progressively reliant on alcohol and narcotics, entering rehab several times. On multiple occasions, he removed their children from the household to stay with friends or family because of her drug- and alcohol-fueled outbursts. Because of his close friendship with SNL associate Jan Hooks, Brynn "joked" on occasion Hooks and Hartman were married "on some other level". Brynn had written threatening letters addressed to Hooks, warning her to not get close to her husband, but they appeared to have never even been sent, being discovered in her belongings following her death.

Stephen Root, Hartman's NewsRadio co-star, said few people knew "the real Phil Hartman", as he was "one of those people who never seemed to come out of character", but he nevertheless gave the impression of a family man who cared deeply for his children. Hartman befriended Joe Rogan during his time on NewsRadio and confided his marital problems to him. Rogan said that he encouraged Hartman to divorce Brynn five times, but "[Hartman] loved his kids and didn't want to leave".

Hartman stated in 1997 that, though a non-practicing Catholic, he displayed a sense of religiousness. In his spare time, he enjoyed driving, flying, sailing, marksmanship, and playing the guitar.

Murder
On May 27, 1998, Hartman's wife, Brynn, visited the Italian restaurant Buca di Beppo in Encino, California, with producer and writer Christine Zander, who said she was "in a good frame of mind"; they had drinks. After returning home, Brynn had a "heated" argument with Hartman, after which he went to bed. She entered his bedroom some time before 3:00 a.m. PDT on May 28, 1998, and, as he slept, fatally shot him once between the eyes, once in the throat and once in the upper chest with a .38 caliber handgun. Hartman was 49 years old. Brynn was taking Zoloft, had been drinking alcohol, and had recently used cocaine.

Brynn then drove to the home of her friend Ron Douglas and confessed to the killing but he did not believe her. They drove back to the house in separate cars and she called another friend and confessed a second time. Upon seeing Hartman's body, Douglas called 9-1-1 at 6:20 a.m. Police arrived and escorted Douglas and the Hartmans' two children from the premises, by which time Brynn had locked herself in the bedroom. Shortly afterward, she shot and killed herself.

The police stated Hartman's death was caused by "domestic discord" between the couple. A neighbor of the Hartmans told a CNN reporter that the couple had marital problems. Yet actor Steve Guttenberg said they had been "a very happy couple and they always had the appearance of being well-balanced".

Brynn's brother, Gregory Omdahl, filed a wrongful death lawsuit in 1999 against both Pfizer, the manufacturer of Zoloft, and his sister’s psychiatrist, Arthur Sorosky, who had provided samples of the antidepressant to Brynn. Pfizer later settled the lawsuit without an admission of any wrongdoing. Hartman's friend and former SNL colleague Jon Lovitz has accused Hartman's NewsRadio co-star Andy Dick of reintroducing Brynn to cocaine, causing her to relapse and suffer a nervous breakdown. Dick claimed to have known nothing of her condition. Lovitz later said he no longer blamed Dick for Hartman's murder but in 2006, Lovitz claimed Dick had approached him at a restaurant and said, "I put the Phil Hartman hex on you. You're the next one to die." Lovitz then had him ejected from the restaurant. The following year at the Laugh Factory comedy club in Los Angeles, Lovitz and Dick had another argument with Lovitz slamming Dick's head into the bar. Dick asserted he was not at fault in relation to Hartman's death.

Brynn's sister Katharine Omdahl and brother-in-law Mike Wright raised the two Hartman children. Hartman's will stipulated each child would inherit money over several years after turning 25. The total value of Hartman's estate was estimated at $1.23 million. In accordance with their wishes, both Hartman's and Brynn's bodies were cremated by Forest Lawn Memorial Park and Mortuary, Glendale, California, and their ashes were scattered over Santa Catalina Island's Emerald Bay. Hartman has a headstone with wife Brynn in Thief River Falls, Minnesota, where Brynn was born.

Response and legacy
NBC executive Don Ohlmeyer stated that Hartman "was blessed with a tremendous gift for creating characters who made people laugh. Everyone who had the pleasure of working with Phil knows that he was a man of tremendous warmth, a true professional and a loyal friend." Guttenberg expressed shock at Hartman's death and Steve Martin said he was "a deeply funny and very happy person". Matt Groening called him "a master" and director Joe Dante said "He was one of those guys who was a dream to work with. I don't know anybody who didn't like him." Dan Snierson of Entertainment Weekly concluded that Hartman was "the last person you'd expect to read about in lurid headlines in your morning paper" and "a decidedly regular guy, beloved by everyone he worked with". In 2007, Entertainment Weekly ranked Hartman the 87th greatest television icon of all time, and Maxim named him the top Saturday Night Live performer of all time.

On the day of Hartman's death, rehearsals for The Simpsons and that night's performance by The Groundlings were canceled. The season five premiere episode of NewsRadio, "Bill Moves On" (aired September 23, the day before what would have been his 50th birthday) finds Hartman's character, Bill McNeal, has died of a heart attack, while the other characters reminisce about his life. Lovitz joined the show in his place beginning with the next episode. An episode which ended a season of 3rd Rock from the Sun, where Hartman played a flamboyant recurring character who ends up kidnapping Harry was scrapped due it being a cliffhanger which would have been resolved in the subsequent season premiere, as well as to show respect for Phil's death. A special episode of Saturday Night Live commemorating Hartman's work on the show aired on June 13, 1998, which ended with one of Hartman's performances showing a widow reflecting on her deceased husband played by Phil. Rather than substituting another voice actor, the writers of The Simpsons retired Hartman's characters. His final appearance in the tenth season episode "Bart the Mother" is dedicated to him. Small Soldiers was dedicated to Phil Hartman, being his final film to be released in movie theatres.

Hartman was preparing to voice Zapp Brannigan, a character written specifically for him on Groening's second animated series Futurama, at the time of his death. Even though the role was specifically made for him, Hartman still insisted on trying out for the role. About a week before his death, he auditioned for Groening and Futurama executive producer David X. Cohen. Groening wrote that Hartman "blew us away with his performances". After Hartman's death, Billy West took over the role. Though Cohen credits West with using his own take on the character, West later said that he purposely tweaked Zapp's voice to better match Hartman's intended portrayal. Hartman was planning to appear with Lovitz in the indie film The Day of Swine and Roses, scheduled to begin production in August 1998.

In 2002, Laugh.com and Hartman's brother John published the album Flat TV, a selection of comedy sketches recorded by Hartman in the 1970s, which had been kept in storage. John Hartmann commented: "I'm putting this out there because I'm dedicating my life to fulfilling his dreams. This [album] is my brother doing what he loved." Flat TV was optioned for an animated adaptation by Michael "Ffish" Hemschoot's animation company Worker Studio in 2013. The deal came about after Michael T. Scott, a partner in the company, posted online a handwritten letter he had received from Hartman in 1997, leading to a correspondence between Scott and Paul Hartmann.

A campaign was started on Facebook by Alex Stevens in 2007, and endorsed by Hartman's brother Paul, to have Phil inducted to Canada's Walk of Fame. Among the campaign's numerous publicity events, Ben Miner of the Sirius XM Radio channel Laugh Attack dedicated the month of April 2012 to Hartman. The campaign ended in success and Hartman was inducted on September 22, 2012, to the Walk of Fame, with Paul accepting the award on his late brother's behalf. Hartman was also awarded the Cineplex Legends Award. In June 2013, it was announced that Hartman would receive a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, which was unveiled on August 26, 2014. Additionally, a special prize at the Canadian Comedy Awards was named for Hartman. Beginning with the 13th Canadian Comedy Awards in 2012, the Phil Hartman Award was awarded to "an individual who helps to better the Canadian comedy community". In 2015, Rolling Stone magazine ranked Hartman as one of the ten greatest Saturday Night Live cast members throughout the show's forty-year history, coming in seventh on its list of all 141 members.

Discography
The following is a list of albums for which Hartman designed the covers.

1974 1975 1977 1979 1980
 * Poco, Seven
 * America, Hearts
 * America, History: America's Greatest Hits
 * America, Harbor
 * Poco, Legend
 * America, Silent Letter
 * Firesign Theatre, Fighting Clowns

title: Phil Hartman


text:
Chama

Chama may refer to:

Places

 * Chama, Colorado, unincorporated town in the United States
 * Chama, New Mexico, village in the United States
 * Chama, Zambia, a small town and district
 * Chama District, district in Zambia
 * Chama River (Venezuela), aka Río Chama, a river in Venezuela
 * Rio Chama (Rio Grande), a tributary of the Rio Grande
 * Chama (Maya site), an archaeological site in the Alta Verapaz, Guatemala

People

 * Chama (surname)
 * Chama people or Ese Ejja people
 * Chama, Archbishop of Kalocsa, 12th-century Hungarian prelate
 * Chama Mechtaly (b. 1992), Moroccan artist
 * Chama Milind (b. 1994), Indian cricketer

Other

 * Chama (bivalve), a genus of bivalve molluscs
 * -chama, a Japanese honorific
 * Chama, a variant name of Kamadeva, the Hindu god of love
 * Chama (investment), a Swahili word meaning a welfare or investment group of people i.e. Merry-go-round fund raising group
 * MV Chama, a Dutch tanker in service 1947-55

title: Chama


text:
Rati

Rati (रति, ) is the Hindu goddess of love, carnal desire, lust, passion, and sexual pleasure. Usually described as the daughter of Prajapati Daksha, Rati is the female counterpart, the chief consort and the assistant of Kama (Kamadeva), the god of love. A constant companion of Kama, she is often depicted with him in legend and temple sculpture. She also enjoys worship along with Kama.

The Hindu scriptures stress Rati's beauty and sensuality. They depict her as a maiden who has the power to enchant the God of Love. When the deity Shiva burns her husband to ashes, it is Rati, whose beseeching or penance, leads to the promise of Kama's resurrection. Often, this resurrection occurs when Kama is reborn as Pradyumna, the son of Krishna and Rukmini. Rati – under the name of Mayavati – plays a critical role in the upbringing of Pradyumna, who is separated from his parents at birth. She acts as his nanny, as well as his lover, and tells him the way to return to his parents by slaying the demon-king, who is destined to die at his hands. Later, Kama-Pradyumna accepts Rati-Mayavati as his wife.

Etymology
The name of the goddess Rati comes from the Sanskrit root , meaning "enjoy" or "delight in." Although the verb root generally refers to any sort of enjoyment, it usually carries connotations of physical and sensual enjoyment. Etymologically, the word  refers to anything that can be enjoyed; but, it is almost always used to refer to sexual love.

Birth and marriage
The Kalika Purana narrates the following tale about Rati's birth. After the creation of the 10 Prajapatis, Brahma – the creator-god – creates Kama (Kamadeva), the god of love, from his mind. Kama is ordered to spread love in the world by shooting his flower-arrows. Prajapati Daksha is requested to present a wife to Kama. Kama first uses his arrows against Brahma and the Prajapatis, who are all incestuously attracted to Brahma's daughter Sandhya ("Twilight-dawn/dusk"). The god Shiva, gets enraged by the heinous act of Brahma and shows his condemnation. Embarrassed, Brahma and the Prajapatis tremble and perspire. From the sweat of Daksha rises a beautiful woman named Rati, who Daksha presents to Kama as his wife. At the same time, the agitated Brahma curses Kama to be burnt to ashes by Shiva in the future. However, on Kama's pleading, Brahma assures him that he would be reborn. The Brahma Vaivarta Purana narrates that Sandhya committed suicide, after Brahma lusts for her. The god Vishnu resurrects her and names her Rati, and marries her to Kama. The Shiva Purana mentions that after her suicide, Sandhya is reborn from the sweat of Daksha as Rati. In some texts, Shiva is described as the father of Rati.

The Harivamsa, an appendix to the epic Mahabharata, mentions that Kama and Rati have two children, Harsha ("Joy") and Yashas ("Grace"). However, the Vishnu Purana mentions that Rati, as Nandi, only has one son – Harsha. The epics Mahabharata as well as the Ramayana, also attest to Rati being the consort of Kama.

Rebirth as Mayavati
The demon Tarakasura had created havoc in the universe, and only the son of god Shiva could slay him, but Shiva had turned to ascetic ways after the death of his first wife, Sati. Kama was thus instructed by the gods to make Shiva fall in love again. Kama went to Mount Kailash with Rati and Madhu or Vasanta ("Spring"), and shot his love-arrows at Shiva (in another version of the legend, Kama entered Shiva's mind) and invoked desire. Wounded by Kama's arrows, Shiva becomes attracted to Parvati, the reincarnation of Sati, but agitated, burns Kama by a glance of his third eye.

The Bhagavata Purana narrates further that the grief-stricken Rati goes mad by Kama's death and in the Matsya Purana and the Padma Purana versions, she smears herself with her husband's ashes. Further in Bhagavata Purana, Rati undergoes severe penance and pleads with Parvati to intercede with Shiva to restore her husband. Parvati reassures her that Kama would be reborn as Pradyumna, the son of Krishna, the avatar of the god Vishnu on earth, and Rati should wait for him in the demon (asura) Sambara's house. In other versions of the narrative like the Matsya Purana, the Padma Purana, the Shiva Purana, the Linga Purana and the Kathasaritsagara, it is Shiva who blesses Rati with the boon of Kama's resurrection.

In other variants, she curses the gods who sent Kama for this doomed mission and the gods, as a group or Brahma, seeks relief for the grieving Rati from Shiva or the Supreme Goddess, Parvati being one of her many manifestations. In some legends, like the one in the Brahmanda Purana, the Goddess revives Kama immediately, hearing the pleading of the wailing Rati and the gods. The renowned Sanskrit poet Kalidasa dedicates canto IV discussing the plight of Rati in his Kumarasambhava, which focuses on the story of the wedding of Shiva and Parvati and the birth of their son Kartikeya, who kills Tarakasura. Canto IV narrates that Rati witnesses the death of her husband and laments his death, and then tries to immolate herself on a funeral pyre. A heavenly voice stops her on time, stating that after the marriage of Shiva, he will revive her husband.

The Kedara Khanda chapter of the Skanda Purana presents a very different version. In this version, after the burning of Kama, Parvati is worried that she could not achieve Shiva in absence of Kama. Parvati is consoled by Rati, who asserts that she will revive Kama and starts severe austerities to achieve her goal. Once, the divine sage Narada asks her "whose she was". Agitated, Rati insults Narada. The spiteful Narada provokes the demon Sambara to kidnap Rati. Sambara takes her to his house, but is unable to touch her as the goddess decreed that he would be reduced to ashes if he touches her. There, Rati becomes the "kitchen in-charge" and is known as Mayavati ("mistress of illusion – Maya").

The Bhagavata Purana and the Kathasaritsagara continue, that on advice of Shiva, Rati assumes the form of Sambara's kitchen-maid Mayavati and awaits her husband's arrival in Sambara's house. Sambara is foretold that the reborn Kama would be his destroyer. Sambara finds out that Kama was born as Pradyumna, the son of Krishna and his chief wife, Rukmini. He steals the child and throws him in the ocean, where the child is swallowed by a fish. This fish is caught by fishermen and sent to Sambara's kitchen. When the fish is cut, the child is found by Mayavati, who decides to nurture him. The divine sage Narada reveals to Mayavati that she was Rati and the child was Kama, and that she was to rear him. As the child grew up, the motherly love of Mayavati changes to the passionate love of a wife. The reborn Kama resents her advances, as he considers her his mother. Mayavati tells him the secret of their previous births as narrated by Narada and that he was not her son, but that of Krishna and Rukmini. Mayavati trains Pradyumna in magic and war and advises him to kill Sambara. Pradyumna defeats Sambara and slays him. He returns to Dvaraka, Krishna's capital with Mayavati as his wife, where they are welcomed.

The Vishnu Purana and the Harivamsa also have a similar account, though the reincarnation of Rati is called Mayadevi and described as Sambara's wife, rather than his maid. Both these scriptures safeguard her chastity saying that Rati donned an illusionary form to enchant Sambara. The Brahma Vaivarta Purana explicitly states that Rati does not sleep with Sambara, but gave him the illusionary form of Mayavati. Rati-Mayavati takes a critical role in all narratives of this story where she seduces – by her Maya – both Sambara and Kama-Pradyumna, her "son" who she convinces to be her lover. All texts at the end stress on her purity, untouched by another man.

The Harivamsa describes Aniruddha, the son of Pradyumna, as "the son of Rati".

Associations, worship, and iconography
The name Rati in Sanskrit means "the pleasure of love, sexual passion or union, amorous enjoyment", all of which Rati personifies. Rati also indicates the female-seed. The word Rati also gives rise to other love-related Sanskrit words like Kama-rati ("a man stupefied by desire"), rati-karman ("sexual intercourse"), rati-laksha ("sexual intercourse"), rati-bhoga ("sexual enjoyment"), rati-shakti ("virile power"), rati-jna ("skilled in the art of love"), and rati-yuddha ("a sex-battle"). The word Rati also appears in title of the Sanskrit erotic work Rati-Rahasya ("secrets of Rati") – which is said to contain the sexual secrets of the goddess – as well as in the Sanskrit names of many sex techniques and positions like Rati-pasha ("the noose of Rati"), a sex position in which the woman locks her legs behind her lover's back.

Rati stands for sexual pleasure, carnal desire and sexuality. Rati represents only the pleasure aspect of sexual activity and does not relate to child-birth or motherhood. Professor Catherine Benton of the Lake Forest College (Department of Religion) relates her birth from the "desire-ridden" sweat to bodily fluids produced during sexual intercourse, which are considered impure in Hinduism. Her association with Kama – the auspicious god of love – grants her the status of an auspicious goddess. Rati and Kama are often pictured on temple walls as "welcome sculptures", symbols of good fortune and prosperity. Not only is Rati Kama's consort, but she is also his assistant and constant companion, who arouses sexual feelings. Kama is usually depicted with Rati along his side. Rati is also included as a minor character in any drama involving Kama. Rati also enjoys worship with Kama in some festival rites dedicated to him.

The Shiva Purana mentions that Kama himself was pierced by his love-arrows when he saw his "auspicious wife", Rati. Rati, as well as her husband Kama, ride a parrot as their vahana (vehicle). Rati is often depicted with a sword.

In Tantra, the Mahavidya goddess Chhinnamasta is depicted severing her own head and standing on the copulating couple of Kama and Rati, with the latter on top, (viparita-rati sex position). The woman-on-top position suggests female dominance over male. Chhinnamasta standing on a copulating couple of Kama and Rati is interpreted by some as a symbol of self-control of sexual desire, while others interpret it as the goddess, being an embodiment of sexual energy. Images of Chhinnamasta depicted sitting on Kamadeva-Rati in a non-suppressive fashion are associated with the latter interpretation. The love-deity couple also symbolize maithuna, ritual sexual union. Worship

 * Kameshwara Temple, in Aragalur. The Sthala purana indicates that Kamadeva woke up Shiva at this place.
 * Kameshvara Temple, in Kamyavan, one of the twelve forests of Vrindavana.
 * Soundaraja Perumal Temple at Thadikombu, near Dindigul, Tamil Nadu. Separate shrine for Kamdev and Rati.
 * Harsat-Mata Temple at Abhaneri has representation of Kamadeva.

Indonesia
In the Indonesian version, Rati (Indonesian: Kamaratih ) is the daughter of Bathara Soma, the son of Sanghyang Pancaresi, the descendant of Sanghyang Wening, the younger brother of Sanghyang Wenang. Kamaratih is married to Bathara Kamajaya, the ninth son of Sanghyang Ismaya and Dewi Senggani. He resides in Kahyangan Cakrakembang.

Kamaratih has a very beautiful face, has charm and character, is very loyal, loving, generous, kind, patient, and devoted to her husband. She, together with her husband, Bathara Kamajaya, is a symbol of husband-wife harmony in the universe, because of their harmony and love for one another.

Kamaratih was once assigned by Sanghyang Manikmaya to send Wahyu Hidayat to Dewi Utari, the youngest son of Prabu Matswapati, the king of Wirata and his consort, Dewi Ni Yutisnawati/Setyawati. Wahyu Hidayat was revealed as the pair of Wahyu Cakraningrat who was passed down by Bathara Kamajaya to Raden Abhimanyu/Angkawijaya, son of Arjuna and Dewi Sumbadra.

title: Rati


text:
Talk:Uncertainty

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): KentView.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Definition
This is good article. Don't ruin it with a narrow-minded definition of uncertainty. Heisenberg's principle has little or nothing to do with the general subject. When one can analyze errors one does not have real uncertainty! Dave 21:48, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

There is no definition of uncertainty on this page. What is it? Also, should have some stuff about the Electron Microscope and Heisenberg, no?

This page needs work. It needs to start with a straightforward definition.

Hi - looking at this page I realize why Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.246.36.54 (talk) 05:09, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

Here's a potential definition (STSS): "Uncertainty is the inability to predict outcomes of future events considering what is known. This reflects “human’s poor ability to predict technoscientific and technological futures.” The level of uncertainty is determined by how complex a situation is. A lot of variables exist that affect uncertainty’s statistical chances. In the context of innovation, uncertainty is used to describe or quantify the instances that the technology can have adverse effects on human health, the environment, and social dynamics.

Difference from unintended consequences is that uncertainty is usually a predicted, negative and unwanted outcome of a certain action (technology). However an unintended consequence is an unpredicted outcome of an action based on the interaction of technology and society."

[Please leave any critiques.]

Radical uncertainty
Whilst Kay and King's 2020 book popularised the term radical uncertainty, it was already in use. Mervyn King's 2016 book The End of Alchemy makes much use of the term, defining it in the introduction as one of the four key concepts of that book. There is no suggestion there it is an original term. Ivan Viehoff (talk) 21:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Removal of evaluation of uncertainty
I removed the following two paragraphs:

 * Evaluating the degree of uncertainty, measuring it, and compensating for it is a basic process which is part of many activities and processes.

Basic process is my nemesis.

 * As a situation is evaluated and more and more data is gathered and thought is taken on a matter, hypotheses are made, experiments are performed, and gradually the degree of uncertainty is reduced as conclusions are drawn, but never wholly eliminated, except in certain special circumstances as where knowledge is defined by definition.

This is one possible view, but I'm sure some epistemologists would disagree. I don't think this is a universally acceptable statement.

--Ryguasu 01:04 Dec 3, 2002 (UTC)

 * After reading The Black Swan, I have to agree with you Ryguasu, although that doesn't mean that hypotheses shouldn't be made. --AB (talk) 15:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Uncertainty in physics
How is uncertainty defined/used in Physics? What about error analysis? --Aug 21, 2005

Decomposition of uncertainty by Peter Fisher
Here's an analysis of the concept I picked up (hopefully correctly) from a lecture by Peter Fisher - I'm sure it's in one of his published papers. I'd like to store it somewhere and this seemed like a good place, but maybe it should be discussed a bit first.

Uncertainty can be divided into well-defined and poorly defined parts. The well-defined uncertainty can be analysed with probability theory. The poorly defined can be divided into vagueness and ambiguity. Vagueness can be analysed with fuzzy set theory. Ambiguity can be divided into non specificity and discord. Non specificity can be analysed with possibility theory and discord can be analysed with ontologies.

--Ari Jolma Feb 1, 2007

 * Links? --AB (talk) 19:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Let's not reinvent the issue
Douglas Hubbard just wrote the book "How to Measure Anything: Finding the Value of Intangibles in Business" published by John Wiley & Sons. He has a pretty complete discussion on every definition of uncertainty and even addresses the quote by Knight. Uncertainty is simply the lack of complete certainty. As he states it, uncertainty is a state of knowledge where 100% correct assessment of a state (past, present or future) is not possible. This is consistent with all the main schools of thought about uncertainty including, probability theory, the decision sciences, statistics, information theory and physics.

Contrary to the claims of the person at the top of this discussion page, it does not confuse the topic to show that these uses of the term are quite consistent. Nor, as the same person states, does it mean that if we just removed error, we would have no uncertainty. In modern physics uncertainty is not just a function of error in observation but an intrinsic and irreducible aspect of reality - at least at the subatomic level.

Hubbard also clarifies what Knight found unclear: the difference between uncertainty and risk. In the pragmatic sense of people who do risk analysis all the time, risk is simply uncertainty about a state of affairs where at least one possible state involves a loss (something undesirable). To take it further, Hubbard defines the measurement of uncertainty as the assignment of probabilities to the set of possible states such that the p(union of all states)=1 and p(intersection of exclusive states)=0 and the p(each state)>0. Finally, the measurement of risk is simply a measurement of uncertainty together with an assignment of loss (or pdf of losses) for each of the uncertain states. Many states may have a loss=0 but if at least one does state does not have loss>0 then there is, by definition, no risk. Knight's quote notwithstanding, this actually is the practical use of the term in the risk-measurement industries and professions.

If you are wondering why a book with that title would talk so much about uncertainty, it is because Hubbard defines measurement as observations that reduce uncertainty expressed as a quantity. This is also the de facto use of the term "measurement" by all of the empirical sciences, even if they don't explicitly define it that way. All empirical measurements in any peer-reviewed journal must report error of a measurement and the error is presumed not to be zero. Even though they don't eliminate uncertainty (usually) it still counts as a measurement because it is less uncertainty than there was before (this is also consistent with Information Theory).

BillGosset 00:23, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Analyzing uncertainty does not mean you have no "real" uncertainty
Dave said "When one can analyze errors one does not have real uncertainty!". This is not correct. First, simply analyzing errors is not the same as removing errors. Much of statistics is about quantifying the error you have remaining after a set of observations even if you don't reduce it further, much less eliminate it. When you compute your 90% confidence interval based on a sample, you have literally analyzed uncertainty but you have not removed it. Furthermore, "real" uncertainty still exists even when you analyze error. Its considered classical, not modern physics, to presume that the only uncertainty is from error in observation. In quantum mechanics, the uncertainty is a basic property of particles and is not just a function of observation error.BillGosset 00:29, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Remove David Wilkinson reference
Wilkinson is not a notable source on this topic. His book was not based on any prior research in the mathematical understanding of uncertainty and risk. He was trained in education management for law enforcement and later became a management consultant. Wilkinson is simply confused about or probably unaware of the mathematically well-defined meanings of these terms. He makes no attempt to reconcile his contradictory definitions with the proper scientific and mathematical use of the terms - he is simply unaware of these established definitions. He is a layman on this topic and should not cited.Hubbardaie 11:40, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Punctuation and usage errors
The big table in the middle of the article says "epistemological" where it should say "epistemic", and the hyphens are missing in "knowldege-guided", "rule-guided", and "intuition-guided". Michael Hardy (talk) 00:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

This article is all over the place
It ought to be refocused or split into multiple articles. All I was looking for was the equation for "uncertainty of the mean" in physics.

Article says that

"Uncertainty is a term used in subtly different ways in a number of fields, including philosophy, physics, statistics, economics, finance, insurance, psychology, sociology, engineering, and information science."

But then you try to glom it all together into one article anyway. It's just a huge mess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.198.129.14 (talk) 19:17, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Remove the entire "Uncertainty and the media" section
Although there is some merit to observe that the public perception of risk is not always rational, the slant given to the "Uncertainty and the media" section shows a significant bias within a hot-topic issue, which is 'global warming'. It presents the view that global warming is 'settled science', which is an oxymoron.

The public may tend to view flying on a commercial airliner as being more risky than driving the same trip in an automobile. The available data do not tend to support that view.

How should the public, and elected officials, evaluate the threat from something that could potentially be catastrophic, like the Earth being hit by a large asteroid, but in any given century is still an unlikely event? How much resources should be dedicated to detecting and diverting such a threat?

There are topics that could be included in this section that do not introduce something as contentious as global warming.

And yes, as an engineer I would never present to the world models that had not been shown to have predictive capability for new data that was not used in making the models, and then recommend drastic and expensive changes in public policy. I would also, as a scientist, never defend my position by saying "it is the consensus opinion of the experts...". That is a very LAME position to take, on ANYTHING, and is an indication that the evidence is not sufficient in and of itself to stand up to scrutiny.

So why use such a contentious topic for explaining something like "Uncertainty and the media". There are less contentious topics that could be used to more effectively make the same points.

PoqVaUSA (talk) 22:46, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Error in example in Measurements section
I believe that the part

also written 10.5(0.5) and 10.50(5)

should be

also written 10.50(5) and 10.500(5)

to be consistent with the later discussion. It would also be clearer to list the parentheses notation separately after each example, to make the association between each example clearer. For example,

Thus it is understood that 10.5 means 10.5±0.05, also written 10.50(5), and 10.50 means 10.50±0.005, also written 10.500(5).

Definition of risk
This article gives a poor (and wrong) definition of risk. Risks can also have positive outcome. When I play lottery, no matter how unlikely it is, there is a risk that I actually win and become rich. This risk is due to stochastic uncertainty. This should be covered here. There is a wide misconception that risks are necessarily negative potential outcomes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.141.218.228 (talk) 11:35, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

'Measurement uncertainty' section duplicates separate 'measurement uncertainty' page Suggestion
The wikipedia page Measurement uncertainty includes all the detail in the 'measurements' section on this page. That's a bit wasteful of space but more importantly, it adds to the likelihood of inconsistency and duplication and (because measurement uncertainty in metrology is an active research field) leaves the present page with quite an incomplete description. I suggest reducing the 'measurements' section to a single brief paragraph stating that there is a well-established special case in metrology/measurement science and pointing to the measurement uncertainty page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slrellison (talk • contribs) 12:14, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Concise notation
The chapter Measurements explains the concise notation to state measurement uncertainties in parentheses. However, there is no example of when the error value crosses the decimal point. So when I have $12.3$, then what is the correct expression, $12.3$ or rather $12.3$ ?? --Geek3 (talk) 18:11, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Uncertainty


text:
Talk:Argon

Hello
Please excuse me,but should read Electron configuration[Ne]:3s2 2p6 3x2+2x6=18 protons 86.122.165.148 (talk) 08:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

 * Electron configuration order goes from 3s to 3p after Neon. Current information is correct. Recon  rabbit  13:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
 * ok 2406:7400:FF03:7900:7878:BE1A:AE1F:8822 (talk) 07:48, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Argon