text:
Centaur (small Solar System body)

In planetary astronomy, a centaur is a small Solar System body that orbits the Sun between Jupiter and Neptune and crosses the orbits of one or more of the giant planets. Centaurs generally have unstable orbits because they cross or have crossed the orbits of the giant planets; almost all their orbits have dynamic lifetimes of only a few million years, but there is one known centaur, 514107 Kaʻepaokaʻawela, which may be in a stable (though retrograde) orbit. Centaurs typically exhibit the characteristics of both asteroids and comets. They are named after the mythological centaurs that were a mixture of horse and human. Observational bias toward large objects makes determination of the total centaur population difficult. Estimates for the number of centaurs in the Solar System more than 1 km in diameter range from as low as 44,000 to more than 10,000,000.

The first centaur to be discovered, under the definition of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and the one used here, was 944 Hidalgo in 1920. However, they were not recognized as a distinct population until the discovery of 2060 Chiron in 1977. The largest confirmed centaur is 10199 Chariklo, which at 260 kilometers in diameter is as big as a mid-sized main-belt asteroid, and is known to have a system of rings. It was discovered in 1997.

No centaur has been photographed up close, although there is evidence that Saturn's moon Phoebe, imaged by the Cassini probe in 2004, may be a captured centaur that originated in the Kuiper belt. In addition, the Hubble Space Telescope has gleaned some information about the surface features of 8405 Asbolus.

Ceres may have originated in the region of the outer planets, and if so might be considered an ex-centaur, but the centaurs seen today all originated elsewhere.

Of the objects known to occupy centaur-like orbits, approximately 30 have been found to display comet-like dust comas, with three, 2060 Chiron, 60558 Echeclus, and 29P/Schwassmann-Wachmann 1, having detectable levels of volatile production in orbits entirely beyond Jupiter. Chiron and Echeclus are therefore classified as both centaurs and comets, while Schwassmann-Wachmann 1 has always held a comet designation. Other centaurs, such as 52872 Okyrhoe, are suspected of having shown comas. Any centaur that is perturbed close enough to the Sun is expected to become a comet.

Classification
A centaur has either a perihelion or a semi-major axis between those of the outer planets (between Jupiter and Neptune). Due to the inherent long-term instability of orbits in this region, even centaurs such as and, which do not currently cross the orbit of any planet, are in gradually changing orbits that will be perturbed until they start to cross the orbit of one or more of the giant planets. Some astronomers count only bodies with semimajor axes in the region of the outer planets to be centaurs; others accept any body with a perihelion in the region, as their orbits are similarly unstable.

Discrepant criteria
However, different institutions have different criteria for classifying borderline objects, based on particular values of their orbital elements:
 * The Minor Planet Center (MPC) defines centaurs as having a perihelion beyond the orbit of Jupiter (5.2 AU < q) and a semi-major axis less than that of Neptune (a < 30.1 AU). Though nowadays the MPC often lists centaurs and scattered disc objects together as a single group.
 * The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) similarly defines centaurs as having a semi-major axis, a, between those of Jupiter and Neptune (5.5 AU ≤ a ≤ 30.1 AU).
 * In contrast, the Deep Ecliptic Survey (DES) defines centaurs using a dynamical classification scheme. These classifications are based on the simulated change in behavior of the present orbit when extended over 10 million years. The DES defines centaurs as non-resonant objects whose instantaneous (osculating) perihelia are less than the osculating semi-major axis of Neptune at any time during the simulation. This definition is intended to be synonymous with planet-crossing orbits and to suggest comparatively short lifetimes in the current orbit.
 * The collection The Solar System Beyond Neptune (2008) defines objects with a semi-major axis between those of Jupiter and Neptune and a Jupiter-relative Tisserand's parameter above 3.05 as centaurs, classifying the objects with a Jupiter-relative Tisserand's parameter below this and, to exclude Kuiper belt objects, an arbitrary perihelion cut-off half-way to Saturn (q ≤ 7.35 AU) as Jupiter-family comets, and classifying those objects on unstable orbits with a semi-major axis larger than Neptune's as members of the scattered disc.
 * Other astronomers prefer to define centaurs as objects that are non-resonant with a perihelion inside the orbit of Neptune that can be shown to likely cross the Hill sphere of a gas giant within the next 10 million years, so that centaurs can be thought of as objects scattered inwards and that interact more strongly and scatter more quickly than typical scattered-disc objects.
 * The JPL Small-Body Database lists 452 centaurs. There are an additional 116 trans-Neptunian objects (objects with a semi-major axis further than Neptune's, i.e. 30.1 AU ≤ a) with a perihelion closer than the orbit of Uranus (q ≤ 19.2 AU).

Ambiguous objects
The Gladman & Marsden (2008) criteria would make some objects Jupiter-family comets: Both Echeclus (, T$J$ = 3.03) and Okyrhoe (T$J$ = 2.95) have traditionally been classified as centaurs. Traditionally considered an asteroid, but classified as a centaur by JPL, Hidalgo (T$J$ = 2.07) would also change category to a Jupiter-family comet. Schwassmann-Wachmann 1 (T$J$ = 2.99) has been categorized as both a centaur and a Jupiter-family comet depending on the definition used.

Other objects caught between these differences in classification methods include, which has a semi-major axis of 32 AU but crosses the orbits of both Uranus and Neptune. It is listed as an outer centaur by the Deep Ecliptic Survey (DES). Among the inner centaurs, (434620) 2005 VD, with a perihelion distance very near Jupiter, is listed as a centaur by both JPL and DES.

A recent orbital simulation of the evolution of Kuiper Belt Objects through the centaur region has identified a short-lived "orbital gateway" between 5.4 and 7.8 AU through which 21% of all centaurs pass, including 72% of the centaurs that become Jupiter-family comets. Four objects are known to occupy this region, including 29P/Schwassmann-Wachmann, P/2010 TO20 LINEAR-Grauer, P/2008 CL94 Lemmon, and 2016 LN8, but the simulations indicate that there may of order 1000 more objects >1 km in radius that have yet to be detected. Objects in this gateway region can display significant activity and are in an important evolutionary transition state that further blurs the distinction between the centaur and Jupiter-family comet populations.

The Committee on Small Body Nomenclature of the International Astronomical Union has not formally weighed in on any side of the debate. Instead, it has adopted the following naming convention for such objects: Befitting their centaur-like transitional orbits between TNOs and comets, "objects on unstable, non-resonant, giant-planet-crossing orbits with semimajor axes greater than Neptune's" are to be named for other hybrid and shape-shifting mythical creatures. Thus far, only the binary objects Ceto and Phorcys and Typhon and Echidna have been named according to the new policy.

Centaurs with measured diameters listed as possible dwarf planets according to Mike Brown's website include 10199 Chariklo, and 2060 Chiron.

Distribution

The diagram illustrates the orbits of known centaurs in relation to the orbits of the planets. For selected objects, the eccentricity of the orbits is represented by red segments (extending from perihelion to aphelion).

The orbits of centaurs show a wide range of eccentricity, from highly eccentric (Pholus, Asbolus, Amycus, Nessus) to more circular (Chariklo and the Saturn-crossers Thereus and Okyrhoe).

To illustrate the range of the orbits' parameters, the diagram shows a few objects with very unusual orbits, plotted in yellow :
 * (Apollo asteroid) follows an extremely eccentric orbit (e = 0.947), leading it from inside Earth's orbit (0.94 AU) to well beyond Neptune (> 34 AU)
 * follows a quasi-circular orbit (e < 0.026)
 * has the lowest inclination (i < 3°).
 * is one of a small proportion of centaurs with an extreme prograde inclination (i > 60°). It follows such a highly inclined orbit (79°) that, while it crosses from the distance of the asteroid belt from the Sun to past the distance of Saturn, if its orbit is projected onto the plane of Jupiter's orbit, it does not even go out as far as Jupiter.

Over a dozen known centaurs follow retrograde orbits. Their inclinations range from modest (e.g., 160° for Dioretsa) to extreme (i < 120°; e.g. 105° for ). Seventeen of these high-inclination, retrograde centaurs were controversially claimed to have an interstellar origin.

Changing orbits

Because the centaurs are not protected by orbital resonances, their orbits are unstable within a timescale of 106–107 years. For example, 55576 Amycus is in an unstable orbit near the 3:4 resonance of Uranus. Dynamical studies of their orbits indicate that being a centaur is probably an intermediate orbital state of objects transitioning from the Kuiper belt to the Jupiter family of short-period comets. (679997) 2023 RB will have its orbit notably changed by a close approach to Saturn in 2201.

Objects may be perturbed from the Kuiper belt, whereupon they become Neptune-crossing and interact gravitationally with that planet (see theories of origin). They then become classed as centaurs, but their orbits are chaotic, evolving relatively rapidly as the centaur makes repeated close approaches to one or more of the outer planets. Some centaurs will evolve into Jupiter-crossing orbits whereupon their perihelia may become reduced into the inner Solar System and they may be reclassified as active comets in the Jupiter family if they display cometary activity. Centaurs will thus ultimately collide with the Sun or a planet or else they may be ejected into interstellar space after a close approach to one of the planets, particularly Jupiter.

Physical characteristics
The relatively small size of centaurs precludes remote observation of surfaces, but colour indices and spectra can provide clues about surface composition and insight into the origin of the bodies.

Colours

The colours of centaurs are very diverse, which challenges any simple model of surface composition. In the side-diagram, the colour indices are measures of apparent magnitude of an object through blue (B), visible (V) (i.e. green-yellow) and red (R) filters. The diagram illustrates these differences (in exaggerated colours) for all centaurs with known colour indices. For reference, two moons: Triton and Phoebe, and planet Mars are plotted (yellow labels, size not to scale).

Centaurs appear to be grouped into two classes:
 * very red – for example 5145 Pholus
 * blue (or blue-grey, according to some authors) – for example 2060 Chiron or

There are numerous theories to explain this colour difference, but they can be broadly divided into two categories:
 * The colour difference results from a difference in the origin and/or composition of the centaur (see origin below)
 * The colour difference reflects a different level of space-weathering from radiation and/or cometary activity.

As examples of the second category, the reddish colour of Pholus has been explained as a possible mantle of irradiated red organics, whereas Chiron has instead had its ice exposed due to its periodic cometary activity, giving it a blue/grey index. The correlation with activity and color is not certain, however, as the active centaurs span the range of colors from blue (Chiron) to red (166P/NEAT). Alternatively, Pholus may have been only recently expelled from the Kuiper belt, so that surface transformation processes have not yet taken place.

Delsanti et al. suggest multiple competing processes: reddening by the radiation, and blushing by collisions.

Spectra
The interpretation of spectra is often ambiguous, related to particle sizes and other factors, but the spectra offer an insight into surface composition. As with the colours, the observed spectra can fit a number of models of the surface.

Water ice signatures have been confirmed on a number of centaurs (including 2060 Chiron, 10199 Chariklo and 5145 Pholus). In addition to the water ice signature, a number of other models have been put forward: Chiron appears to be the most complex. The spectra observed vary depending on the period of the observation. Water ice signature was detected during a period of low activity and disappeared during high activity.
 * Chariklo's surface has been suggested to be a mixture of tholins (like those detected on Titan and Triton) with amorphous carbon.
 * Pholus has been suggested to be covered by a mixture of Titan-like tholins, carbon black, olivine and methanol ice.
 * The surface of 52872 Okyrhoe has been suggested to be a mixture of kerogens, olivines and a small percentage of water ice.
 * 8405 Asbolus has been suggested to be a mixture of 15% Triton-like tholins, 8% Titan-like tholin, 37% amorphous carbon and 40% ice tholin.

Similarities to comets
Observations of Chiron in 1988 and 1989 near its perihelion found it to display a coma (a cloud of gas and dust evaporating from its surface). It is thus now officially classified as both a minor planet and a comet, although it is far larger than a typical comet and there is some lingering controversy. Other centaurs are being monitored for comet-like activity: so far two, 60558 Echeclus, and 166P/NEAT have shown such behavior. 166P/NEAT was discovered while it exhibited a coma, and so is classified as a comet, though its orbit is that of a centaur. 60558 Echeclus was discovered without a coma but recently became active, and so it too is now classified as both a comet and an asteroid. Overall, there are ~30 centaurs for which activity has been detected, with the active population biased toward objects with smaller perihelion distances.

Carbon monoxide has been detected in 60558 Echeclus and Chiron in very small amounts, and the derived CO production rate was calculated to be sufficient to account for the observed coma. The calculated CO production rate from both 60558 Echeclus and Chiron is substantially lower than what is typically observed for 29P/Schwassmann–Wachmann, another distantly active comet often classified as a centaur.

There is no clear orbital distinction between centaurs and comets. Both 29P/Schwassmann-Wachmann and 39P/Oterma have been referred to as centaurs since they have typical centaur orbits. The comet 39P/Oterma is currently inactive and was seen to be active only before it was perturbed into a centaur orbit by Jupiter in 1963. The faint comet 38P/Stephan–Oterma would probably not show a coma if it had a perihelion distance beyond Jupiter's orbit at 5 AU. By the year 2200, comet 78P/Gehrels will probably migrate outwards into a centaur-like orbit.

Rotational periods
A periodogram analysis of the light-curves of these Chiron and Chariklo gives respectively the following rotational periods: 5.5±0.4~h and 7.0± 0.6~h.

Size, density, reflectivity
Centaurs can reach diameters up to hundreds of kilometers. The largest centaurs have diameters in excess of 300 km, and primarily reside beyond 20 AU.

Hypotheses of origin
The study of centaurs’ origins is rich in recent developments, but any conclusions are still hampered by limited physical data. Different models have been put forward for possible origin of centaurs.

Simulations indicate that the orbit of some Kuiper belt objects can be perturbed, resulting in the object's expulsion so that it becomes a centaur. Scattered disc objects would be dynamically the best candidates (For instance, the centaurs could be part of an "inner" scattered disc of objects perturbed inwards from the Kuiper belt.) for such expulsions, but their colours do not fit the bicoloured nature of the centaurs. Plutinos are a class of Kuiper belt object that display a similar bicoloured nature, and there are suggestions that not all plutinos' orbits are as stable as initially thought, due to perturbation by Pluto.

Further developments are expected with more physical data on Kuiper belt objects.

Some centaurs may have their origin in fragmentation episodes, perhaps triggered during close encounters with Jupiter. The orbits of centaurs 2020 MK4, P/2008 CL94 (Lemmon), and P/2010 TO20 (LINEAR-Grauer) pass close to that of comet 29P/Schwassmann–Wachmann, the first discovered centaur and close encounters are possible in which one of the objects traverses the coma of 29P when active.

At least one centaur, 2013 VZ70, might have an origin among Saturn's irregular moon population via impact, fragmentation, or tidal disruption.

title: Centaur (small Solar System body)


text:
Talk:Scottsdale

Untitled
This paragraph seems pointless. Are we going to list every town with Nieman Marcus and Starbucks? Also, Snotsdale is kind of nasty.

 * Nicknamed Snotsdale by many, this area hosts a variety of businesses, such as Soccer Express, Neiman Marcus, Starbucks Coffee amd the John Casablancas Modeling and Acting School.

Ortolan88

Is there only one Scottsdale, Arizona? A few days after this Scottsdale article was created, the Rambot created another one at Scottsdale, Arizona. If both refer to the same place, they should be merged. -- Oliver PEREIRA 14:04 Jan 24, 2003 (UTC)
 * It's the same place, I'll merge to the rambot version, dropping the Starbucks,etc., and the Snotsdale comment, but keeping the "sociology". Ortolan88

The links to countries are against wiki guidelines for disambiguation pages. I've fixed it. CGameProgrammer 23:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Despite the regs., I do prefer:
< http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=scottsdale&oldid=31181653 >.

Hopiakuta 01:56, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

< http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=scottsdale%2c_Arizona&diff=77935090&oldid=77934782 >.

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 23:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Scottsdale (Novel)
Scottsdale is a young adult novel by Stephen Holmes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gforce1037 (talk • contribs) 00:54, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Scottsdale


text:
Foreign relations of São Tomé and Príncipe

Until independence in 1975, São Tomé and Príncipe had few ties abroad except those that passed through Portugal. Following independence, the new government sought to expand its diplomatic relationships. A common language, tradition, and colonial legacy have led to close collaboration between São Tomé and other ex-Portuguese colonies in Africa, particularly Angola. São Toméan relations with other African countries in the region, such as Gabon and the Republic of the Congo, are also good. In December 2000, São Tomé signed the African Union treaty; it was later ratified by the National Assembly.

The São Toméan government has generally maintained a foreign policy based on nonalignment and cooperation with any country willing to assist in its economic development. In recent years, it has also increasingly emphasized ties to the United States and western Europe.

Diplomatic relations
List of countries which São Tomé and Príncipe maintains diplomatic relations with:


text:
Capricorn One

Capricorn One is a 1978 British-produced American thriller film in which a reporter discovers that a supposed Mars landing by a crewed mission to the planet has been faked via a conspiracy involving the government and—under duress—the crew themselves. It was written and directed by Peter Hyams and produced by Lew Grade's ITC Entertainment. It stars Elliott Gould as the reporter, and James Brolin, Sam Waterston, and O. J. Simpson as the astronauts. Hal Holbrook plays a senior NASA official who goes along with governmental and corporate interests and helps to fake the mission.

The music score was created by Jerry Goldsmith.

Plot
Capricorn One—the first crewed mission to Mars—is on the launch pad. Just before liftoff, astronauts Charles Brubaker, Peter Willis, and John Walker are suddenly removed from the spacecraft. Bewildered, they are flown to an abandoned military base in the desert. The launch proceeds on schedule, with the public unaware the spacecraft is empty.

At the base, NASA official James Kelloway informs the astronauts that a faulty life-support system would have killed them in-flight. He says they must help counterfeit the televised footage during the flight to and from Mars. Another failed space mission would result in NASA's funding being cut and private contractors losing millions in profits. Kelloway threatens their families to force their cooperation.

The astronauts remain captive during the flight and appear to be filmed after landing on Mars, although they are actually inside of a makeshift TV studio at the base. At the command center, only a few officials know about the conspiracy until an alert technician, Elliot Whitter, notices that ground control receives the crew's televised transmissions before the spacecraft telemetry arrives. Whitter reports this to his supervisors, including Kelloway, but is told it is due to a faulty workstation. Whitter partially shares his concerns with a TV journalist friend, Robert Caulfield. Whitter suddenly vanishes, and when Caulfield goes to Whitter's apartment the next day, he discovers someone else living there and that all evidence of Whitter's recent life has been erased. As Caulfield investigates, several attempts are made on his life.

Upon returning to Earth, the empty spacecraft burns up during atmospheric reentry due to a faulty heat shield, which would have killed the astronauts had they been on board. The astronauts realize officials will need to kill them to keep the hoax a secret. They escape in a small jet which quickly runs out of fuel, forcing a crash-landing in the desert. They split up on foot to increase their chances of finding help and exposing the plot. Kelloway sends helicopters after them. Willis and Walker are found, while Brubaker evades capture.

Caulfield interviews Brubaker's "widow" after reviewing a televised conversation between the astronauts and their wives. Mrs. Brubaker had seemed confused when her husband mentioned their last family vacation. She explains that the family had actually gone to a different location, where a western movie was being filmed. Brubaker was intrigued by how special effects and technology made it seem real.

Caulfield believes Brubaker would never make such a mistake and may have been sending his wife a message. Caulfield goes to the deserted western movie set and is shot at. As he investigates further, federal agents break into his home, arresting him for possessing cocaine that they planted there. His exasperated boss bails Caulfield out, then fires him.

A reporter friend tells Caulfield about an abandoned military base located 300 miles (480 km) from Houston. The base is deserted, but Caulfield finds Brubaker's necklace and medallion and concludes the astronauts were there. Caulfield hires a crop-dusting pilot named Albain to search the desert. They spot and follow two helicopters to a closed isolated gas station where Brubaker is hiding. They rescue him as he attempts to escape his pursuers. The helicopters chase their plane through a canyon but crash when Albain blinds them with crop spray.

Ultimately, Caulfield and Brubaker arrive at the astronauts' memorial service, where Kelloway and Brubaker's wife see them and live network TV coverage exposes the truth. The audience is left to imagine the fallout.

Development
Peter Hyams began thinking about a film of a space hoax while working on broadcasts of the Apollo missions for CBS. He later reflected regarding the Apollo 11 Moon landing, "There was one event of really enormous importance that had almost no witnesses. And the only verification we have ... came from a TV camera."

He later elaborated: "Whenever there was something on the news about a [space flight], they would cut to a studio in St. Louis where there was a simulation of what was going on. I grew up in the generation where my parents basically believed if it was in the newspaper it was true. That turned out to be bullshit. My generation was brought up to believe television was true, and that was bullshit too. So I was watching these simulations and I wondered what would happen if someone faked a whole story."

Hyams wrote the script in 1972 but no one wanted to make it. He says interest in the script was re-activated by the Watergate Scandal. He approached producer Paul Lazarus. Hyams and Lazarus had a meeting with Lew Grade, head of production company ITC Entertainment who had recently moved into film production with The Return of the Pink Panther. Grade agreed to make the film after only five minutes. The budget was $4.8 million.

Grade announced the film in October 1975 as a part of a slate of ten films he intended to make over the next 12 months, including The Domino Principle, Action - Clear the Fast Lanes and Juarez. The last two were ultimately not made.

To stay within the budget, NASA's co-operation was needed. Lazarus had a good relationship with the space agency from Futureworld. The filmmakers were thus able to obtain government equipment as props, including a prototype Apollo Lunar Module, despite the story's negative portrayal of the space agency.

In September 1976, it was announced the cast would include Elliott Gould, O.J. Simpson, James Brolin, Brenda Vaccaro, and Candice Bergen. The presence of Brolin and Simpson in the cast helped secure a presale to NBC. Ultimately Bergen pulled out and was replaced by Karen Black.

Shooting
Filming started in January 1977. Shooting locations included Cinema Center Films in Studio City, and Red Rock Canyon State Park.

Hyams later joked, "O. J. Simpson was in it, and Robert Blake was in Busting [Hyams' first feature]. I've said many times: Some people have AFI Lifetime Achievement awards; some people have multiple Oscars; my bit of trivia is that I've made films with two leading men who were subsequently tried for the first-degree murder of their wives."

Release
The film originally was scheduled to debut in the United States in February 1978, but good preview screenings and delays in Superman caused it to move to June. Capricorn One became the year's most-successful independent film.

Hyams later said: "Audiences just stood up and cheered at one point in the film. It wasn't because it was such a great movie, it's just that certain movies strike certain chords with people. In a successful movie, the audience, almost before they see it, know they're going to like it. I remember standing in the back of the theater and crying because I knew that something had changed in my life. Sitting on the film cans outside the screening room, I felt my cheeks were wet with tears. A bright man, [studio executive] David Picker came over to me and said, 'You're going to have a lot of new best friends tomorrow. You better know how to handle it.'"

In Japan and the UK, a version with a running time of 129 minutes was released theatrically, with additional scenes such as the docking of the spacecraft during the Mars landing, and with different cuts of detail. However, the rights company (ITC Entertainment) has since taken the position that the final version of "Capricorn One" is the 123-minute version currently in circulation, and that the 129-minute version no longer exists. Therefore, only the 123-minute version is currently distributed in Japan and the UK. However, in 2019, film material from the 129-minute version was discovered at the National Film Archive of Japan, so remastered material was created based on this film and released as "bonus content" only on Japanese Blu-ray, after obtaining special permission from the rights company.

Reception
Vincent Canby of The New York Times called the film "an expensive, stylistically bankrupt suspense melodrama" while describing much of its screenplay as "humorless comic-strip stuff." Conversely, Gene Siskel of the Chicago Tribune gave the film three-and-a-half stars out of four and called it "a surprisingly good thriller" with a runaway car sequence "that provides some of the best action footage I've seen in a long time." Variety faulted the film's "underdeveloped script" and "scattershot casting", calling the duo of Savalas and Gould "a bullseye" but Waterston and Simpson lacking in "group chemistry".

Kevin Thomas of the Los Angeles Times thought the beginning of the film was the best part, and what follows "is wildly uneven, veering between the serious and the merely silly, and ending up likely to please only the least demanding." Gary Arnold of The Washington Post wrote, "Capricorn One harks back to the old adventure serials, but Hyams doesn't have remotely enough wit or technique to achieve a fresh stylization of vintage formulas."

Richard Combs of The Monthly Film Bulletin stated "Somewhere within this flabby, overproduced fantasy about space-age double-dealing and Watergate-type sleuthing lives a smaller, tighter film—and a much wittier satire on the space program and technologies, like Hollywood, designed to deceive and manipulate. The trouble is that this more ideal version is not really struggling to get out but wallowing complacently in the limitless excess that has become the Lew Grade trademark."

In a retrospective review, AllMovie critic Donald Guarisco wrote: "This agreeable high-concept effort is one of Peter Hyams' most accomplished films. The script's conspiracy-theory premise requires a major suspension of disbelief, but Hyams makes it worthwhile for those willing to make that leap."

Capricorn One holds a 65% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 23 reviews, with an average rating of 6.2/10. The site's consensus states: "A string of questionable plot contrivances threaten to bury its story, but Capricorn One manages to unfurl an amusing, sharply cynical conspiracy yarn."

Other media
Two novelizations of the film were written and published by separate authors. The first was written by Ken Follett (under the pseudonym Bernard L. Ross) and published in the United Kingdom; the other was written by Ron Goulart and published in the United States.

The Follett novel is notable for giving Robert Caulfield more development than the movie does, including giving him something of a relationship with CBS reporter Judy Drinkwater (who has more time in the book than in the movie) and ending the book with him and Judy. The story saves his career and results in his being employed by CBS.

Clips from the faked Mars landing scenes have been used for illustration purposes in various Moon landing hoax conspiracy documentaries, notably the Fox TV show Conspiracy Theory: Did We Land on the Moon and Bart Sibrel's film A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Moon (2001). The latter also features a still shot from the hoax scene on the DVD's front cover.

In 2020–2021, Capricorn One was used as part of an internet prank. A viral video purported to be released by WikiLeaks was uploaded to BitChute, Twitter, Facebook and other social media platforms and blogs with a title: "Wikileaks releases - Moon landing cut scene - filmed in Nevada desert". In fact, WikiLeaks released no such video. Close inspection revealed this prank video to be made using clips from Capricorn One and even various film reels shot on the set of Capricorn One, which were then cut and spliced with stock footage from the Apollo missions and training sessions.

title: Capricorn One


text:
Northern Low Saxon

Northern Low Saxon (in Standard High German: Nordniedersächsisch, also Nordniederdeutsch, lit. North(ern) Low Saxon/German; in Standard Dutch: Noord-Nedersaksisch) is a subgroup of Low Saxon dialects of Low German. As such, it covers a great part of the West Low German-speaking areas of northern Germany, with the exception of the border regions where South Low Saxon (Eastphalian and Westphalian) is spoken, and Gronings dialect in the Netherlands.

Dialects
Northern Low Saxon can be divided into Holsteinian (Holsteinisch), Schleswigian (Schleswigsch), East Frisian Low Saxon, Dithmarsch (Dithmarsisch), North Hanoveranian (Nordhannoversch), Emslandish (Emsländisch), and Oldenburgish (Oldenburgisch) in Germany, with additional dialects in the Netherlands such as Gronings.

Holsteinisch is spoken in Holstein, the southern part of Schleswig-Holstein in Germany, in Dithmarschen, around Neumünster, Rendsburg, Kiel and Lübeck.

Schleswigsch is spoken in Schleswig, which is divided between Germany and Denmark. It is mainly based on a South Jutlandic substrate. Therefore, it has some notable differences in pronunciation and grammar with its southern neighbour dialects. The dialects on the west coast of Schleswig (Nordfriesland district) and some islands show some North Frisian influences.

Oldenburgisch is spoken around the city of Oldenburg. It is limited to Germany. The main difference between it and East Frisian Low Saxon, which is spoken in the Frisian parts of Lower Saxony, is the lack of an East Frisian substrate. Oldenburgisch is spoken in the city of Bremen as "Bremian", which is the only capital where Oldenburgisch is spoken.

Overviews
a)
 * Schleswigsch
 * Holsteinisch
 * Hamburgisch
 * Bremisch-Oldenburgisch
 * Ostfriesisch (East Frisian)
 * Emsländisch

b)
 * Ostfriesisch (East Frisian)
 * Emsländisch
 * Bremisch-Oldenburgisch
 * Nordhannoversch
 * Niederelbisch (Hamburg, Elbmarschen)
 * Holsteinisch
 * Schleswigsch

c)
 * Dithmarsch
 * Schleswigsch / Schleswigian
 * Holsteinisch / Holsteinian
 * Oldenburgisch
 * Emsländisch
 * Nordhannoversch

Emsländisch and Oldenburgisch are also grouped together as Emsländisch-Oldenburgisch, while Bremen and Hamburg lie in the area of Nordhannoversch (in a broader sense).

Characteristics
The most obvious common character in grammar is the forming of the perfect participle. It is formed without a prefix, as in all North Germanic languages, as well as English and Frisian, but unlike standard German, Dutch and some dialects of Westphalian and Eastphalian Low Saxon:
 * gahn (to go): Ik bün gahn  (I have gone/I went), Standard German: gehen; ich bin gegangen/ich ging
 * seilen (to sail): He hett seilt  (He (has) sailed), Standard German: segeln; er ist gesegelt/er segelte
 * kopen (to buy): Wi harrn köfft  (We had bought), Standard German: kaufen; wir haben gekauft/wir  kauften
 * kamen (to come): Ji sünd kamen  (You (all) have come/You came), Standard German: kommen; ihr seid gekommen/ihr kamt
 * eten (to eat): Se hebbt eten  (They have eaten/They ate), Standard German: essen; sie haben gegessen/sie aßen

The diminutive (-je) (Dutch and East Frisian Low Saxon -tje, Eastphalian -ke, High German -chen, Alemannic -le, li) is hardly used. Some examples are Buscherumpje, a fisherman's shirt, or lüttje, a diminutive of lütt, little. Instead the adjective lütt is used, e.g. dat lütte Huus, de lütte Deern, de lütte Jung.

There are a lot of special characteristics in the vocabulary, too, but they are shared partly with other languages and dialects, e.g.:
 * Personal pronouns: ik (like Dutch ik, standard German form ich), du  (like German Du, standard German form du), he   (like Dutch hij, standard German form er), se  (like Dutch zij, standard German form sie), dat  (Dutch dat, standard German form es/das), wi, ji  (similar to English ye, Dutch jij, standard German forms wir, ihr), se  (standard German form sie).
 * Interrogatives (English/High German): wo, woans (how/wie), wo laat  (how late/wie spät), wokeen  (who/wer), woneem  (where/wo), wokeen sien  / wen sien  (whose/wessen)
 * Adverbs (English/High German): laat (late/spät), gau  (fast/schnell), suutje  (slowly, carefully/langsam, vorsichtig, from Dutch zoetjes  ‘nice and easy’, adverbial diminutive of zoet  ‘sweet’), vigeliensch  (difficult, tricky/schwierig)
 * Prepositions (English/High German): bi (by, at/bei), achter  (behind/hinter), vör  (before, in front of/vor), blangen  (beside, next to, alongside/neben), twüschen  (betwixt, between/zwischen), mang, mank  (among/unter)

title: Northern Low Saxon


text:
Talk:Smothers Brothers

Why no mention of an entire show?
"The Return of the Smothers Brothers" was broadcast February 16, 1970. I remember vividly Peter Fonda reading part of the Declaration of Independence, and it sounded extremely subversive. 2602:306:BC65:4189:4CA:C8C7:E5C6:C881 (talk) 18:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Found a ref and added it. Schazjmd   (talk)  18:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * You're GOOD.
 * I added your paragraph to the Revival section of "The Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour" article. But I'm not sure I should have. 2602:306:BC65:4189:74F5:3B6:4D83:6445 (talk) 12:56, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I think that's fine. The ref alluded to it being just like the original show. Schazjmd   (talk)  16:31, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Smothers Brothers


text:
Hamburg German

Hamburg German, also known as Hamburg dialect or Hamburger dialect (natively Hamborger Platt, Hamburger Platt), is a group of Northern Low Saxon varieties spoken in Hamburg, Germany. Occasionally, the term Hamburgisch is also used for Hamburg Missingsch, a variety of standard German with Low Saxon substrates. These are urban dialects that have absorbed numerous English and Dutch loanwords, for instance Törn 'trip' (< turn) and suutje 'gently' (< Dutch zoetjes).

Hamburg's name is pronounced in these dialects, with a "ch" similar to that in the standard German words ich or Milch (ich-Laut). Typical of the Hamburg dialects and other Lower Elbe dialects is the pronunciation (and eu spelling) for the diphthong  (written öö, öh or ö), e.g.:

However, as in most other Northern Low German dialects, the long monophthong is pronounced  (as in French peu), for instance Kööm ~ Kœm  'caraway'.

The Northern Low Saxon language in Hamburg is divided in several subdialects, namely:
 * Finkwarder Platt
 * Olwarder Platt
 * Veerlanner Platt (with many sub-sub-dialects)
 * Barmbeker Platt.

The Hamborger Veermaster is a famous sea shanty sung in the regional dialect. The all-purpose greeting "moin" is universally used in Hamburg.

title: Hamburg German


text:
Murderball

Murderball may refer to:
 * Murderball (sport), the original name for wheelchair rugby (known in the U.S. as quad rugby)
 * Murderball (film), a 2005 documentary about wheelchair rugby co-directed by Henry Rubin and Dana Adam Shapiro
 * Murderball, a character in the film The Violent Kind

title: Murderball


text:
Talk:Hidden message

Simpsons reference not actually 'backmasking'
The reference to the 'yvan eht nioj' backmasking used in The Simpsons isn't entirely accurate. Backmasking is a recording technique, whereas in that episode, the text is merely pronounced as it is written in reverse. Evidence of this can be noted in the 't' sound in 'eht'. If the audio were backmasked it would be a softer 'th' sound in reverse, not a sharp 't'. 203.6.205.31 (talk) 03:04, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Pattern Recognition
This sidebar looks inappropriate in a scientific article. Consider removing the pattern recognition element.--Adoniscik (talk) 06:34, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

"Backmasking" is incorrect... but?
The first line of the article states that "backmasking" is not a correct term for backwards messages, but the term is then used throughout the rest of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.97.178.151 (talk • contribs)
 * fixed. TheJabberwock 21:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Backward messages in logos
Is there already a article about backward messages in graphics? For example, if you flip the Coca-Cola logo, you supposedly get a arabic word about how bad allah is, or something. There are also Ambigrams, which can be flipped (and usually read the same as in correct order). Another example is Lucky Strike's old cigarette packaging, which, when rotated "clearly" shows a burning house, accompaning the Japan-flag Red Dot and the trademark phrase "it's toasted".

Thanks, --Abdull 20:24, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Added. TheJabberwock 04:17, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

The ship on [old?] bottles of 'Molson Export' (a Canadian beer) very clearly resembles an armadillo when rotated 90 degrees. The funny thing is that this was pointed out to me in university by a girl on acid (under the influence of the hallucinogen LSD and/or others) and it was true. 69.49.44.11 15:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Empty Spaces
"Please send your answer to Old Pink, care of the funny farm, Chalfont," which refers to former lead singer Syd Barrett, who suffered a breakdown years earlier."

Two problems with this: One, I doubt Floyd would make light of Syd's situation in this manner considering their remorse towards the current condition of their former frontman.

Two, I've never seen this anywhere, so I'm wondering exactly where this might come from in the first place. Keep in mind, it's a nonsense backward lyric, so it doesn't necessarily have to have a meaning behind it. That link reeks of trying to find meaning which simply doesn't appear to have any basis in the truth. Charles M. Reed July 8, 2005 03:26 (UTC)

 * The "they're talking about Syd" thing was widely assumed and passed on at the time I heard the message, which was about 1990, courtesy of a friend excited about his new sound-sampling software. There are web pages which claim that band-members have confirmed this in interview, but they don't cite the interviews.

 * In fairness, I should note that around the same time we believed that eating whole nutmegs would kill you, and that it was feasible to get high on banana strings. We may have been misinformed on all three.

 * Finally, the article is missing the message itself! After the introduction comes the message. It's fainter than the introduction, and is simply someone calling out, "Roger, Carolyne's on the phone". (Carolyne was the name of Roger Waters' wife.)

 * --Telsa

 * The relevant message is no longer in the article. TheJabberwock 22:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

klumphue
Her kan det stå noe norsomt. -catweasel

This section of empty spaces is actually clearly audible, as he recorded it backwards, and just placed it in the song, but at a lower volume.

 * lol yea seriously, does anyone even try these things? i know i do. get a copy of the music, get a copy of cooledit pro and get crackin with reverse action :) --da404LewZer 23:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Not including every single example
I think we've established that most rock bands, as well as other forms of media, have played around with backward messages or been accused of adding backward messages. The listing of bands and pop-culture experiments is huge; I think it should be deleted (or moved to an Examples of backward messages; I don't see a huge amount of value there, but it's evident that people find it interesting) so that the main themes of the article don't get buried under a hoard of examples.--Prosfilaes 21:54, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Here's another good source for backmasking clips: CoolKatt number 9999 06:23, 17 August 2005

 * So yes, this article is very very long. I propose starting a new article "List of examples of backwards messages" and moving all of the examples there, broken up into the same categories as here (alleged, deliberate, parody), and sorted neatly by some criteria (either date or artist). A few revealing examples, at most 2 for each type, should be kept on this page and the rest replaced by a link to the new list article. Comments? Objections? In particular is there a better title for the list article? The one I proposed seems clunky. -- Tyler 22:24, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree, split to a diff article and link to it. --68.94.47.235 05:19, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree with Prosfilaes in that there are many examples of backwards messages not listed in the article. However, I don’t believe the article should be split into two separate pages.  Perhaps the top portion of the article would note the history and characteristics of backwards messages, while the bottom section of the article would have a list (as comprehensive as possible) of known backwards messages (both intentional and questionable).--Governorchavez 19:39, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree, sometimes people like to know 'interesting facts' ya know?? i mean i do.. So what if i know that led zep had some backmask action (i mean c'mon seriously folks), at least it's better than talking about the next 'survivor' ;) --da404LewZer 23:57, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Done: List of backward messages. TheJabberwock 22:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Missy Elliot
May be worth adding to the proposed "examples" section - the song "Work It" by Missy Elliot prominently features reversed speech in its chorus. When reversed, it is simply a repeat of the previous line. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamiemcc (talk • contribs)

Done. TheJabberwock 22:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Neil Armstrong
Supposedly when Neil armstrong's quote about one small step for man is played backwards it says Man Will Space walk... Can someone confirm this? Drstrangeluv
 * "Good luck, Mr. Gorsky..." 81.232.72.148 17:53, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Seems bogus, since Armstrong would have had to practice speaking the quote normally while still creating a backwards message. TheJabberwock 22:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Kiss kiss kiss
Yoko Ono's song "Kiss kiss kiss" becomes "six six six" backwards... =D 81.232.72.148 17:53, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

 * LOL; I added it to List of backward messages. TheJabberwock 22:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Mucha Lucha
In the Mucha Lucha movie "The return of El Malefico," Ricochet reads from the code of Mask Wrestling backwards because of a dare. Does anybody have this movie and the proper tools to reverse what he recites? If so, I would love to hear what the speech reads reversed. It's obviously a parody message.

Backmasking vs. backward speech
I have seen backmasking defined as "intentional backward messages." This distinction is not made in this article.

 * I have NOT seen this defined as such, but i agree. In my opinion, simply reversing something is what it is. reversing audio sounds like complete random gibberish played forwards. Missy Eliots 'backmask' shouldn't be considered a backmask because obviously no work went into it. Led Zep. on the other hand, his lyrics are pretty much understandable in BOTH directions. this is what i would call backmasking. Anything that has a message in both directions. Otherwise it's just being played backwards. whoopty-doo. --da404LewZer 00:03, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm going to split of Backmasking to address this concern. TheJabberwock 22:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Alleged v. Known?
How can "Stairway to Heaven" allegedly have backward messages, and then also be known to. If it's known to, it's past alleged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Capitan Obvio (talk • contribs)
 * It's alleged, not known. TheJabberwock 22:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Miscellaneous
In Kiss, Kiss, Kiss by Yoko Ono she says "i shot John Lennon" and in Led Zeppelin "Stairway to Heaven" they say "bring back hitler now and suddenly"

Are these true? They look suspicious. Citation? 218.102.218.7 15:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I took out this sentence from the "Deliberate Backmasking" sentence: Also, in the theme song for Kingdom Hearts II, "Passion ~single version~", by Utada Hikaru, parts of the song sound like, when played backwards, "I need more affection than you know."

It's gramatically questionable, it's in an awkward location, and it's not even clear if it is accidental or deliberate.

 * Indeed, it IS intentional, as it plays a role in the game Kingdom Hearts 2. I, however, see nothing grammatically incorrect with     it.

Probably should put in a section about the message in doom2 level 30 (?) with the backward message there (a bit of fun in the otherwise serious article).

Novacatz 06:18, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

what about "paul is the walrus"?

what about five iron frenzy's "brad is dead, let's kill brad" on their album, quantitiy is job one, between the track "the untimely death of brad" and the one before it?

what about iron butterfly's "you will all die" in in-a-godda-da-vida (which makes sense since it's gibberish forwards, so they could have recorded it backwards, listened to it, and then written down what it sounded like backwards and re-sang it so that it wouldn't sound like backmasking)?

I removed the section on Ozzy Osbourne because it wasn't clear that this lawsuit involved backwards messagess. If it did it really should be put back in. Rmhermen 19:14 Jan 21, 2003 (UTC)

 * calling a song "suicide solution" sounds like a forwards message! -- Tarquin

 * Upon doing a Web search, I found that the reference was mistaken: it was actually a Judas Priest song, and supposedly it did indeed involve backward messages. However, the suit was lost and the band won.

Wasn't Genesis questioned for the alleged messages "it's fun to smoke mariuhana" and "do it"? I think the case was dismissed when they proved you could also find other "messages" like "could I have a peppermint". // Liftarn

Not genesis, I think it was Queen's "another one bites the dust" that said "it's fun to smoke mariuhana" 67.168.34.86 02:15, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC);

Backmasking is a great concern in some conservative Christian circles.

What conservatives say this and why?

When a particular phrase was cited beforehand and the subjects prompted to listen for it, 90% were able to hear it, even though the sound passage was or was not intentionally recorded.

What? Is the "was or was not" a mistake or does it mean "whether it was or was not"?

--Furrykef 05:18, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

- I'm a little concerned about the comment that conservative Christians are undereducated. It sounds pretty POV to me. Mpolo 08:17, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)

Check the link that I provide in the article to Fundamentalism which has a section about how suspicious Conservative Christians are of any form of Scholarship. I'm actually a Conservative Christian myself and a suspicion of the intellect is one of my pet hates among my fellow Christians. I qualified the statement in the article that it was mainly Conservative Christians in the US that are more likely to be undereducated. In my country - Australia - we Conservative Christians are generally more educated than the average person. One Salient Oversight 08:41, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * "Suspicious of academia", however, is not the same as undereducated. I think that it would be difficult to prove empirically that the average grade level completed is, say, 15% lower for conservative Christians than it is for all other identifiable groups. Indeed, most vocal conservative Christians finish high school or even university studies. There might be a point about the "flocks", but I'd prefer something on the lines of: Many conservative Christians tend to be suspicious of secular scholarship, particularly if it might seem to conflict with some tenet of their faith..." This avoids calling them dumb and gives some motivation for the statement. Mpolo 10:03, Aug 14, 2004 (UTC)

 * I do remember reading some empirical studies that confirmed the assertion that Conservative Protestant Christians in the United States have a lower than average level of educational attainment. Do I remember where and when the study was done? Unfortunately no but I will do some research on the net for this. I suppose one general level of indication is to examine which States of the United States have above-average levels of Church attendance and below-average levels of educational attainment. I'm willing to bet that states like Texas, Alabama and Missisippi show high church attendance and low education, while States like Maine, New Hampshire and Vermont show low Church attendance and higher educational attainment. Not empirical evidence but certainly indicatory. I'll find a reference to back me up. One Salient Oversight 03:29, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I've removed the "lower level of education" line until it can be substantiated. Without a reference, it's at the least POV and at the worst inflammatory. Tyler 19:00, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'm concerned that the section might still be POV/inflammatory. I'm not a conservative Christian, but the suggestion that most of them believe in "the supernatural" might be construed as meaning that they believe in "pagan rituals". I might suggest that a word besides "supernatural" be used to describe Satan. The details are a bit unclear to me, but I could definitely see the section being interpreted as anti-conservative Christian. It seems to suggest that they are unintelligent, superstitious, or close-minded. If they do believe in the supernatural, we (ironically) need some empirical studies to support it, and if it's not true it should be changed. I'll take a shot at it, there are some other areas that need grammar cleaned up. --Jacius 21:31, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

If you actually listen to the backwards version of Stairway to Heaven, "my sweet Satan" is pretty clear, even if it is accidental. The rest of the phrase that's supposed to be there is just gibberish, but that part's there. --Prosfilaes 10:05, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I agree with prosfilaes... plus, on the main page there is a link where the song has been played backwards. give it a shot, you'll see... i mean, hear. although, just because it includes the word 'satan' and sounds a little morbid, doesn't mean its roots are satanic. --aditya mukherjee 07:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I remember when I tried it a few years ago. I popped in Led Zeppelin IV into my CD-Rom drive and played STH. I recorded the song onto my HDD and then used the audio software to reverse the song. I got the required part... and couldn't understand anything at all. I then went to a backmasking website and it showed me where it was located. Although it sounded as though it could be "my sweet satan", it was only after I had viewed the website that it appeared to be clearer. My point is that it is essentially gibberish, and was given phonetic meaning by someone who listened to it backwards. Try it. Play the section backwards to someone who is not familiar with the "My sweet Satan" idea. Make sure you play it to them with no knowledge of what they are about to hear. Then ask them if they heard anything that sounded satanic or blasphemous - I guarantee you that they won't. One Salient Oversight 08:13, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

mostly rumours
reads mostly like rumours someone googled or got from a friend of a friend ... furthermore it's inconsistent and overall a poorly structured article. at the very least before one writes "A is a song with backward messages hidden" one should try to verify it and cite song, album, release date and timings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holle (talk • contribs)

 * I accept that criticism. Why don't you go ahead and fix it? TheJabberwock 21:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Bill Lanphier
The Bill Lanphier reference ("Artistic backmasking") refers to a song noted on this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mapsax (talk • contribs)

Thanks, I added a link. TheJabberwock 23:16, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Webdings/Wingdings
The text "NYC" in Webdings and Wingdings should be replaced with images for computers without these fonts.

Blakeops 16:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Agreed. Want to do it? Just take a screen capture and upload it.  Λυδ α cιτγ  22:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Crop it first, of course.  Λυδ α cιτγ  22:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Please don't use Rorschach inkblot images publicly
As a psychologist who administers the Rorschach inkblot test, I want to express my concern about the use of one of the official Rorschach cards as the main picture for this and many other pages (relating to subliminal thought). These cards are not to be displayed publicly in any way because they obstruct the validity of the test. If someone takes this test after having previously seen even one of the images elsewhere, their protocol is spoiled (For this test was normed with individuals who were seeing the cards for the first time, thus eliciting a "fresh" response). If an image of an inkblot must be used, there are plenty of Inkblots that aren't part of the ten card Rorschach inkblot test. 71.141.237.95 00:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)Dr. Atlas 71.141.237.95 00:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Check This Out
normal: Q33 NY

Wingdings: Q33 NY

A Secret Message Of 9/11?

 * See Talk:Pareidolia.  Λυδ α cιτγ  00:29, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:CocaColaHiddenPicture.jpg
Image:CocaColaHiddenPicture.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:15, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The fonts
It should be explicitly noted in the section about the Microsoft fonts that they're viewable only in Internet Explorer. I will do that. --Crackthewhip775 (talk) 06:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Navbox
Pareidolia is not about messages. And could someone please explain the link from hiden message to paradox? Paradox casts a rather wide net, but I'm having doubts about this catch. Paradoctor (talk) 01:00, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

lexicon congugation-listening!
The lexicon of people in the U.S.A. is being used without their knowledge of what they are in actually saying, i.e. One says "I'll aahh" - do this or do that but it in actuality it sounds like "Allah" the Islamic God. It was said at a Congressional Hearing aired on TV about the asymmetrical warfare in Afghanistan and in TV commercials BUT what is important is that it is used by everyone in common day speech patterns by the normal American citizens without their knowing it! Say "I will" if one must but think of the subliminal suggestiveness of saying "Allah" and not even knowing it. God Bless America!

Page should include the Language of Flowers
It was used to communicate hidden messages in real life. That's about as relevant as it gets, right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.99.154.77 (talk) 07:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

What is Language of Flowers?? MystinaRose (talk) 00:25, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Hidden message. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20060821143244/http://www.triplo.com/ev/reversal/ to http://www.triplo.com/ev/reversal/

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:34, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Hidden message. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20060529171600/http://www.computerandvideogames.com:80/article.php?id=135427 to http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=135427

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:03, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hidden message. 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/20060909084408/http://www.thelostaways.com/lost-character-walt-lloyd.html to http://www.thelostaways.com/lost-character-walt-lloyd.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) 01:45, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hidden message


text:
Marchian

The Marchian dialects (named after the March of Brandenburg; also called Brandenburgian or Brandenburgish; German: Brandenburgisch) are dialects of Low German, more precisely Northern Low German, spoken in Germany in the northern and western parts of Brandenburg (Uckermark, Prignitz and Mittelmark regions) as well as in northern Saxony-Anhalt (Altmark). The language area can be further divided into North-Markish (Stendal, Wittenberge, Prenzlau) and Middle-Markish (Brandenburg an der Havel).

The modern South-Markish (also called South Brandenburgian) dialects of southern Brandenburg and Berlin, however, are not Low German but Central German dialects. With the development of the Berlin metropolitan area, the original Low German Brandenburgish of Berlin developed into Berlinerisch, the local High German dialects, which today are considered an East Central German subgroup. The spread of High German into the Brandenburgish language area is an ongoing process.

title: Marchian


text:
Talk:Capricorn One

"Upon returning to Earth, the empty spacecraft unexpectedly burns up due to a faulty heat shield during reentry"
Uhhh, not quite. It is quite clear in the book (which, unusually, the movie follows very closely) that Kelloway and his conspirators had no intention of allowing the astronauts to return alive (think about it ... how could they???) and the failure of the heat shield is a planned event. Old_Wombat (talk) 08:51, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Obviously, we can only interpret the events of the film. It is not clear the accident was planned, nor is it clear it wasn't, so I suggest we simply remove the word "unexpectedly".  The motivations are unclear, so we should just stick to the events that are depicted i.e. the vessel burns up on re-entry implying the astronauts must have died. Betty Logan (talk) 09:30, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Having just watched the film, it seems that the bad guys were going to allow them to return home. If you watch the scene where the heat shield is failing, the astronauts are on board the jet flying out. Then the jet turns around and puts them back where they were a few minutes earlier - The next we see of them are in a briefing room that was established earlier to be right next to the film set. What would be the point of the charade of putting them on a jet dong a U-turn and taking them back where they started to kill them? Further, the whole point of the conspiracy was to have a successful mission. Dead astronauts would destroy the program much worse than if the launch had never happened. The whole conspiracy was about showing success so the budget didn't get pulled. I'm guessing if they went a different way in the novelization, they explained the bad guys to have different motivations to in the movie.178.99.90.150 (talk) 18:16, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Dead astronauts would destroy the program much worse than if the launch had never happened....
 * good point. if they were trying to show how safe space-travel is it doesn't make sense to destroy the capsule. and if they were pulling out the astronauts at the last minute to save their lives it doesn't make sense to kill them later anyhow. and if they planned both the explosion and the murder of the astronauts they might as well have let those astronauts go to mars and die in the explosion (unless the ship never went to mars? then they'd need the studio-footage of the mars-landing)
 * so this article might try to clear up the motivations of the 'bad guys'. insofar as the movie or book makes those motives clear. Selena1981 (talk) 22:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

The article title is simply the name of the work, ie, it seems not to make a distinction between the book and the movie. The book does make it quite clear. Having said all that, yes, your suggestion will do the trick for either. Old_Wombat (talk) 08:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

We have the date wrong. Capricorn One opened May or June 1978
‘Capricorn One’ Relaunches Grounded Career of Gould, The Press-Courier, PC The Weekly Magazine of Ventura County [looks like Sunday supplement for Saturday paper], June 24, 1978, page 5.

‘Capricorn One’ a space-age thriller, The Miami News, Tuesday, June 6, 1978, 2C.

and a slew of other newspaper sources.

http://www.google.com/search?pz=1&cf=all&ned=us&hl=en&tbm=nws&gl=us&as_epq=Capricorn%20One&as_occt=any&as_drrb=b&as_mindate=07%2F01%2F1977&as_maxdate=12%2F31%2F1978&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A07%2F01%2F1977%2Ccd_max%3A12%2F31%2F1978&authuser=0

 * I guess just goes to show how easy it is to get the date wrong. FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 19:47, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

 * This film was released in Japan six months earlier than in the US, so there is no problem.49.97.107.93 (talk) 06:15, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

 * Fun fact, the original story from 1954, 'Appointment in Tomorrow', is subtitled 'Poor Superman'. Cold war between East and West, the West created a secret agency tasked with professionally disinforming the voters in order to prove the technological superiority of the Western ideology. The director is convinved that eventually the west will actually deliver what it could not achieve at the time the bureau has to deceive the voters in believing what the West could achieve. And, voila, 'Capricorn One' won the race against 'Superman'.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A0A:A548:D02E:0:1507:D61D:BB73:8709 (talk) 22:33, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

'Capricorn One' discussed in book(s)
pages 257-59:

' .  .  .  One of the first to imagine the conceit was CBS reporter Peter Hymas. “There was one event of really enormous importance,” Hyams later reflected, “that had almost no witnesses. And the only verification we have. . . came from a TV camera.”. . .  '

' .  .  .  Explaining the delay, the [New York] Times concluded: “Watergate may not have inspired ‘Capricorn One,’ but it made its thesis more acceptable, its plot more credible and some of its content strangely prophetic.”. . .  '

Genesis of the film
Seems to be a major contradiction on the page. In the lead the article says that the story was inspired by conspiracy theories about the moon landings. But the production section explains in detail how the writer and director, Peter Hymas, thought of the concept and story while working at CBS on news of the Apollo program. I'd suggest removing the item from the lead and making a link to the conspiracy theory page in a 'See also'. Would have done so myself, but the page has 42 watchers and some may either like to comment or know a back-story I don't. If nobody comments in a couple of days, or does a fix, and if I recall to come back here, I'll do it then. Thanks. Randy Kryn 12:28 13 November, 2014 (UTC)

Helicopters aren't black
while being pursued by black helicopters The helicopters are green not black, and the link to the conspiracy theory article seems irrelevant. NotYourFathersOldsmobile (talk) 15:45, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I notice that this issue was also brought up previously in 2010, so I've gone ahead and changed the article's text to remove the "black" and the link. NotYourFathersOldsmobile (talk) 05:49, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

OK to simplify the plot section?
I'd like to modify the plot section to remove some slightly tedious details. Is that OK? For example, I would make At an unspecified time,[1] Capricorn One—the first manned mission to Mars—is on the launch pad. NASA authorities such as Dr. James Kelloway (Hal Holbrook) realize, too late, that a faulty life-support system supplied by a lowest-bid NASA contractor will kill the astronauts during the flight. As the manned space program needs a success to continue, they find themselves forced to falsify the landing rather than cancel the mission. into something like Capricorn One—the first manned mission to Mars—is about to launch. NASA authorities realize, too late, that a faulty life-support system will kill the astronauts during the flight. As the manned space program needs a success to continue, they falsify the landing rather than cancel the mission. I think that it's better to be concise and remove the details. If nobody replies, I'll proceed with the work. I'd also like to add information about the film's performance at the box office, etc. NotYourFathersOldsmobile (talk) 09:16, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and done this. Hope that's OK. NotYourFathersOldsmobile (talk) 02:11, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Bart Sibrel's video
Is there a reason we cannot include the cover of Bart Sibrel's DVD cover? The Capricorn One Mars set is obviously featured on the cover and its appearance there is mentioned in the final section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.111.13.126 (talk) 00:55, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Capricorn One


text:
Talk:Big Dig

Typo?
"Although the project was estimated in 1985 at $2.8 billion (in 1982 dollars, US$6.0 billion adjusted for inflation as of 2006[update]),[3] over $14.6 billion ($8.08 billion in 1982 dollars)[3] had been spent in federal and state tax dollars as of 2006[update].[4]" Why is a 1985 emstimate using 1982 dollars instead of 1985 dollars? Also the ratio between 2.8 to 6 billion is not the same ratio as 8.08 to 14.6 billion yet they are both meant to be 1982 to 2006 inflation conversions.Is Mise (talk) 20:56, 20 March 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jjupiter100 (talk • contribs)

 * This calculation has further problems. The conversion of $14.6 billion from 2006 dollars to 1982 dollars by the cited website gives the figure $7.07 billion.  This is irrelevant, however, since those $14.6 billion were not all raised and/or spent in 2006.  Thus any conversion that does not take into account the spending time-line is going to be problematic.  For this reason, I believe that the conversions are inherently misleading, and should probably be removed. Ihearthonduras (talk) 17:36, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Link
Scheme Z — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerem43 (talk • contribs) 18:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Diagram is much more annoying than helpful
While I appreciate the technological wizardry behind this diagram (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boston_Highway_System_Pre_Post_Big_Dig.gif), I have to say, I'd rather it wasn't in the article, especially in the lede. Because it switches back and forth between the Pre-dig and Post-dig so rapidly, I can't compare them. Of course, I can understand why having them switch more slowly would annoy others, but look, I had to watch this thing switch a dozen times before I was able to figure out which was the before and which was the after (and my original guess was wrong). Furthermore, it's hard to study the differences between them with them switching. Can we please just have two diagrams, side-by-side? This thing is giving me a headache, and I'm just not going to be able to learn what I had hoped to learn from this. Unschool 19:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Yeah, it is pretty hard to compare with how fast the images switch, but the gif still has utility. I provided a static side-by-side image based off the gif and fit it in below. Hopefully this satisfies everyone. Hwamplero (talk) 04:35, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Missing word in 1.1 second paragraph
Beginning of second paragraph reads "By 1970, building demolition and land clearances for had been completed along the I-95 right of way..." Missing something after "for". Probably should be "the Inner Belt" but I've never edited Wikipedia before so I'll let someone else verify & finalize.

I would also like to second the above post "Diagram is much more annoying than helpful". I also found it difficult to look at this quickly changing picture and make sense out of it. Side-by-side static comparison would be better, or at least slow it down, or even provide both options.

Moominpippi (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Big Dig


text:
Drag coefficient

In fluid dynamics, the drag coefficient (commonly denoted as: $$c_\mathrm{d}$$, $$c_x$$ or $$c_{\rm w}$$) is a dimensionless quantity that is used to quantify the drag or resistance of an object in a fluid environment, such as air or water. It is used in the drag equation in which a lower drag coefficient indicates the object will have less aerodynamic or hydrodynamic drag. The drag coefficient is always associated with a particular surface area.

The drag coefficient of any object comprises the effects of the two basic contributors to fluid dynamic drag: skin friction and form drag. The drag coefficient of a lifting airfoil or hydrofoil also includes the effects of lift-induced drag. The drag coefficient of a complete structure such as an aircraft also includes the effects of interference drag.

Definition
The drag coefficient $$c_\mathrm d$$ is defined as

$$c_\mathrm d = \dfrac{ 2F_\mathrm d}{ \rho u^2 A}$$

where:
 * $$F_\mathrm d$$ is the drag force, which is by definition the force component in the direction of the flow velocity;
 * $$\rho$$ is the mass density of the fluid;
 * $$u$$ is the flow speed of the object relative to the fluid;
 * $$A$$ is the reference area

The reference area depends on what type of drag coefficient is being measured. For automobiles and many other objects, the reference area is the projected frontal area of the vehicle. This may not necessarily be the cross-sectional area of the vehicle, depending on where the cross-section is taken. For example, for a sphere $$A = \pi r^2$$ (note this is not the surface area = $$4 \pi r^2$$).

For airfoils, the reference area is the nominal wing area. Since this tends to be large compared to the frontal area, the resulting drag coefficients tend to be low, much lower than for a car with the same drag, frontal area, and speed.

Airships and some bodies of revolution use the volumetric drag coefficient, in which the reference area is the square of the cube root of the airship volume (volume to the two-thirds power). Submerged streamlined bodies use the wetted surface area.

Two objects having the same reference area moving at the same speed through a fluid will experience a drag force proportional to their respective drag coefficients. Coefficients for unstreamlined objects can be 1 or more, for streamlined objects much less.

As a caution, note that although the above is the conventional definition for the drag coefficient, there are other definitions that one may encounter in the literature. The reason for this is that the conventional definition makes the most sense when one is in the Newton regime, such as what happens at high Reynolds number, where it makes sense to scale the drag to the momentum flux into the frontal area of the object. But, there are other flow regimes. In particular at very low Reynolds number, it is more natural to write the drag force as being proportional to a drag coefficient multiplied by the speed of the object (rather than the square of the speed of the object). An example of such a regime is the study of the mobility of aerosol particulates, such as smoke particles. This leads to a different formal definition of the "drag coefficient," of course.

Cauchy momentum equation
In the non dimensional form of the Cauchy momentum equation, the skin drag coefficient or skin friction coefficient is referred to the transversal area (the area normal to the drag force, so the coefficient is locally defined as:

$$c_\mathrm d = \dfrac \tau q= \dfrac{ 2 \tau}{ \rho u^2}$$

where:
 * $$\tau$$ is the local shear stress, which is by definition the stress component in the direction of the local flow velocity;
 * $$q$$ is the local dynamic pressure of the fluid
 * $$\rho$$ is the local mass density of the fluid;
 * $$u$$ is the local flow speed of the fluid

Background

The drag equation

 * $$F_{\rm d} = \tfrac12 \rho u^2 c_{\rm d} A$$

is essentially a statement that the drag force on any object is proportional to the density of the fluid and proportional to the square of the relative flow speed between the object and the fluid. The factor of $$1/2$$ comes from the dynamic pressure of the fluid, which is equal to the kinetic energy density.

The value of $$c_\mathrm d$$ is not a constant but varies as a function of flow speed, flow direction, object position, object size, fluid density and fluid viscosity. Speed, kinematic viscosity and a characteristic length scale of the object are incorporated into a dimensionless quantity called the Reynolds number $$\mathrm{Re}$$. $$c_\mathrm d$$ is thus a function of $$\mathrm{Re}$$. In a compressible flow, the speed of sound is relevant, and $$c_\mathrm d$$ is also a function of Mach number $$\mathrm{Ma}$$.

For certain body shapes, the drag coefficient $$c_\mathrm d$$ only depends on the Reynolds number $$\mathrm{Re}$$, Mach number $$\mathrm{Ma}$$ and the direction of the flow. For low Mach number $$\mathrm{Ma}$$, the drag coefficient is independent of Mach number. Also, the variation with Reynolds number $$\mathrm{Re}$$ within a practical range of interest is usually small, while for cars at highway speed and aircraft at cruising speed, the incoming flow direction is also more-or-less the same. Therefore, the drag coefficient $$c_\mathrm d$$ can often be treated as a constant.

For a streamlined body to achieve a low drag coefficient, the boundary layer around the body must remain attached to the surface of the body for as long as possible, causing the wake to be narrow. A high form drag results in a broad wake. The boundary layer will transition from laminar to turbulent if Reynolds number of the flow around the body is sufficiently great. Larger velocities, larger objects, and lower viscosities contribute to larger Reynolds numbers.

Drag coefficient on a sphere vs. Reynolds number - main trends.svg Re, as obtained from laboratory experiments. The dark line is for a sphere with a smooth surface, while the lighter line is for the case of a rough surface. The numbers along the line indicate several flow regimes and associated changes in the drag coefficient:

•2: attached flow (Stokes flow) and steady separated flow,

•3: separated unsteady flow, having a laminar flow boundary layer upstream of the separation, and producing a vortex street,

•4: separated unsteady flow with a laminar boundary layer at the upstream side, before flow separation, with downstream of the sphere a chaotic turbulent wake,

•5: post-critical separated flow, with a turbulent boundary layer.]] For other objects, such as small particles, one can no longer consider that the drag coefficient $$c_\mathrm d$$ is constant, but certainly is a function of Reynolds number. At a low Reynolds number, the flow around the object does not transition to turbulent but remains laminar, even up to the point at which it separates from the surface of the object. At very low Reynolds numbers, without flow separation, the drag force $$ F_\mathrm d$$ is proportional to $$v$$ instead of $$v^2$$; for a sphere this is known as Stokes' law. The Reynolds number will be low for small objects, low velocities, and high viscosity fluids.

A $$c_\mathrm d$$ equal to 1 would be obtained in a case where all of the fluid approaching the object is brought to rest, building up stagnation pressure over the whole front surface. The top figure shows a flat plate with the fluid coming from the right and stopping at the plate. The graph to the left of it shows equal pressure across the surface. In a real flat plate, the fluid must turn around the sides, and full stagnation pressure is found only at the center, dropping off toward the edges as in the lower figure and graph. Only considering the front side, the $$c_\mathrm d$$ of a real flat plate would be less than 1; except that there will be suction on the backside: a negative pressure (relative to ambient). The overall $$c_\mathrm d$$ of a real square flat plate perpendicular to the flow is often given as 1.17. Flow patterns and therefore $$c_\mathrm d$$ for some shapes can change with the Reynolds number and the roughness of the surfaces.

General
In general, $$c_\mathrm d$$ is not an absolute constant for a given body shape. It varies with the speed of airflow (or more generally with Reynolds number $$\mathrm{Re}$$). A smooth sphere, for example, has a $$c_\mathrm d$$ that varies from high values for laminar flow to 0.47 for turbulent flow. Although the drag coefficient decreases with increasing $$\mathrm{Re}$$, the drag force increases.

Aircraft
As noted above, aircraft use their wing area as the reference area when computing $$c_\mathrm d$$, while automobiles (and many other objects) use projected frontal area; thus, coefficients are not directly comparable between these classes of vehicles. In the aerospace industry, the drag coefficient is sometimes expressed in drag counts where 1 drag count = 0.0001 of a $$c_\mathrm d$$.

Concept
The force between a fluid and a body, when there is relative motion, can only be transmitted by normal pressure and tangential friction stresses. So, for the whole body, the drag part of the force, which is in-line with the approaching fluid motion, is composed of frictional drag (viscous drag) and pressure drag (form drag). The total drag and component drag forces can be related as follows:

$$\begin{align} c_\mathrm d &= \dfrac{2 F_\mathrm d}{\rho v^2 A}\\ &= c_\mathrm p + c_\mathrm f \\ &= \underbrace{ \dfrac{2}{\rho v^2 A} \displaystyle \int_{S} \mathrm{d}S (p-p_o) \left(\hat{\mathbf{n}} \sdot \hat{\mathbf{i}}\right) }_{ c_\mathrm p }+ \underbrace{ \dfrac{2}{\rho v^2 A} \displaystyle \int_{S} \mathrm{d}S  \left(\hat{\mathbf{t}} \sdot \hat{\mathbf{i}}\right) T_{\rm w} }_{ c_\mathrm f} \end{align}$$

where:
 * $$A$$ is the planform area of the body,
 * $$S$$ is the wet surface of the body,
 * $$c_\mathrm p$$ is the pressure drag coefficient,
 * $$c_\mathrm f$$ is the friction drag coefficient,
 * $$\hat \mathbf{t} $$ is the unit vector in the direction of the shear stress acting on the body surface dS,
 * $$\hat \mathbf{n} $$ is the unit vector in the direction perpendicular to the body surface dS, pointing from the fluid to the solid,
 * $$T_\mathrm w$$ magnitude of the shear stress acting on the body surface dS,
 * $$p_\mathrm o$$ is the pressure far away from the body (note that this constant does not affect the final result),
 * $$p$$ is pressure at surface dS,
 * $$\hat{\mathbf{i}}$$ is the unit vector in direction of free stream flow

Therefore, when the drag is dominated by a frictional component, the body is called a streamlined body; whereas in the case of dominant pressure drag, the body is called a blunt or bluff body. Thus, the shape of the body and the angle of attack determine the type of drag. For example, an airfoil is considered as a body with a small angle of attack by the fluid flowing across it. This means that it has attached boundary layers, which produce much less pressure drag. The wake produced is very small and drag is dominated by the friction component. Therefore, such a body (here an airfoil) is described as streamlined, whereas for bodies with fluid flow at high angles of attack, boundary layer separation takes place. This mainly occurs due to adverse pressure gradients at the top and rear parts of an airfoil.

Due to this, wake formation takes place, which consequently leads to eddy formation and pressure loss due to pressure drag. In such situations, the airfoil is stalled and has higher pressure drag than friction drag. In this case, the body is described as a blunt body.

A streamlined body looks like a fish (tuna), Oropesa, etc. or an airfoil with small angle of attack, whereas a blunt body looks like a brick, a cylinder or an airfoil with high angle of attack. For a given frontal area and velocity, a streamlined body will have lower resistance than a blunt body. Cylinders and spheres are taken as blunt bodies because the drag is dominated by the pressure component in the wake region at high Reynolds number.

To reduce this drag, either the flow separation could be reduced or the surface area in contact with the fluid could be reduced (to reduce friction drag). This reduction is necessary in devices like cars, bicycle, etc. to avoid vibration and noise production.

title: Drag coefficient


text:
An American Family

An American Family is an American television documentary series that followed the life of a California family in the early 1970s. Widely referred to as the first example of an American reality TV show, the series drew millions of weekly viewers, who were drawn to a story that seemed to shatter the rosy façade of upper-middle-class suburbia. It also became a lightning rod for discussion about the precarious state of the American family in the early 1970s. An American Family ranks #32 on TV Guide's 50 Greatest TV Shows of All Time list.

Production and story
Created by Craig Gilbert, An American Family examined the daily trials and tribulations of the Loud family of Santa Barbara, California. Researching subjects for the series, Gilbert interviewed about 24 families before he settled on the Louds—a mother, father, and five "telegenic" children who owned a luxurious house, multiple cars, and a swimming pool. Shooting began in May 1971, and Gilbert and his film crew, which included the cinematographer Alan Raymond and his wife Susan Raymond who handled sound, spent the next seven months filming the Louds.

The final product, edited down from 300 hours of 16-millimeter footage, was An American Family, which aired in 1973 as 12 weekly one-hour episodes on the Public Broadcasting Service (PBS). The film was presented in fly-on-the-wall style without narration.

The story that unfolded of the Louds, who at the outset of the series seemed to epitomize the American dream, showed a married couple on the verge of divorce and children, ranging from 14 to 20 years old, in high and low moments. The "toothpaste‐bright affluence, California‐style" family, as described in 1973 in The New York Times, turned out to be "comfortably ordinary, sadly familiar, the kind of family most white middle-class Americans can identify with."

The series was very popular, earning more than 10 million viewers a week. It also sparked controversy and drove conversation in national magazines and television talk shows about the state of the American family.

The intense interest in the Louds, wrote Dennis Lim in The New York Times in 2011, "had much to do with their lives seeming to fall apart as America watched."

The Loud family
The popularity of the series, which was viewed by 10 million Americans per week, gave the Louds a form of celebrity. Family members profiled were:

 * Bill Loud (1921–2018)
 * Pat Loud (1926–2021)
 * Lance Loud (1951–2001)
 * Kevin Robert Loud (born 1953)
 * Grant Loud (born 1954)
 * Delilah Ann Loud (born 1955)
 * Michelle Loud (born 1957)

Lance Loud is credited as the first continuing character on television who was openly gay, and he subsequently became an icon within the LGBT community. He later became a columnist for the national LGBT news magazine The Advocate. Lance, who had been a pen pal of Andy Warhol, himself known for his commentary on celebrity, said the series fulfilled “the middle-class dream that you can become famous for being just who you are.”

One of the more notable moments of the series was when, after 21 years of marriage, Pat asked Bill for a divorce and to leave the house. Pat's saying to her husband, "You know there's a problem" – with Bill's response, "What's your problem?" – was chosen as one of the Top 100 Television Moments by TV Guide.

The series drew intense interest, millions of viewers, and considerable controversy. The family was featured in Newsweek on March 12, 1973, in the article "The Broken Family".

In 2003, PBS broadcast the show Lance Loud!: A Death in an American Family, which was filmed in 2001. Visiting the same family again at the invitation of Lance before his death, the family members participated in the documentary, with the exception of Grant. Lance was 50 years old, had gone through 20 years of addiction to crystal meth, and was HIV positive. He died of liver failure caused by a hepatitis C and HIV co-infection that year. The show was billed by PBS as the final episode of An American Family.

Subsequent to the showing of A Death in an American Family, Pat and Bill Loud moved back in together, granting one of Lance's last wishes. They lived very close to three of their four surviving children—Grant, Michelle and Delilah—and kept in close contact with Kevin and his family, who lived in Arizona. In 2012, Pat Loud released a book about her son's life called Lance Out Loud. Bill died in July 2018. Pat Loud died in her sleep from natural causes on January 10, 2021, at age 94.

Critical response
According to The New York Times in 2011, "critical and popular reaction varied," and it suggested the series reflected America in a "counterculture hangover."

Some critics praised the raw honesty of the series. The anthropologist Margaret Mead called it "an extraordinary series" and said that "nothing like it has ever been done." Mead also proclaimed that An American Family was "as new and significant as the invention of drama or the novel.” Others were put off, viewing the Louds as a sign of the nuclear family's demise.

Jean Baudrillard, a French philosopher and sociologist, described An American Family as a symptom of the way TV has changed our relationship with reality itself.

The Louds' response to the series was positive at first, it seemed. Shortly after filming wrapped, Pat Loud wrote in a letter to Gilbert: “I think you’ve handled the film with as much kindness as is possible and still remained honest. I am, in short, simply astounded, enormously pleased and very proud.” But the Louds' feelings soon soured. They began to vocalize criticism of Gilbert's emphasis on the negative parts of their lives. In an appearance on The Dick Cavett Show in 1973, Pat Loud said the series “makes us look like a bunch of freaks and monsters."

In 1988, Gilbert reflected on the legacy, stating, “I stand behind every frame of that series, yet I understand why it made so many people uncomfortable. This was a film about all of us. About how we’re all trying, and usually failing, to make sense out of life."

A 1973 review by John J. O'Conner in the New York Times, called it "quite extraordinary" and "unusually sensitive," and maintained: "It might be challenged and attacked. It cannot be dismissed."

Cultural impact
An American Family is widely credited with ushering in the era of reality television. In 2013, Gilbert criticized the modern-day genre of reality television, saying, "What they’re doing is they’re using real people, but they’re scripting the shows." He called reality TV "basically cheap television."

The series inspired numerous TV shows, films, and documentaries.

In 1974, the BBC made its own similar program, called The Family. The program consisted of 12 half-hour episodes, showing the daily lives and concerns of the working-class Wilkins family, of Reading, Berkshire, England.

In 1978, in a skit called "The Loud Family," Saturday Night Live portrayed a family whose members shouted at the top of their lungs, even during intimate moments.

The series inspired a 1977 story arc in the satirical soap opera Mary Hartman, Mary Hartman in which a television crew for The David Susskind Show documents the daily life of the titular character as the "typical American consumer housewife".

In 1979, Albert Brooks spoofed the series in his film Real Life.

In 1983, HBO broadcast An American Family Revisited: The Louds 10 Years Later.

The Kate & Allie episode "The Very Loud Family", where Emma films their daily lives for a school project, is inspired by An American Family.

The 1985–88 mockumentary series of TV films The History of White People in America and Portrait of a White Marriage parody the series in following the lives of a dysfunctional white suburban family led by Fred Willard and Mary Kay Place.

The series inspired the MTV reality television series The Real World.

Jonathan Dayton, co-director of the 2006 film Little Miss Sunshine, says the film was inspired in part by An American Family.

In April 2011, PBS rebroadcast the entire original series in a marathon format on many of its member stations, before the release of the HBO film Cinema Verite, based on the series.

On July 7, 2011, most PBS stations presented An American Family: Anniversary Edition, a two-hour film by Alan and Susan Raymond that featured selected moments from the documentary series, in tribute to the 40 years since the series began filming in 1971. It was subsequently released on DVD.

French philosopher, Jean Baudrillard mentions the television series in his 1981 book, Simulacra and Simulation.

Dispute over Cinema Verite
The 2011 HBO film Cinema Verite, a fictional examination of the making An American Family, brought to the surface a dispute over the process of making An American Family.

The film portrays a clash between the series' creator, Gilbert (played by James Gandolfini), and the cinematographer Alan Raymond (played by Patrick Fugit). The clash depicted in the film was over the validity of the original series' cinema verite descriptor. The film suggests Gilbert "may have instigated drama and may have overstepped boundaries" during the filming of An American Family, including a rumored relationship between him and Pat Loud (which both parties deny).

Alan Raymond and his wife, Susan, who handled sound on An American Family, served as consultants on the HBO project, but they said they agreed with the "thrust" of Gilbert's series. The Raymonds did have their criticisms. Alan said he and Susan were "at odds with Craig over the treatment of the family. There were numerous confrontations where we tried to raise the question about whether the experiment was veering off course.”

Director Robert Pulcini said, "Everybody remembers it a little bit differently or a lot differently depending on what you’re talking about."

Gilbert saw it differently, defending his approach this way: "I didn’t script a thing. I didn’t do anything. I didn’t negotiate anything. I didn’t manipulate anything." He dismissed the HBO film as "a fiction" and offered that "an impossible script" challenged the film.

The film's screenwriter David Seltzer defended his script, saying, "The critical mass of research was my barometer for what to go with". Seltzer also consulted Pat Loud's book when writing the script.

Gilbert and the Raymonds shared the opinion that An American Family is unfairly blamed as the progenitor of today's reality television.

Craig Gilbert
Gilbert was born in New York City; his father was a copyright lawyer who worked with songwriters including Irving Berlin. He started his film and TV career at WNET-TV, in New York. He produced documentaries about anthropologist Margaret Mead and Christy Brown, a disabled Irish artist. Daniel Day-Lewis, in preparation for his Oscar-winning role as Brown for the 1989 movie My Left Foot, consulted Gilbert. Gilbert and his wife, Suzanne Stater, separated in the early 1970s shortly before filming began (incidentally, Bill and Pat announce their separation on camera in an episode of the series). "The idea for the series was something out of my own life," Gilbert said to The Washington Post in 1973.

Credits
An American Family episode nine end-credits; rerun airdate April 24, 2011, 7 a.m., WNET-TV

 * Conceived and produced by Craig Gilbert
 * Executive producer: Curtis W. Davis
 * Camera: Alan Raymond
 * Sound: Susan Raymond
 * Coordinating producer: Jacqueline Donnet
 * Associate producer: Susan Lester
 * Film editor: Ken Werner
 * Assistant film editor: Bob Alvarez
 * Additional photography: Joan Churchill
 * Additional sound: Peter Pilafian
 * Assistant cameramen: Tom Goodwin, Peter Smokler, Mike Levine
 * Series title film created by Elinor Bunin
 * Title-music supervision: John Adams
 * Film editors unit: Pat Cook, David Hanser, Eleanor Hamerow, Ken Werner
 * Editing assistants: Joanna Alexander, Ernie Davidson, Bob Alvarez, Janet Lauretano, Tikki Goldberg, Dan Merrill, Joe Lovett, Sue Steinberg

 * Apprentices: Jesse Maple, Hannah Wajshonig, Harvey Rosenstock
 * Sound editor: Thomas Halpin
 * Assistant sound editor: Peet Begley
 * Production managers: Kathleen Walsh, Michael Podell
 * Assistant: Janet Freeman
 * Location unit managers: David Burke, Bernard Katz, Peter Scarlet
 * Production secretary: Alice Carey
 * Production assistants: Kristin Glover, David Henry
 * Research: Will MacDonald
 * Sound mixer: Richard Vorisek
 * Engineering supervisor: Ed Reingold
 * Senior video engineer Art Emerson
 * Funding provided by the Ford Foundation and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting
 * A production of WNET/13
 * Copyright 1973 Educational Broadcasting Corporation

title: An American Family


text:
Afterburner (disambiguation)

An afterburner is an addition to a jet engine to increase thrust.

Afterburner may also refer to:

Media and entertainment

 * After Burner, a 1987 flight combat video game
 * Afterburner (Transformers), several fictional characters
 * Afterburner (ZZ Top album), 1985
 * Afterburner (Dance Gavin Dance album), 2020
 * Afterburner (modification kit), an aftermarket frontlighting kit for Game Boy Advance
 * Afterburner with Bill Whittle, an Internet streaming television show
 * Afterburner (Fun Spot), a former roller coaster at Fun Spot Amusement Park & Zoo in Angola, Indiana

Other uses

 * Afterburner (wireless networking) or 125 High Speed Mode, an enhancement to the IEEE 802.11g wireless networking standard
 * Excess post-exercise oxygen consumption, a post-workout body effect also known as the afterburner effect
 * Apple Afterburner card, an accelerator card for the 3rd generation Mac Pro

title: Afterburner (disambiguation)