text:
Land run

A land run or land rush was an event in which previously restricted land of the United States was opened to homestead on a first-arrival basis. Lands were opened and sold first-come or by bid, or won by lottery, or by means other than a run. The settlers, no matter how they acquired occupancy, purchased the land from the United States General Land Office. For former Indian lands, the Land Office distributed the sales funds to the various tribal entities, according to previously negotiated terms. The Oklahoma Land Rush of 1889 was the most prominent of the land runs while the Land Run of 1893 was the largest. The opening of the former Kickapoo area in 1895 was the last use of a land run in the present area of Oklahoma.

In Oklahoma
After years of raids—led by the leaders of the Boomers activist movement such as David L. Payne—into the central area of what would become the U.S. state of Oklahoma, Congress finally agreed to open what was dubbed the Unassigned Lands. Seven land runs in all took place in Oklahoma, beginning with the initial and most famous Land Rush of April 22, 1889, which gave rise to the terms "Eighty-Niner" (a veteran of that run) and "Sooner." That area led to today's Canadian, Cleveland, Kingfisher, Logan, Oklahoma, and Payne counties of Oklahoma.

The nearly two million acres of land opened up to white settlement was located in Indian Territory, a large area that once encompassed much of modern-day Oklahoma. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 eventually led to the Trail of Tears. Creek and Seminole tribes were granted area known before the Land Run as the Unassigned Lands. Some American Indian tribes signed a treaty of alliance with the Confederacy in 1861. Initially considered unsuitable for white colonization, Indian Territory was thought to be an ideal place to relocate Native Americans who were removed from their traditional lands to make way for white settlement. The relocations began in 1817, and by the 1880s, Indian Territory was a new home to a variety of tribes, including the Chickasaw, Choctaw, Cherokee, Creek, Cheyenne, Comanche, and Apache.

The Land Run of September 22, 1891, opened the Iowa, Sac and Fox, Potawatomi, and Shawnee lands to settlement. The land run opened 6,097 plots of 160 acre each of former reservation land. On the following day, a land run was held to settle Tecumseh, the pre-designated location of the county seat of County B, later renamed as Pottawatomie County. On September 28, 1891, another land run was held to settle Chandler, the pre-designated location of the county seat of County A, later renamed as Lincoln County.

The Land Run of April 19, 1892, opened the Cheyenne and Arapaho lands.

The Land Run of September 16, 1893 was known as the Cherokee Strip Land Run. It opened 8,144,682.91 acres (12,726 square miles or about 3.3 million hectares) to settlement. The land was purchased from the Cherokees. It was the largest land run in U.S. history, four times larger than the Land Rush of 1889. The Cherokee Strip Regional Heritage Center museum at the eastern edge of Enid, Oklahoma commemorates this event.

The final land run in Oklahoma was the Land Run of 1895 to settle the Kickapoo lands. Each run had exhibited many problems and the Federal Government deemed the run to be an inefficient way to distribute land to would-be settlers. After 1895, the government distributed land by sealed-bid auctions. Major openings by this method included Kiowa-Comanche-Apache Reservation (1901), the Wichita-Caddo Reservation (1901), and the Big Pasture (1906).

There was one land run in the 20th century, but on a much smaller scale, held to select lots in the community of Arcadia, on August 6, 1901. This was similar to the run to settle Chandler in 1891.

Legacy
In honor of Oklahoma's Centennial of statehood, sculptor Paul Moore won the commission for the Oklahoma Centennial Land Run Monument. As Moore completed elements of the 45-piece monument, such as horses and riders, wagons and horse teams, dogs, and others, they were installed in lower Bricktown, Oklahoma City. To be completed at a future date the monument covers approximately 365 ft, making it overall one of the largest bronze sculptures in the world.

In popular culture

 * The 1889 and 1893 Oklahoma Land Runs were portrayed in Edna Ferber's 1929 novel, Cimarron, as well as the 1931 and 1960 films of the same name based on the novel.
 * The Land Run of 1893, also known as the Cherokee Strip Land Run, was portrayed in the films Tumbleweeds (1925) and Far and Away (1992) and was also depicted in 1969 novel The Thundering Prairie by M. A. Hancock.

title: Land run


text:
List of burials in the Valley of the Kings

The following is a list of burials in the Valley of the Kings, in Thebes (modern Luxor, Egypt) and nearby areas.

The numbering system was established by John Gardner Wilkinson in 1821. Wilkinson numbered the 21 tombs known to him (some of which had been open since antiquity) according to their location, starting at the entrance to the valley and then moving south and west. Tombs that have been discovered since then have been allocated a sequential KV number (those in the Western Valley are known by the WV equivalent) in the order of their discovery.

Since the mid 20th century, Egyptologists have used the acronym "KV" (standing for Kings' Valley) to designate tombs located in the Valley of the Kings. Additionally, the acronym "WV" is also used to designate tombs located in the West Valley (of the Kings).

East Valley
Most of the open tombs in the Valley of the Kings are located in the East Valley, and this is where most tourists can be found.

West Valley
The numbering the West Valley follows in sequence to that of the East Valley, and there are only five known burials/pits in the valley.

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


text:
Talk:Salt (chemistry)

What about ammoniumironhexacyanoferrate
caesium-binder (see for ex), toxic ?, color ?--Lamiot (talk) 16:41, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It would be at Ammonium iron hexacyanoferrate, the fully systematic Ammonium iron(III) hexacyanidoferrate(II), the older-style Ammonium ferric hexacyanoferrate (AFCF), or possibly Giese salt. I don't see any of them on any wiki. DMacks (talk) 17:41, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
 * 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6628 has some information about it as a feed additive (and a note about its crystal structure). It's related to Prussian blue. It's mentioned in our Caesium-137 article as a reagent or treatment for converting soluble radioactive cesium salts less-soluble. DMacks (talk) 17:49, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Merger proposal
I propose salt (chemistry) be merged with ionic compound due to salt being synonymous with or nearly synonymous with ionic compound.OrganoMetallurgy (talk) 00:08, 1 July 2017 (UTC) edited OrganoMetallurgy (talk) 14:48, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Per their definitions, salts are a only a subset of ionic compounds—those conceptually formed by acid+base, which seems to exclude those that are themselves the parent acid/base (Na2O for example). DMacks (talk) 19:57, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment. Any anion can viewed as being a derived from some parent acid, and any cation can likewise be viewed as derived from some parent base. Na2O can be formed from sodium hydroxide, acting as the acid, and sodium hydride, acting as the base, at high enough temperatures. OrganoMetallurgy (talk) 20:50, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * What is the parent acid of hydride? I don't think anyone that understands chemical bonding considers H2 to be "conceptually H+ + H–". That said and with more thought, given I don't think salts are distinct from ionic compounds, and most of the content about salts is really more generally about ionic compounds. And now for the final nail: IUPAC's Red Book defines "salt" as "A chemical compound consisting of an assembly of cations and anions." I therefore strongly support merger. We can surely retain the idea that acid/base neutralization creates a salt, but not that such a conceptual origin is the definition of it. DMacks (talk) 07:19, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * This was almost six years ago, un-acted on. Oh well. DMacks (talk) 00:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Chemistry
salt can be defined as a substance produced by the reason of an acid with a base. 105.113.41.96 (talk) 12:26, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Differences between salt and ionic compound
What exactly is the difference between salt and ionic compound? This is a question about the definition.

It appears that IUPAC defines salt and ionic compound to be the exact same thing. IUPAC's salt means "a chemical compound consisting of an assembly of cations and anions", which is exactly the definition of ionic compound. Another common definition is that salt is ionic compound that can be produced by neutralization, which is a subset of ionic compound. Currently, the pages Salt and Ionic compound are effectively saying the same thing in their first paragraphs respectively. Salt is cited with IUPAC's definition (which means ionic compound), while Ionic compound is uncited.

If we are to accept the definition of IUPAC (which seems to be reasonable):

 * The page Salt should be a redirect to the page Ionic compound. In other words, these 2 pages should merge. While it would take quite a lot of effort, it needs to be done.

If we are to accept that salt and ionic compound are not the same thing, and salt is ionic compound that can be produced by neutralization:

 * The first paragraph of Salt needs to state that explicitly and IUPAC should not be cited.
 * There can be no such thing as alkali salt and acid salt, since they cannot be produced by neutralization (correct me with examples if I am wrong).

This is of course on top of the mess of the definition of acid and base, that is, which acid-base theory are we subscribed to. If we are to adopt Lewis acids and bases, then again salt and ionic compound effectively means the same thing, whether we use IUPAC's definition or not.

That leads to: is there a third definition? This seems to be an important question that needs to be resolved, ideally with sources. Also, please kindly correct me if I am wrong. Thanks a lot! Throowa (talk) 13:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Fewer all caps, instruction, and general bombast would be conducive to collaboration. Salt is a huge topic with many applications and implications and interpretations.--Smokefoot (talk) 16:18, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry if this is too wordy, too much all caps but I sincerely do not think my language is intentionally difficult (quite the contrary), inflated (this problem is very serious) or pretentious (I didn't write anything impressive). Please understand I love to make it short too, but to be precise, I have to use loads of words. With that being said, I will try make it concise and never use all caps again. I understand salt is a huge topic with many applications and implications but this is not relevant to the definition. I also understand salt have many interpretations and that is why I want to discuss. After all, we need to make that consistent. Throowa (talk) 08:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Throowa We have recently discussed which name should be given to the merger of salt (chemistry) and ionic compound. The conclusion has now been implemented, with the former chosen as the main topic (partly because that's the WP:COMMONNAME but with other reasons also mentioned). Hence ionic compound is now a redirect here. As the article alkali salt mentions, such salts are formed when there is incomplete neutralization: one of the most important applications of this is in buffer solutions such as Sodium acetate which can in practice either be produced by adding some NaOH to acetic acid (in which case there will be some water also formed) or by dissolving anhydrous sodium acetate in glacial acetic acid. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:12, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot for clearing things up and the correction of 'alkali salt cannot be produced by neutralization'👍. Throowa (talk) 08:42, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Salt (chemistry)


text:
George Emil Palade

George Emil Palade (November 19, 1912 – October 7, 2008) was a Romanian-American cell biologist. Described as "the most influential cell biologist ever", in 1974 he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology and Medicine along with Albert Claude and Christian de Duve. The prize was granted for his innovations in electron microscopy and cell fractionation which together laid the foundations of modern molecular cell biology, the most notable discovery being the ribosomes of the endoplasmic reticulum – which he first described in 1955.

Palade also received the U.S. National Medal of Science in Biological Sciences for "pioneering discoveries of a host of fundamental, highly organized structures in living cells" in 1986, and was previously elected a Member of the US National Academy of Sciences in 1961. In 1968 he was elected as an Honorary Fellow of the Royal Microscopical Society (HonFRMS) and in 1984 he became a Foreign Member of the Royal Society (ForMemRS).

Education and early life
George Emil Palade was born on November 19, 1912, in Iași, Romania; his father was a professor of philosophy at the University of Iași and his mother was a high school teacher. Palade received his M.D. in 1940 from the Carol Davila School of Medicine in Bucharest.

Career and research
Palade was a member of the faculty at University of Bucharest until 1946, when he went to the United States to do postdoctoral research. While assisting Robert Chambers in the Biology Laboratory of New York University, he met Professor Albert Claude. He later joined Claude at the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research.

In 1952, Palade became a naturalized citizen of the United States. He worked at the Rockefeller Institute (1958–1973), and was a professor at Yale University Medical School (1973–1990), and University of California, San Diego (1990–2008). At UCSD, Palade was Professor of Medicine in Residence (Emeritus) in the Department of Cellular & Molecular Medicine, as well as a Dean for Scientific Affairs (Emeritus), in the School of Medicine at La Jolla, California.

In 1970, he was awarded the Louisa Gross Horwitz Prize from Columbia University together with Renato Dulbecco winner of 1975 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for discoveries concerning the functional organization of the cell that were seminal events in the development of modern cell biology", related to his previous research carried out at the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research. His Nobel lecture, delivered on December 12, 1974, was entitled: "Intracellular Aspects of the Process of Protein Secretion", published in 1992 by the Nobel Prize Foundation,  He was elected an Honorary member of the Romanian Academy in 1975. He received the Golden Plate Award of the American Academy of Achievement in 1975. In 1981, Palade became a founding member of the World Cultural Council. In 1985, he became the founding editor of the Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology. In 1988 he was also elected an Honorary Member of the American-Romanian Academy of Arts and Sciences (ARA).

Palade was the first Chairman of the Department of Cell Biology at Yale University. Presently, the Chair of Cell Biology at Yale is named the "George Palade Professorship".

At the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, Palade used electron microscopy to study the internal organization of such cell structures as ribosomes, mitochondria, chloroplasts, the Golgi apparatus, and others. His most important discovery was made while using an experimental strategy known as a pulse-chase analysis. In the experiment Palade and his colleagues were able to confirm an existing hypothesis that a secretory pathway exists and that the Rough ER and the Golgi apparatus function together.

He focused on Weibel-Palade bodies (a storage organelle unique to the endothelium, containing von Willebrand factor and various proteins) which he described together with the Swiss anatomist Ewald R. Weibel.

Palade's coworkers and approach in the 1960s
The following is a concise excerpt from Palade's Autobiography appearing in the Nobel Award documents

"In the 1960s, I continued the work on the secretory process using in parallel or in succession two different approaches. The first relied exclusively on cell fractionation, and was developed in collaboration with Philip Siekevitz, Lewis Joel Greene, Colvin Redman, David Sabatini and Yutaka Tashiro; it led to the characterization of the zymogen granules and to the discovery of the segregation of secretory products in the cisternal space of the endoplasmic reticulum. The second approach relied primarily on radioautography, and involved experiments on intact animals or pancreatic slices which were carried out in collaboration with Lucien Caro and especially James Jamieson. This series of investigations produced a good part of our current ideas on the synthesis and intracellular processing of proteins for export. A critical review of this line of research is presented in the Nobel Lecture."

One notes also that the Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded in 2009 to Venkatraman Ramakrishnan, Thomas A. Steitz, and Ada E. Yonath "for studies of the structure and function of the ribosome", discovered by George Emil Palade.

Personal life
Palade's widow Marilyn Farquhar was a cell biologist at the University of California, San Diego.

title: George Emil Palade


text:
U.S. Route 26

U.S. Highway 26 (US 26) is an east–west United States Numbered Highway that runs from Seaside, Oregon, to Ogallala, Nebraska. When the U.S. Numbered Highway System was first defined, it was limited to Nebraska and Wyoming; by the 1950s, it continued into Idaho and Oregon. The highway's eastern terminus is in Ogallala at an intersection with Interstate 80 (I-80). Its western terminus is south of Seaside at an intersection with US 101. Prior to 2004, the route's last 20 mi were cosigned with US 101 from the highways' junction south of Seaside north to Astoria where its intersection with US 30 was also US 30's western terminus. Long segments of the highway follow the historic Oregon Trail. At its peak, immediately before the establishment of the Interstate Highway System, US 26 was 1557 mi in length and terminated in Astoria.

Route description

 * OR
 * 472 mi
 * ID
 * 403 mi
 * WY
 * 454 mi
 * NE
 * 151 mi
 * Total
 * 1479 mi
 * }
 * 151 mi
 * Total
 * 1479 mi
 * }
 * }

Oregon
Starting at a junction with US 101 near Seaside, US 26 heads southeast through the Coast Range to Portland. In the western Portland area, US 26 is a freeway known as the Sunset Highway. After passing through the Vista Ridge Tunnels, heading into Downtown Portland, it intersects with I-405 and runs along the Interstate southbound for about a half-mile (0.5 mi) before exiting onto surface streets at the waterfront, meeting Oregon Route 43 (OR 43) at Macadam Avenue before crossing I-5. After crossing the Willamette River and meeting at an incomplete interchange with OR 99E, US 26 then heads east on Powell Boulevard where it crosses I-205 and continues east to Sandy on what is known as the Mount Hood Highway No. 26, a four-lane divided highway that was supposed to be the Mount Hood Freeway, which was never built just south of Division Street.

After passing through Sandy, US 26 (known there as the Mount Hood Highway) continues on toward Government Camp and Bennett Pass, where it eventually meets up with OR 35. The Mount Hood Highway continues north along OR 35, while US 26 heads southeast toward Madras, where it intersects with US 97. It then continues southeast to Prineville, where it meets OR 126 and heads east through John Day where it meets US 20 in Vale. The remainder of US 26 follows US 20 to the Idaho state line.

Idaho
From the Oregon state line, US 26 continues to follow US 20 to Boise, with short concurrencies with US 95 near Parma and I-84 at Caldwell. At Boise, US 26/US 20 merges with I-84 for about 40 mi until Mountain Home, where US 20 splits from US 26/I-84. About 41 mi later in Bliss, US 26 splits from I-84, joining US 93 at Shoshone with the concurrent routes joining US 20 at Carey. US 20/US 26/US 93 skirt the north edge of Craters of the Moon National Monument and Preserve and then through Arco where US 93 splits north. Near Idaho National Laboratory, US 26 again splits from US 20 to the southeast, proceeding to Blackfoot, where US 26 joins I-15 for about 20 mi before splitting just south of Idaho Falls toward Alpine, Wyoming.

Wyoming
From Alpine, US 26 is cosigned with US 89 east and north to Hoback Junction, then cosigned with US 89, US 189, and US 191 to Jackson. US 189 ends in Jackson, and the other three highways continue their concurrency through Grand Teton National Park up to Moran. At "Glacier View Turnout", a view of Teton Glacier, on the north of Grand Teton, can be seen. At Moran, US 26 turns east, concurrent with US 287. Crossing the Continental Divide at Togwotee Pass, US 26 passes through Dubois, the end of the Wyoming Centennial Scenic Byway, and at Diversion Dam Junction, US 26 and US 287 separate; US 26 continues southeast to Riverton, then northeast to Shoshoni. From Shoshoni to Casper, US 26 is cosigned with US 20. US 20/US 26 has a bypass north of Casper, the eastern half of which is concurrent with I-25 and US 87. US 20/US 26/US 87 parallels I-25 from Casper to Glenrock; east of Glenrock, US 26 (along with US 20 and US 87) is cosigned on I-25. US 26 follows I-25 to Dwyer Junction, where it turns east to continue along the Old Oregon Trail. US 26 passes through Guernsey, Fort Laramie, Lingle, and Torrington before entering Nebraska. US 85 is concurrent with US 26 between Lingle and Torrington.

Nebraska
US 26 runs southeastward parallel to the North Platte River. The largest city US 26 runs through in Nebraska is Scottsbluff, which is just 22 miles (35 km) from the Wyoming border. US 26 also goes past Chimney Rock National Historic Site. US 26 intersects with US 385 in Bridgeport and then continues to its eastern terminus in Ogallala, Nebraska at I-80. All told, there are 150.79 mi of US 26 in the state of Nebraska.

History
U.S. Highway 320 (US 320) was part of the initial 1926 system, connecting US 20 in Shoshoni with US 87W in Riverton, Wyoming. It became Wyoming Highway 320 (WYO 320) in 1938, which was extended southwest to Lander in 1940 when US 287 (which had replaced US 87W) was realigned. The original part of US 320/WYO 320 became part of an extension of US 26 in 1950, and the rest of WYO 320 became part of WYO 789 in 1954.

Major intersections

 * Oregon
 * south of Seaside
 * in Portland. The highways travel concurrently through the city.
 * in Portland
 * in Madras. The highways travel concurrently through the city.
 * in Mount Vernon. The highways travel concurrently to John Day.
 * in Vale. The highways travel concurrently to Mountain Home.

 * Idaho
 * north-northwest of Parma. The highways travel concurrently to southeast of Parma.
 * north of Caldwell. The highways travel concurrently to Caldwell.
 * in Boise. The highways travel concurrently through the city.
 * in Boise. I-84/US 26 travel concurrently to Bliss. US 26/US 30 travel concurrently to west-northwest of Bliss.
 * in Shoshone. The highways travel concurrently to Arco.
 * in Carey. The highways travel concurrently to northwest of Atomic City.
 * in Blackfoot. The highways travel concurrently to Idaho Falls.
 * in Idaho Falls

 * Wyoming
 * on the Alpine Northwest–Alpine Northeast line. The highways travel concurrently to Moran.
 * in Hoback Junction. US 26/US 189 travel concurrently to Jackson. US 26/US 191 travel concurrently to Moran.
 * in Moran. The highways travel concurrently to west-northwest of Morton.
 * in Shoshoni. The highways travel concurrently to Orin.
 * on the Casper–Hartrandt city line. I-25/US 26 travel concurrently into Casper proper. US 26/US 87 travel concurrently to west-southwest of Dwyer.
 * southeast of Glenrock. The highways travel concurrently to west-southwest of Dwyer.
 * in Orin
 * in Lingle. The highways travel concurrently to Torrington.

 * Nebraska
 * in Bridgeport. The highways travel concurrently to Northport.
 * west of Ogallala. The highways travel concurrently to Ogallala.
 * in Ogallala. The roadway continues as.

title: U.S. Route 26


text:
Talk:Economy of Bermuda

Untitled
The anonymous user 68.10.115.135 sent the following to me by email:

 * Hi, I put that stuff about "for which it is now a world center" in because there's now a bigger pool of re-investment insurance capital available in Bermuda than there is in London, which I thought was notable. Re-insurance is now by far and away the largest sector of the international business in Bermuda - one only needs to look at the giant buildings put up by ACE and XL to see that!

 * I'll try and dig up some actual statistics and put that all in the article, unless you have some reason why I shouldn't.

Saying it's "a" world centre is just a somewhat biased way of saying it's one of the biggest. But there's no point in arguing about the best way to summarise this important point down to half a sentence -- go ahead and write a paragraph about it.

-- Tim Starling 00:06, Aug 6, 2003 (UTC)

Will do - it may take me a while to dig up the data, though, as I want to cover two wholly separate points: first, Bermuda's role in the world re-insurance market, and second, re-insurance's role in Bermuda's offshore business sector. I recall the first from an article I saw in RG magazine while waiting in the Bank of Bermuda one day, but finding the data online may be a bit tricky. -- Noel Chiappa

 * According to, which is supported by the Royal Gazette, Bermuda's main newspaper, "Bermuda-based companies provide 30%, the largest block, of Lloyd's total capacity", which I think qualifies it to call itself "a world center" for re-insurance. Noel (talk) 03:50, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Economy of Bermuda


text:
Fan-out

In digital electronics, the fan-out is the number of gate inputs driven by the output of another single logic gate.

In most designs, logic gates are connected to form more complex circuits. While no logic gate input can be fed by more than one output at a time without causing contention, it is common for one output to be connected to several inputs. The technology used to implement logic gates usually allows a certain number of gate inputs to be wired directly together without additional interfacing circuitry. The maximum fan-out of an output measures its load-driving capability: it is the greatest number of inputs of gates of the same type to which the output can be safely connected.

Logical practice
Maximum limits on fan-out are usually stated for a given logic family or device in the manufacturer's datasheets. These limits assume that the driven devices are members of the same family.

More complex analysis than fan-in and fan-out is required when two different logic families are interconnected. Fan-out is ultimately determined by the maximum source and sink currents of an output and the maximum source and sink currents of the connected inputs; the driving device must be able to supply or sink at its output the sum of the currents needed or provided (depending on whether the output is a logic high or low voltage level) by all of the connected inputs, while maintaining the output voltage specifications. For each logic family, typically a "standard" input is defined by the manufacturer with maximum input currents at each logic level, and the fan-out for an output is computed as the number of these standard inputs that can be driven in the worst case. (Therefore, it is possible that an output can actually drive more inputs than specified by fan-out, even of devices within the same family, if the particular devices being driven sink and/or source less current, as reported on their data sheets, than a "standard" device of that family.) Ultimately, whether a device has the fan-out capability to drive (with guaranteed reliability) a set of inputs is determined by adding up all the input-low (max.) source currents specified on the datasheets of the driven devices, adding up all the input-high (max.) sink currents of those same devices, and comparing those sums to the driving device's guaranteed maximum output-low sink current and output-high source current specifications, respectively. If both totals are within the driving device's limits, then it has the DC fan-out capacity to drive those inputs on those devices as a group, and otherwise it doesn't, regardless of the manufacturer's given fan-out number. However, for any reputable manufacturer, if this current analysis reveals that the device cannot drive the inputs, the fan-out number will agree.

When high-speed signal switching is required, the AC impedance of the output, the inputs, and the conductors between may significantly reduce the effective drive capacity of output, and this DC analysis may not be enough. See AC Fan-out below.

DC fan-out
A perfect logic gate would have infinite input impedance and zero output impedance, allowing a gate output to drive any number of gate inputs. However, since real-world fabrication technologies exhibit less than perfect characteristics, a limit will be reached where a gate output cannot drive any more current into subsequent gate inputs - attempting to do so causes the voltage to fall below the level defined for the logic level on that wire, causing errors.

The fan-out is the number of inputs that can be connected to an output before the current required by the inputs exceeds the current that can be delivered by the output while still maintaining correct logic levels. The current figures may be different for the logic zero and logic one states and in that case we must take the pair that give the lower fan-out. This can be expressed mathematically as

 * $$\text{DC Fan-out} = \operatorname{min}\left ( \left\lfloor\frac{I_{\text{out high}}}{I_{\text{in high}}}\right\rfloor ,\left\lfloor\frac{I_{\text{out low}}}{I_{\text{in low}}}\right\rfloor \right ) $$

where $$\lfloor\;\rfloor$$ is the floor function.

Going on these figures alone TTL logic gates are limited to perhaps 2 to 10, depending on the type of gate, while CMOS gates have DC fan-outs that are generally far higher than is likely to occur in practical circuits (e.g. using NXP Semiconductor specifications for their HEF4000 series CMOS chips at 25 °C and 15 V gives a fan-out of 34 000).

AC fan-out
However, inputs of real gates have capacitance as well as resistance to the power supply rails. This capacitance will slow the output transition of the previous gate and hence increase its propagation delay. As a result, rather than a fixed fan-out the designer is faced with a trade off between fan-out and propagation delay (which affects the maximum speed of the overall system). This effect is less marked for TTL systems, which is one reason why TTL maintained a speed advantage over CMOS for many years.

Often a single signal (as an extreme example, the clock signal) needs to drive far more than 10 things on a chip. Rather than simply wiring the output of a gate to 1000 different inputs, circuit designers have found that it runs much faster to have a tree (as an extreme example, a clock tree) – for example, have the output of that gate drive 10 buffers (or equivalently a buffer scaled 10 times as big as the minimum-size buffer), those buffers drive 100 other buffers (or equivalently a buffer scaled 100 times as big as the minimum-size buffer), and those final buffers to drive the 1000 desired inputs. During physical design, some VLSI design tools do buffer insertion as part of signal integrity design closure.

Likewise, rather than simply wiring all 64 output bits to a single 64-input NOR gate to generate the Z flag on a 64-bit ALU, circuit designers have found that it runs much faster to have a tree – for example, have the Z flag generated by an 8-input NOR gate, and each of their inputs generated by an 8-input OR gate.

Reminiscent of radix economy, one estimate for the total delay of such a tree—the total number of stages by the delay of each stage – gives an optimum (minimum delay) when each stage of the tree is scaled by e, approximately 2.7. People who design digital integrated circuits typically insert trees whenever necessary such that the fan-in and fan-out of each and every gate on the chip is between 2 and 10.

Dynamic or AC fan-out, not DC fan-out is therefore the primary limiting factor in many practical cases, due to the speed limitation. For example, suppose a microcontroller has 3 devices on its address and data lines, and the microcontroller can drive 35 pF of bus capacitance at its maximum clock speed. If each device has 8 pF of input capacitance, then only 11 pF of trace capacitance is allowable. (Routing traces on printed circuit boards usually have 1-2 pF per inch so the traces in this case can be 5.5 inches long max.) If this trace length condition can't be met, then the microcontroller must be run at a slower bus speed for reliable operation, or a buffer chip with higher current drive must be inserted into the circuit. Higher current drive increases speed since $$\textstyle\ I = C\frac{dV}{dt}$$; more simply, current is rate of flow of charge, so increased current charges the capacitance faster, and the voltage across a capacitor is equal to the charge on it divided by the capacitance. So with more current, voltage changes faster, which allows faster signaling over the bus.

Unfortunately, due to the higher speeds of modern devices, IBIS simulations may be required for exact determination of the dynamic fan-out since dynamic fan-out is not clearly defined in most datasheets. (See the external link for more information.)

title: Fan-out


text:
Talk:Electromagnetic phenomenon

Geez, what's the point? "Electromagnetic phenomena" include all of biology, chemistry and solid state physics - an area so wide that any general statements you make would easily fit in electromagnetism. See the objections raised by Larry in Talk:phenomenon.

I recommend redirecting to electromagnetism. -- CYD

title: Talk:Electromagnetic phenomenon


text:
USS Sand Lance

Two submarines of the United States Navy have been named USS Sand Lance for the sand lance.

 * The first USS Sand Lance (SS-381), a Balao-class submarine, served during World War II, then was loaned to Brazil, becoming Brazilian submarine Rio Grande do Sul (S-11).
 * The second USS Sand Lance (SSN-660), a Sturgeon-class submarine, commissioned 1971, decommissioned 1998.

title: USS Sand Lance


text:
Samjeondo Monument

The Samjeondo Monument is a monument marking the submission of the Korean Joseon dynasty to the Manchu-led Qing dynasty in 1636 after the latter's invasion of the former. Its original name was Daecheong Hwangje Gongdeok Bi (大淸皇帝功德碑), which means the stele to the merits and virtues of the Emperor of the Great Qing. Initially erected at Samjeondo, near the Sambatnaru crossing point of the Han River in modern-day Seoul, it was thereafter buried and erected again several times. It is designated as the 101st historic site of South Korea.

Erection
Following the siege of Namhansanseong, King Injo of Joseon was forced to surrender and accept tributary status to Qing China in 1636. The following year, Hong Taiji, founding emperor of the Qing dynasty, ordered King Injo to put up a monument "in honor of the excellent virtues of the Qing Emperor". In 1639 it was erected at Samjeondo, where the ceremony of surrender had been conducted. Inscriptions were written in Manchu and Mongolian on the front side and in Hanmun on the back; they have almost identical contents. The Hanmun version was composed by Yi Gyeongseok (李景奭), and the rest seem to have been translated from it.

Samjeondo, meaning "crossing of the three fields", was located near the Sambatnaru, a major crossing point of the Han River in early Joseon times. The Sambatnaru way was the shortest route to the stronghold of Gwangju and the southern provinces. It was also the one most often used to visit the tomb of King Taejong of Joseon at the foot of Mt. Daemosan.

Timeline
Because of the strong emotional charge attached to it, this monument has been buried and then erected again several times from 1639 till nowadays.

 * 1895. The monument was buried down as a result of the Treaty of Shimonoseki that concluded the First Sino-Japanese War.
 * 1913. The monument is erected again.
 * ???. The monument is buried after 1945. During Syngman Rhee's presidency (1948–1960), orders were given to destroy the stele, but the Ministry of Culture had it buried instead.
 * 1957. South Korean Government designates the site as Historic Site No 101 (1957/02/01).
 * 1963. The monument becomes visible after the river floods.
 * 1983. Monument is placed in a park, 37.503351 N,127.107083 E, i.e. in Seokchon-dong, Songpa-gu, Seoul, South Korea

 * 2010. Monument is relocated 37.510407 N, 127.101635 E.

Names

 * in Manchu: Daicing gurun-i Enduringge Han-i gung erdemui bei (Samjeondo Monument-Manchu.png)
 * in Mongolian: Dayičing ulus-un Boγda Qaγan-u erdem bilig-i daγurisγaγsan bei (Samjeondo Monument-Mongolian.png)
 * in Hanmun: Dàqīng huángdì gōngdé bēi (大淸皇帝功德碑)

which can be translated as "the stele to the merits and virtues of the Emperor of the Great Qing."

Description
Both the Qing and Joseon dynasties saw the inscription as the litmus test for the latter's attitude toward the Qing emperor, so King Injo ensured that it flattered the Qing dynasty: the inscription narrates how the king of Joseon came to attach himself to the virtue of the Qing emperor from a Joseon point of view. Although one-sided, it provides a concise account of the Qing-Joseon relationship.

The inscription starts with the description of the Qing campaign against Joseon in 1636. The Qing army besieged the Namhan fortress, where King Injo took refuge. He admitted his guilt, accepted the imperial edict and surrendered at Samjeondo. Since Hong Taiji felt compassion for the Joseon king, he mercifully sent the king back to the capital and rapidly withdrew the army without doing harm to the people.

In the next paragraph, the inscription traces the history back to the Battle of Sarhū in 1619. The Joseon army, led by Gang Hong-rip, put on the appearance of supporting the Ming dynasty but surrendered to the Qing dynasty. However, all of the soldiers except the high-ranking ones were released by Nurhaci, and the inscription emphasizes the merciful act. Since Joseon still displayed disobedient behavior, Hong Taiji commenced the Later Jin invasion of Joseon in 1627. He did not overthrow the kingdom but established a Confucian "elder brother-younger brother" relationship. The inscription then goes on to describe the second campaign. When Hong Taiji proclaimed the Qing dynasty in 1636, Joseon did not accept it even though Qing China announced a war. The inscription stressed his benevolent acts during the war.

Next, the inscription explains the background of erection of the monument. It says that the king voluntarily erected the monument at Samjeondo to let the excellent virtue of the Qing emperor be known around the world.

Finally, the inscription summarizes the entire course of events in verse.

title: Samjeondo Monument


text:
Talk:In Through the Out Door/Archive 1

I removed "-drawn ??query this ", and clarified it a bit. Not sure what was being queried - the factual correctness of the statement, or maybe the term "line drawn" was ambiguous, implying hand drawn. Hopefully the edition should make it clear. If it was factual correctness, well - I have a copy here, it's true! GRAHAMUK 00:24, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)

title: Talk:In Through the Out Door/Archive 1


text:
KV55

KV55 is a tomb in the Valley of the Kings in Egypt. It was discovered by Edward R. Ayrton in 1907 while he was working in the Valley for Theodore M. Davis. It has long been speculated, as well as much disputed, that the body found in this tomb was that of the famous king, Akhenaten, who moved the capital to Akhetaten (modern-day Amarna). The results of genetic and other scientific tests published in February 2010 have confirmed that the person buried there was both the son of Amenhotep III and the father of Tutankhamun. Furthermore, the study established that the age of this person at the time of his death was consistent with that of Akhenaten, thereby making it almost certain that it is Akhenaten's body. However, a growing body of work soon began to appear to dispute the assessment of the age of the mummy and the identification of KV55 as Akhenaten.

Both the tomb's history and the identification of its single occupant have been problematic. It is presumed to be a royal cache and reburial dating from the late eighteenth dynasty, prepared after the abandonment of Amarna and the dismantling of the royal necropolis there. On the basis of the recovered artifacts, it is also suggested that the burial once contained more than a single occupant, either interred on one occasion or over a period of time. Queen Tiye is most often named in this context.

It is also clear that the tomb was re-entered at a later time, almost certainly during the twentieth dynasty. At that time, any additional, hypothetical occupants of the tomb would have been removed and (possibly) relocated to KV35, while the remaining mummy and some of the other artefacts were desecrated and abandoned.

The tomb is often referred to as the "Amarna cache", given the mixed nature of its contents.

Discovery and excavations
The entrance to KV55 was uncovered by Ayrton on 6 January 1907. Its discovery was brought to Davis's attention on the following day. The tomb was first entered on 9 January by Ayrton, Davis, Joseph Lindon Smith and (as the representative of the antiquities service) Arthur Weigall. On 11 January 1907, the finds were photographed. Ayrton then began clearance of the tomb. On 25 January 1907, the coffin and mummy were investigated in situ.

According to a letter from Davis to Gaston Maspero, some of the objects found in KV55 were still in place in January 1908, and their study and attempts at conservation were still ongoing at that later date. In 1921, while excavating south of the tomb, Howard Carter discovered several items that seem to have originated in KV55. These include a jasper burnisher and some fragments of copper rosettes from a funerary pall.

After its excavation, the tomb's entrance was initially fitted with a steel door, which was later removed and replaced by stone blocking. By 1944, this blocking had collapsed and filled the tomb's entrance with debris. In 1993, the tomb was cleared again by Lyla Pinch Brock. In 1996, she undertook conservation work on the stairs and the plastering inside the burial chamber through a grant from the American Research Centre in Egypt.

KVC
Three days before the discovery of KV55, Ayrton uncovered a recess in the rock (now designated as KVC) located immediately above the entrance to KV55 and containing jars of twentieth dynasty type. This recess may have been an unfinished tomb commencement, and its contents may be analogous to the embalming cache found in KV54, but because the find was never properly published, the precise nature of its contents, the date of the jars, and its relation (if any) to KV55 are now unclear.

Location and general appearance
KV55 is a relatively small, undecorated, single-chamber tomb, its total length measuring only 27.61 meters. It is located in the central area of the valley, immediately adjacent to and below KV6 (Ramesses IX) and across the valley floor from KV7 (Ramesses II) and the near-contemporary tomb KV62 (Tutankhamun). Oriented almost due east, its entrance way consists of a set of stairs cut into the valley bedrock that leads to a gently sloping corridor and then to the single chamber of the tomb.

The tomb appears to be unfinished: in the south wall of the burial chamber is a small niche, the commencement of an unfinished antechamber, while red masonry marks within the burial chamber indicate plans for yet another room. When finished these would have made the tomb's layout roughly similar to that of the tomb of Tutankhamun. Such a plan seems to indicate that KV55, like KV62, was initially intended as a private burial site and only later taken over for a royal interment.

Entranceway
The tomb is accessed by a flight of 20 steps, cut into the bedrock and covered by an overhanging rock. An ostracon found by Pinch Brock in 1993 has been interpreted as a plan of the tomb, and possibly indicates a widening of the entrance after its initial cutting. This possibility is also suggested by mason's marks found on the walls by the tomb entrance. It appears that the stairwell has been enlarged, its ceiling raised, and the number of steps increased.

When the tomb was discovered in 1907, the stairwell was covered with debris, probably originating from the cutting of KV6 directly above. The upper layer of this filling consisted of chips cemented together by water; underneath, the chips were dry and clean.

Doorway and blocking
When it was discovered, the tomb's outer door was blocked by two consecutive walls. The primary blocking consisted of a wall of cemented limestone blocks, plastered and stamped with the seal of the Royal Necropolis (with the jackal and nine captives motif). Weigall later stated that a fragment of Tutankhamun's seal had been recovered from this original blocking. However, his statement is not corroborated by any of the other reports dating from the initial discovery, leaving Weigall's claim open to question.

The first wall had been partially pulled down in antiquity, and the tomb was closed again by a second wall made of loose limestone fragments, erected in front of the remains of the first wall. Because Weigall described these consecutive blockings in ambiguous terms, it is unclear whether the secondary wall was found intact or had already been partially dismantled, like the primary wall.

Corridor
The sloping corridor beyond the entrance was partially filled with rubble. Since the secondary wall was built on top of material originating from this rubble, the fill seems to date from the time of the original interment. By 1907 this rubble had spread down into the burial chamber. Stains on the ceiling and walls of the corridor indicate that water had infiltrated the tomb in the past.

On top of the rubble fill were found a panel and door of a large gilded shrine, although the exact position of these items is unclear. Additional pieces of the same shrine were recovered from the burial chamber.

Burial chamber and niche
The walls of the burial chamber were plastered, but otherwise undecorated. This plastering seems to have been done some years after the cutting of the tomb, and repairs are evident. Rubble fill from the corridor had spread down into the chamber, partially covering its floor with debris. Elsewhere in the burial chamber, the floor and numerous objects were covered with fragments of plaster fallen from the walls and stones fallen from the ceiling.

Items found in the burial chamber can be grouped into several categories:
 * Parts of a dismantled, gilded shrine: Related to the panel and door found in the corridor. A door was found lying on the rubble inflow near the entrance to the chamber; large panels were lying on the floor or stacked against the eastern wall; and smaller elements (such as doorjambs, a lintel and possibly parts of the cornice) were lying on the floor.
 * Coffin, mummy and related items: Lying against the southern wall and resting on the decayed remains of a lion-headed bier was a badly damaged coffin. Its lid was ajar, and the coffin box had rotted. The mummy contained in this coffin was badly preserved but its linen wrappings appear to have been intact. The damaged skull had been separated from the body and was found with a vulture pectoral wrapped around it. The left arm of the body was crossed over the chest, the right arm extended. In the niche above this coffin was found a set of four canopic jars. Also related to this group of items were four "magical bricks".
 * Remains of boxes and their contents: At least two badly preserved boxes were found in the southeastern corner of the room, their contents spread on the floor. These included faience objects and appear to have been related to the "Opening of the Mouth" ceremony.
 * Seal impressions: Several small seal impressions were found underneath the panels of the gilded shrine. These carry Tutankhamun's prenomen and are identical to seal type N found in Tutankhamun's own tomb.
 * Other items: Their exact location in the chamber is not always clear. Included are a vase stand, a fragment of furniture, a silver head of a goose, pall-discs of gilded copper and a statue plinth.

Some wooden objects in the burial chamber seem to have suffered water damage, most notably the coffin, bier and boxes; however, the elements of the gilded shrine appear to have been reasonably solid. Moisture is also the likely cause of the discoloration visible on some of the faience objects, although other, similar objects appear unaffected.

Interpretation
The problems surrounding the interpretation of KV55 are due in large part to the shortcomings of Davis's original publication of the excavation. Its mix of fact, assumption, error and omission has obscured a full understanding of the deposit. The blame for these shortcomings usually falls on Davis (as editor of the publication) and Ayrton (as supervising archaeologist). Recent careful re-examinations of the original publication, of eyewitness reports, and of the photographs taken before the tomb was cleared have brought some clarity to the situation.

Although the tomb was clearly disturbed in antiquity and its contents have been described as disordered and chaotic, Martha Bell argued that this disarray was more apparent than real. Her reconstruction of the layout of the tomb indicates an orderly and deliberate arrangement of artefacts, and she suggests that the impression of chaos might be due to the collapse of wooden objects caused by falling plaster and stone. The "cemented" chips and stains in the corridor indicate that water entered the tomb along the corridor ceiling, but the amount of water might not have been great, and most damage could have been caused by increased humidity rather than direct contact with water. Bell also suggested that the moisture under the mummy might have resulted from rainfall shortly after the tomb's opening in 1907. Other damage to wooden objects might result from insects.

The shrine and Tiye's burial
A recent reconstruction of the shrine, based on photographic evidence, drawings, eyewitness descriptions and two surviving planks on display in Cairo, indicate that it resembled Tutankhamun's second and third shrines in general appearance and size. The presence of copper rosettes indicate that a funeral pall was draped on a frame associated with the shrine, also comparable to Tutankhamun's shrines. However, the decoration and inscriptions on the shrine are markedly different from those of Tutankhamun: the decoration was dominated by large offering scenes rather than a multitude of smaller mythological scenes; the text was far more brief, and seems primarily concerned with titles, names and the shrine's dedication, rather than with excerpts from funerary books; and the interior of the shrine was uninscribed and undecorated.

The text on the shrine states that it was made by Akhenaten for his mother Tiye. With one exception, the names of Akhenaten were erased and in some places were replaced by those of Amenhotep III (the father of Akhenaten) in ink. The text also refers to the "House of the Aten in Akhetaten", perhaps indicating that the shrine was made and originally used in Amarna. The decoration, which appears to have been very similar on all sides of the shrine, features Akhenaten and Tiye making offerings to the Aten, with a focus on the king rather than his mother. As with his names, Akhenaten's figure was erased from the scenes, with one exception.

The orderly arrangement of the shrine parts inside the tomb seems to indicate that it once stood up, fully assembled, with its doors facing south, and that it was later dismantled inside the tomb. It appears that only a single shrine was used in KV55, rather than a suite of four nested shrines, as in the tomb of Tutankhamun.

The presence of a shrine dedicated to Tiye is usually seen as evidence that Tiye's mummy once reposed inside the shrine in KV55. Other objects inscribed with her name (such as the piece of furniture) and with those of Amenhotep III are also seen as belonging to her funerary equipment. The seal impressions found near the east wall might indicate further items that were removed together with the queen's mummy at some later point.

Coffin, canopic jars and magical bricks
When KV55 was initially opened, Theodore Davis believed that he had found the tomb of Queen Tiye. However, it was quickly recognized that the human remains interred there were male. Georges Daressy further deduced that the gilded coffin found in the tomb was originally made for a woman and only later adapted to accommodate a king, through alterations to its inscriptions and the addition of a false beard, a uraeus and the royal scepters (crook and flail). The identity of the coffin's original owner has been a matter of much discussion over the years, with Tiye, Nefertiti, Meketaten and Meritaten all proposed as candidates. It is now widely accepted that the coffin was originally intended for Akhenaten's secondary wife Kiya. It is also recognized that the four canopic jars discovered near the coffin belonged to Kiya, and that the female heads on the stoppers of the jars portray her. Like the coffin, the canopic jars were altered for the burial of a king through the erasure of Kiya's titulary and the addition of a royal uraeus to each portrait head.

All personal names inscribed on the coffin and the canopic jars were excised in antiquity, rendering the identity of the human remains inside the coffin a matter of long debate. Over the past century, the chief candidates for this individual have been either Akhenaten or Smenkhkare, another male member of the Amarna royal family.

Evidence that the occupant of the coffin was Akhenaten is provided by the four magical bricks found inside the tomb. Two were inscribed in hieratic, but they are poorly preserved and the name of their owner is lost. The other two, however, are of better quality, with hieroglyphic inscriptions naming the Osiris Neferkheprure Waenre, a reference to Akhenaten's nomen. The fact that all four bricks were oriented correctly and that three of them were positioned in close association with the coffin suggests that they were intended as a set and were made for the coffin's final occupant, who therefore, would be Akhenaten.

The identification of the mummy
The mummy found in the tomb was, however, at first identified as belonging to a woman by two visiting physicians who examined the remains in situ. This led Davis to conclude he had found the mummy of queen Tiye and he therefore published his account of the discovery as The Tomb of Queen Tiyi. As possible reasons for this initial identification the (typical female) position of the mummy's arms, post-mortem damage to the pelvic bones and the absence of male genitalia have been suggested. But when anatomist Grafton Elliot Smith examined the skull and bones in Cairo a few months later he concluded that they were those of a young male, with wide hips, a pendent chin, and distorted cranium brought on by chronic hydrocephalus. The age of death he estimated as being around 25 years although he later suggested the possibility that the body had suffered from Frölich's syndrome which delayed normal skeletal maturation. These results were seen to support the initial claims by Weigall, Maspero and Smith, based on other evidence found in the tomb (see above) that the body was that of Akhenaten.

Later re-examinations of the remains confirmed Smith's original identification of the mummy as belonging to a young male (although with feminine traits) but pushed the estimated age of death back to around 20 years. These re-examinations also indicated that the body showed no signs of delayed maturation, and that, while the skull was of unusual shape, it was not abnormal, and showed no indication of hydrocephalus. Reconstruction of the facial features of the skull also indicated that the mummy's face in life bore no particular resemblance to Akhenaten's representation on his monuments. However, as Akhenaten's depictions were highly stylised, the lack of similarity is not conclusive. After the discovery of the tomb of Tutankhamun, a close resemblance was noted between his mummy and the body found in KV55 and later tests showed both shared the same blood-group (A2) and serum antigen (MN), all of which suggests Tutankhamun and the individual found in KV55 were closely related to each other, either as father and son, or brothers. Based on these results it was concluded that the KV55 body was too young to be Akhenaten and they were seen to support the claim that the mummy was that of Smenkhkare, an idea first proposed by Rex Engelbach in 1931.

Before February 2010, it was pointed out that the reliability of methods to assess the age of death for mummies in general was uncertain. For these reasons the correctness of the age estimates was repeatedly called into question. Several studies estimated the mummy to be of a man who died around age 25–26; beside Smith, Douglas E. Derry and Ronald G. Harrison came to this conclusion. John R. Harris in the late 1980s offered 35 years as its age, while Joyce Filer in the early 2000s suggested early 20s. Elsewhere, an analysis of the skeletal remains based on dentition and X-rays of the long bones indicated 35 years. Finally, examinations using CT scans from the late 2000s, published in 2010 and 2016, showed the mummy to have died between age 35–45, which the examiners believe supports the theory that the mummy is Akhenaten's. The archaeological, inscriptional, and now genetic evidence indicate that the ancient Egyptians who buried (and later desecrated) the body in KV55 believed this to be Akhenaten's. However, a number of experts dispute these findings, claiming that Hawass et al. have not provided sufficient evidence to assume the older age at death. In fact, the original 2010 paper only cites a single point of spinal degeneration, while other analyses, such as Strouhal's cite multiple indicators for a younger age.

Further complicating the identity of the KV55 mummy is the fact that he does not seem to be the father of the female mummy KV21a. The latter has been identified as a likely candidate for the mother of two foetuses found in Tutankhamun's tomb, thus probably making her Ankhesenamun, the daughter of Akhenaten and the only known wife of Tutankhamun. The identity of the KV55 mummy, therefore, remains controversial for many.

In March 2021, the results of a new forensic facial reconstruction were released.

Reconstruction
The deposit, as it was found in KV55, presents a mixture of chronological and religious anomalies. Objects inscribed with Amenhotep III's nomen and prenomen might be contemporary with that king's reign and could be interpreted as possessions of Queen Tiye. Other items inscribed with Tiye's name (such as the shrine and furniture elements) also clearly belonged to her. Akhenaten's presence is indicated by items originally inscribed for him (such as the magical bricks) and items that were adapted for his use (such as the coffin and canopic jars).

It is nevertheless highly unlikely that either of these two burials within KV55 was original. In the case of Tiye, evidence found in tomb WV22 suggests that Amenhotep III prepared her burial in his own tomb. However, the fact that Tiye outlived her husband by possibly as much as twelve years seems to have disrupted such plans. On the other hand, from inscriptional evidence on the KV55 shrine, it seems likely that Tiye was buried at Amarna by her son Akhenaten. In the case of Akhenaten, it seems almost certain that he was originally buried in the tomb he prepared for himself in the Amarna royal wadi. Although it is unclear whether or not the original blocking of the tomb was stamped with Tutankhamun's seal, the several small seal-impressions carrying his prenomen are most likely related to the reburial(s) in KV55, since he was probably not involved in the original burial preparations of either Tiye (who died several years before Tutankhamun came to the throne) or Akhenaten (who, presumably, was buried by his co-regent and probable immediate successor, Smenkhkare).

One scenario, suggested by Nicholas Reeves, is as follows: Akhenaten and his mother, Queen Tiye, were originally entombed at Akhenaten's new capital Akhetaten (modern Amarna), but their mummies were moved to KV55 following the total abandonment of Akhetaten during the reign of Tutankhamun, who was Akhenaten's son. The door to KV55 was sealed with Tutankhamun's name. There, the mummies remained for about 200 years, until the tomb was rediscovered by workmen excavating the tomb of Ramesses IX (KV6) nearby. By this time, Akhenaten was reviled as the "heretic king"; consequently, Queen Tiye's sarcophagus was hastily removed from his defiling presence, except for its surrounding gilded wooden shrine, which would have had to be dismantled for removal. Akhenaten's likeness was chiseled off the shrine's carved relief. Moreover, the gold face mask was ripped from Akhenaten's sarcophagus and his identifying cartouche was removed from its hieroglyphic inscription, thus consigning its occupant to oblivion. As a final insult, a large rock was thrown at the coffin. However, a finely made vulture pectoral—a symbol of royalty in Ancient Egypt—was still found placed around this mummy's head.

Later use of KV55
In 1923, Harry Burton used KV55 as a darkroom to develop his photographs documenting Howard Carter's excavation of Tutankhamun's tomb.

In literature
The discovery and opening of KV55 is one of the events recounted in the novel The Ape Who Guards the Balance by the Egyptologist Barbara Mertz (writing as Elizabeth Peters).

title: KV55


text:
John Cairncross

John Cairncross (25 July 1913 – 8 October 1995) was a British civil servant who became an intelligence officer and spy during the Second World War. As a Soviet double agent, he passed to the Soviet Union the raw Tunny decryptions that influenced the Battle of Kursk. He was alleged to be the fifth member of the Cambridge Five. He was also notable as a translator, literary scholar and writer of non-fiction.

The most significant aspect of his work was helping the Soviets defeat the Germans in battle during the Second World War; he may also have told Moscow that the US was developing a nuclear bomb. Cairncross confessed in secret to MI5's Arthur S. Martin in 1964 and gave a limited confession to two journalists from The Sunday Times in December 1979. He was given immunity from prosecution.

According to The Washington Post, the suggestion that John Cairncross was the "fifth man" of the Cambridge ring was not confirmed until 1990, by Soviet double-agent Oleg Gordievsky. This was re-confirmed by former KGB agent Yuri Modin's book published in 1994, My Five Cambridge Friends Burgess, Maclean, Philby, Blunt, and Cairncross by Their KGB Controller.

Childhood and education
Cairncross was born at Pine Cottage, Lesmahagow, in Lanarkshire, the youngest of four girls and four boys, of Elizabeth Andrew Wishart (1875–1958), a primary schoolteacher, and Alexander Kirkland Cairncross (1865–1947), an ironmongery manager. His three brothers became professors, one of whom was the economist Sir Alexander Kirkland Cairncross (a.k.a. Alec Cairncross). The journalist Frances Cairncross is his niece. Cairncross grew up in Lesmahagow, a small town on the edge of moorland, near Lanark in the Central Belt of Scotland, and was educated at Lesmahagow Higher Grade School (where his name appears as the 1928 winner of the Dux prize); Hamilton Academy; the University of Glasgow; the Sorbonne; and Trinity College, Cambridge, where he studied French and German.

Early professional work
After graduating, Cairncross took the British Civil Service exam and won first place in both the "home civil service" and the "foreign office and diplomatic service" competitions. An article in the Glasgow Herald on 29 September 1936 noted that Cairncross had scored an "outstanding double success of being placed 1st in the Home List and 1st in the competition for the Foreign Office and the Diplomatic Service" and that he had been placed fifth in the University of Glasgow bursary competition of 1930 and was also a Scholar and Bell Exhibitioner at Trinity College, Cambridge.

Cairncross worked initially in the Foreign Office before transferring to the Treasury and then the Cabinet Office, where he worked as a private secretary to Lord Hankey, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster. It has been suggested that in 1936, whilst at Cambridge, Cairncross joined the Communist Party of Great Britain but he was not noted whilst at university for any political activity by his brother Alec, who was also at Cambridge until 1935. Sir Alec also recalled that John "was a prickly young man, who was difficult to argue with and resented things rather easily".

It was while he was working with the Foreign Service (c. 1936) that he was recruited as a spy for the Soviets by James Klugmann of the Communist Party of Great Britain.

Second World War
In 1942 and 1943 Cairncross worked at GC&CS, Bletchley Park in Hut 3, on Ultra ciphers. He had access to communications of the German military and intelligence services. In June 1943, he left Bletchley Park for a job in MI6.

Government Code and Cypher School, Bletchley Park
Cairncross passed decrypted documents through secret channels to the Soviet Union. Codenamed Liszt by the Russians because of his love of music, Cairncross had been instructed to get into Bletchley Park, known to the KGB as Kurort.

From 1942, the Oberkommando der Wehrmacht (German Armed Forces High Command) communicated with Army group commanders in the field using a machine that the British codenamed Tunny. Cairncross smuggled Tunny decrypts due to be destroyed out of Hut 3 in his trousers, transferring them to his bag at the railway station before going to meet his NKVD contact in London, Anatoli Gorsky. The Soviets were particularly interested in traffic between Berlin–Pskov, Berlin–Helsinki, Berlin–Lisbon, Trebizond–Istanbul, Berlin–Bucharest, and Kirkenes–Oslo. They were also interested in British efforts to decipher Soviet ciphers and in the joint effort by German and Japanese cipher experts to decipher Soviet signals including military ones, which the combined German–Japanese effort failed to achieve with the Soviet diplomatic ciphers.

The raw transcripts decrypted by Colossus were passed to intelligence officers at Bletchley Park, who created reports based on this material by disguising its origin as signals traffic. By providing verbatim transcripts, Cairncross showed the Soviets that the British were breaking German ciphers. It was considered to be in the British interest for the Soviet Union to be made aware of German military plans, but not of how they were obtained, because of "defective and leaky" internal security in the Soviet Union. The Lubianka originally suspected a "trap" because of the amount of high-grade material supplied, but it was acted on and found to be accurate. One item passed was "advance warning to develop tanks with stronger shells in the light of German armament reports. Information based on decrypts was passed to the Soviets through official channels as from Agent "Boniface". Stalin distrusted unsourced intelligence presented to him by Britain and the United States.

Operation Citadel
Operation Citadel was the codename given by Nazi Germany to their offensive which led to the Battle of Kursk. After being defeated at Kursk, the Wehrmacht retreated steadily until Berlin was taken. Tunny decrypts (transcripts) gave the British advance intelligence about Operation Citadel. Almost all raw transcripts were destroyed at the end of the war but a surviving transcript dated 25 April 1943 from Army Group South signed by Maximilian von Weichs shows the high level of detail available to British intelligence officers. Analysts deduced the northern and southern attack routes, and a report based on this transcript was passed through official channels to Stalin. During this period, Cairncross provided a second, clandestine channel, supplying raw Tunny transcripts directly.

Tito and the Yugoslav partisans
Axis occupation forces in Yugoslavia used radio communication extensively. In addition to German Abwehr, Sicherheitsdienst (SD), Luftwaffe, naval, railway, Army group and OKW messages, GC&CS intercepted and decrypted Yugoslav partisan communications with Comintern and with the Soviet Union. Cairncross first in Hut 3, then later at MI6 HQ, had access to raw decrypts. Communications from Comintern to Tito supplying some of this intelligence, strongly suggest that he passed decrypts concerning Yugoslavia to the KGB.

As a spy
Between 1941 and 1945, Cairncross supplied the Soviets with 5,832 documents, according to Russian archives. In 1944, Cairncross joined MI6, the foreign intelligence service. In Section V, the counter-intelligence section, Cairncross produced under the direction of Kim Philby an order of battle of the SS. Cairncross later suggested that he was unaware of Philby's connections with the Russians. In October 1944, he wrote to his Soviet leaders in foreign intelligence that "I am delighted that our friends found my help worthy of attention, and I am proud that I contributed something to the victory, which led to the almost complete cleansing of the Soviet land from the invaders". In March 1945, he was awarded a £1,000 per year pension but he refused to accept it.

Yuri Modin, the Russian MGB (later KGB) Controller in London, claims that Cairncross gave him details of nuclear arms to be stationed with NATO in West Germany. He gives no date for this message. Cairncross was at the Ministry of Supply in 1951 and NATO was established in April 1949. There was no such plan at this time and it was only much later that NATO obtained tactical nuclear weapons under US control in Germany. This appears to have been a disinformation exercise.

In September 1951, he was questioned by British counterintelligence about his relationship with Maclean and the Communist Party. Cairncross had been trained by the Soviets on how to behave during a counterintelligence interrogation. On 23 October 1951, Cairncross informed his Soviet controller that he had merely explained to the interrogator that he did not hide his membership with the party and that he would merely greet Maclean when he worked at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs but did not maintain any contact with him after graduation. For security, the residence temporarily stopped contact with him, allowed him to continue to report monthly his situation with appropriate signals, and planned a follow-up meeting on 23 January 1952. The Soviets developed an exfiltration plan for Cairncross including funds, documents, and communication methods while living in other countries. Cairncross did not signal his controller until an early March 1952 meeting during which Cairncross stated that he had been interrogated again. The residency did not have any more contact with Cairncross and instructed Kim Philby to determine Cairncross's whereabouts. Philby could not determine the whereabouts of Cairncross.

Cairncross admitted to some impropriety in 1951 after MI5 found papers in Guy Burgess's flat with a handwritten note from him, after Burgess's flight to Moscow. This included a 15-page report about international affairs and policy obtained from nine officials. Cairncross claimed that this was the only document that he had ever provided to Burgess. No evidence of his spying for the Soviets during the war was produced. The official report concluded that the interrogations in 1951 and 1952 had "failed to produce evidence on which a charge of espionage could be based". Philby had also informed the residency of this.

Evidence from the Soviet archives strongly indicate that Cairncross supplied to his Soviet handlers early information about British intentions to develop an atomic weapons programme. In September 1940 Cairncross was assigned to the office of Maurice Hankey, a Minister without Portfolio who sat on numerous scientific committees including the MAUD Committee and later the Tube Alloys Consultative Committee. While this did not include technical data, it provided the Soviet Union evidence that the British were considering the production of atomic weapons. He was never prosecuted, which later led to charges that the government engaged in a conspiracy to cover up his role.

The identity of the infamous 'fifth man' in the Cambridge Five remained a mystery outside intelligence circles until 1990, when KGB defector Oleg Gordievsky confirmed Cairncross publicly. Cairncross worked independently of the other four and did not share their upper-middle-class backgrounds or tastes. Although he knew Anthony Blunt at Cambridge, Guy Burgess socially (and had a dislike of both of them), Donald Maclean from the Foreign Office and Kim Philby from MI6, he claimed not to have been aware that they were also passing secrets to the Russians.

Cairncross had resigned from the civil service in late 1952 and forfeited his pension. In 1964, he admitted to interrogator Arthur Martin that he had spied for the Soviets. In December 1979, Cairncross was approached by journalist Barrie Penrose and confessed to him. The news was widely publicized leading many to surmise that he was in fact the "fifth man", a designation which would be confirmed in 1989 by Gordievsky, who had defected to Britain.

While Cairncross is now widely considered to be the "fifth man", a few sources previously believed that the designation should go to Victor Rothschild, 3rd Baron Rothschild. In his 1994 book The Fifth Man, Roland Perry asserted this claim. After the book was published, former KGB controller Yuri Modin denied ever having named Rothschild as "any kind of Soviet agent". Modin's own book's title clarifies the name of the fifth man: My Five Cambridge Friends: Burgess, Maclean, Philby, Blunt, and Cairncross.

Cairncross did not view himself as one of the Cambridge Five, insisting that the information he sent to Moscow was not harmful to Britain and that he had remained loyal to his homeland. He believed that he had been doing a favour to an ally who was being refused information by a "right wing clique", according to one news item. His link to the Cambridge ring is tenuous, since his truly valuable spy work had concluded by the end of the war. A review of the 2019 book by Chris Smith, The Last Cambridge Spy: John Cairncross, Bletchley Park Codebreaker and Soviet Double Agent, proposes this view. The review adds that unlike the other four, described as "privileged" and as "haute bourgeois" by another book (A Spy Named Orphan: The Enigma of Donald Maclean), he was "lower middle class" with a heavy Scottish accent. "It was mere happenstance that he was at Cambridge with the others".

Later life
At the end of the war, Cairncross joined the Treasury; he claimed that he ceased working for the MGB (later to become the KGB). KGB reports, published subsequently, contradict this. After his first confession (1952), Cairncross lost his civil-service job and was penniless and unemployed. With some financial assistance from his previous handler, Modin, he moved to the US, where he taught at universities in Chicago and as a lecturer in Romance Languages at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio. Cairncross was an expert on French authors and translated the works of many 17th century French poets and dramatists such as Jean Racine, Jean de La Fontaine and Pierre Corneille, as well as writing three of his own books, Molière bourgeois et libertin, New Light on Molière and After Polygamy was Made a Sin.

This career was ended following further investigation into Cairncross by MI5 investigative officer Arthur Martin. After Philby fled to Moscow in 1963, Martin reopened the files to hunt for the fourth and fifth men in 1964. To Martin's surprise, Cairncross made a full confession. Martin also received a denunciation which led to Blunt's confession. Despite his confession to Martin, Cairncross was never prosecuted for his espionage activities. The confession, conducted in Cleveland, Ohio, was not made under police caution and would therefore have been inadmissible in court. Despite MI5 enquiries regarding extradition, the FBI did not view Cairncross a danger to US security and had no grounds to deport him to Britain. MI5 asked Cairncross if he would be willing to voluntarily return to Britain to provide his confession again, this time under caution. He declined to do so.

In 1967, Cairncross moved to Rome, where he worked for the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization as a translator, also taking on work for the Research Office of Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL), Banca d'Italia and IMI. In 1970, he moved to France and lived in Provence. In the BNL, a young economist engaged with international scenarios analysis (the Iran–Iraq War of 1980–1988, petroleum's strategic routes in the Middle East and Far East) reported a strong and unusual interest by Cairncross in the bank's role in that area. During his time in Rome, his secret finally reached the public. In December 1979, in the wake of the Blunt scandal, the former civil servant Jock Colville alluded to the Sunday Times journalist, Barrie Penrose, that there had been another spy in the Foreign Office at the same time as Donald Maclean. After searching the Foreign Office lists, Penrose concluded that Cairncross was that spy and confronted him.

Cairncross's third confession became front-page news. In 1981, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher informed parliament that Cairncross was a Soviet agent and was living with his wife in the west of England while he wrote his memoirs. His status as the "fifth man" was established in 1990 by Oleg Gordievsky, the KGB defector. Cairncross retired to the south of France until 1995 when he returned to Britain and married American opera singer Gayle Brinkerhoff, daughter of John Brinkerhoff. This was one month after his first wife whom he married in 1951, Gabriella Oppenheim, died. Later that year he died after suffering a stroke, at the age of 82. Unlike many other spies, Cairncross was never charged with criminally passing information to Moscow. His only imprisonment was in Rome, after being convicted of charges involving currency.

Cairncross's autobiography, The Enigma Spy, was published in 1997. In 2001, writer Rupert Allason lost a court case in which he claimed to have ghostwritten The Enigma Spy in return for copyright and 50% of the book proceeds. According to the BBC, "John Cairncross denied both that he was the supposed 'fifth man' and that such a person had ever existed. Critics at the time viewed this book as a last attempt to clear his name, though few appear to have been convinced".

Cultural representations
Cairncross is depicted in part three of the 2003 BBC TV series Cambridge Spies, where he appears reluctant to continue passing Bletchley Park data to the Russians for fear that the Red Army was heavily penetrated by Abwehr (German intelligence) and by Eastern Front military intelligence under General Gehlen. Anthony Blunt is depicted in the drama as pressuring him with threats. Cairncross appears as a character in the Franco-Belgian comic India Dreams by Maryse and Jean-François Charles. He is depicted as the fifth of the Cambridge Five in Frederick Forsyth's The Deceiver.

Cairncross appears as a cryptographer at Bletchley Park in the 2014 film The Imitation Game, played by Allen Leech. He is portrayed as an unwitting double agent being used as a back-channel by MI6 to pass information to the Soviets that Churchill is too cautious to provide; no historical basis for this is provided. Historians, and the spy's own autobiography, have confirmed that Cairncross was spying for the Soviets because of his own views, and that this was not discovered by MI6 until long after the end of WWII.

Awards

 * Order of the Red Banner for his obtaining information about German plans and operations on the Soviet-German front during World War II.

Written

 * New Light on Molière: Tartuffe, Elomire Hypocondre (Librairie Droz, 1956)
 * Molière bourgeois et libertin (Nizet, 1963)
 * After Polygamy Was Made a Sin: The Social History of Christian Polygamy (Routledge, 1974)
 * Things to come: the world food crisis, the way out (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, 1974).
 * An Approach to Food and Population Planning (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, 1978)
 * Population and Agriculture in the Developing Countries (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, 1980).
 * La Fontaine Fables, And Other Poems (Colin Smythe, 1982)
 * L'Humanité de Molière (Nizet, 1988)
 * The Enigma Spy: An Autobiography (Century, 1997)

Translated

 * Iphigenia; Phaedra; Athaliah (Racine, Penguin Classics, 1963)
 * Andromache; Britannicus; Berenice (Racine, Penguin Classics, 1967)
 * The Cid, Cinna, The Theatrical Illusion (Corneille, Penguin Classics, 1975)
 * Polyeuctus, The Liar, The Nicomedes (Corneille, Penguin Classics, 1980)
 * La Fontaine Fables and Other Poems (La Fontaine, Colin Smythe, 1982)

title: John Cairncross