text:
Violent crime

A violent crime, violent felony, crime of violence or crime of a violent nature is a crime in which an offender or perpetrator uses or threatens to use harmful force upon a victim. This entails both crimes in which the violent act is the objective, such as murder, assault, rape and assassination, as well as crimes in which violence is used as a method of coercion or show of force, such as robbery, extortion and terrorism. Violent crimes may, or may not, be committed with weapons. Depending on the jurisdiction, violent crimes may be regarded with varying severities from homicide to harassment. There have been many theories regarding heat being the cause of an increase in violent crime. Theorists claim that violent crime is persistent during the summer due to the heat, further causing people to become aggressive and commit more violent crime.

Violent criminals who use hostile acts towards others include murderers, active shooters, kidnappers, rapists, burglars, muggers and torturers. Another category of violent criminals are pirates and hijackers of cars or aircraft. Criminal organizations, gangsters and drug cartels frequently employ violent criminals in their group, usually as enforcers or hitmen. Violent criminals often display characteristics such as low anger threshold, disinhibition/absence of impulsivity control, strong dominance/territorial instinct, antisocial personality, psychological/mental health issues and aggressive tendencies which enable them to carry out usually violent acts.

Violent crime by country
The comparison of violent crime statistics between countries is usually problematic, due to the way different countries classify crime. Valid comparisons require that similar offences between jurisdictions be compared. Often this is not possible, because crime statistics aggregate equivalent offences in such different ways that make it difficult or impossible to obtain a valid comparison. Depending on the jurisdiction, violent crimes may include: homicide, murder, assault, manslaughter, sexual assault, rape, robbery, negligence, endangerment, kidnapping (abduction), extortion, and harassment. Different countries such as Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Europe and the United States all have different systems of recording and reporting crimes.

Australia
The International Crime Victimization Survey (ICVS) is one way Australia analyzes crime. This way is done separately from formal police reporting and gives the citizens of Australia an opportunity to express their experience of crime that otherwise would not have been reported to the police. It is similar to the NCVS which is a survey that the United States does to estimate non-reported crime. The two major categories of the ICVS are personal crime and household crime.

The first annual national survey of crime victimization in Australia, the Crime Victimisation Survey, was conducted in 2008–09. Personal crimes included in the survey are: One type of sexual offense is Intimate Partner Violence (IPV). Intimate Partner Violence often stems from other violent tendencies/ behavior such as anger, lack of self-control and/or mental instability. There is a gender gap that is notable when it comes to Intimate Partner Violence. Men are more likely to be guilty of general violence while women are more likely to be guilty of IPV. Lack of self-control in men has a direct correlation on whether they are guilty of IPV or not while anger is more correlated to women on whether they engage in this type of behavior or not.
 * Physical assault
 * Threatened assault (including face-to-face and non face-to-face)
 * Robbery (including attempted)
 * Sexual assault (including attempted)

Household Crimes that could lead to violent crime are: burglary and attempted burglary. Rates for households crimes were higher than personal crimes and this rate is calculated based on every 100 people per 100 households.

Australia (as well as New Zealand) classifies crime according to the Australian and New Zealand Standard Offence Classification (ANZSOC). Originally released in 1997 as the Australian Standard Offence Classification (ASOC), it was revised in 2008 and renamed in 2011 to reflect the international use of the standard in both countries and follows agreed policy to harmonises classifications between the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and Statistics New Zealand. The standard has no single category for violent crime, but its first six divisions involve offences committed against the person:
 * 01 Homicide and related offences;
 * 02 Acts intended to cause injury;
 * 03 Sexual assault and related offences;
 * 04 Dangerous or negligent acts endangering persons;
 * 05 Abduction, harassment and other offences against the person;
 * 06 Robbery, extortion and related offences.

Canada
Canada conducts an annual measure of crime incidences called the Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR). UCR "Violent Criminal Code" violations include: homicide, attempted murder, sexual assault, assault, robbery, criminal harassment, uttering threats, and other violent violations. Canada also collects information on crime victimization every five years via its General Social Survey on Victimisation (GSS). Among the eight GSS crimes tracked are three violent crimes: sexual assault, robbery, and physical assault.

New Zealand
Prior to the country adopting the Australian standard for classifying offences (ASOC) in 2010, New Zealand's crime statistics had a category for violence that included homicides, kidnapping, abduction, robbery, assaults, intimidation, threats, and group assembly, while all sexual offences were shown in a separate category from violence. Violent crime is not specifically defined New Zealand legislation, with the Crimes Act 1961 having separate parts that deal with "Crimes against morality and decency, sexual crimes, and crimes against public welfare" and "Crimes against the person" instead. During 2015, New Zealand Police changed the way it counted crime, changing from counting recorded offences to counting people victimised or those found to be offending. The thinking here is that instead of just simply recording the offense, analyzing who exactly is the victim and who exactly is the offender can be more helpful in understanding the nature of the violent crime along with pointing out any trends/patterns. Historic recorded offence statistics from 1994 to 2014 are available from Statistics NZ, while more recent statistic are available from New Zealand Police via policedata.nz. While violent crime is not defined in New Zealand Law, the first 6 divisions of the classification standard do define offences against the person.

Europe
Austria, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, England, Latvia, Netherlands, Portugal, Greece and Sweden count minor violence such as slapping another person as assault. An example is the case of Ilias Kasidiaris in 2012. Kasidaris, then spokesperson for Greece's far-right Golden Dawn party, slapped a left-wing female opponent in the face during a live televised debate. He was subsequently wanted by Greek prosecutors for assault and faced an arrest warrant.

France does not count minor violence like slapping somebody as assault.

The United Kingdom includes all violence against the person, sexual offences, as violent crime. Today, violent crimes are considered the most heinous whereas historically, according to Simon Dedo, crimes against property were equally important. Rates of violent crime in the UK are recorded by the British Crime Survey. For the 2010/2011 report on crime in England and Wales, the statistics show that violent crime continues a general downward trend observed over the last few decades as shown in the graph. "The 2010/11 BCS showed overall violence was down 47 per cent on the level seen at its peak in 1995; representing nearly two million fewer violent offences per year." In 2010/11, 31 people per 1,000 interviewed reported being a victim of violent crime in the 12 preceding months. Regarding murder, "increasing levels of homicide (at around 2% to 3% per year) [have been observed] from the 1960s through to the end of the twentieth century". Recently the murder rate has declined, "a fall of 19 per cent in homicides since 2001/02", as measured by The Homicide Index.

United States

The U.S. federal government's definition of a "crime of violence" is stated at Title 18 of the United States Code Chapter 1 § 16: "The term “crime of violence” means—
 * (a) an offense that has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another, or
 * (b) any other offense that is a felony and that, by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense." There are two main crime databases maintained by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ): the Bureau of Justice Statistics' National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Uniform Crime Report (UCR). Non-fatal violence is reported in the NCVS, which measures rape and sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated and simple assault reported by households surveyed by the U.S. Census Bureau. The UCR tracks similar non-fatal violence, plus murder and non-negligent manslaughter recorded by law enforcement.

There are significant methodological and definitional differences between the NCVS and UCR:
 * The NCVS includes estimates of both reported and unreported crimes, while the UCR collects data on crimes recorded by the police.
 * The UCR includes homicide, arson, and commercial crimes, while the NCVS does not.
 * The UCR excludes simple assault (attacks or attempted attacks without a weapon resulting in either no injury or minor injury) and sexual assault, which are in the NCVS.
 * The NCVS data are estimates from a nationally representative sample of U.S. households, but the UCR data are based on the actual counts of offenses reported by law enforcement.

The NCVS excludes crimes against children under 12 years, persons in institutions, and, possibly, highly mobile populations and the homeless; however, victimizations against these persons may be included in the UCR. Since they use different methodologies and measure overlapping, but not identical, crimes, the data are complementary and not necessarily congruent.

UCR and FBI

In 2019, The FBI's data reports that there were approximately 1,203,808 Violent Crimes that occurred in the United States. Compared to statistics from last year, robbery, rape and burglary offenses saw a decrease in rates while assault and murder saw a slight increase. Per 100,000 people living in the United States, 156 arrests were made that related to violent crime in some capacity. More specifically, for every 100,000 people, 3 arrests were made for murder, 7 for rape, 24 for robbery, and assault was the most common with 120 arrests made for every 100,000 people.

Bureau of Justice Statistics and NCVS In 2019, The NCVS data collected consists of 155,076 households across the United States. A notable statistic from this data collection is the rate of violent crime dropping 15% in 2019. Per 1,000 individuals interviewed, 7.3 people were said to be victims of a violent crime which is a decrease compared to 2018 (8.6 per every 1,000 people). Being a victim of a violent crime as it relates to race decreased as well. Black people saw a decrease of 29% while white people saw a decrease of 22%.

Violent crime in both the UCR and NCVS category have a common variable: alcohol consumption. About 25% of American women have been victims of sexual assault while about 20% of American men have been the ones to commit this sexual assault and other violent behavior, which shows a clear gender gap. Women are disproportionately more likely to be victims of these categories in the United States. Alcohol is known to impair judgement which results in irrational decisions being made. The UCR rates for forcible rape are so low because women are unlikely to report being a victim of this violent behavior.

In 2011, the UCR violent crime rate had dropped to 386.3 cases per 100,000 persons, compared to 729.6 per 100,000 in 1990.

U.S. homicide data is also available in the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS).

Socioeconomic Status and Crime Rates

Socioeconomic status plays an infamous role in the violent crime rates shown in the graph above. There is a direct correlation to violence in the poor areas of the United States. Poverty and inequality have a direct impact on violent crime rates across countries, as well as social and environmental factors. In these poor areas, individuals may take a "survival of the fittest" approach or feel that they do not have the necessary means to provide for themselves or family in a legal way, causing them to turn to violent crime.

title: Violent crime


text: File:Stamp IS 1948 25a-400px.jpg

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

title: File:Stamp IS 1948 25a-400px.jpg


text:
Talk:Positron-emission tomography

Shaheen Lakhan - I as copyright holder give permission to post such material.

title: Talk:Positron-emission tomography


text:
Talk:Human memory process

Shaheen Lakhan - I as copyright holder give permission to post such material.

human memory
human memory is I beleive encoded in the double helix. It can be awakened when the polaritys of left and right hemispheres of the brain are in sync through the use of energy practices uniting the magnetic poles within the body thereby taking on a metaphysical understanding. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.185.233.30 (talk) 13:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

 * the double helix of DNA is not perpetually updated and changed from one millisecond to the next, in every cell across the human body. I believe what you are referring to would be called "genetic memory", and is a very different thing than is being defined in "human memory process"
 * -maxnort|173.75.240.76 (talk) 19:02, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Human memory process


text:
Talk:Memory distrust syndrome

Permission
Shaheen Lakhan - I as copyright holder give permission to post such material.
 * What material? Biosthmors (talk) 00:58, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

1982 or 1992?
A quick Google Scholar search yields a lot of citations for a 1992 paper on this topic, not 1982 as the article suggests, but I have not been able to track the paper down yet. --Beefyt 21:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

 * According to one of the cited papers it was 82', however I suppose they could have been incorrect as well. Adam Edward Brown (talk) 00:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Accessibility
I think this article needs to be rewritten to be more accessible to the general public, and less focused on its relevance to police interrogation.

 * I agree somewhat. I did however find it difficult to find literature focused on memory distrust syndrome outside of courtroom testimonials or passive references. Adam Edward Brown (talk) 00:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Memory distrust syndrome


text:
Talk:Source amnesia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 February 2020 and 2 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Aborame.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Permission
I as copyright holder give permission to post such masterial and have expanded the scope. --Slakhan 19:01, 6 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Anterograde amnesia
I'd like to mention that many anterograde amnesia sufferers posess similar symptoms, in regard to skills learned and thought 'forgotten' after the onset. But I don't have sufficient information on the phenomenon.

Not just disorder.
This article treats source amnesia as a disorder, but I have also seen the term used to simply indicate the phenomenon that people don't remember exactly where they heard or read something. Ironically, I don't remember exactly where I read the term used in this way. Possibly in The Skeptical Inquirer circa 2000. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 12:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC) Martin.

 * Additional info: in the article List of memory biases this is called Source confusion. 93.95.251.162 (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2011 (UTC) Martin (my ip# has changed).

I had the same issue with the article. The only cited source in the wikipedia article regarding Source Amnesia does not refer to it as a disorder, but a common phenomenon. I quote: "False beliefs are everywhere. Eighteen percent of Americans think the sun revolves around the earth, one poll has found. Thus it seems slightly less egregious that, according to another poll, 10 percent of us think that Senator Barack Obama, a Christian, is instead a Muslim. The Obama campaign has created a Web site to dispel misinformation. But this effort may be more difficult than it seems, thanks to the quirky way in which our brains store memories - and mislead us along the way.

''The brain does not simply gather and stockpile information as a computer's hard drive does. Facts are stored first in the hippocampus, a structure deep in the brain about the size and shape of a fat man's curled pinkie finger. But the information does not rest there. Every time we recall it, our brain writes it down again, and during this re-storage, it is also reprocessed. In time, the fact is gradually transferred to the cerebral cortex and is separated from the context in which it was originally learned. For example, you know that the capital of California is Sacramento, but you probably don't remember how you learned it.''

''This phenomenon, known as source amnesia, can also lead people to forget whether a statement is true. Even when a lie is presented with a disclaimer, people often later remember it as true."'' Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/29/opinion/29iht-edwang.1.14069662.html

None of this includes the word "disorder" anywhere, it uses phrases like "False beliefs are everywhere," and it implies that the neurotypical brain is susceptible to source amnesia. Sadie (talk) 21:40, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Source amnesia


text:
John of Cappadocia

John II, surnamed Cappadox or the Cappadocian (Greek: Ἰωάννης ὁ Καππαδόκης; died 19 January 520), was Patriarch of Constantinople in 518–520, during the reign of Byzantine emperor Anastasius I after an enforced condemnation of the Council of Chalcedon. His short patriarchate is memorable for the celebrated Acclamations of Constantinople, and the reunion of East and West after a schism of 34 years. At the death of Timothy I, John of Cappadocia, whom he had designated his successor, was presbyter and chancellor of the Church of Constantinople.

Biography
On July 9, 518, the long reign of Anastasius came to a close, the orthodox Justin succeeding. On Sunday July 15, the new emperor entered the cathedral, and the patriarch, accompanied by twelve prelates, was making his way through the throngs that crowded every corner. As he came near the raised dais where the pulpit stood shouts arose, "Long live the patriarch! Long live the emperor! Why do we remain excommunicated? Why have we not communicated these many years? You are Catholic, what do you fear; worthy servant of the Trinity? Cast out Severus the Manichee! O Justin, our emperor, you win! This instant proclaim the synod of Chalcedon, because Justin reigns". These and other cries continued. The procession passed into the inclosure, but the excited congregation went on shouting outside the gates of the choir in similar strains: "You shall not come out unless you anathematize Severus", referring to the heretical patriarch of Antioch. The patriarch John, having meanwhile gained time for thought and consultation, came out and mounted the pulpit, saying, "There is no need of disturbance or tumult; nothing has been done against the faith; we recognize for orthodox all the councils which have confirmed the decrees of Nicaea, and principally these three - Constantinople, Ephesus, and the great council of Chalcedon".

The people were determined to have a more formal decision, and continued shouting for several hours, mingling with their former cries such as these: "Fix a day for a festival in honour of Chalcedon!" "Commemorate the holy synod this very morrow!". The people being thus firm, the deacon Samuel was instructed to announce the desired festival. Still the people continued to shout with all their might, "Severus is now to be anathematized; anathematize him this instant, or there's nothing done!". The patriarch, seeing that something must be settled, took counsel with the twelve attendant prelates, who agreed to the curse on Severus. This extemporaneous and intimidated council then carried a decree by acclamation: "It is plain to all that Severus in separating himself from this church condemned himself. Following, therefore, the canons and the Fathers, we hold him alien and condemned by reason of his blasphemies, and we anathematize him". The domes of St. Sophia rang with shouts of triumph and the crowd dispersed. It was a day long remembered in Constantinople.

The next day the promised commemoration of Chalcedon took place. Again as the patriarch made his processional entrance and approached the pulpit clamours arose: "Restore the relics of Macedonius to the church! Restore those exiled for the faith! Let the bones of the Nestorians be dug up! Let the bones of the Eutychians be dug up! Cast out the Manichees! Place the four councils in the diptychs! Place Leo, bishop of Rome, in the diptychs! Bring the diptychs to the pulpit!". This kind of cry continuing, the patriarch replied, "Yesterday we did what was enough to satisfy my dear people, and we shall do the same to-day. We must take the faith as our inviolable foundation; it will aid us to reunite the churches. Let us then glorify with one mouth the holy and consubstantial Trinity". But the people went on crying madly, "This instant, let none go out! I abjure you, shut the doors! You no longer fear Amantius the Manichee! Justin reigns, why fear Amantius?". So they continued. The patriarch tried in vain to bring them to reason. It was the outburst of enthusiasm and excitement long pent up under heterodox repression. It bore all before it. The patriarch was at last obliged to have inserted in the diptychs the four councils of Nicaea, Constantinople, Ephesus, and Chalcedon, and the names of Euphemius and Macedonius, patriarchs of Constantinople, and Leo, bp. of Rome. Then the multitude chanted for more than an hour, "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for He hath visited and redeemed His people!". The choir assembled on the raised platform, and, turning eastwards, sang the Trisagion, the whole people listening in silence. When the moment arrived for the recitation of the names of the defunct bishops from the diptychs, the multitude closed in silence about the holy table; and when the deacon had read the new insertions, a mighty shout arose, "Glory be to Thee, O Lord!".

To authenticate what had been done, John assembled on July 20 a council of 40 bishops, who happened to be at the capital. The four general councils and the name of Pope Leo were inscribed in the diptychs. Severus of Antioch was anathematized after an examination of his works in which a distinct condemnation of Chalcedon was discovered. John wrote to John III of Jerusalem and to Epiphanius of Tyre, telling them the good news of the acclamations and the synod. His letters were accompanied by orders from Justin to restore all who had been banished by Anastasius, and to inscribe the council of Chalcedon in the diptychs. At Jerusalem and at Tyre there was great joy. Many other churches declared for Chalcedon, and during the reign of Justin 2,500 bishops gave their adhesion and approval. Now came the reconciliation with Rome. The emperor Justin wrote to the pope a fortnight after the scene of the acclamations, begging him to further the desires of the patriarch John for the reunion of the churches. John wrote saying that he received the four general councils, and that the names of Leo and of Hormisdas himself had been put in the diptychs. A deputation was sent to Constantinople with instructions that Acacius was to be anathematized by name, but that Euphemius and Macedonius might be passed over in silence.

The deputies arrived at Constantinople on March 25, 519. Justin received the pope's letters with great respect, and told the ambassadors to come to an explanation with the patriarch, who at first wished to express his adherence in the form of a letter, but agreed to write a little preface and place after it the words of Hormisdas, which he copied out in his own handwriting. Two copies were sent by the legates to Rome, one in Greek, the other in Latin. Emperor, senate, and all present were overjoyed at this ratification of peace.

The sting of the transaction still remained; they had now to efface from the diptychs the names of five patriarchs - Acacius, Fravitta, Euphemius, Macedonius, and Timothy - and two emperors - Zeno and Anastasius I. All the bishops at Constantinople gave their consent in writing; so did all the abbots, after some discussion. On Easter Day the pacification was promulgated. The court and people, equally enthusiastic, surged into St. Sophia. The vaults resounded with acclamations in praise of God, the emperor, St. Peter, and the Pope of Rome. Opponents, who had prophesied sedition and tumult, were signally disappointed. Never within memory had so vast a number communicated. The emperor sent an account of the proceedings throughout the provinces and the ambassadors forwarded their report to Rome, saying that there only remained the negotiations with the Patriarch of Antioch. John wrote to Hormisdas to congratulate him on the great work, and to offer him the credit of its success. Soon after, on January 19, 520, John died.

title: John of Cappadocia


text:
RM-81 Agena

The RM-81 Agena was an American rocket upper stage and satellite bus which was developed by Lockheed Corporation initially for the canceled WS-117L reconnaissance satellite program. Following the division of WS-117L into SAMOS and Corona for image intelligence, and MIDAS for early warning, the Agena was later used as an upper stage, and an integrated component, for several programs, including Corona reconnaissance satellites and the Agena Target Vehicle used to demonstrate rendezvous and docking during Project Gemini. It was used as an upper stage on the Atlas, Thor, Thorad and Titan IIIB rockets, and considered for others including the Space Shuttle and Atlas V. A total of 365 Agena rockets were launched between February 28, 1959 and February 1987. Only 33 Agenas carried NASA payloads and the vast majority were for DoD programs.

On some missions, the payload was built directly into the Agena, which provided it with electric power, communications and three-axis stabilization. Payload components were usually located ahead of the Agena's standard bulkhead. On missions where the payload was not built into the Agena, and instead separated after launch, the Agena was known as an Ascent Agena. The Agena was upgraded twice from the original Agena A in order to support heavier and more sophisticated satellites, such as Corona spacecraft with multiple and more powerful cameras.

The Agena name was suggested by the Department of Defense's Advanced Research Projects Agency for the star Beta Centauri, also known as Agena, because this upper stage would "ignite in the sky". This followed Lockheed's tradition of naming products for stellar phenomena.

The final launch was of an Agena D on February 12, 1987, configured as the upper stage of a Titan 34B. In all, 365 Agena vehicles were launched by NASA and the US Air Force.

Characteristics
The Agena was 5.0 feet (1.5 m) in diameter, three-axis stabilized (for the benefit of the reconnaissance system cameras) and its Bell Aircraft XLR81 engine produced 16,000 lbs (71 kN) of thrust using unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (UDMH) as the fuel, and inhibited red fuming nitric acid (IRFNA) as the oxidizer. This is a hypergolic fuel/oxidizer combination, and as such, it does not need an ignition system. This rocket engine could be restarted multiple times in orbit, by radio command, and it frequently was. The engine was notable for its unusual aluminum construction. The regeneratively-cooled channels that cooled the throat and nozzle were formed from straight gun drill formed channels. The parabolic shape of the chamber throat made for a difficult gun-drilling problem, which Bell Aerosystems engineers solved by arranging the cooling channels in a "One-Sheeted Circular Hyperboloid" shape, allowing machinists to gun-drill straight cooling channels through the curved surfaces of the combustion chamber. The engine was derived from the XLR-81 propulsion unit for the canceled rocket-propelled nuclear warhead pod of the Convair B-58 Hustler bomber. Until 1959, the Agena was also known as the Discoverer Vehicle or Bell Hustler.

Attitude control of the horizontal flying Agena was provided by an inertial reference package with three gyroscopes, two horizon sensors, and micro-jets using a nitrogen-freon mixture of cold gas. Pitch and roll were sensed by two hermetic integrating gyro units. A rate gyro unit determined yaw error by sensing orbital rate. Pitch and roll gyro errors were corrected from the horizon sensors, which were later supplemented by Sun and star trackers. This enabled the Agena to accommodate the higher pointing stability required for better ground resolution imaging with the improved Corona cameras.

As the Agena was designed to hold a fixed orientation in space while orbiting Earth, a passive thermal control system was devised.

The main source of the Agena's electrical power was silver peroxide-zinc batteries, which from the early 1960s on were supplemented by solar arrays. An S-band transponder enabled the Agena to receive ground command sequences (image motion compensation, altered attitude, etc.), which could be stored for later execution.

Versions
Three versions of the Agena were flown:

Agena-A
The Agena A was the first type of Agena to be built. It was launched atop Thor and Atlas rockets, mostly into polar orbits from Vandenberg Air Force Base Launch Complex 75 and Point Arguello Launch Complex 1 respectively. Two Atlas launches occurred from Launch Complex 14 at Cape Canaveral. The Agena-A was propelled by a Bell 8048 (XLR-81-BA-5) engine, which could produce 69 kilonewtons (about 15,500 lbs) of thrust for two minutes. Eighteen Agena As were launched in 1959–61, all of them for the Discoverer, MIDAS, and Samos programs.

Agena-B
During 1960, Lockheed introduced the improved Agena B, which could be restarted in orbit and had longer propellant tanks for increased burn time. It was equipped with a Bell 8081 engine, which could generate 71 kilonewtons of thrust, and be restarted in orbit. The stage carried enough propellant for the engine to burn for a total of four minutes. These launched the SAMOS-E, SAMOS-F (ELINT Ferret), and MIDAS (Missile Defense Alarm System) military early-warning satellites, Ranger lunar probes, Mariner planetary probes, OGO, and Nimbus satellites. Agena B's first flight was the (unsuccessful) launch of Discoverer 16 on October 26, 1960. The Agena B took months to be ready for Atlas launches and did not fly on that booster until Midas 3 on July 12, 1961. The final Agena B flight was the launch of OGO 3 on June 7, 1966. A total of 75 were launched.

Agena-D
The Agena D was the result of a proposal by Lockheed engineering executive Lawrence Edwards, who suggested standardizing the basic Agena configuration (up to this point, each Agena was custom-built for both the payload and the launch vehicle it was used with), and adding additional features depending on payload requirements, and a requirement from the Pentagon that the Agena be made compatible with the Titan rocket. This proposal originated in late 1962 when mounting frustration over the high failure rate of Thor and Atlas-Agena prompted the suggestion that greater standardization of launch vehicles would improve reliability. David N. Spires summarizes the standardization as follows: "The Agena D's common configuration included four usable modules containing the major guidance, beacon, power, and telemetry equipment, a standard payload console, and a rear rack above the engine for plug-in installation of optional gear-like solar panels, 'piggyback' subsatellites, and an optional Bell Aerosystems engine that could be restarted in space as many as sixteen times."

Its orbital configuration had a diameter of 60 in and a length of 248 in, and provided 19,500 Wh of electrical power from batteries. As of 2014, the Agena-D is the most-launched US upper stage. A special production line was set up to turn out 40 Agena-D spacecraft per year. Edwards remained responsible for the engineering for several years, until the Air Force declared the Agena-D as operational and froze its design. By the time of its retirement, the reliability of the Agena-D exceeded 95 percent. The first Agena D launch was of KH-4 #7 on June 28, 1963, and a total of 269 Agena Ds were launched.

Thor-Agena flew for the last time in 1972 when it launched a KH-4B satellite. The last Atlas-Agena used an Agena D stage atop a refurbished Atlas F missile to launch Seasat in 1978. Twelve more Agenas were launched on Titan vehicles through 1987 before the stage was completely retired.

The Agena-D was used to launch KH-7 GAMBIT and KH-8 Gambit 3 reconnaissance satellites, three Mariner probes to Venus and the two Mariner space probes to Mars. The final Agena-D upper stage was launched on a Titan IIIB rocket on February 12, 1987, carrying USA-21, the last SDS-1 satellite.

Agena Target Vehicle

The Agena Target Vehicle was based around the Agena-D, with equipment fitted to support use as a rendezvous and docking target for missions conducted as part of Project Gemini. It was equipped with a Bell Aerospace Model 8247 engine, which was qualified for up to 15 restarts. On later missions, the Agena's engine was fired while the Gemini spacecraft was docked, in order to boost the spacecraft to a higher orbit, and to bring it back again. During the Gemini 11 mission, an elliptical orbit with an apogee of 1375 km was reached, which set an altitude record for crewed spaceflight that held until Apollo 8, the first crewed mission to the Moon, exceeded it.

Other variants
In the early 1970s Lockheed studied the use of Agena as a payload booster in the Space Shuttle payload bay. An Agena-C with an increased diameter was proposed, but never built.

The Agena-2000 was intended as a modernized Agena, and would have been used on the Atlas V Light Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle. The Atlas V Light was cancelled in favor of standardizing the Medium configuration, and as a result the Agena-2000 was never built.

Launches
The first launch of an Agena-D was Agena Flight #64 on 27 June 1962. By the end of 1967, a total of 162 Agena-D had been launched:

Debris
Since many of the Agenas have remained in orbit long after they were needed, they've had time to break-up resulting in more orbital debris. They are thought to have exploded due to residual propellant igniting.

title: RM-81 Agena


text:
User talk:Richard kim52

Hi, I see that you have renamed Bernard Freyberg to Bernard Cyril Freyberg, 1st Baron of Wellington and Munstead.

You probably didn't know that this goes against the naming convention established for Wikipedia. Naming conventions (names and titles) in the section Other Non-royal names point 5 says
 * 5. Life peers (ie, people who have peerages awarded exclusively for their lifetime but who neither inherit it nor pass it on to anyone else)1 are generally mentioned by their personal name not title, because among other reasons a life peerage is often awarded at the end of a career, while the individual holding them may be far more widely known though their personal name, so use George Robertson, not Lord Robertson.

As Bernard Freyberg is a life peer so should be refered to as Bernard Freyberg because this is what he is commonly known for most of his life.

-- Popsracer 04:40 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hello there, welcome to the 'pedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Naming conventions or how to format them visit our manual of style. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. Cheers! --maveric149

title: User talk:Richard kim52


text:
Talk:Bernard Freyberg, 1st Baron Freyberg

Untitled
I have moved this page back to Bernard Freyberg as it conforms with Naming conventions (names and titles) -- Popsracer 04:43 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Actually, these seem to indicate that the format A B, nth of X be generally used, except in the case of life peers, which Freyberg was not. -- Lord Emsworth 01:49, Jan 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * There was a big vote on this matter not too long ago, and I'm fairly certain that the outcome supported the "most common name" rule. Bernard Freyberg's most common name was and is Bernard Freyberg. -- Vardion 07:09, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, policy is to use the peerage unless the person concerned is known universally without it, as is the case with many British Prime Ministers, for instance. "Lord Freyberg" gets more than a thousand Google hits, and so the non-peerage form is not universal. Proteus (Talk) 07:21, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * But what is the origin of this "policy"? The vote (Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Peerage/Archived_talk_3 approved exceptions to the use of peerage titles, but the idea that peerage titles should automatically be included unless "unheard of" seems to have been put forward solely by User:John Kenney (after, not during, the poll). I do not believe that there was any consensus to support this "policy" - the poll approved exceptions, but didn't specify whether they should be common or rare. That was determined afterwards, and without any substantial input from the community. I'm not going to move this page just yet, but I don't consider this "policy" to be valid (yet), and suggest that the matter be brought up at the Village Pump for general consideration. -- Vardion 07:39, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Dentist
Regarding my Persondata entry on Freyberg--he was indeed a dentist at one point. Thr Dictionary of New Zealand Biography on Freyberg notes:
 * "Freyberg’s aspiration to be a doctor died with his early departure from school, and he was apprenticed to a Wellington dentist. He was admitted to the Dentists’ Register of New Zealand on 22 May 1911. His first post was as an assistant and locum tenens in Morrinsville, and he would later practise in Hamilton and Levin."

It actually describes him as "Dentist, military leader, governor general" Hehe :D Greentubing 08:16, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Heh, I removed it thinking it was somebody's weird sense of humour. I stand corrected. Leith p 08:22, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Neither the title Governor General nor any British military ranks are hyphenated. Extramural

honorific-prefix
The honorific-prefix section of the info box shows Freybergs title to be: Lieutenant-General The Right Honourable ....

Now i will admit that am not up on the titles given to people but surely this should only be "The Right Honourable" with the military rank dropped?--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 16:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

 * You're right....you're not up on titles! It is correct as it stands. Have a look at Harold Alexander for another example and the way it slides from "The Honourable" to "The Right Honourable" in 1946! Stephen Kirragetalk - contribs 17:49, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Right oh! :)--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 20:03, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Mexico?
I don't think Freyberg's involvement in the Mexican Revolution was ever substantiated. The Oxford Companion to New Zealand Military History says 'he may have been briefly involved'.

I has been debunked - he made it up.https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/43794076 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agh47 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

Arms
I have added Freyberg's personal coat of arms. I have a reliable source and will add it (along with descriptions of several other elements) as soon as I get the time. Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by A1 Aardvark (talk • contribs) 12:39, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Freyberg buildings
I see Freyburg High School in Palmerston North is mentioned - how about adding Freyburg Community School in Te Atatu? Or the Freyburg Building on Stout St, Wellington?

Naval Victoria Cross
I was reading an article about Lord Freyberg, and he was awarded the 'Naval Victoria Cross' in 1917 which has a blue ribbon (similar to the George Cross). Until 1920 the Victoria Cross was split into two categories (army and navy) with seperate ribbons. I believe it should be noted in the article somewhere as in 1917 there was a difference, however Lord Freyberg did recieve a crimson ribbon in 1920. Regards, Nford24 (Want to have a chat?) 09:22, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
 *

DSOs
I'm rather confused on the whole DSO thing.

Was he awarded three bars to his DSO ? The infobox states 'one DSO and three bars'. As does the lede. In the 'First World War' section, para 6, which starts: 'Freyberg gained promotion...' he gained his first bar, but in para 7 he gained his third bar. And in the 'Second World War' section, he won his third bar ! In the 'Styles' section, it is worded, in italics: 'An asterisk denotes a Bar to the DSO'. The last entry shows: 'DSO***', which I take to mean (to put it crudely), one medal and three supplementary whatsits. That makes a total of four awards !! What is the correct total?

RASAM (talk) 14:21, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * 3 Bars to the DSO - commonly written as DSO*** though not on formal documents.Garlicplanting (talk) 11:32, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

 * Yes. After the first DSO any additional DSO award is referred to as a bar (this applies to other medals as well). This is because if you receive multiple awards of a medal, you only wear the first medal and each subsequent award is evidenced by a metal clasp ("bar") on the ribbon of the first medal. He was awarded three bars to the DSO which means in effect he was awarded the DSO four times. The second bar (ie third DSO) was at the very end of WWI and the fourth DSO (third bar) was in WWII. If you follow the links to the citations in the London Gazette this will all become clear. An extraordinary achievement when you consider he was also awarded the VC. Stephen Kirragetalk - contribs 15:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I believe no-one else has achieved it.Garlicplanting (talk) 11:28, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Frederick Lumsden also held a VC, DSO & Three Bars, all awarded during the First World War. He is the only other I am aware of, though a few VC recipients also held a DSO & Two Bars (such as John Vereker, 6th Viscount Gort, David Wanklyn and Leonard Cheshire, to name a couple). Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 12:18, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected - I could think of various with two as you list but had forgotten Lumsden. Garlicplanting (talk) 14:36, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

ULTRA
'Battle of Crete. Controversy surrounds his use of ULTRA intelligence messages during this battle.'
 * This needs explaining. I heard that the campaign would logically have been called-off, but this would have alerted the enemy that their decrypts had been understood. Freyberg then had the miserable job of launching the campaign, and going round giving pep-talks, knowing that it would fail, with terrible losses. Valetude (talk) 00:11, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

 * Freyberg would almost certainly have been unaware of the existence of Ultra, and any information supplied to him from that source would have had its origin disguised.

 * Knowledge of Ultra was restricted to a comparatively few individuals, and personnel, e.g. field officers, of any rank, who might some day be at risk of capture were specifically excluded from being informed, the notable exception being Montgomery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.149.173.52 (talk) 19:43, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Bernard Freyberg, 1st Baron Freyberg. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Park/7572/nzvcross.txt
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041204085907/http://www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk:80/stewart/surrey.htm to http://www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk/stewart/surrey.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:05, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bernard Freyberg, 1st Baron Freyberg. 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/20131015162016/http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/publications/pointer/journals/2008/v34n3/personality_profile.html.print.html?Status=1 to http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/publications/pointer/journals/2008/v34n3/personality_profile.html.print.html?Status=1
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk/stewart/surrey.htm

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) 15:17, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bernard Freyberg, 1st Baron Freyberg. 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/20080109171155/http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-vc/freyberg-vc.htm to http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-vc/freyberg-vc.htm

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) 18:05, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

British/New Zealander
The lead currently reads Freyberg "was a British-born New Zealand soldier and Victoria Cross recipient...". As indicated by my edits, this description is inaccurate. Even if we ignore for a moment that "xxx-born" is discouraged per WP:ETHNICITY, the lead gives the impression that Freyberg was almost exclusively a New Zealander. Yet he was born, died and spent the majority of his life in the UK. His military career was predominantly in the British Army, and he won his VC while serving with the Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve. I do not, of course, challenge Fregberg's association with New Zealand. But the lead as it currently stands minimises his association with Britain. As my above edits indicate, altering the lead to "was a British-New Zealand soldier and Victoria Cross recipient" is a far more accurate description and is consistent with usage elsewhere on WP. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:27, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Should Joan Sutherland who spent most of her life away from Australia be described as Scottish or Swiss? Eddaido (talk) 05:45, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * What relevance does Joan Sutherland have to Freyberg? And even if one were to follow that logic, it would appear to support that Freyberg should be identified as British. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:51, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

 * No. Joan Sutherland is Australian (says WP), Freyberg is a New Zealander. Please do not try to change New Zealand history. Eddaido (talk) 05:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
 * What proof do you have that Freyberg was exclusively a New Zealander? His place of birth, death, and where he spent the vast majority of his life and career directly contradict your claims. WP is built on verifiability, not nationalism. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:58, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

 * It reads to me as if you know little of your subject (or about Joan Sutherland). What I have done is made a note of your concerns on the talk page of Wikiproject New Zealand and let any one who might be interested come up with their thoughts. It will be interesting to see whether or not there is any interest in the matter. Eddaido (talk) 06:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

 * Not a big building even by local standards but it was our Defence headquarters. Eddaido (talk) 06:19, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

 * According to the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography entry here, his family moved to Wellington when he was two and he didn't leave New Zealand until he was 25 years old, so he was at least brought up as a New Zealander. Jon (talk) 12:51, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Categorisation of Freyberg —> British Army generals of World War I and —> Military personnel from London
Hi, please would you give your opinion of the appropriateness of adding Freyberg to these categories. Thanks in advance etc. Eddaido (talk) 04:50, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , well, he grew up in New Zealand and when he joined the Navy, I would have thought it's clear that he did so as a New Zealander.  Schwede 66  07:42, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Mmm, yes although I think I'm in a position to vouch for his not being "in the navy". Must say your thoughts aren't very clear. Can you recommend someone else? Eddaido (talk) 08:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , Do you people have any strong feelings on this matter? Eddaido (talk) 08:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , sorry can't help.  Schwede 66  08:37, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I have revised this comment after looking at the article edit history and realising what the problem is. The British Army Generals in WW1 category seems fine. Personally, I think being a 'temporary' brigadier general in WW1 is enough to warrant the category - I don't think we need to be too pedantic about that. I am not so sure, however, about the Military personnel from London category. I think there has been a misunderstanding on this because Richmond has been part of Greater London since 1965. Therefore using the modern borders Freyberg would be a Londoner. However, the use of modern borders is not appropriate and the 1889 borders from when Freyberg was born should be used (i.e. not born in London). Additionally, although Freyberg did spend time later in his life in London for various occupations, I would argue not enough (or not at a key stage of his life) to be called a Londoner. But it depends how you define being from London. Stanley Bannerman (talk) 18:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm with Stanley regarding the British Army generals cat. For the London category I'm not so fussed. Zawed (talk) 03:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)


text:
Nicholas Rémy

Nicholas Rémy, Latin Remigius (1530–1616) was a French magistrate who claimed in his book to have overseen the execution of more than 800 witches and the torture or persecution of a similar number. His work shows much influence from Jean Bodin.

Early life
After studying law at the University of Toulouse, Remy practised in Paris from 1563 to 1570. In 1570, his uncle retired as Lieutenant General of Vosges and Remy was appointed to the post; in 1575 he was appointed secretary to Duke Charles III of Lorraine.

Publications
Remy wrote a number of poems and several books on history, but is known for his Daemonolatreiae libri tres ("Demonolatry"), written in Latin and published in Lyon in 1595. The book was reprinted several times, translated into German, and eventually replaced the Malleus Maleficarum as the most recognized handbook of witch-hunters in parts of Europe.

According to Remy, the Devil could appear before people in the shape of a black cat or man, and liked Black Masses. Demons could also have sexual relationships with women and, in case they did not agree, rape them.

Career
He was of the Catholic faith, and wrote his Latin works with the blessings of the Church, but was not himself a priest and married at least once (possibly twice), fathering quite a few children. One of them, a favored son, was supposedly killed in a street accident at the beginning of Remy's judicial career after being cursed by an old beggar woman when Remy refused to give her any money. This incident in 1582 was the start of Remy's career as a witch-hunter. He successfully prosecuted the beggar for bewitching his son and had the woman put to death.

Finding witches was very personal business for Remy. An extremely educated man for his day, he seemed to have utterly believed in what he was doing. Remy personally sentenced 900 people to death between 1581 and 1591. In 1592, Remy retired and moved to the country to escape the bubonic plague. There he compiled notes from his ten-year campaign against witchcraft into the Demonolatry.

Claims 800 executed and a revision
Remy brags that during a mere 16-year period when he worked as a judge in Lorraine, not less than 800 persons (non minus octingentos) were condemned at the stake for sortilegis crimen or the crime of witchcraft (sorcery seems to derive from the Latin sortilegus ), which certain witch-phobic Christians of this time period considered to a real supernatural power that was sourced from the devil. Remy further claims than an equivalent number of around 800 persons escaped punishment by fleeing capture or by "a stubborn endurance of the torture."

Writing more than 400 years later, the scholar William Monter scoffs at these numbers and claims that Lorraine's records from the 1580s are "well-preserved" and amount to barely "one-sixth as many as Nicholas Remy boasted in his Demonalatria of 1595." Monter characterizes Remy's claim of 800 condemned as "a literary flourish" and refers to Remy as a "humanist" though there does not seem to be any instance in which Remy used the term "humanist" to describe himself. Remy dedicated his book to the Cardinal of Lorraine and characterizes himself a soldier in a war against anti-Christian forces that he considers aligned with the devil. Monter's reason for doubting Remy's numbers is that Remy's book lists the specific names of "only about 125 individuals tried for witchcraft." Monter compares Remy's list to some instances of non-corroboration within the surviving records and concludes that "we must take his numbers with a very large grain of salt; but the documented reality is dreadful enough."

In forwarding his theory, Monter doesn't proffer a reason or motive for Remy to inflate his numbers or why the printer and booksellers (including a number of reprints) would have wanted a brag of "900 Person's More or Less" on the title page of Remy's work, and whether this may have helped sell books, and if so, what this also might say about the well-educated Latin readers who were the target audience for Remy's work, written and sold in a Catholic borderland region during a time period often referred to as the Counter Reformation.

Pop culture

 * In the 1988 television series Werewolf, Nicholas Remy is shown as a werewolf who has been alive since the times of the Inquisition. He used his position as a magistrate to conceal his own lycanthropy.  The character was portrayed by Brian Thompson.
 * Nicholas Remy and his book, Daemonolatreiae libri tres, are also featured in the 1999 movie The Ninth Gate.

title: Nicholas Rémy


text:
Talk:Tokamak

Old stuff
"The tokamak continues to be the most promising device for generating net power from nuclear fusion" Who made that claim and what is it founded upon? There are in fact competing devices such as the polywell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polywell)

From the quote: "The hair is analogous to the magnetic field lines needed in a fusion reactor. It turns out that it is impossible to comb hair on a sphere so that no hair sticks up".... How about if I combed the sphere into a very neat afro? every hair would stand on end, so this is not an impossibility is it?

How about if it read:

"The hair is analogous to the magnetic field lines needed in a fusion reactor. It turns out that it is impossible to comb hair on a sphere so that no hairs cross over each other (or are not parallel to each other). A strand of hair that crosses another would be equivalent to an instability in the reactor. However, a hairy doughnut can be so combed by combing along the circumference and with a slight twist, and thus adjustments to the magnetic field can be made to correct the irregularities. This allows the magnetic field to better confine the plasma"

-donville

 * You don't seem to understand the hairy ball theorem, I've reverted the changes you made as they're incorrect. However I will agree that the section is badly written, and a deeper physical explanation (of what the hairy ball theorem means for confining a plasma) would be good. Suggestions? -TeeEmCee 12:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

 * This is my favorite kind of critical exercise. "You don't seem understand this. I'm not going to bother explaining it in anyway, but trust me, you're wrong." What a waste of time. Eaglizard (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Some indication as to the absolute size of the pictured tokamak would be useful.

Saying it is the "smallest" doesn't mean much without that reference.

The article states that the only way to confine a plasma is with magnetic fields. Surely a plasma can also (albeit momentarily) be confined by its own inertia. Such is the principle of inertial confinement devices (ICD) after all. --- Yes but this isnt an ICD, its a magnetic confinement device.

 * To say that some thing or some method is the "only way" to do something is always a dangerous and dubious statement - given no mathematical proof of that fact. Even if something is the 99% most likely way, that doesn't make it the "only way". People do need to learn to express themselves with some precision.74.163.36.177 (talk) 14:57, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Most plasma in the universe is confined by gravity.

The explanation given in the article for the spelling of tokamak (with a final 'k', to avoid orthographic similarity with 'magic') seems quite dubious. More likely is that the 'g' of 'magnitnaya' is subjected to the typical Russian language devoicing of consonants at the end of a word.

Alodyne 04:25, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

to avoid analogy with the word magic

 * The Russian word for magic??? I'm confused. - Omegatron 00:03, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

"Tokamak" comes from Russian "toroidalnaya kamera s magnitnoi katushkoi" (toroidal camera with magnetic coil).

 * I thought "kamera" was "chamber"? YggdrasilsRoot 28 June 2005 12:53 (UTC)
 * yes (gritzko)

 * A key element missing in this explanation is the word "acronym".74.163.36.177 (talk) 15:00, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

http://nature.web.ru/db/msg.html?mid=1173581&uri=page4.html

Note: most probably, the author of the general idea of tokamak is Sgt. Oleg Aleksandrovich Lavrent'ev (no kidding, his work was sent to I.V.Stalin circa 1949, A.D.Sakharov reviewed that letter). "Nauka i zhizn'" ("Science and life", one of oldest Russian popular science journals) claims that A.D.Sakharov recognized scientific priority of Lavrent'ev, although I don't have the exact quote (by ADS). Dr. Lavrent'ev was working at Kharkov Physics&Technics Institute as of 2001. (gritzko)

http://ufn.ioc.ac.ru/archive/russian/abstracts/abst2145.html "Role of O.A.Lavrent'ev in raising the problem and initiating the research on (manageable?) thermonuclear synthesis in USSR" by B.D.Bondarenko, from USPEKHI FIZICHESKIKH NAUK ("Successes of physics"), a purely academic journal. Resume: although the initial idea by O.A.Lavrent'ev clearly could not be implemented in practice, the proposed original approach (i.e. plasma containment by a field) was further developed by Tamm and Sakharov into a workable solution. Scientific priority of O.A.Lavrent'ev "worth mentioning".

Name
Can anyone from russia confirm which of the two terms is official, or at least which is prevalent ? - JohnyDog 01:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) тороидальная камера в магнитных катушках (... in magnetic coils) - currently in article
 * 2) тороидальная камера с магнитными катушками (... with magnetic coils) - in Russian Wikipedia article
 * Looks like (2) is prevalent. Gritzko
 * There is actually third one, according to Merriam-Webster and other similar sources: toroidal'naya kamera s aksial'nym magnitnym polem (toroidal chamber with an axial magnetic field).
 * To me it seems likely that the acronym has changed over time, as the technology and design has evolved, but I've been unable to verify this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.16.193.62 (talk) 11:24, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Power generation
What is the plan for extracting the energy generated from fusion in these devices? Will it be used to heat water, or what? A5 16:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, the basic idea is to heat water. See Fusion_power for a bit more detail. - mako 19:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

 * No, there is the strong possibility of using magnetohydrodynamics to generate electricity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.163.36.177 (talk) 15:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Someone ought to put this up since it's in the news... http://upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060724-065917-5783r --D3matt

This really should have a section about potential uses and hazards, etc... If I had the info I'd do it. Otherwise, this thing is pretty lame.

Torus In operation
I believe there's also a Torus in operation at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

Here's some links about it http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/fusion.htm http://plasma.physics.wisc.edu/mst/html/mst.htm

 * They do have the Madison Symmetric Torus, but it's a reversed field pinch device not a tokamak. --Gabbec 07:11, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, they also have the Pegasus spherical torus; does this count as a tokamak? NSTX should also be added in that case. --Gabbec 07:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Pegasus's page makes a distinction between tokamaks and spherical torii, so we should probably keep them separate. - mako 02:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

 * If we're going to distinguish between "spherical torus" and "tokamak", we'd better do it in the introduction. There isn't even a Spherical torus page. I think a spherical torus is just a special case of a tokamak, especially at the introductory level. So lets just note that a sperical torus is a kind of tokamak, and include them in this article. --Dashpool 13:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

 * American writers tend to scrupulously differentiate between "tokamak" and "spherical torus" because (I am told) they are considered as separate concepts for funding purposes, although the actual difference is mainly one of emphasis. Here in the UK, "spherical tokamak" is the usage; cf. MAST, the Mega Amp Spherical Tokamak. Dashpool's recommendation is the sensible one. By the by, the plural of "torus" is "tori" - a Japanese torii is something quite different! Dave Taylor 10:26, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

 * The term "spherical torus" is self-contradictory - sounds typically British. Topologically, a sphere does not have any "holes" through it - but a torus does have one. A torus can be viewed as a sphere with a hole punched through it. Topologically, there exists no method to "smoothly" transform a sphere into a torus, and vice-versa, and so, a sphere and a torus are topologically-distinct in a very important way.

Shape
Should there be a reference to the Hairy ball theorem? --Bkkbrad 16:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Probably. There was a paragraph on it up till this edit last December. Nobody objected to removing it at the time, probably because the theorem and its significance were poorly and maybe incorrectly explained. If you want to return it, be my guest, but please make an effort to make it understandable to the lay reader. --Art Carlson 17:11, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Photos of the toruses being used in fusion research bring to mind the path of the center of a star orbited by a planet.

The Earth, orbiting the Sun, moves the sun just as do the planets being discovered with spectrographically detected Doppler shift in the stellar spectra. From the Earth, it looks like the center of the Universe moves, relative to the Sun. But the "center of the universe" is equated since antiquity what was always thought to be a firmament, the unmovable. Whether or not this has any secular equivalent is debatable but since antiquity, ideas of the unmoving, immovable something exist in Hindu mythology (Brahman) and other concepts. They use images like trees, for instance, to represent the unmovable.

By trying to create the Universe, are we creating that path? A hot plasma center moving in a circle? Makes a good constructionist goal image...

It would be good to have competent discussion determine this more carefully than I have here. Fusion success might be more quickly attained, though it is certainly already very substantial.

Accounting motion of the Sun caused by Earth
Photos of the Toruses being used in fusion research bring to mind the path of the center of a star orbited by a planet. The sun moves around the barycenter of the solar system, which is the actual center of mass of the solar system, and often this is outside the Sun's surface. Even Earth, orbiting the Sun, moves the sun just as do all other planets, with Jupiter being the main cause of the shift of the barycenter. Motion like this is used in the discovery of extrasolar planets found with Doppler shift in the spectra of many other stars. The center of gravity of the Sun alone moves in a torus around the barycenter.

Is that motion of the sun caused the planets taken into formal account in present day fusion theory and chamber design?

The Earth is the specific object, because it is and contains ourselves and our research and thinking, influencing us subjectively. Earth is the place from which we view the Sun year after year. Other planets and moons go out of phase quickly. But the Sun's motion in a torus is also to be scrutinized.

From the subjective view Earth, which moves -- The center of the Universe, or the center of the Sun?

The 'center of the universe' is equated since antiquity with what was always thought to be a firmament, the unmovable.

Whether or not this has any secular equivalent is debatable but since antiquity, ideas of the unmoving immovable something exist in Hindu mythology (Brahman) and other mythologies which use images like Trees, for instance, to represent the unmovable. It was called by some the Eternally Moving Unmoved Mover, and other grand, inflated phrases.

Of course, relative velocities of the Earth, Moon, and Sun are already well known with high accuracy and the motion of the Milky Way is estimated fairly closely. In other words, are established ancient concepts confusing modern thought?

By trying to create the universe, is any confusion caused by not accounting the motion of the Sun?

A hot fiery gaseous center moving in a circle makes a good constructionist goal image...

It would be good to have competent discussion carefully determine any possible remaining confusion, or a merciful professional describe the solution that was used. Fusion success might be more quickly attained, though it is certainly already very substantial. SyntheticET 03:08, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Unimportant
But in 'Ohmic Heating' should the 20-30 million degrees Celsius but changed to Kelvin or converted to eV? Celsius is a bit obsolete in the scientific community right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.8.138.110 (talk) 17:28, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

 * We are talking about a difference of 273 degrees on a scale where the temperature is 25 million plus or minus 5.0 million degrees. The 273 degrees fades into vanishingly-small insignificance and can be ignored. Engineers, chemists, and biologists use Celsius temperatures all the time - but we know when to make the conversion between Celsius and Kelvin whenever it is important - smart! In so many applications, what is important is the difference between two temperatures, and not what the absolute temperature is. For example, in calculating the energy that is released by a certain chemical reaction. 74.163.36.177 (talk) 15:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 10:04, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Successes and Failures
I think that a section should be added to this article that explains what the current abilities of a tokamak are. For instance, how long have people been able to contain plasma at fusion-inducing temperatures before it cools? I don't know nearly enough to add that myself. Rhinocerous Ranger (talk) 19:40, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

 * The answer to that is "not nearly long enough" - and at the bottom line, the "successes" of a tokamak are 0% and the "failures" are 100%. The same applies to all other forms of controlled thermonuclear reaction methods that hav been tried so far. The only manmade, net-energy-producing thermonuclear reaction so far is the hydrogen bomb. 74.163.36.177 (talk) 15:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

 * I don't think its fair to say that tokamaks are failures. To date, AFAIK, there has never been the expectation that they'd be net-energy-producing. They've all been intended to learn more about what was needed to build a working fusion reactor. AFAIK, they've all achieved fusion, just not net-energy production. The same can be said for the Polywell, the Farsnworth-Hirsch, and the Elmore-Tuck-Watson Fusors. EmteeOh (talk) 13:05, 3 August 2011 (EDT) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.65.73.39 (talk)

Questions for the article:
Here are some questions that perhaps the article could answer:
 * When attempting to read magnetic fusion publications above the ones intended for the general public, one is immediately confronted with numerous mysterious Greek symbols, letters with superscripts, and weird units of measure. I understand what Q is, and why it's important, what magnetic field strength/flux? (in terms of tesla) is, and maybe what the Greek symbol beta stands for in the context of MFE (plasma pressure?), but all of the other general parameters--and there are like 20 or so, I think--could use some explaining in language that's understandable...this would allow people without a background in plasma physics to gain a better understanding of the differing approaches that different MFE experiments have taken, and how research has quantitatively advanced from experiment to experiment. For example, differing experiments seem to be intent on maximizing one statistic or another -- gain, confinement time, temperature, pressure, or the other parameters that I don't understand...what are "good" values for each (high, low, in the middle), how have these values progressed over time since the start of experimentation, how do they effect the design and plasma, what are the parameters that ITER & DEMO are projected to have, and how can one use these parameters and measurements to assess the success of an experiment, and the progress of the science?
 * The answer to your first comment is that there isn't any other way. You'll just have to learn the scientific language. Also, the idea behind maximizing one "statistic" or another is simply to find out what can be done and what cannot be done. 74.163.36.177 (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Would a tokamak for power production be "on" all the time, or would it generate power in a series of pulses? Why do so many current tokamaks seem to be more focused on "pulsed" experiments than "steady state" experiments?
 * The whole idea is that a thermonuclear reactor that produces power in pulses is very likely to be "easier" to do than on that is "on all the time". Otherwise, nobody would bother with the pulsed methods.74.163.36.177 (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

 * What are the major questions and uncertainties involved in magnetic fusion research that are yet to be answered, that could determine success or failure of magnetic fusion energy? What are the problems remaining to be solved? (I believe a lot have to do with plasma stability and "edge localized modes", along with neutron activation and degradation of operational components, but what are the relative certainties of solving each problem? Or have they been solved (enough)?)
 * The bottom line is that ALL attempts at making power-porducing thermonuclear reactors are failures so far, and that nobody knows where the crucial breakthroughs might occur. All we can do is to keep on trying. That is the heart of scientific and engineering research into an unknown area.74.163.36.177 (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Why are most of the MFE concepts (to date) toroidal instead of spherical? On a logical level, I would suppose that a sphere of plasma (or anything) is a lot more compressable than a doughnut, and a lot easier to heat, shoot fuel into, and contain...why isn't this the case?
 * The whole idea of using a toroid or donut is that you can wind electromagnetic coils around one and attempt to generate a magnetic field of the right shape inside of a toroid. This is impossible for a sphere because there topologically isn't any place to wind the coils. Another imaginable possibility would be to wind the coil around an infinitely-long cylinder (a "solenoid" in the language of physicists), but of course, that is impossible. Nice to think about, though.74.163.36.177 (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Are there any possibilities to achieve Q > 1 prior to ITER (ex. upgrading JET or JT-60)?
 * Yes, using a "stellerator", or else a laser machine like the "Shiva", but those haven't worked, either.

 * How likely is ITER to succeed, at least from a technical standpoint? Will it achieve a long term burning plasma? Are there any potentially show-stopping technical obstacles?
 * How likely is ITER to succeed - nobody knows, nobody knows, nobody knows! Otherwise, there wouldn't be much point in building it and trying it out74.163.36.177 (talk) 16:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Iter have some pictures published about their progress on the tokamak at the site. Could be used? http://www.fusionforenergy.europa.eu/mediacorner/imagegallery.aspx?id=33 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.200.224.138 (talk) 06:25, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Maybe these would be good for the article to answer? Katana0182 (talk) 22:02, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

See no 22 below for PDF info. keoka 00:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Current Tokamak news section needed
I had to watch the Science channel to learn that the Tokamak only operates for 30 seconds because the magnets field is not strong enough. They explained the european version will have supermagnets which will keep the plasma away from the walls of the tokamak longer.

Where is this mentioned in this article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericg33 (talk • contribs) 06:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

An idea:intermittent Laser Ignition of Deuterium-Tritium within the Torus
Has anyone considered intermittent Laser Ignition of Deuterium-Tritium witin the Torus in order to maintain continuous operation of the plasma field? The DT and the lasers can be ignited as needed to maintain a continuous and stable plasma field. I have this concept as a combination of the US inertial laser system and the Torus approach. Calculations need to be done, but it seems the strong magnetic field of the Torus could also be used for focusing the Laser beams on the DT when needed...ie, when the plasma begins to show signs of fading towards extinguishment. Obviously this must be done with adjusting mirrors and Laser amplification when needed. The magnetic field already required to maintain the Torus seems capable of matching the energy input used at Lawrence-Livermore for DT ignition, superficially at least, but surely someone can run the numbers. Shaping the Laser charge and the US use of reflective Holraums for inertial ignition are issues that must be addressed and modified to suit the Torus.But I see no reason these problems cannot be overcome as the energy output at Lawrence Livermore now exceeds the energy input, thus there should be sufficient energy to mirror-focus and shape the Laser shots "on the run" directly onto the cryogenic DT capsules as they are dropped into the Torus as needed. Essentially what I am asking is.....Can both the Laser Photons and the DT caps be aligned for instant ignition within the Torus as needed to "maintain the flame". Can the energy being used to maintain the Torus be partially redirected to the Laser system as the plasma field fades, then be used to get off a DT shot, and then be redirected back to the Torus maintenance system within nanoseconds? Am I crazy for suggesting this? Feedback from qualified PhD's are appreciated. PS: ITER is using a Berylium compound as its inner surface wall, not ceramics.LaserPhoton (talk) 07:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC)LaserPhoton

 * See no 22 below for PDF info. - keoka 00:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia Talk pages are not the place to suggest new physics experiments. Try some Physics forums ? - Rod57 (talk) 09:33, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Tokamak
Tokamak —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.42.155.8 (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Should we archive everything above here ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If no objections - I'll try to do it one day. - Rod57 (talk) 15:37, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Alternating current?
The article says that 1987 saw the first demonstration of alternating current in a tokamak. Is it correct that the tokamaks since then all use an AC plasma current? I assume that this AC plasma current is induced by an alternating magnetic field, using the principle of a transformer. How did the tokamaks prior to 1987 generate a DC plasma current? AxelBoldt (talk) 22:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm putting links to PDF's below in no 22, which answer several outstanding questions: These answer this question as follows. The most powerful Tokomak so far produces a very short pulse which is triggered from the very high current in the windings around the toroid.

These pulses produce plasma which in turn induces a high current around the toroid, but not strong enough to initiate fusion so far.

http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/t/tokamak.htm http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/i/iter.htm The aim in the next 10 years is to make the plasma pulse strong enough that it will maintain itself and produce huge quantities of energy continuously from a very small feed of hydrogen and tritium. keoka 00:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

 * What is "no 22" ? If you mean a section below it would be easier to find if you give the section title. I'm guessing it's More info on Tokamak. - Rod57 (talk) 09:26, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

History
Experimental research of tokamak systems started in 1956 in Kurchatov Institute, Moscow by a group of Soviet scientists led by Lev Artsimovich.

I have a source that states that the first tokamak was created in 1954: http://www.toodlepip.com/tokamak/discovered-here.htm

--Frozen Serge 23:13, 11 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frozen Serge (talk • contribs)

 * There was an early Tokamak (perhaps 10 feet across with a chamber bore of 6-8 inches?) in mothballs at UCLA when I was there in the 1980's, and another much larger Tokamak that was the twin of one at Princeton that was used for microscopy. The operational Tokamak was powered by a series of Litton microwave ovens that were repurposed to be pumped by an enormous Lincoln Welding transformer. The data collection system consisted of about a dozen Commodore 64 computers that were often destroyed by the intense magnetic field generated during tests. The Tokamak was also electrically insulated with machined teflon approximately 4 inches thick which would melt and flow out the bottom of the device during testing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6AE5:2510:0:0:0:46 (talk) 21:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Can you identify it on http://www.tokamak.info/? Maybe Macrotor or the "Continuous Current Tokamak" CCT? It should also be on the list of fusion experiments. Maybe https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1117531/ gives some clues. --Geek3 (talk) 23:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Greetings! Yes, it appears that the tokamaks I saw were Microtor and Macrotor. It is unfortunate that no photographs seem to be extant of the state of Macrotor ca. 1988 when it had the microwave ovens and C64 computers arrayed around it. I scrounged large hunks of scrap Teflon from the project for my own work with graphite resistance furnaces.
 * It is likely that what was described to me as microscopy apparatus was plasma probe apparatus. This was shared between Princeton and UCLA as their tokamaks went online and offline in scheduled rotation. 2600:1700:6AE5:2510:0:0:0:24 (talk) 19:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Nit picking?
Under "Tokomak Cooling" I cite: "A cryogenic system is used to prevent heat loss from the superconducting magnets." Should this have read instead: "A cryogenic system is used to prevent heat absorption by the superconducting magnets." Or more simply to cool the etc. More knowledgable please answer. Idealist707 (talk) 18:52, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Major disruption
The phenomenon of major disruptions in Tokamaks is definitely real, but the paragraph discussing not only feels out of place, but is distinctly not NPV. Hpa (talk) 08:39, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes - needs work. Not clear if it is talking about Edge-localized modes or something else. - Rod57 (talk) 15:08, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

confusing
Improper wording leads to ambiguity which leads to misunderstanding of the text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jangirke (talk • contribs) 02:56, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Add section about theories how engergy is supposed to be harvested from the fusion chain reaction
See above. :)

Major disruptions would definitely damage the ITER chamber
From the paper listed as note 7, it states on the first page "The consequences of a disruption in ITER include a divertor power load of between 10 and 100 GWm-2, which limits the lifetime of the plasma facing components (PFCs)." This comes from another paper which states "The surface-damage potential of interaction of a multi-MA runaway current with localized portions of the at-risk PFC surfaces leads to serious concerns about the high levels of runaway conversion following naturally occurring disruption and intentional ‘fast-shutdown’ actions, intended to ameliorate disruptions." This seems to indicate that the claims are well-founded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.245.59.10 (talk) 04:28, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
 * We now have Edge-localized mode which describes the instabilities, and how they are being controlled/mitigated. - Rod57 (talk) 09:54, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

No mention of H-mode
How Fritz Wagner "discovered" the H-Mode makes it sound important. "H-mode is what "makes the goals of fusion possible." All tokamaks today are designed to operate in H-Mode and without it, ITER would have needed to be twice as large and, consequently, twice as expensive." Shouldn't it be mentioned in this article ? - Rod57 (talk) 03:23, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Since it's also possible in stellarators I've started a stub for high-confinement mode (H-mode) - and linked to it. - Rod57 (talk) 15:17, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Added External link to Observer newspaper
I've added an external link to the Observer/Guardian newspaper which has an informative and illustrated article on a Tokamak being built in France.

keoka 21:48, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

More info on Tokamak
In response to "Questions for the article:"  and  "Current Tokamak news section needed"  sections above, I think we need a header in the main article for updates rather than rewrite the article which hasn't happened in years and I'm not going to take that on. I'll go through the following PDF's I've found which answer quite a few questions like pulsed or continuous, but for a start, here are two PDF links: http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/csp_008c/pdf/pdp_7.pdf http://iopscience.iop.org/0029-5515/43/9/303/pdf/0029-5515_43_9_303.pdf so if anyone else wants to answer the various queries - have a go.

Here are some more links and info repeated from above: The most powerful Tokomak so far produces a very short pulse which is triggered from the very high current in the windings around the toroid.

These pulses produce plasma which in turn induces a high current around the toroid, but not strong enough to initiate fusion so far.

http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/t/tokamak.htm http://www.euronuclear.org/info/encyclopedia/i/iter.htm The aim in the next 10 years is to make the plasma pulse strong enough that it will maintain itself and produce huge quantities of energy continuously from a very small feed of hydrogen and tritium.

keoka 00:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Oscillating Tokamak
This article does not include the "oscillating Tokamak" model and it's statistics. In that version, the magnets are generating a vibrating field at very high frequencies, but always controlled - inside the nominal levels. The huge magnets never oscillate, only the field they create. It has no effect if the oscillation is at low frequencies. It causes no heat loss if well designed - it might even increace the temperature. It works better on huge Tokamaks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.84.216.225 (talk) 14:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * We need some sources. - Rod57 (talk) 14:43, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

What is different about tokamak
Article isn't clear what a tokamak is and how it differs from a stellarator, and its essential characteristics - eg pulsed operation ? Needs something on how it operates - are the toroidal and poloidal coil currents increased together at a constant rate - then maintained at max level until plasma disperses ? Graphic suggests toroidal coil currents are constant and the poloidal coil currents are pulsed which induces a plasma current which increases the poloidal field ? - Rod57 (talk) 15:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Define advanced tokamak
Maybe based on plasma shape, extending plasma duration with non-inductive current drive ... ? Could start with a section here - later maybe split out ? - Rod57 (talk) 14:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Does it imply using bootstrap currents 2013 for non-inductive (and longer) pulses ? - Rod57 (talk) 10:09, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Where does fusion actually take place?
I assume the magnetic fields push nuclei into a ring around the center of the ring, forming an inner ring where the fusion actually occurs? The article doesn't mention and a casual web search didn't help. -- Beland (talk) 20:17, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Full protection for one week
I have no views on whether Bob Guccione should be included (although if so, more tentative wording might be better). If you guys can't sort it out, how about an RfC? Protection is only for a week. Doug Weller talk 08:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Could mention the Greenwald density limit and islands
2015 makes the Greenwald density limit sound significant. What is the density limit ? - Connected with 'island growth' 2015 - Rod57 (talk) 10:03, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Whether fusion actually takes place
I saw somewhere that there is a hope to make this article FA in the near future. After a quick scan, I was unable to find the answer to what I think is a pretty basic question, and if this article is going for FA, I think that should be addressed.

The question is, at what point in the development of the tokamak were they good enough that it was clear that any fusion was actually taking place? Or, for that matter, has that even happened yet?

To put it another way, at what point did the confidence interval for the Q factor exclude zero?

This is not rhetorical or argumentative. I just wasn't able to determine the answer by reading the article (and I also don't know the answer). It seems to me that the answer must either be known or be the subject of controversy, and in either case there ought to be reliable sources that would allow covering the question in the article. --Trovatore (talk) 00:08, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

 * sorry just saw this now. There has been direct evidence for fusion reactions since the US's Theta Pinch machine in 1958. Fusion output has grown steadily since then, and the record is currently held by JET at about 16 MW of output. That it is actual fusion can be demonstrated many ways, including randomly directed neutrons, alphas, x-rays and fusion "ash" in the resulting plasma. Maury Markowitz (talk) 14:37, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Cool! Thanks for adding a sentence about that to the lead. --Trovatore (talk) 17:00, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Occurs to me that a great addition would be a graph of the fusion power record by year, if anyone were willing to put in the effort. --Trovatore (talk) 17:13, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Progress towards break-even and ignition
Is this the article to list the progress towards break-even and ignition? eg. to add record pressures, temperatures, Lawson criterion, or fusion triple product, eg (achieved 2 atm pressure in 2016). - Rod57 (talk) 09:10, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

 * I found Fusion_power, so added it there, and linked in see-also - Rod57 (talk) 10:13, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan sentenced 'Oil crisis is over'
How long before being diagnosed with Dementia was this Reagan pontification? Yeah, the 1973 Oil Crisis rampant prices triggered search for new oil deposits, Middle East still being today the easier and cheaper to extract of it all, but prices made profitable searching and drilling in formerly too expensive sites. Did the crisis reduce overall oil consumption? What were forecasts, actual current figures? In such an scenario, at least for USA, it can be said 'they live on an ocean of oil', supply is no longer an immediate difficulty, even with lines of huge oil transport ships waiting in Sea to have customers, Donald Trump regretted, oil prices are quite stable around $50 a barrel. But the global warming knocks on door, anything reducing oil as source of energy would send oil prices down, increasing oil consumption, thus greenhouse effect gases release. So what? Anyone able to present figures of forecasts in different energy use, energy sources situations? Blessings +
 * What you say may be correct, but in the context of this article isn't the given statement just sufficient? No matter what the actual situation is, the declaration lead to a historic cut in funding of fusion technologies. --Geek3 (talk) 07:49, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

What about T-15MD ?
"In August 2023, at the Technoprom forum, Alexander Blagov, Vice-President of the National Research Center Kurchatov Institute, announced the first tests for the power start-up of the tokamak" ... "According to Blagov, the first stable thermonuclear plasma was obtained at the T-15MD tokamak, which reached a temperature of more than 100 million degrees Celsius " Is it true ? https://vsluh.net/2530-kurchatovcy-dobilis-proryva-v-termojadernom-sinteze.html?__cf_chl_tk=GRmbrwM9D58WySDZr0DhshCT11OnMwk54CnSzcRHeh8-1692904811-0-gaNycGzNDbs 2A02:AB04:13A:1A00:90:C673:D443:F792 (talk) 14:10, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * It is here: T-15_(reactor). --Geek3 (talk) 13:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tokamak