text:
Manchester Baby

The Manchester Baby, also called the Small-Scale Experimental Machine (SSEM), was the first electronic stored-program computer. It was built at the University of Manchester by Frederic C. Williams, Tom Kilburn, and Geoff Tootill, and ran its first program on 21 June 1948.

The Baby was not intended to be a practical computing engine, but was instead designed as a testbed for the Williams tube, the first truly random-access memory. Described as "small and primitive" 50 years after its creation, it was the first working machine to contain all the elements essential to a modern electronic digital computer. As soon as the Baby had demonstrated the feasibility of its design, a project was initiated at the university to develop it into a full-scale operational machine, the Manchester Mark 1. The Mark 1 in turn quickly became the prototype for the Ferranti Mark 1, the world's first commercially available general-purpose computer.

The Baby had a 32-bit word length and a memory of 32 words (1 kilobit, 1,024 bits). As it was designed to be the simplest possible stored-program computer, the only arithmetic operations implemented in hardware were subtraction and negation; other arithmetic operations were implemented in software. The first of three programs written for the machine calculated the highest proper divisor of 218 (262,144), by testing every integer from 218 downwards. This algorithm would take a long time to execute—and so prove the computer's reliability, as division was implemented by repeated subtraction of the divisor. The program consisted of 17 instructions and ran for about 52 minutes before reaching the correct answer of 131,072, after the Baby had performed about 3.5 million operations (for an effective CPU speed of about 1100 instructions per second).

Background

The first design for a program-controlled computer was Charles Babbage's Analytical Engine in the 1830s, with Ada Lovelace conceiving the idea of the first theoretical program to calculate Bernoulli numbers. A century later, in 1936, mathematician Alan Turing published his description of what became known as a Turing machine, a theoretical concept intended to explore the limits of mechanical computation. Turing was not imagining a physical machine, but a person he called a "computer", who acted according to the instructions provided by a tape on which symbols could be read and written sequentially as the tape moved under a tape head. Turing proved that if an algorithm can be written to solve a mathematical problem, then a Turing machine can execute that algorithm.

Konrad Zuse's Z3 was the world's first working programmable, fully automatic computer, with binary digital arithmetic logic, but it lacked the conditional branching of a Turing machine. On 12 May 1941, the Z3 was successfully presented to an audience of scientists of the Deutsche Versuchsanstalt für Luftfahrt ("German Laboratory for Aviation") in Berlin. The Z3 stored its program on an external tape, but it was electromechanical rather than electronic. The earliest electronic computing devices were the Atanasoff–Berry computer (ABC), which was successfully tested in 1942, and the Colossus of 1943, but neither was a stored-program machine.

The ENIAC (1946) was the first automatic computer that was both electronic and general-purpose. It was Turing complete, with conditional branching, and programmable to solve a wide range of problems, but its program was held in the state of switches in patch cords, rather than machine-changeable memory, and it could take several days to reprogram. Researchers such as Turing and Zuse investigated the idea of using the computer's memory to hold the program as well as the data it was working on, and it was mathematician John von Neumann who wrote a widely distributed paper describing that computer architecture, still used in almost all computers.

The construction of a von Neumann computer depended on the availability of a suitable memory device on which to store the program. During the Second World War researchers working on the problem of removing the clutter from radar signals had developed a form of delay-line memory, the first practical application of which was the mercury delay line, developed by J. Presper Eckert. Radar transmitters send out regular brief pulses of radio energy, the reflections from which are displayed on a CRT screen. As operators are usually interested only in moving targets, it was desirable to filter out any distracting reflections from stationary objects. The filtering was achieved by comparing each received pulse with the previous pulse, and rejecting both if they were identical, leaving a signal containing only the images of any moving objects. To store each received pulse for later comparison it was passed through a transmission line, delaying it by exactly the time between transmitted pulses.

Turing joined the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) in October 1945, by which time scientists within the Ministry of Supply had concluded that Britain needed a National Mathematical Laboratory to co-ordinate machine-aided computation. A Mathematics Division was set up at the NPL, and on 19 February 1946 Turing presented a paper outlining his design for an electronic stored-program computer to be known as the Automatic Computing Engine (ACE). This was one of several projects set up in the years following the Second World War with the aim of constructing a stored-program computer. At about the same time, EDVAC was under development at the University of Pennsylvania's Moore School of Electrical Engineering, and the University of Cambridge Mathematical Laboratory was working on EDSAC.

The NPL did not have the expertise to build a machine like ACE, so they contacted Tommy Flowers at the General Post Office's (GPO) Dollis Hill Research Laboratory. Flowers, the designer of Colossus, the world's first programmable electronic computer, was committed elsewhere and was unable to take part in the project, although his team did build some mercury delay lines for ACE. The Telecommunications Research Establishment (TRE) was also approached for assistance, as was Maurice Wilkes at the University of Cambridge Mathematical Laboratory.

The government department responsible for the NPL decided that, of all the work being carried out by the TRE on its behalf, ACE was to be given the top priority. NPL's decision led to a visit by the superintendent of the TRE's Physics Division on 22 November 1946, accompanied by Frederic C. Williams and A. M. Uttley, also from the TRE. Williams led a TRE development group working on CRT stores for radar applications, as an alternative to delay lines. Williams was not available to work on the ACE because he had already accepted a professorship at the University of Manchester, and most of his circuit technicians were in the process of being transferred to the Department of Atomic Energy. The TRE agreed to second a small number of technicians to work under Williams' direction at the university, and to support another small group working with Uttley at the TRE.

Williams–Kilburn tube
Although some early computers such as EDSAC, inspired by the design of EDVAC, later made successful use of mercury delay-line memory, the technology had several drawbacks: it was heavy, it was expensive, and it did not allow data to be accessed randomly. In addition, because data was stored as a sequence of acoustic waves propagated through a mercury column, the device's temperature had to be very carefully controlled, as the velocity of sound through a medium varies with its temperature. Williams had seen an experiment at Bell Labs demonstrating the effectiveness of cathode-ray tubes (CRT) as an alternative to the delay line for removing ground echoes from radar signals. While working at the TRE, shortly before he joined the University of Manchester in December 1946, he and Tom Kilburn had developed a form of electronic memory known as the Williams tube or Williams–Kilburn tube, based on a standard CRT: the first electronic random-access digital storage device. The Baby was designed to show that it was a practical storage device by demonstrating that data held within it could be read and written reliably at a speed suitable for use in a computer.

For use in a binary digital computer, the tube had to be capable of storing either one of two states at each of its memory locations, corresponding to the binary digits (bits) 0 and 1. It exploited the positive or negative electric charge generated by displaying either a dash or a dot at any position on the CRT screen, a phenomenon known as secondary emission. A dash generated a positive charge, and a dot a negative charge, either of which could be picked up by a detector plate in front of the screen; a negative charge represented 0, and a positive charge 1. The charge dissipated in about 0.2 seconds, but it could be automatically refreshed from the data picked up by the detector.

The Williams tube used in Baby was based on the CV1131, a commercially available 12 in diameter CRT, but a smaller 6 in tube, the CV1097, was used in the Mark I.

Genesis of the project

After developing the Colossus computer for code breaking at Bletchley Park during World War II, Max Newman was committed to the development of a computer incorporating both Alan Turing's mathematical concepts and the stored-program concept that had been described by John von Neumann. In 1945, he was appointed to the Fielden Chair of Pure Mathematics at Manchester University; he took his Colossus-project colleagues Jack Good and David Rees to Manchester with him, and there they recruited F. C. Williams to be the "circuit man" for a new computer project for which he had secured funding from the Royal Society.

"Having secured the support of the university, obtained funding from the Royal Society, and assembled a first-rate team of mathematicians and engineers, Newman now had all elements of his computer-building plan in place. Adopting the approach he had used so effectively at Bletchley Park, Newman set his people loose on the detailed work while he concentrated on orchestrating the endeavor."

- David Anderson, historian

Following his appointment to the Chair of Electrical Engineering at Manchester University, Williams recruited his TRE colleague Tom Kilburn on secondment. By the autumn of 1947 the pair had increased the storage capacity of the Williams tube from one bit to 2,048, arranged in a 64 by 32-bit array, and demonstrated that it was able to store those bits for four hours. Engineer Geoff Tootill joined the team on loan from TRE in September 1947, and remained on secondment until April 1949.

"Now let's be clear before we go any further that neither Tom Kilburn nor I knew the first thing about computers when we arrived at Manchester University ... Newman explained the whole business of how a computer works to us.""

- Frederic Calland Williams

Kilburn had a hard time recalling the influences on his machine design:

"[I]n that period, somehow or other I knew what a digital computer was ... Where I got this knowledge from I've no idea."

- Tom Kilburn

Jack Copeland explains that Kilburn's first (pre-Baby) accumulator-free (decentralized, in Jack Good's nomenclature) design was based on inputs from Turing, but that he later switched to an accumulator-based (centralized) machine of the sort advocated by von Neumann, as written up and taught to him by Jack Good and Max Newman.

The Baby's seven operation instruction set was approximately a subset of the twelve operation instruction set proposed in 1947 by Jack Good, in the first known document to use the term "Baby" for this machine. Good did not include a "halt" instruction, and his proposed conditional jump instruction was more complicated than what the Baby implemented.

Development and design
Although Newman played no engineering role in the development of the Baby, or any of the subsequent Manchester computers, he was generally supportive and enthusiastic about the project, and arranged for the acquisition of war-surplus supplies for its construction, including GPO metal racks and "…the material of two complete Colossi" from Bletchley.

By June 1948 the Baby had been built and was working. It was 17 ft in length, 7 ft tall, and weighed almost 1 LT. The machine contained 550 valves (vacuum tubes)—300 diodes and 250 pentodes—and had a power consumption of 3500 watts. The arithmetic unit was built using EF50 pentode valves, which had been widely used during wartime. The Baby used one Williams tube to provide 32 by 32-bit words of random-access memory (RAM), a second to hold a 32-bit accumulator in which the intermediate results of a calculation could be stored temporarily, and a third to hold the current program instruction along with its address in memory. A fourth CRT, without the storage electronics of the other three, was used as the output device, able to display the bit pattern of any selected storage tube.

Each 32-bit word of RAM could contain either a program instruction or data. In a program instruction, bits 0–12 represented the memory address of the operand to be used, and bits 13–15 specified the operation to be executed, such as storing a number in memory; the remaining 16 bits were unused. The Baby's single operand architecture meant that the second operand of any operation was implicit: the accumulator or the program counter (instruction address); program instructions specified only the address of the data in memory.

A word in the computer's memory could be read, written, or refreshed, in 360 microseconds. An instruction took four times as long to execute as accessing a word from memory, giving an instruction execution rate of about 700 per second. The main store was refreshed continuously, a process that took 20 milliseconds to complete, as each of the Baby's 32 words had to be read and then refreshed in sequence.

The Baby represented negative numbers using two's complement, as most computers still do. In that representation, the value of the most significant bit denotes the sign of a number; positive numbers have a zero in that position and negative numbers a one. Thus, the range of numbers that could be held in each 32-bit word was −231 to +231 − 1 (decimal: −2,147,483,648 to +2,147,483,647).

Programming
The Baby's instruction format had a three-bit operation code field, which allowed a maximum of eight (23) different instructions. In contrast to the modern convention, the machine's storage was described with the least significant digits to the left; thus a one was represented in three bits as "100", rather than the more conventional "001".

The awkward negative operations were a consequence of the Baby's lack of hardware to perform any arithmetic operations except subtraction and negation. It was considered unnecessary to build an adder before testing could begin as addition can easily be implemented by subtraction, i.e. x+y can be computed as −(−x−y). Therefore, adding two numbers together, X and Y, required four instructions:

"LDN X // load negative X into the accumulator SUB Y // subtract Y from the value in the accumulator STO S // store the result at S LDN S // load negative value at S into the accumulator"

Programs were entered in binary form by stepping through each word of memory in turn, and using a set of 32 buttons and switches known as the input device to set the value of each bit of each word to either 0 or 1. The Baby had no paper-tape reader or punch.

First programs

Three programs were written for the computer. The first, consisting of 17 instructions, was written by Kilburn, and so far as can be ascertained first ran on 21 June 1948. It was designed to find the highest proper factor of 218 (262,144) by trying every integer from 218 − 1 downwards. The divisions were implemented by repeated subtractions of the divisor. The Baby took 3.5 million operations and 52 minutes to produce the answer (131,072). The program used eight words of working storage in addition to its 17 words of instructions, giving a program size of 25 words.

Geoff Tootill wrote an amended version of the program the following month, and in mid-July Alan Turing — who had been appointed as a reader in the mathematics department at Manchester University in September 1948 — submitted the third program, to carry out long division. Turing had by then been appointed to the nominal post of Deputy Director of the Computing Machine Laboratory at the university, although the laboratory did not become a physical reality until 1951.

Later developments
Williams and Kilburn reported on the Baby in a letter to the Journal Nature, published in September 1948. The machine's successful demonstration quickly led to the construction of a more practical computer, the Manchester Mark 1, work on which began in August 1948. The first version was operational by April 1949, and it in turn led directly to the development of the Ferranti Mark 1, the world's first commercially available general-purpose computer.

Legacy
In 1998, a working replica of the Baby, now on display at the Museum of Science and Industry in Manchester, was built to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the running of its first program. Demonstrations of the machine in operation are held regularly at the museum.

In 2008, an original panoramic photograph of the entire machine was discovered at the University of Manchester. The photograph, taken on 15 December 1948 by a research student, Alec Robinson, had been reproduced in The Illustrated London News in June 1949.

title: Manchester Baby


text:
America East Conference

The America East Conference (AmEast) is a collegiate athletic conference affiliated with NCAA Division I whose members are located in the Northeastern United States. The conference is headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts.

Founded in 1979, the conference has nine core members including eight public research universities, three of which - the University of Maine, the University of New Hampshire, and the University of Vermont - are the flagship universities of their states. Two non-flagship university centers of the State University of New York - the University at Albany and Binghamton University - are in the conference along with UMass Lowell, New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) and Bryant University. Bryant is the latest institution to join the conference in 2022, when Stony Brook University and the University of Hartford departed the conference. It is the only private university among the core members.

The America East Conference sponsors 18 sports (8 men's and 10 women's). The conference is among the best in the country according to Graduation Success Rate (GSR) data released by the NCAA.

History
The America East Conference was founded as the Eastern College Athletic Conference-North, a men's basketball-only athletic conference in 1979. The conference was known as the Eastern College Athletic Conference-North from 1979 to 1988 and the North Atlantic Conference from 1988 to 1996. The charter members were the University of Rhode Island, the College of the Holy Cross, Canisius College, Niagara University, Colgate University, Northeastern University, Boston University, the University of Maine, the University of New Hampshire and the University of Vermont. The America East Conference made history during the 2018 NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament on March 16, 2018, when No. 16 seed UMBC defeated No. 1 seed Virginia, marking the first time in men's tournament history that a No. 1 seed had lost to a No. 16 seed.

Many other events have occurred since its formation:
 * Rhode Island left in 1980.
 * Holy Cross left in 1983.
 * Siena College joined in 1984.
 * The University of Hartford joined in 1985.
 * Later, the conference became an all-sports conference, named as the North Atlantic Conference in the 1988–89 season, only for Canisius, Niagara and Siena to leave after the spring of 1989 to join the Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference (MAAC).
 * Colgate left in 1990 to join the Patriot League.
 * The University of Delaware and Drexel University joined in 1991.
 * Hofstra University joined in 1994.
 * Towson University joined in 1995.
 * On July 1, 1996, the conference's name changed to its present name, the America East Conference.
 * During 2001, Delaware, Drexel, Hofstra and Towson left to join the Colonial Athletic Association (CAA) while the University at Albany, Binghamton University and Stony Brook University replaced them.
 * The University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC) soon joined in 2003.
 * Northeastern left in 2005 to join the CAA.
 * Boston University left to join the Patriot League on July 1, 2013, while the University of Massachusetts Lowell joined from Division II.
 * In 2020, New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT) joined from the ASUN Conference.
 * In March 2022, Bryant University accepted an invitation to join the America East Conference, leaving the Northeast Conference. This move took effect on July 1.
 * On July 1, 2022, Stony Brook University left to join the all-sports Colonial Athletic Association (now the Coastal Athletic Association); it had been a member of the CAA's technically separate football arm, CAA Football, since 2013. Then-current field hockey associate Monmouth left to join the CAA, which sponsors that sport.
 * In 2022, the University of Hartford left the conference during its transition down to Division III. At the time this move was announced, the school's departure from the conference had been planned for 2023, but this was eventually changed to 2022.

On May 6, 2021, Hartford's governing board voted to begin the process of transitioning the school from Division I to NCAA Division III. Under the plan, Hartford would formally apply to the NCAA for reclassification in January 2022, stop awarding athletic scholarships to incoming students from 2022–23 forward, and join an as-yet-undetermined D-III conference in 2023 before becoming a full D-III member in 2025–26.

Several media reports indicated that Hartford's last year in the American East Conference would be the 2021–22 season. This was confirmed on June 21, 2022, when the Commonwealth Coast Conference (CCC) announced that it would be Hartford's partner in the school's reclassification process, with the Hawks joining that league effective in 2023–24. Hartford played most of its sports in the 2022–23 season as a D-I independent.

At the time, Hartford was the only private university in the conference; this status transferred to Bryant when it joined in July 2022.

On July 20, 2022, Merrimack College was announced to join the conference as a men's lacrosse member for the 2022–23 season.

Associate members
Two schools currently hold associate membership: one from California and one from Virginia

 * Notes:

Former associate members
Eight schools have had single-sport membership in the past. Three of these, Fairfield, Monmouth, and Providence, moved their America East sports into their all-sports conferences. Another such school, NJIT, left when it joined a conference that sponsored its America East sport, but returned as a full member in July 2020 (by which time the AmEast had dropped that sport). Pacific dropped its America East sport following the 2018–19 academic year due to budget cuts. Merrimack College dropped its America East sport following the 2023–24 academic year when the school joined the MAAC. Both Stanford and Cal moved their America East sports into the ACC following the 2023–24 academic year when both of the schools joined the conference.

Membership timeline
undefined undefined undefined undefined undefined

Sports sponsored
The America East Conference sponsors championship competition in eight men's and ten women's NCAA sanctioned sports. The most recent changes to the roster of America East sports were announced in 2016, with the dropping of women's tennis after the 2015–16 season due to a lack of sponsoring teams and the revival of men's swimming and diving effective in the 2017–18 school year.

Men's sports

 * Notes

Women's sports

 * Notes

NCAA team championships
No America East school has won a national title in a sport sponsored by the conference; however, member institutions have been national champions in non-America East sports.

All-time school record by winning percentage
This list goes through the 2018–19 season.

No. 16 UMBC upset of No. 1 Virginia
During the 2018 NCAA tournament, UMBC became the first No. 16 seed to defeat a No. 1 seed in the NCAA men's tournament, beating the Virginia Cavaliers 74–54.

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

title: America East Conference


text:
Raymond-Roupen

Raymond-Roupen (also Raymond-Rupen and Ruben-Raymond; 1198 – 1219 or 1221/1222) was a member of the House of Poitiers who claimed the thrones of the Principality of Antioch and Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia. His succession in Antioch was prevented by his paternal uncle Bohemond IV, but his maternal great-uncle Leo I of Cilicia recognized him as heir presumptive to Cilicia and pressed his claim to Antioch. In 1211 Raymond-Roupen was crowned junior king of Cilicia, and was finally installed as Prince of Antioch in 1216. The War of the Antiochene Succession ended with Leo's death in 1219, shortly before Raymond-Roupen was ousted from Antioch. He then pursued his claim to Cilicia, which Leo had unexpectedly willed to his daughter Isabella on his deathbed, but was defeated and imprisoned until death.

Succession uncertainty
The marriage of Raymond-Roupen's parents, Raymond of Antioch and Alice of Armenia, was arranged in 1195 to end the hostilities between the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia and the Latin Principality of Antioch and to eventually unite them under one ruler. The idea failed when Raymond died in early 1197, leaving Alice pregnant. She gave birth to a posthumous son, Raymond-Roupen. The infant was heir apparent to his grandfather Bohemond III of Antioch by primogeniture, but this principle was not upheld in the Latin East. Instead, the fiefs passed by the proximity of blood, which favored Bohemond III's surviving children. Raymond-Roupen's grandfather was elderly and unlikely to live until Raymond-Roupen reached the age of majority, making an undesirable Armenian-dominated regency likely if Raymond-Roupen were to succeed him.

Bohemond sent his widowed daughter-in-law back to Cilicia along with his newborn grandson, either to ensure their safety or to remove the grandson from succession in favor of a son by his latest marriage. The two arrived just in time for the coronation of Alice's uncle, Leo I, as the first king of Cilicia. The ceremony was combined with Raymond-Roupen's baptism, and both were performed by the papal legate Conrad of Wittelsbach. Leo, who had no sons, recognized Raymond-Roupen as his heir presumptive, and made it his principal mission to secure his grandnephew's succession to Antioch as well.

Conrad of Wittelsbach traveled from Sis to Antioch, where he compelled Bohemond III to summon his vassals and have Raymond-Roupen recognized as his heir apparent. Bohemond III's eldest surviving son, Bohemond, who was already ruling the County of Tripoli, immediately denounced the oaths of allegiance given to Raymond-Roupen. Having secured the support of the Knights Templar, the Knights Hospitaller, the Genoese and Pisan merchants, and the Commune of Antioch, Bohemond suddenly appeared in Antioch in late 1198, ejected his father and had the commune swear allegiance to himself as the future prince. The Antiochene clergy too abandoned Raymond-Roupen's cause after Leo fell out with Peter of Angoulême, Latin Patriarch of Antioch.

War of the Antiochene Succession
When Bohemond III died in April 1201, Bohemond IV had no difficulty establishing himself as Prince of Antioch. Many noblemen who had favored Raymond-Roupen fled to Sis. Leo laid siege to the city of Antioch, starting the War of the Antiochene Succession. Amalric, King of Jerusalem and Cyprus, favored Raymond-Roupen but declined to intervene. Leo arranged for Raymond-Roupen to marry Helvis, Amalric's daughter and sister of King Hugh I of Cyprus, in 1210. On 15 August 1211, Raymond-Roupen was crowned as junior king of Cilicia, with a crown sent by Emperor Otto IV. The following year, when he was about to reach the age of majority, Raymond-Roupen was sent by Leo to plunder Antioch.

Raymond-Roupen found new allies in the Hospitallers and Antiochene noblemen, including the leader of the commune, by promising grants of land. In this too he was supported by Leo. In early 1216, Antioch was finally occupied. Raymond-Roupen and Leo entered the city on 14 February, while Bohemond was absent. Raymond-Roupen was consecrated as Prince of Antioch by the Latin Patriarch, Peter of Ivrea, and received the submission of the nobility and the commune. The Seljuk Turks promptly attacked Cilicia, and Raymond-Roupen may have been asked to assist his granduncle. Their relationship, however, deteriorated and Raymond-Roupen intended to capture Leo. The latter was warned by the Templars and escaped to Cilicia. Without Leo's backing, Raymond-Roupen could not hold Antioch. He helped the Hospitallers occupy Jableh in 1218 but found himself lacking resources, as the principality had been devastated by the war. An increase of taxation made him unpopular among his subjects.

In 1219, the burghers and noblemen of Antioch rose up and persuaded Bohemond to return. On his uncle's arrival, Raymond-Roupen sought refuge in the citadel but then fled to Cilicia. He left the citadel in the hands of the Hospitallers, earning their friendship.

Cilician claim
Once ousted from Antioch, Raymond-Roupen sought shelter with Leo in Cilicia. His granduncle was on his deathbed, however, and decided to disinherit Raymond-Roupen in favor of his infant daughter Isabella. Prince Bohemond IV's restoration, followed by King Leo I's death in May 1219, thus ended Raymond-Roupen's prospects of ruling Antioch. Raymond-Roupen instead rose to claim Cilicia, as did John of Brienne, husband of Leo's elder daughter, Stephanie. Pope Honorius III ruled that Stephanie or her son by John should succeed King Leo, but both mother and child died soon after. Honorius then ruled in favor of Raymond-Roupen.

Raymond-Roupen's chances of winning the Cilician throne seemed good: he had the support of his mother, Alice; of some Cilician nobles; of the Hospitallers; of the papacy and of the papal legate Pelagius of Albano, who was leading the Fifth Crusade in Egypt. Raymond-Roupen traveled to Damietta in the summer of 1220 to consult with Pelagius in person, after which he invaded Cilicia with his mother. They established themselves in Tarsus, where they waited for help from the Hospitallers. Constantine of Baberon, regent for Queen Isabella, quickly marched to their stronghold. After a three-month siege, Tarsus was captured together with Raymond-Roupen and Alice.

Aftermath
Raymond-Roupen died in a Cilician prison in 1221 or 1222. He was in his mid-twenties. Isabella and Bohemond were left to reign uncontested in Cilicia and Antioch, respectively, and shortly thereafter Bohemond's son Philip became king by marrying Isabella, but met a similar fate. Honorius and Pelagius decided not to put forward the claims of Raymond-Roupen's young daughters, Maria and Eschiva, who were taken by their mother to Cyprus.

title: Raymond-Roupen


text:
On Aggression

On Aggression (Das sogenannte Böse. Zur Naturgeschichte der Aggression, "So-called Evil: on the natural history of aggression") is a 1963 book by the ethologist Konrad Lorenz; it was translated into English in 1966. As he writes in the prologue, "the subject of this book is aggression, that is to say the fighting instinct in beast and man which is directed against  members of the same species." (Page 3)

The book was reviewed many times, both positively and negatively, by biologists, anthropologists, psychoanalysts and others. Much criticism was directed at Lorenz's extension of his findings on non-human animals to humans.

Publication
On Aggression was first published in German in 1963, and in English in 1966. It has been reprinted many times and translated into at least 12 languages.

Programming
According to Lorenz, animals, particularly males, are biologically programmed to fight over resources. This behavior must be considered part of natural selection, as aggression leading to death or serious injury may eventually lead to extinction unless it has such a role.

However, Lorenz does not state that aggressive behaviors are in any way more powerful, prevalent, or intense than more peaceful behaviors such as mating rituals. Rather, he negates the categorization of aggression as "contrary" to "positive" instincts like love, depicting it as a founding basis of other instincts and its role in animal communication.

Hydraulic model
Additionally, Lorenz addresses behavior in humans, including discussion of a "hydraulic" model of emotional or instinctive pressures and their release, shared by Freud's psychoanalytic theory, and the abnormality of intraspecies violence and killing. Lorenz claimed that "present-day civilized man suffers from insufficient discharge of his aggressive drive" and suggested that low levels of aggressive behaviour prevented higher level responses resulting from "damming" them. His 'hydraulic' model, of aggression as a force that builds relentlessly without cause unless released, remains less popular than a model in which aggression is a response to frustrated desires and aims.

Ritualization
In the book, Lorenz describes the development of rituals among aggressive behaviors as beginning with a totally utilitarian action, but then evolving to more and more stylized actions, until finally, the action performed may be entirely symbolic and non-utilitarian, now fulfilling a function of communication. In Lorenz's words:

"Thus while the message of inciting [a particular aggressive behavior performed by the female of cooperating mated pairs] in ruddy shelduck and Egyptian geese could be expressed in the words 'Drive him off, thrash him!', in diving ducks [a related species in which this trait has been further ritualized] it simply means, 'I love you.' In several groups, midway between these two extremes, as for example in the gadwall and wigeon, an intermediate meaning may be found, 'You are my hero. I rely on you.'"

Favourable
J. L. Fischer, reviewing On Aggression in American Anthropologist in 1968, called it a "fascinating book by a distinguished animal ethologist" that would "annoy most social and cultural anthropologists" but nonetheless stated "an important thesis", namely that intraspecific aggression was "instinctive in man, as it can be shown to be in a number of other species." Fischer found Lorenz's account of nonhuman animals at the start of the book, written from Lorenz's own experience, "the most convincing and enlightening". Fischer noted that Lorenz acknowledges the role of culture in human life but that he perhaps underrated its effects on individual development. Fischer argued that Lorenz's view of the instinctive nature of human aggression was "basically right", commenting that "Lorenz would probably cite the fury of his critics as further proof of the correctness of his thesis".

Edmund R. Leach, comparing the book with Robert Ardrey's The Territorial Imperative in The New York Review of Books in 1966, calls On Aggression "no landmark, but .. modest and wise, while Ardrey's version is only noisy and foolish." Leach writes that where Ardrey focuses on territoriality, Lorenz aims to demonstrate that "animal aggression is only a 'so-called evil' and that its adaptive consequences are advantageous or at least neutral." Leach is however less sure that Lorenz is correct to equate animal and human aggression, the one taking standard ritualized forms, the other far more complex.

The mental health researcher Peter M. Driver reviewed the book in Conflict Resolution in 1967 alongside two by Ardrey and one by Claire Russell and W. M. S. Russell, Human Behavior – A New Approach. He commented that those against the book, especially S. A. Barnett, T. C. Schneirla, and Solly Zuckerman, were specialists in animal behaviour, while most of the favourable reviews came from "experts in other fields". Driver stated that Lorenz had provided a "powerful thesis" to explain the "aggression gone wrong" in humans, mentioning the millions of deaths in world wars, aggression resembling (Driver argued) the unlimited interspecific attack of a predator on its prey rather than the kind of intraspecific aggression seen in nonhuman animals which is strictly limited. Driver concluded that ethology could contribute, alongside neurophysiology and psychology, to resolving the problem of conflict.

Critical
The zoologists Richard D. Alexander and Donald W. Tinkle, comparing On Aggression with Ardrey's The Territorial Imperative in BioScience in 1968, noted that few books had been reviewed so often "or with as much vehemence in both defense and derogation" as these two. In their view, this was because both men had tried to write about a sensitive and important question, human nature and to what extent it is determined by evolution. They call On Aggression a personal commentary from a professional zoologist where Ardrey's book is a well-documented book by a non-biologist. Both, in their view, tend "to rekindle old, pointless arguments of the instinct vs. learning variety" and both include "some peculiarly nonevolutionary or antievolutionary themes."

The psychoanalyst Erich Fromm, writing in The New York Times in 1972, called Lorenz's theory "complicated and sometimes fuzzy". Fromm considered that in one way Lorenz had succeeded where Sigmund Freud had failed, Lorenz's hydraulic theory of aggression, innately programmed, being in Fromm's view a better explanation than Freud's opposed passions, the supposed drives for life (eros) and death or destruction (thanatos). However, Fromm noted that the ethologist Nico Tinbergen had rejected the hydraulic theory, and that Lorenz himself "modified it" in 1966, but without indicating that in the English translation of On Aggression. Fromm cites evidence from neuroscience that aggression is "essentially defensive", arising in "phylogenetically programed brain areas" for fight or flight when an animal or person feels threatened. Fromm points out that "self-propelling aggressiveness" is seen in people with brain disease, but not in "normal brain functioning".

The biologist E. O. Wilson, in On Human Nature (1978), argues that both Lorenz and Fromm are essentially wrong. He lists a variety of aggression categories, each separately subject to natural selection, and states that aggressive behavior is, genetically, one of the most labile of all traits. He maintains that aggression is a technique used to gain control over necessary resources, and serves as a "density-dependent factor" in population control. He argues against the "drive-discharge" model created by Freud and Lorenz, where substitute aggressive activities (such as combative sports) should reduce the potential for war, and in support of Richard G. Sipes's "culture-pattern" model, where war and substitute activities will vary directly. Wilson compares aggression to "a preexisting mix of chemicals ready to be transformed by specific catalysts that are added," rather than "a fluid that continuously builds pressure against the walls of its containers."

The anthropologist Donald Symons, in The Evolution of Human Sexuality (1979), accused Lorenz of inadequately documenting his major thesis.

The evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins described Lorenz in The Selfish Gene (1976) as a "'good of the species' man". He criticises On Aggression for its "gem of a circular argument" that aggressive behaviour has a "species preserving" function, namely to ensure "that only the fittest individuals are allowed to breed". In Dawkins's view, the idea of group selection was "so deeply ingrained" in Lorenz's thinking that he "evidently did not realize that his statements contravened orthodox Darwinian theory."

title: On Aggression


text:
Artemisia tridentata

Artemisia tridentata, commonly called big sagebrush, Great Basin sagebrush or simply sagebrush (one of several related species of this name), is an aromatic shrub from the family Asteraceae.

It grows in arid and semi-arid conditions, throughout a range of cold desert, steppe, and mountain habitats in the Intermountain West of North America. Big sagebrush and other Artemisia shrubs are the dominant plant species across large portions of the Great Basin.

Sagebrush provides food and habitat for a variety of species, such as sage grouse, pronghorn antelope, grey vireo, pygmy rabbit, and mule deer. Several major threats exist to sagebrush ecosystems, including human settlements, conversion to agricultural land, invasive plant species, and wildfires.

Native Americans have used the plant medicinally. It is also useful as firewood.

Description
Big sagebrush is a coarse, many-branched, pale-grey shrub with yellow flowers and silvery-grey foliage, which is generally 0.5–3 m tall. A deep taproot 1–4 m in length, coupled with laterally spreading roots near the surface, allows sagebrush to gather water from both surface precipitation and the water table several meters beneath. Big sagebrush that is over a meter tall is an indicator of arable land, because it prefers deep, basic soils. Sagebrush is generally long-lived once it makes it past the seedling stage, and can reach ages of over 100 years.

The species has a strong pungent fragrance (especially when wet) due to the presence of camphor, terpenoids and other volatile oils. The taste is bitter and, together with the odor, serves to discourage browsing by many herbivores. It is an evergreen shrub, keeping some of its leaves year-round (although it loses many of them in the late summer). The leaves—attached to the branches at the axillary nodes—are wedge-shaped, 1–3 cm long and 0.3–1 cm broad, with the wider outer tips divided into three lobes (hence the scientific name tridentata). The leaves are covered with fine silvery hairs.

The plant flowers in the late summer or early fall. The small yellow flowers are in long, loosely arranged tubular clusters. The fruits are seed-like and have a small amount of hairs on the surface.

Big sagebrush can also reproduce through sprouts, which shoot up from the underground rhizome. The sprouts are an extension of the parental plant while seedlings are completely individualistic to any other plant. Among these two strategies, the seedlings need more moisture for germination and early survival. This is due to the sprouts being connected to already healthy and associated plants while the new seedlings will start anew.

Chemistry
Sagebrush essential oil contains approximately 40% l-camphor; 20% pinene; 7% cineole; 5% methacrolein; and 12% a-terpinene, d-camphor, and sesqiterpenoids.

Taxonomy
Much discussion and disagreement revolves around the question of how to divide the species into varieties and subgenera. The following subspecies are accepted by some authors, though others advocate different systems.
 * A. tridentata subsp. tridentata ("basin big sagebrush")
 * A. tridentata subsp. vaseyana ("mountain big sagebrush")
 * A. tridentata subsp. wyomingensis ("Wyoming big sagebrush") – Found in the drier portions of the sagebrush steppe. Shrub density is generally less than 1 plant/m2, with little herbaceous cover surrounding the shrub.
 * A. tridentata subsp. xericensis ("scabland big sagebrush")
 * A. tridentata subsp. spiciformis ("subalpine big sagebrush")
 * A. tridentata subsp. parishii ("Parish's big sagebrush")

Distribution and habitat
Artemisia tridentata grows in arid and semi-arid conditions, throughout the Intermountain West of North America. Sagebrush is not a desert plant, but rather a resident of the steppe, in areas that receive 18 – of annual precipitation. Big sagebrush and other Artemisia species are the dominant plants across large portions of the Great Basin, covering some 422000 sqmi in 11 western U.S. states and Canadian provinces. The range extends northward through British Columbia's southern interior, south into Baja California, and east into the western Great Plains of New Mexico, Colorado, Nebraska, and the Dakotas.

Ecology
Sagebrush provides food and habitat for a variety of animal species, such as sage grouse, pronghorn, gray vireo, pygmy rabbit, and mule deer. It is especially important to game animals during the winter. Sagebrush also creates habitat for many species of grasses and herbs. Besides providing shade and shelter from the wind, the long taproot of sagebrush draws water up from deep in the soil, some of which becomes available to these surrounding shallow-rooted plants.

The terpenoid compounds in big sagebrush are thought to ward off herbivores. These oils, at high concentrations, are toxic to the symbiotic bacteria in the rumen of some ruminants like deer and cattle. Pronghorn are the only large herbivore to browse sagebrush extensively. Damage to sagebrush plants caused by grazing herbivores results in the release of volatile chemicals, which are used to signal a warning to nearby plants, so that they can increase the production of repellent chemical compounds. This plant-to-plant communication can take place at distances of up to 60 cm. Several major threats exist to sage brush ecosystems, including human settlements, conversion to agricultural land, invasive plant species, wildfires, and climate change. Due to large periods of time where sagebrush was the primary shrub, many species have become adapted to this habitat. The burning of the shrubs leads to habitat loss of many species and can be very detrimental to the ecosystem as a whole. Furthermore, the destruction of native grasses and forbs by grazing and fire creates conditions where invasive plants colonize the area. The invasive species which has destroyed the largest amount of sagebrush habitat is cheatgrass (Bromus tectorum). Since its accidental introduction in the 1890s, cheatgrass has radically altered the native shrub ecosystem by replacing indigenous vegetation, and by creating a fire cycle that is too frequent to allow sagebrush to re-establish itself. Sagebrush lacks fire tolerance and relies on wind-blown seeds from outside the burned area for re-establishment. Some tree species have also encroached on big sagebrush habitat. For example, in the late 20th century, Abies concolor (white fir) was out-competing big sagebrush in Warner Mountains in California.

Galls
This species is host to the following insect induced galls: external link to gallformers  Eutreta diana 1.jpg|Eutreta diana Rhopalomyia calvipomum.jpg|Rhopalomyia calvipomum Rhopalomyia conica 1.jpg|Rhopalomyia conica Rhopalomyia pomum gall.jpg|Rhopalomyia pomum Rhopalomyia_medusa_1.jpg|Rhopalomyia medusa
 * Eutreta diana  fly bud gall
 * Eutreta divisa fly bud gall
 * Eutreta oregona fly bud gall
 * Eutreta pollinosa fly bud? gall
 * Oxyna aterrima fly bud gall
 * Rhopalomyia (ampullaria, anthoides, brevibulla,calvipomum, conica, cramboides,culmata, florella, gossypina, hirticaulis, hirtipomum, lignea, lignitubus, mammilla, medusa, medusirrasa, nucula, obovata, occidentalis, pomum, rugosa, tridentatae, tubulus, tumidibulla, tumidicaulis) Various gall midges.

Uses
The Cahuilla used to gather large quantities of sagebrush seed and grind it to make flour. The main modern use is as firewood, with the wood's oils being particularly flammable.

Medicinal
The plant's active medicinal constituents include camphor, terpenoids, and tannins.

It is used as a herbal medicine by Native Americans throughout the Intermountain West of North America, most notably as a smudging herb. It is also used for preventing infection in wounds, stopping internal bleeding, and treating headaches and colds.

The Navajo use the vapors of sagebrush as a treatment for headache. The Okanagan and Colville people used sagebrush to smoke hides.

Among the Zuni people, an infusion of the leaves is used externally for body aches. The infusion is also taken as a cold medicine. It is also placed in shoes to treat athlete's foot, fissures between toes, and as a foot deodorant.

Culture
Artemisia tridentata is the state flower of Nevada.

title: Artemisia tridentata


text:
Talk:Liberal Party of Canada leadership elections

Untitled
It would be great if we could add info on which losing candidates in 1919, 1968, 1984 and 1993 were dropped or withdrew and gave their support to which other candidates Formeruser-83 23:55, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

2006 Convention
Can we include a bit about the upcoming Liberal convention? Probably candidates include Brian Tobin, Frank McKenna, Belinda Stronach, Michael Ignatieff, John Manley.

 * Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. It is too early. If Martin loses the election, then specualtion will begin. There is little that could be added now that would encyclopedic. Ground Zero | t

2003 Convention
Perhaps the article should mention that at the last convention most delegates had no choice on the first ballot. Elected delegates, the vast majority, were elected as either a Martin delegate or a Copps delegate (although I believe there were some independent delegates). If one was a Martin delegate, one was handed a pre-marked Martin ballot for the first round. I believe that candidates were not bound after the first round but with only two major candidates (and Martin's huge vitory), there was no second round. --JGGardiner 22:05, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:53, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * JoyceMurray.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:37, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Deborah Coyne.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Turner 1968 cropped.jpg


text:
King Solomon's Ring

King Solomon's Ring may refer to:
 * The Seal of Solomon, a legendary ring
 * King Solomon's Ring (book), a book by Konrad Lorenz
 * "King Solomon's Ring" (short story), a short story by Roger Zelazny
 * The Ring of Solomon, a children's fantasy novel by Jonathan Stroud

title: King Solomon's Ring


text:
Talk:Electroconvulsive therapy

Why are we mentioning voltage and current, but not impedance?
Please, to make the information more correct, mention the follow information. It's crucially important.

"However, only about 1% of the electrical current crosses the bony skull into the brain because skull impedance is about 100 times higher than skin impedance (Weaver et al., 1976)." https://assets.cambridge.org/97805218/83887/excerpt/9780521883887_excerpt.pdf

title: Talk:Electroconvulsive therapy


text:
User talk:McCann51

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Lorenz.gif
Thank you for uploading File:Lorenz.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 14:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:16, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:McCann51


text:
Karl, 8th Prince Kinsky of Wchinitz and Tettau

Karl, 8th Prince Kinsky of Wchinitz and Tettau (Karl Rudolf Ferdinand Andreas Fürst Kinsky von Wchinitz und Tettau; 29 November 1858 – 11 December 1919) was the 8th Prince Kinsky of Wchinitz and Tettau.

Early life
Karl was born in Vienna, the capital of the Austrian Empire, as the son of Ferdinand Bonaventura, 7th Prince Kinsky of Wchinitz and Tettau (1834–1904), the head of the princely line of the House of Kinsky, and Princess Marie of Liechtenstein (1835–1905).

Karl was born into the family's great equine tradition and inherited a love of horses. A servant, the Kinskys’ master of the horse, Rowland Reynolds, who had two great loves, England and the Grand National steeplechase, was to prove a great influence on Karl, passing on his passions to the young Count.

Karl first visited England as part of the retinue of Empress Elisabeth of Austria in the late 1870s. The Empress arranged to visit Liverpool and see the famous steeplechase which provided Kinsky with his first opportunity to witness the event. Later, in 1882, he bought the 3rd-place horse in the 1882 Grand National, 5-year-old mare Zoedone and won on her the following year.

Marriage
Karl married on 7 January 1895 in Herdringen, Arnsberg, to Countess Elisabeth Wolff-Metternich zur Gracht (1874–1909). They had no children.

Ambitions
Karl achieved his two greatest British goals in rapid succession. First, he was made Austro-Hungarian attaché to Britain; and second, he rode his own horse, Zoedone, to win the 1883 Grand National. He was distraught when Zoedone was poisoned on the race day two years later.

Relationship with Jennie Jerome
Karl was involved in an affair with Lady Randolph Churchill, wife of Lord Randolph Churchill and the American-born mother of Sir Winston Churchill. She was four years his senior, a famous socialite, and one of the most beautiful women of the time, and he was completely infatuated by her. Lady Randolph Churchill has been described as being a captivating woman, whose looks and demeanor made her almost irresistible. She was powerful, having social and romantic contacts that could make or break anyone wishing to climb in social status in the Britain of the time.

She later claimed that she would not have spent the time that she did with Kinsky were it not for the unfounded rumours of an affair being spread by society gossips, and her desire to spend time with him was simply for spite. However, accounts from the time do indicate that the two were involved romantically, and the only motivation for quelling the rumours was that this affair was a semi-secret one.

In this period, having extra-marital affairs was not uncommon among the upper classes. Her affairs were rumored to have included The Prince of Wales (later Edward VII). Her affairs may have even assisted Lord Randolph’s political and social standing. At the time of Kinsky's affair with Jennie Churchill, she likely wielded more power behind the scenes than did Kinsky, and it would have been he who would have benefited more from the affair. Although she certainly had friendships with many powerful men, it is unknown whether every relationship was sexual.

World War I and after
Karl remained in England until 1914 when Austria-Hungary went to war with Britain. Keen to do his duty, but unwilling to fight the country he regarded as his second home, Kinsky volunteered to fight on the dreaded Russian front. He survived but returned to a broken homeland and the knowledge that it was unlikely he would ever be welcome in England again. A broken man, Karl died in 1919.

Popular culture
He is portrayed in the 1974 television series, Jennie: Lady Randolph Churchill, by the actor Jeremy Brett.

Notes and sources

 * Almanach de Gotha, Reference: 1874 150; 1924 426


text:
Kurt Schuschnigg

Kurt Alois Josef Johann von Schuschnigg (14 December 1897 – 18 November 1977) was an Austrian politician who was the Chancellor of the Federal State of Austria from the 1934 assassination of his predecessor Engelbert Dollfuss until the 1938 Anschluss with Nazi Germany. Although Schuschnigg considered Austria a "German state" and Austrians to be Germans, he was strongly opposed to Adolf Hitler's goal to absorb Austria into the Third Reich and wished for it to remain independent.

When Schuschnigg's efforts to keep Austria independent had failed, he resigned his office. After the Anschluss he was arrested, kept in solitary confinement and eventually interned in various concentration camps. He was liberated in 1945 by the advancing United States Army and spent most of the rest of his life in academia in the United States. Schuschnigg gained American citizenship in 1956.

Early life
Schuschnigg was born in Riva del Garda in the Tyrolean crown land of Austria-Hungary (now in Trentino, Italy), the son of Anna Josefa Amalia (Wopfner) and Austrian General Artur von Schuschnigg, member of a long-established Austrian officers' family of Carinthian Slovene descent. The Slovene spelling of the family name is Šušnik.

He received his education at the Stella Matutina Jesuit College in Feldkirch, Vorarlberg. During World War I, he was taken prisoner at the Italian Front and held captive until September 1919. Subsequently, he studied law at the University of Freiburg and the University of Innsbruck, where he became a member of the Catholic fraternity A.V. Austria. After graduating in 1922, he practiced as a lawyer in Innsbruck.

Political career
Schuschnigg first joined the right-wing Christian Social Party and in 1927 was elected to the Nationalrat, then the youngest parliamentary deputy. Suspicious of the paramilitary Heimwehr organisation, he established the Catholic Ostmärkische Sturmscharen forces in 1930. On 29 January 1932, the Christian Social chancellor Karl Buresch appointed Schuschnigg Minister of Justice, an office he retained in the cabinet of Buresch's successor Engelbert Dollfuss, and he also served as Minister of Education from 24 May 1933. As justice minister, he openly discussed the abolition of the parliamentary system and restored the death penalty. In March 1933, he and Chancellor Dollfuss took the occasion to dissolve the National Council parliament. After the socialist February Uprising of 1934, he had eight insurgents immediately executed, earning him the reputation of an "assassin of the workers". The executions have since been referred to as a vengeful act of judicial murder. Schuschnigg himself later called his orders a "faux pas".

On 1 May 1934, Dollfuss had erected the authoritarian Federal State of Austria. After Dollfuss was assassinated by the Nazi Otto Planetta during the July Putsch, Schuschnigg on 29 July was appointed Austrian chancellor. Like Dollfuss, Schuschnigg ruled mostly by decree. Although his rule was milder than that of Dollfuss, his Austrofascist policies were not much different from the policies of his predecessor. He had to manage the economy of a near-bankrupt state and to maintain law and order in a country which was forbidden, by the terms of the 1919 Treaty of Saint-Germain, to maintain an army in excess of 30,000 men. At the same time, he had to also cope with armed paramilitary forces in Austria, which owed their allegiance not to the state but to various rival political parties. He also had to be mindful of the growing strength of the Austrian Nazis, who supported Adolf Hitler's ambitions to absorb Austria into Nazi Germany. His overriding political concern was to preserve Austria's independence within the borders imposed on it by the terms of the Treaty of Saint-Germain, which ultimately failed.

John Gunther wrote in 1936 of Schuschnigg: "It would not be too much to say that he is as much a prisoner of the Italians now [as he was during World War I]—if the Germans don't get him next week." His policy of counterbalancing the German threat by aligning himself with Austria's southern and eastern neighbours—the Kingdom of Italy under the fascist rule of Benito Mussolini and the Kingdom of Hungary—was doomed to failure after Mussolini had sought Hitler's support in the Second Italo-Ethiopian War and left Austria under the increasing pressure of a massively rearmed Third Reich. Schuschnigg adopted a policy of appeasement towards Hitler and called Austria the "better German state", but struggled to keep Austria independent. In July 1936, he signed an Austro-German Agreement, which, among other concessions, allowed the release of imprisoned July Putsch insurgents and the inclusion of the Nazi contact men Edmund Glaise-Horstenau and Guido Schmidt in the Austrian cabinet. The Nazi Party remained banned; however, the Austrian Nazis gained ground and relations between the two countries deteriorated further. In reaction to Hitler's threats to exercise a controlling influence over Austrian politics, Schuschnigg publicly declared in January 1938:

"There is no question of ever accepting Nazi representatives in the Austrian cabinet. An absolute abyss separates Austria from Nazism ... We reject uniformity and centralization. ... Catholicism is anchored in our very soil, and we know but one God: and that is not the State, or the Nation, or that elusive thing, Race."Rumours concerning his involvement in the Von Trapp family’s rise to fame have also come to light. It’s rumoured that upon hearing the Von Trapp family sing over the radio, he invited them to perform in Vienna which greatly helped them in their rise to fame.

Anschluss
On 12 February 1938, Schuschnigg met with Hitler in his Berghof residence in an attempt to smooth the worsening relations between their two countries. To Schuschnigg's surprise, Hitler presented him with a set of demands which, in manner and in terms, amounted to an ultimatum, effectively demanding the handing over of power to the Austrian Nazis. The terms of the agreement, presented to Schuschnigg for immediate endorsement, stipulated the appointment of Nazi sympathiser Arthur Seyss-Inquart as minister of security, which controlled the police. Another pro-Nazi, Dr Hans Fischböck, was to be named as minister of finance to prepare for economic union between Germany and Austria. A hundred officers were to be exchanged between the Austrian and the German armies. All imprisoned Nazis were to be amnestied and reinstated. In return, Hitler would publicly reaffirm the treaty of 11 July 1936 and Austria's national sovereignty. "The Fuhrer was abusive and threatening, and Schuschnigg was presented with far-reaching demands ..." According to Schuschnigg's memoirs, he was coerced into signing the "agreement" before leaving Berchtesgaden.

The president, Wilhelm Miklas, was reluctant to endorse the agreement but eventually did so. Then he, Schuschnigg and a few key Cabinet members considered a number of options:

 * 1. The Chancellor resign and the President call on a new Chancellor to form a Cabinet, which would be under no obligation to the commitments of Berchtesgaden.
 * 2. The Berchtesgaden agreement be carried out under a newly appointed Chancellor.
 * 3. The agreement be carried out and the Chancellor remain at his post.

In the event, they decided to go with the third option.

On the following day, 14 February, Schuschnigg reorganised his cabinet on a broader basis and included representatives of all former and present political parties. Hitler immediately appointed a new Gauleiter for Austria, a Nazi Austrian army officer who had just been released from prison in accordance with the terms of the general amnesty stipulated by the Berchtesgaden agreement.

On 20 February, Hitler made a speech before the Reichstag which was broadcast live and which for the first time was relayed also by the Austrian radio network. A key phrase in the speech was: "The German Reich is no longer willing to tolerate the suppression of ten million Germans across its borders."

In Austria, the speech was met with concern and by demonstrations by both pro and anti-Nazi elements. On the evening of 24 February, the Austrian Federal Diet was called into session. In his speech to the Diet, Schuschnigg referred to the July 1936 agreement with Germany and stated: "Austria will go thus far and no further." He ended his speech with an emotional appeal to Austrian patriotism: "Red-White-Red (the colours of the Austrian flag) until we're dead!" The speech was received with disapproval from the Austrian Nazis and they began mobilising their supporters. The headline in The Times of London was "Schuschnigg's Speech – Nazis Disturbed". The phrase "thus far and no further" was found "disturbing" by the German press.

To resolve the political uncertainty in the country and to convince Hitler and the rest of the world that the people of Austria wished to remain Austrian and independent of the Third Reich, Schuschnigg, with the full agreement of the President and other political leaders, decided to proclaim a plebiscite to be held on 13 March. But the wording of the referendum which had to be responded to with a "Yes" or a "No" turned out to be controversial. It read: "Are you for a free, German, independent and social, Christian and united Austria, for peace and work, for the equality of all those who affirm themselves for the people and Fatherland?"

There was another issue which drew the ire of the National Socialists. Although members of Schuschnigg's party (the Fatherland Front) could vote at any age, all other Austrians below the age of 24 were to be excluded under a clause to that effect in the Austrian Constitution. This would shut out from the polls most of the Nazi sympathisers in Austria, since the movement was strongest among the young. Knowing he was in a bind, Schuschnigg held talks with the leaders of the Social Democrats, and agreed to legalise their party and their trade unions in return for their support of the referendum.

The German reaction to the announcement was swift. Hitler first insisted the plebiscite be cancelled. When Schuschnigg reluctantly agreed to scrap it, Hitler demanded his resignation, and insisted that Seyss-Inquart be appointed his successor. This demand President Miklas was reluctant to endorse but eventually, under the threat of immediate armed intervention, it was endorsed as well. Schuschnigg resigned on 11 March, and Seyss-Inquart was appointed Chancellor, but it made no difference; German troops flooded into Austria and were received everywhere by enthusiastic and jubilant crowds. On the morning after the invasion, the London Daily Mail 's correspondent asked the new Chancellor, Seyss-Inquart, how these stirring events came about, he received the following reply: "The Plebiscite that had been fixed for tomorrow was a breach of the agreement which Dr. Schuschnigg made with Hitler at Berchtesgaden, by which he promised political liberty for National Socialists in Austria." On 12 March 1938, Schuschnigg was placed under house arrest.

Prison and concentration camp
After initial house arrest followed by solitary confinement at Gestapo headquarters, he spent the whole of World War II in Sachsenhausen, then Dachau. In late April 1945, Schuschnigg narrowly escaped an execution order by Adolf Hitler, with other prominent concentration camp inmates, by being transferred from Dachau to South Tyrol where SS-Totenkopfverbände guards abandoned the prisoners into the hands of some Wehrmacht officers, who freed them. They were then turned over to American troops on 4 May 1945. From there, Schuschnigg and his family were transported, along with many of the ex-prisoners, to the isle of Capri in Italy before being set free.

Later life
After World War II, Kurt Schuschnigg was forbidden from joining the ÖVP because the party wanted to distance itself from the Austrian dictatorship. Moreover, the ÖVP did not expect their social democratic coalition partner to tolerate Schuschnigg's presence in the party, since after the civil war of 1934 he had had many social democrats killed as Minister of Justice. Schuschnigg emigrated to the United States, where he was sheltered at the chateau estate Vouziers of the Desloge family in St. Louis, Missouri; and then became a professor of political science at Saint Louis University from 1948 to 1967. He became an American citizen in 1956.

His first wife Herma died in a car accident in 1935. He remarried in 1938, but lost his second wife, Vera Fugger von Babenhausen (née Countess Czernin) in 1959.

Kurt Schuschnigg went back to Austria where he downplayed his time as chancellor with dictatorial powers and tried to justify Austrofascism.

Schuschnigg died at Mutters, near Innsbruck, in 1977.

Awards and decorations

 * Austria-Hungary: Military Merit Cross
 * Austria-Hungary: Military Merit Medal
 * Austria-Hungary: Karl Troop Cross
 * Austria-Hungary: Decoration of Honour for Services to the Republic of Austria, Pre-war version (2 awards)
 * Holy See: Order of St. Gregory the Great, Knight Grand Cross
 * Kingdom of Italy: Order of Saints Maurice and Lazarus, Knight Grand Cordon
 * Czechoslovakia: Order of the White Lion, Knight Grand Cross
 * other medals

Works
In German
 * My Austria (1937)
 * Austrian Requiem (1946)
 * International Law (1959)
 * The Brutal Takeover (1969)
 * Dreimal Österreich. Verlag Thomas Hegner, Wien 1937.
 * Ein Requiem in Rot-Weiß-Rot. Aufzeichnungen des Häftlings Dr. Auster. Amstutz, Zürich 1946.
 * Österreich. Eine historische Schau. Verlag Thomas Morus, Sarnen 1946.
 * Im Kampf gegen Hitler. Die Überwindung der Anschlußidee. Amalthea, Wien 1988, ISBN 3-85002-256-0.
 * Dieter A. Binder (Hrsg.): Sofort vernichten. Die vertraulichen Briefe Kurt und Vera von Schuschnigg 1938–1945. Amalthea, Wien 1997, ISBN 3-85002-393-1.

title: Kurt Schuschnigg


text:
File talk:Apollo 18 album cover.png

Untitled
Honestly, I think the first version looked better. It looks too faded when it's this bright. -Branddobbe 00:01, Mar 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * Huh. Judging from some of the images I've seen on the Internet (and what you just said), I think that my monitor is a lot darker than most people's. I'll go revert it now. I think my resolution's also a little denser than normal, so if you think the first version's too big, I can scale it down, too. -- Djinn112 01:01, Mar 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't think it's all that big (but then I have my resolution settings set to where NOTHING is all that big). If need be, we can always just make the image in the article a thumbnail.

 * Out of curiosity, where did you get the image? -Branddobbe 05:39, Mar 17, 2004 (UTC)

 * From here, at Amazon.com. -- Djinn112 06:06, Mar 17, 2004 (UTC)

title: File talk:Apollo 18 album cover.png


text:
Charles Ammi Cutter

Charles Ammi Cutter (March 14, 1837 – September 6, 1903) was an American librarian. In the 1850s and 1860s he assisted with the re-cataloging of the Harvard College library, producing America's first public card catalog. The card system proved more flexible for librarians and far more useful to patrons than the old method of entering titles in chronological order in large books. In 1868 he joined the Boston Athenaeum, making its card catalog an international model. Cutter promoted centralized cataloging of books, which became the standard practice at the Library of Congress. He was elected to leadership positions in numerous library organizations at the local and national level. Cutter is remembered for the Cutter Expansive Classification, his system of giving standardized classification numbers to each book, and arranging them on shelves by that number so that books on similar topics would be shelved together.

Biography
Cutter was born in Boston, Massachusetts. His aunt was an employee of the regional library in Boston. In 1856 Cutter was enrolled into Harvard Divinity School. He was appointed assistant librarian of the divinity school while still a student there and served in that capacity from 1857 to 1859. During that time, Cutter began designing a distinct cataloging schema for the library's outdated system. The catalog, dating from 1840, had a lack of order after the acquisition of 4,000 volumes from the collection of Professor Gottfried Christian Friedrich Lücke of the University of Göttingen, which added much depth to the Divinity School Library's collection.

During the 1857–1858 school year, Cutter rearranged the library collection on the shelves into broad subject categories along with classmate Charles Noyes Forbes. During the winter break of 1858–1859, they arranged the collection into a single listing alphabetically by author. This project was finished by the time Cutter graduated in 1859. By 1860 Cutter was already a seasoned staff member of the library and a full-time librarian. He became a journeyman to the chief cataloger and assistant librarian to Ezra Abbot. At Harvard College Cutter developed a new form of index catalog, using cards instead of published volumes, containing both an author index and a "classed catalog" or a rudimentary form of subject index.

In 1868 the Boston Athenæum library elected Cutter as its head librarian. His first assignment was to organize and aggregate the inventory of the library and develop a catalog from that and to publish a complete dictionary catalog for their collection. The previous librarian and assistants had been working on this, but much of the work was sub par and, according to Cutter, needed to be redone. This did not sit well with the trustees who wanted to get a catalog published as soon as possible. However, the catalog was revised and published in five volumes and is known as the Athenæum Catalogue. Cutter was the librarian at the Boston Athenaeum for twenty-five years (1869-1892).

In 1876, Cutter was hired by the United States Bureau of Education to help write a report about the state of libraries for the Centennial. Part two of this report was his Rules for a Printed Dictionary Catalogue (1876). This catalog was included in the organization's publication Public Libraries in the United States of America: Their History, Condition, and Management. Cutter implemented many ideologies familiar to contemporary librarians during his time at the Athenaeum. Cutter introduced characteristic structures and philosophies such as inter-library loan and furnishing every book with a pouch in the rear to encase a card in order to keep track of the item's circulating status.

Cutter served as editor of the Library Journal from 1891 to 1893. Of the many articles he wrote during this time, one of the most famous was an article called "The Buffalo Public Library in 1983". In it, he wrote what he thought a library would be like one hundred years in the future. He spent a lot of time discussing practicalities, such as how the library arranged adequate lighting and controlled moisture in the air to preserve the books.

In 1880 Cutter introduced an avant-garde and divergent system of cataloging he termed the Cutter Expansive Classification. This system incorporated seven levels of classification with the most basic libraries operating at the first level and the grandest, most distinguished institutions utilizing the seventh level, and it was Cutter's aspiration to orchestrate a classification system for every type of library. The classification system, or scheme, utilized an alpha-numeric methodology used to abbreviate authors' names and generate unique call numbers known as "Cutter numbers" or "Cutter codes". This scheme, on which the current Library of Congress cataloging system is partially based, in turn laid the foundation for the Library of Congress Subject Headings and the Sears List of Subject Headings. When Cutter began to delegate a new system for the library he initially chose the Dewey Decimal Classification, however he determined it was more beneficial to assign a more distinct adaptation for the collection. Even though Cutter's Expansive Classification was recognized as a significant contribution to libraries and to the burgeoning field of library science, Cutter himself did not champion its success nor did he anticipate future editions of his system. Nevertheless, his "Cutter numbers" survived and are still used in libraries today.

Cutter did not find the Dewey system practical for his cataloging purposes, and indeed, Dewey and he often experienced tensions with one another while constituting the American Library Association. of which they were two of the 100 founding members in 1876. Nevertheless, he was regarded as an accomplished and sophisticated librarian and cataloger. Cutter was commissioned on at least one occasion to propose an architectural conception for the University of Toronto Library which had recently been consumed by a massive conflagration. In response to the library's requests, Cutter admonished, "It is of little use to have a fire proof stack if the rest of the building gets afire". The ever austere Cutter with his competence in cataloging expressed this, "The catalogers ought to be put near the catalog; they have continual reason to refer to it". Cutter then continued his cataloging tirade by rebuking their present approach and stating, "Catalog work cannot be carried on economically unless there is plenty of shelf room near for bibliographic authorities and some empty shelves in the room to hold books waiting to be cataloged".

In 1893, Cutter submitted a letter to the trustees that he would not seek to renew his contract at the end of the year. However, there was an opportunity for him in Northampton, Massachusetts. Judge Charles E. Forbes left a considerable amount of money to the town to start a library. This was Cutter's chance to institute his ideas from the ground up. He developed a cataloging system called the expansive classification system. It was to have seven levels of classification, each with increasing specificity. Thus small libraries who did not like having to deal with unnecessarily long classification numbers could use lower levels and still be specific enough for their purpose. Larger libraries could use the more specific tables since they needed to be more specific to keep subjects separate. He died in 1903 before he could finish this task. At Forbes, Cutter set up the art and music department and encouraged children of nearby schools to exhibit their art. He also established branch libraries and instituted a traveling library system much like the bookmobile. Today, Charles Ammi Cutter might be surprised to see his own portrait hanging over the reference librarians' desk in the Forbes Library in Northampton. His roll top desk is also in the office currently occupied by the recently elected director of the library.

Cutter died on September 6, 1903, in Walpole, New Hampshire.

Predictions

 * "The desks had... a little keyboard at each, connected by a wire. The reader had only to find the mark of his book in the catalog, touch a few lettered or numbered keys, and [the book] appeared after an astonishingly short interval."

Charles Cutter "The Buffalo Public Library in 1983" (Library journal 1883)

title: Charles Ammi Cutter


text:
Experimental Breeder Reactor I

Experimental Breeder Reactor I (EBR-I) is a decommissioned research reactor and U.S. National Historic Landmark located in the desert about 18 mi southeast of Arco, Idaho. It was the world's first breeder reactor. At 1:50 p.m. on December 20, 1951, it became one of the world's first electricity-generating nuclear power plants when it produced sufficient electricity to illuminate four 200-watt light bulbs. EBR-I subsequently generated sufficient electricity to power its building, and continued to be used for experimental purposes until it was decommissioned in 1964. The museum is open for visitors from late May until early September.

History
As part of the National Reactor Testing Station (since 2005 Idaho National Laboratory), EBR-I's construction started in late 1949. The reactor was designed and constructed by a team led by Walter Zinn at the Argonne National Laboratory Idaho site, known as Argonne-West. In its early stages, the reactor plant was referred to as Chicago Pile 4 (CP-4) and Zinn's Infernal Pile. Installation of the reactor at EBR-I took place in early 1951 (the first reactor in Idaho) and it began power operation on August 24, 1951. On December 20 of that year, EBR-I produced electricity for its first time. The following day, the reactor produced enough power to light the whole building. The EBR-I produced 200 kW of electricity out of 1.4 MW of heat generated by the reactor.

The production of electricity at EBR-I is the first time that a reactor created in-house available electricity, and it is sometimes misreferred to as the first time that a nuclear reactor has ever created electricity. However, the world's first electricity produced by a nuclear reactor occurred during an experiment 3 years earlier in September 1948 at the X-10 Graphite Reactor at the Oak Ridge National Lab in Tennessee. Later in 1955, another nuclear milestone was reached when an experimental boiling water reactor plant called BORAX-III (also designed, built, and operated by Argonne National Laboratory) was connected to external loads, powering the nearby city of Arco, Idaho, the first time a city had been powered solely by nuclear power.

The design purpose of EBR-I was not to produce electricity but instead to validate nuclear physics theory that suggested that a breeder reactor should be possible. In 1953, experiments revealed the reactor was producing additional fuel during fission, thus confirming the hypothesis. On November 29, 1955, the reactor at EBR-I suffered a partial meltdown during a coolant flow test. The flow test was trying to determine the cause of unexpected reactor responses to changes in coolant flow. It was subsequently repaired for further experiments, which determined that thermal expansion of the fuel rods and the thick plates supporting the fuel rods was the cause of the unexpected reactor response.

Besides being one of the world's first to generate electricity from atomic energy, EBR-I was also the world's first breeder reactor and the first to use plutonium fuel to generate electricity (see also the Clementine nuclear reactor). EBR-I's initial purpose was to prove Enrico Fermi's fuel breeding principle, a principle that a nuclear reactor can produce more fuel atoms than it consumes. EBR-I proved this principle.

Design
EBR-I used uranium metal fuel and NaK primary coolant. It was in this identical to the initial configuration of the later Dounreay Fast Reactor which first went critical in 1959.

The primary liquid metal coolant flows by gravity from the supply tank through the reactor core, where it absorbs heat. Then, the coolant flows to heat the exchanger, where it gives up this heat to the secondary coolant, another liquid metal. The primary coolant is returned to the supply tank by an electromagnetic pump. The secondary coolant is pumped to the boiler, where it gives up its heat to water, generating steam. This steam passes to the turbine, which is how electricity is produced. This steam then condenses and returned to the boiler by a water pump.

Decommission and legacy
EBR-I was deactivated by Argonne in 1964 and replaced with a new reactor, Experimental Breeder Reactor II.

It was declared a National Historic Landmark in 1965 with its dedication ceremony held on August 25, 1966, led by President Lyndon Johnson and Glenn T. Seaborg. It was also declared an IEEE Milestone in 2004.

title: Experimental Breeder Reactor I


text:
User:DJWOLF

Composer and music scholar. Budapest, Hungary.

title: User:DJWOLF


text:
Talk:Experimental Breeder Reactor I

Meltdown
Here, I found this on the internet...

The U.S. experience with "fast breeder" reactors argues against restarting the Fast Flux Test Facility. In November 1955, the first U.S. "power reactor" ever to produce electricity, the EBR-1, (experimental breeder reactor) melted down during testing. Rather than scramming the reactor, the operator mistakenly hit the button for slow shut down, and in the few seconds it took to press the correct button, approximately half of the reactor core melted down. The public was not made aware of this meltdown until Lewis Strauss, head of the Atomic Energy Commission, and the man who claimed nuclear power would be "too cheap to meter," was confronted by the Wall Street Journal and had to admit his ignorance of the accident.

 * Cut the from the page and redirected. Mark Richards 00:08, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Merge
Note: I do not believe it is appropriate to merge this with EBR II. The two were in different locations, run by different organizations, and ran for different periods. Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) 18:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree with not merging. Calling twe two unrelated however is the other extreme. I propose to delete "unrelated" as you make enough distance, so to speak, with just stating:
 * "There is also a separate facility called Experimental Breeder Reactor II."

Pukkie (talk) 12:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

to cheap to meter

 * re: "Too cheap to meter:" IAnyone in the power industry should have understood that there are huge costs associated with the production and distribution of power, even if the heat source to create the steam were free. No one gives away switchyard, transmission system, aux power, operators, maintenance force, unit transformers, boilers, or turbines free. Edison (talk) 05:02, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

First reactor
EBR-1 was the first reactor to generate power. Is it worth mentioning the first actual nuclear power plants? The first was, I believe, Obninsk. DonPMitchell (talk) 02:34, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

"Atomic energy was successfully harvested for the first time"--wasn't there actually a tiny generator at Oak Ridge immediately after the war? I'm not the expert to edit the main page, but I think the museum there shows the first electricity-generating apparatus.

Disputed
Nuclear power plant contains this: "Electricity was generated by a nuclear reactor for the first time ever on September 3, 1948 at the X-10 Graphite Reactor in Oak Ridge, Tennessee in the United States, and was the first nuclear power station to power a light bulb."

I don't think this article should contain the claim it does, and I am marking it as dubious on that basis. --John (talk) 23:27, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

No, indeed, X-10 did not generate electricity
A confusion might be arising here from the fact that the English word power is overly polysemic. X-10 generated a lot of thermal power indeed (up to 500 kW it seems), but I cannot find any indication that this heat was ever used to generate electricity. The goal here was to synthetize plutonium as a fission product, and heat was, in this instance, an undesirable by-product that had to be evacuated.

After thoughtfull consideration and carefull reviewing of internal links and external sources, I hereby take the decision to remove any reference to X-10 as producing electrical power.

On a side note, I don't suppose that it is reasonable at all to cite flicker.com as a source.

Noliscient (talk) 13:53, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

 * It appears the X-10 indeed ran an experiment that used thermal heat from the reactor to generate electricity. This youtube video shows diagrams of the experiment and a plaque at the X-10 site commemorating the event. I updated the EBR-I article to clarify the conflict. Ajnosek (talk) 16:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Design
I was somewhat appalled to find no mention of the fuel or coolant. These are important parts of the historical significance of EBR-I (and what I was looking for when I came here... it was an LMFBR but neither sodium cooled nor oxide fueled as I now discover, while EBR-II went to sodium cooling but retained the metallic fuel). I've made a tiny but referenced start to a section on its design. Andrewa (talk) 15:52, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Experimental Breeder Reactor I