text:
National Center for Policy Analysis

The National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) was a non-profit American think tank

whose goals were to develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control. Topics it addressed include reforms in health care, taxes, Social Security, welfare, education, and environmental regulation.

The NCPA was founded in February 1983 and ceased operation in mid-2017, announcing it had faced three years of serious financial trouble. An NCPA website is being maintained by a former board member at NCPAThinkTank.org, where publications have been archived. A history of the organization and summary of its accomplishments may be found at the Goodman Institute.

History
NCPA was founded by British businessman Antony Fisher together with Dallas businessmen Russell Perry (CEO of Republic Financial Services), Wayne Calloway (CEO of Frito-Lay), John F. Stephens (CEO of Employers Insurance of Texas), and Jere W. Thompson (CEO of the Southland Corporation).

Its founding president was libertarian economist John C. Goodman. Its first offices were at the University of Dallas. The organization later had offices in Dallas and Washington, D.C.. An NCPA website is being maintained by a former board member at NCPAThinkTank.org. Publications have been archived at www.ncpathinktank.org/pdfs. A history of the organization and summary of its accomplishments may be found at Goodmaninstitute.org

In June 2014, the NCPA board and Goodman accused each other of misconduct, and Goodman left the organization.

Leadership of the NCPA included:
 * Steve Ivy, Chairman of the Board. July 1, 2016
 * James H. Amos Jr., President and CEO July 1, 2016
 * Allen West, Executive Director, July 1, 2016

Its first offices were at the University of Dallas. The organization later had offices in Dallas and Washington, D.C.

Issues
Media attention focused on the NCPA (for example, U.S. News & World Report, Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel, Orange County Register ) for recommending pension reform legislation including automatic enrollment into companies' 401(k) plans.

The NCPA was a member of the Cooler Heads Coalition, an organization created by the now-defunct non-profit group Consumer Alert that described itself as "an alliance of some two dozen non-profit public policy groups concerned about the implications of the Kyoto Protocol for consumers," and which generally rejected the scientific basis for anthropogenic global warming. NCPA has also attempted to debunk peak oil claims.

Funding
NCPA's revenues for the fiscal year ending 9/30/14 were $5,281,913 against expenses of $4,544, 953; for the fiscal year ending 9/30/10 were $4,222,403 against expenses of $5,888,951; for the fiscal year ending 9/30/09 were $4,222,403 against expenses of $7,569,793; for the fiscal year ending 9/30/08 they were revenues of $6,603,905 against expenses of $4,898,261. As of November 2013, the organization's web site reported that for 2011 its funding breakdown was 52% from foundations, 21% from individuals and 22% from corporations. The press release it issued in July 2017 announcing its dissolution attributed the Board's decision to cease operations immediately as necessitated by three years of financial difficulty.

According to Greenpeace, the NCPA received at least $570,000 from Koch Industries in the eleven-year period ending in 2008.

In 1992, The New York Times reported that the NCPA was partially funded by the insurance industry.

title: National Center for Policy Analysis


text:
Skee-Ball

Skee-Ball is an arcade game and one of the first redemption games. It is played by rolling a ball up an inclined lane and over a "ball-hop" hump (resembling a ski jump) that jumps the ball into bullseye rings. The object of the game is to collect as many points as possible by having the ball fall into holes in the rings which have progressively increasing point values the higher the ring is.

History
Skee-Ball was invented and patented in 1908 by Joseph Fourestier Simpson, a resident of Vineland, New Jersey. On December 8, 1908, Simpson was granted for his "Game". Simpson licensed the game to John W. Harper and William Nice Jr. who created the Skee-Ball Alley Company and began marketing the thirty-two-foot games in early 1909. The first advertisement for Skee-Ball appeared on April 17, 1909, in Billboard magazine. About two months later the first alley was sold. Alleys continued to sell slowly over the next few years.

In January 1910, Nice died unexpectedly, leaving Harper without the necessary funding for promotion. The company struggled for the rest of 1910, 1911 and 1912. Simpson worked with Harper, but they were having difficulty making any headway, and by December 1912 the Skee-Ball Alley Company was moribund.

In 1910, Jonathan Dickinson Este became enamored of the game, and in 1913 he helped Simpson and John W. Harper to revitalize the company. Este installed two alleys at a Princeton location, near the university, to see how well they would do. After a few weeks, interest in the game fizzled, but in 1914 Este installed Skee-Ball in rented space on Atlantic City's boardwalk. He purchased the patent and all rights to the game from Simpson, incorporated The J. D. Este Company to build and market the game, and hired Harper as general manager. In 1917 Este enlisted in the military and turned over operation of the company to his business partners. After his return in 1919 he sold The J. D. Este Company to his partners and exited the business.

Este's business partners renamed the company the "Skee-Ball Company". They operated the manufacturing and distribution of the game until 1928 when the game was sold to Herman Bergoffen, Hugo Piesen, and Maurice Piesen, who incorporated the National Skee-Ball Company. In 1929, the National Skee-Ball Company of Coney Island, New York, trademarked the name Skee-Ball.

The National Skee-Ball Company organized the first national Skee-Ball tournament at Skee-Ball Stadium in Atlantic City. The tournament alleys were shorter than the alleys that Simpson had built. Over one hundred contestants qualified to play in the tournament. $2400 in prizes were awarded to the winners.

In 1935, Bergoffen died unexpectedly in Atlantic City, leaving Hugo and Maurice Piesen to run the National Skee-Ball Company. In June 1936, The Rudolph Wurlitzer Manufacturing Company bought all of the rights to the game and set up a games division. Wurlitzer produced more than five thousand Skee-Ball alleys and began selling them in December 1936, but they ceased production of alleys in 1937 as demand weakened. Beginning in 1942, Wurlitzer shifted its focus from amusement devices to the war effort by building equipment for the United States government.

As the war drew to a close, the Philadelphia Toboggan Company (PTC) contacted Wurlitzer to ask about either licensing the rights to Skee-Ball or selling it outright. By January 1946, PTC was the new owner and manufacturer of Skee-Ball. That lasted until 1977 when Skee-Ball, Inc., was spun-off from PTC under the same ownership. By 1984, Joe Sladek and three other partners had bought the company. Over the next several years Sladek bought out his partners and renamed the company Skee-Ball Amusement Games Inc. In February 2016, Bay Tek Games, Inc., of Pulaski, Wisconsin, acquired Skee-Ball Amusement Games, Inc., acquiring the rights to the legacy Skee-Ball game and trademark in the process, and moved its manufacturing to Pulaski.

Super Ball!!, a version of skee-ball, was a pricing game on the American game show The Price Is Right from 1981 to 1998.

Skee-Ball is now a social sport played in bars in North America, with leagues forming under various banners. In recent years, it has inspired the development of professional Woodball, a sport version of the game known for its unique blend of skill and strategy.

A beach version of Skee-Ball played in the Carolinas, with scoring resembling cornhole, is called Flyball. The inventors first publicized it on social media in March 2023.

Gameplay
Gameplay varies depending on the particular machine but, normally, a player, after inserting appropriate payment, receives a queue of (usually nine) balls made of either polished Masonite or heavy plastic and each approximately three inches in diameter. Each machine has an inclined ramp, 10–13 feet long, up which the player must roll the balls. A sudden increase in incline at the end of the ramp (called the "ball-hop") launches the balls above the plane of the ramp toward a series of rings that direct the balls into holes of varying point values, with the smallest and hardest to reach usually giving the most points. The machine dispenses coupons to the player, based on scoring thresholds, either during the game or after the game ends. The coupons are typically traded at the arcade for prizes. Some machines award large coupon bonuses to players who attain or surpass a posted high score.

At traveling carnival midways, prizes are typically won by scoring a certain minimum number of points in one game. This requires an attendant to hand out prizes immediately at the end of games, which is not common in arcade settings. Usually multiple small prizes can be traded for medium prizes and multiple mediums for large. Perfect or nearly perfect scores earn the largest prize available, while very low scores may earn nothing at all.

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

title: Skee-Ball


text:
Svenska Vitterhetssamfundet

Svenska Vitterhetssamfundet (SVS) or The Swedish Society for Belles-Lettres is a non-profit membership organization formed in 1907 for the purpose of publishing scholarly text critical editions of works by the most important authors in Swedish literature. Membership is 300 kr. (approximately 30 euro) per year and includes a subscription of the volumes published in that year.

President

 * 1) 1907–1918: Karl Warburg
 * 2) 1918–1947: Otto Sylwan
 * 3) 1947–1969: Elias Wessén
 * 4) 1969–1980: Carl Ivar Ståhle
 * 5) 1980–1984: Bertil Molde
 * 6) 1984–2013: Sture Allén
 * 7) 2013–2019: Anders Olsson
 * 8) 2019–    : Paula Henrikson

Publications
Between 1910 and 2004, the society has published 250 volumes covering 30-some authors. The first to be presented in full text on the Internet is Carl Jonas Love Almqvist. The publishing plan for this author alone comprises 51 volumes of which 11 are now available online.

Swedish authors published by SVS
 * Olof von Dalin (1708-1763)
 * Carl Gustaf Leopold (1756-1829)
 * Erik Johan Stagnelius (1793-1823)
 * Lars Johansson, "Lasse Lucidor" (1638-1674)
 * Carl Michael Bellman (1740-1795)
 * Anna Maria Lenngren (1754-1817)
 * Gunno Eurelius Dahlstierna (1661-1709)
 * Georg Stiernhielm (1598-1672)
 * Johan Henric Kellgren (1751-1795)
 * Carl August Ehrensvärd (1745-1800)
 * Hedvig Charlotta Nordenflycht (1718-1763)
 * Erik Sjöberg, "Vitalis" (1794-1828)
 * Jacob Wallenberg (1746-1778)
 * Bengt Lidner (1757-1793)
 * Thomas Thorild (1759-1808)
 * Johan Ludvig Runeberg (1804-1877)
 * Johan Runius (1679-1713)
 * Viktor Rydberg (1828-1895)
 * August Strindberg (1849-1912)
 * Carl Jonas Love Almqvist (1793-1866)
 * Johan Olof Wallin (1779-1839)
 * Per Daniel Amadeus Atterbom (1790-1855)
 * Gustaf Rosenhane, "Skogekär Bergbo" (1619-1684)
 * Fredrika Bremer (1801-1865)
 * Emilie Flygare-Carlén (1807-1892)
 * Samuel Columbus (1642-1679)
 * Urban Hiärne (1641-1724)
 * Israel Holmström (1661-1708)
 * Sophie von Knorring (1797-1848)
 * Hans Gustaf Rålamb (1716-1790)
 * Haquin Spegel (1645-1714)
 * Johan Gabriel Werving (1675-1715)

title: Svenska Vitterhetssamfundet


text:
Frenet–Serret formulas

In differential geometry, the Frenet–Serret formulas describe the kinematic properties of a particle moving along a differentiable curve in three-dimensional Euclidean space $$\mathbb{R}^{3}$$, or the geometric properties of the curve itself irrespective of any motion. More specifically, the formulas describe the derivatives of the so-called tangent, normal, and binormal unit vectors in terms of each other. The formulas are named after the two French mathematicians who independently discovered them: Jean Frédéric Frenet, in his thesis of 1847, and Joseph Alfred Serret, in 1851. Vector notation and linear algebra currently used to write these formulas were not yet available at the time of their discovery.

The tangent, normal, and binormal unit vectors, often called T, N, and B, or collectively the Frenet–Serret frame or TNB frame, together form an orthonormal basis spanning $$\mathbb{R}^{3}$$ and are defined as follows: The Frenet–Serret formulas are:
 * T is the unit vector tangent to the curve, pointing in the direction of motion.
 * N is the normal unit vector, the derivative of T with respect to the arclength parameter of the curve, divided by its length.
 * B is the binormal unit vector, the cross product of T and N.

\begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d} \mathbf{T} }{ \mathrm{d} s } &= \kappa\mathbf{N}, \\ \frac{\mathrm{d} \mathbf{N} }{ \mathrm{d} s } &= -\kappa\mathbf{T}+\tau\mathbf{B},\\ \frac{\mathrm{d} \mathbf{B} }{ \mathrm{d} s } &= -\tau\mathbf{N}, \end{align} $$ where d/ds is the derivative with respect to arclength, κ is the curvature, and τ is the torsion of the curve. The two scalars κ and τ effectively define the curvature and torsion of a space curve. The associated collection, T, N, B, κ, and τ, is called the Frenet–Serret apparatus. Intuitively, curvature measures the failure of a curve to be a straight line, while torsion measures the failure of a curve to be planar.

Definitions

Let r(t) be a curve in Euclidean space, representing the position vector of the particle as a function of time. The Frenet–Serret formulas apply to curves which are non-degenerate, which roughly means that they have nonzero curvature. More formally, in this situation the velocity vector r′(t) and the acceleration vector r′′(t) are required not to be proportional.

Let s(t) represent the arc length which the particle has moved along the curve in time t. The quantity s is used to give the curve traced out by the trajectory of the particle a natural parametrization by arc length (i.e. arc-length parametrization), since many different particle paths may trace out the same geometrical curve by traversing it at different rates. In detail, s is given by
 * $$s(t) = \int_0^t \left\|\mathbf{r}'(\sigma)\right\|d\sigma.$$

Moreover, since we have assumed that r′ ≠ 0, it follows that s(t) is a strictly monotonically increasing function. Therefore, it is possible to solve for t as a function of s, and thus to write r(s) = r(t(s)). The curve is thus parametrized in a preferred manner by its arc length.

With a non-degenerate curve r(s), parameterized by its arc length, it is now possible to define the Frenet–Serret frame (or TNB frame):   The tangent unit vector T is defined as

$$ \mathbf{T} := \frac{ \mathrm{d} \mathbf{r} }{ \mathrm{d} s } .$$   The normal unit vector N is defined as

$$ \mathbf{N} := { \frac{ \mathrm{d} \mathbf{T} }{ \mathrm{d} s } \over \left\| \frac{ \mathrm{d} \mathbf{T}}{ \mathrm{d} s}  \right\| },$$ from which it follows, since T always has unit magnitude, that N (the change of T) is always perpendicular to T, since there is no change in length of T. Note that by calling curvature $$ \kappa = \left\| \frac{ \mathrm{d} \mathbf{T}}{ \mathrm{d} s}\right\|$$ we automatically obtain the first relation.    The binormal unit vector B is defined as the cross product of T and N:

$$ \mathbf{B} := \mathbf{T} \times \mathbf{N},$$

from which it follows that B is always perpendicular to both T and N. Thus, the three unit vectors T, N, and B are all perpendicular to each other.

The Frenet–Serret formulas are:

\begin{align} \frac{\mathrm{d} \mathbf{T} }{ \mathrm{d} s } &= \kappa\mathbf{N}, \\ \frac{\mathrm{d} \mathbf{N} }{ \mathrm{d} s } &= -\kappa\mathbf{T}+\tau\mathbf{B},\\ \frac{\mathrm{d} \mathbf{B} }{ \mathrm{d} s } &= -\tau\mathbf{N}, \end{align} $$

where $$\kappa$$ is the curvature and $$\tau$$ is the torsion.

The Frenet–Serret formulas are also known as Frenet–Serret theorem, and can be stated more concisely using matrix notation:
 * $$ \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{T'} \\ \mathbf{N'} \\ \mathbf{B'} \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix}

0 & \kappa & 0 \\ -\kappa & 0 & \tau \\ 0 & -\tau & 0 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{T} \\ \mathbf{N} \\ \mathbf{B} \end{bmatrix}.$$

This matrix is skew-symmetric.

Formulas in n dimensions
The Frenet–Serret formulas were generalized to higher-dimensional Euclidean spaces by Camille Jordan in 1874.

Suppose that r(s) is a smooth curve in $$\mathbb{R}^{n}$$, and that the first n derivatives of r are linearly independent. The vectors in the Frenet–Serret frame are an orthonormal basis constructed by applying the Gram-Schmidt process to the vectors (r′(s), r′′(s), ..., r(n)(s)).

In detail, the unit tangent vector is the first Frenet vector e1(s) and is defined as

 * $$\mathbf{e}_1(s) = \frac{\overline{\mathbf{e}_1}(s)} {\| \overline{\mathbf{e}_1}(s) \|}$$

where

 * $$\overline{\mathbf{e}_1}(s) = \mathbf{r}'(s)$$

The normal vector, sometimes called the curvature vector, indicates the deviance of the curve from being a straight line. It is defined as
 * $$\overline{\mathbf{e}_2}(s) = \mathbf{r}(s) - \langle \mathbf{r}(s), \mathbf{e}_1(s) \rangle \, \mathbf{e}_1(s)$$

Its normalized form, the unit normal vector, is the second Frenet vector e2(s) and defined as

 * $$\mathbf{e}_2(s) = \frac{\overline{\mathbf{e}_2}(s)} {\| \overline{\mathbf{e}_2}(s) \|}

$$

The tangent and the normal vector at point s define the osculating plane at point r(s).

The remaining vectors in the frame (the binormal, trinormal, etc.) are defined similarly by

 * $$\begin{align}

\mathbf{e}_{j}(s) = \frac{\overline{\mathbf{e}_{j}}(s)}{\|\overline{\mathbf{e}_{j}}(s) \|} \mbox{, } \end{align} $$
 * $$\begin{align}

\overline{\mathbf{e}_{j}}(s) = \mathbf{r}^{(j)}(s) - \sum_{i=1}^{j-1} \langle \mathbf{r}^{(j)}(s), \mathbf{e}_i(s) \rangle \, \mathbf{e}_i(s). \end{align} $$

The last vector in the frame is defined by the cross-product of the first $$n-1$$ vectors:
 * $${\mathbf{e}_n}(s)={\mathbf{e}_1}(s)\times{\mathbf{e}_2}(s)\times\dots\times{\mathbf{e}_{n-2}}(s)\times{\mathbf{e}_{n-1}}(s)$$

The real valued functions used below χi(s) are called generalized curvature and are defined as

 * $$\chi_i(s) = \frac{\langle \mathbf{e}_i'(s), \mathbf{e}_{i+1}(s) \rangle}{\| \mathbf{r}'(s) \|} $$

The Frenet–Serret formulas, stated in matrix language, are

 * $$\begin{align}

\begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{e}_1'(s)\\ \vdots \\ \mathbf{e}_n'(s) \\ \end{bmatrix}

= \\ \end{align}

\| \mathbf{r}'(s) \| \cdot

\begin{align} \begin{bmatrix} 0 & \chi_1(s) &             &           0 \\ -\chi_1(s) &   \ddots &         \ddots &             \\ &   \ddots &              0 & \chi_{n-1}(s) \\ 0 &         & -\chi_{n-1}(s) &             0 \\ \end{bmatrix}

\begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{e}_1(s) \\ \vdots \\ \mathbf{e}_n(s) \\ \end{bmatrix} \end{align} $$

Notice that as defined here, the generalized curvatures and the frame may differ slightly from the convention found in other sources. The top curvature $$\chi_{n-1}$$ (also called the torsion, in this context) and the last vector in the frame $$ \mathbf{e}_{n} $$, differ by a sign

 * $$ \operatorname{or}\left(\mathbf{r}^{(1)},\dots,\mathbf{r}^{(n)}\right) $$

(the orientation of the basis) from the usual torsion. The Frenet–Serret formulas are invariant under flipping the sign of both $$\chi_{n-1}$$ and $$ \mathbf{e}_{n} $$, and this change of sign makes the frame positively oriented. As defined above, the frame inherits its orientation from the jet of $$ \mathbf{r} $$.

Proof of the Frenet-Serret formulas
The first Frenet-Serret formula holds by the definition of the normal N and the curvature κ, and the third Frenet-Serret formula holds by the definition of the torsion τ. Thus what is needed is to show the second Frenet-Serret formula.

Since T, N, and B are orthogonal unit vectors with B = T × N, one also has T = N × B and N = B × T. Differentiating the last equation with respect to s gives

∂N / ∂s = (∂B / ∂s) × T + B × (∂T / ∂s)

Using that ∂B / ∂s = -τN and ∂T / ∂s = κN, this becomes

∂N / ∂s = -τ (N × T) + κ (B × N)

= τB - κT

This is exactly the second Frenet-Serret formula.

Kinematics of the frame

The Frenet–Serret frame consisting of the tangent T, normal N, and binormal B collectively forms an orthonormal basis of 3-space. At each point of the curve, this attaches a frame of reference or rectilinear coordinate system (see image).

The Frenet–Serret formulas admit a kinematic interpretation. Imagine that an observer moves along the curve in time, using the attached frame at each point as their coordinate system. The Frenet–Serret formulas mean that this coordinate system is constantly rotating as an observer moves along the curve. Hence, this coordinate system is always non-inertial. The angular momentum of the observer's coordinate system is proportional to the Darboux vector of the frame.

Concretely, suppose that the observer carries an (inertial) top (or gyroscope) with them along the curve. If the axis of the top points along the tangent to the curve, then it will be observed to rotate about its axis with angular velocity -τ relative to the observer's non-inertial coordinate system. If, on the other hand, the axis of the top points in the binormal direction, then it is observed to rotate with angular velocity -κ. This is easily visualized in the case when the curvature is a positive constant and the torsion vanishes. The observer is then in uniform circular motion. If the top points in the direction of the binormal, then by conservation of angular momentum it must rotate in the opposite direction of the circular motion. In the limiting case when the curvature vanishes, the observer's normal precesses about the tangent vector, and similarly the top will rotate in the opposite direction of this precession.

The general case is illustrated below. There are further illustrations on Wikimedia.

Applications
The kinematics of the frame have many applications in the sciences.
 * In the life sciences, particularly in models of microbial motion, considerations of the Frenet–Serret frame have been used to explain the mechanism by which a moving organism in a viscous medium changes its direction.
 * In physics, the Frenet–Serret frame is useful when it is impossible or inconvenient to assign a natural coordinate system for a trajectory. Such is often the case, for instance, in relativity theory. Within this setting, Frenet–Serret frames have been used to model the precession of a gyroscope in a gravitational well.

Graphical Illustrations

 * 1) Example of a moving Frenet basis (T in blue, N in green, B in purple) along Viviani's curve.

 * 1) On the example of a torus knot, the tangent vector T, the normal vector N, and the binormal vector B, along with the curvature κ(s), and the torsion τ(s) are displayed. At the peaks of the torsion function the rotation of the Frenet–Serret frame (T,N,B) around the tangent vector is clearly visible.

 * 1) The kinematic significance of the curvature is best illustrated with plane curves (having constant torsion equal to zero). See the page on curvature of plane curves.

Frenet–Serret formulas in calculus
The Frenet–Serret formulas are frequently introduced in courses on multivariable calculus as a companion to the study of space curves such as the helix. A helix can be characterized by the height 2πh and radius r of a single turn. The curvature and torsion of a helix (with constant radius) are given by the formulas
 * $$ \kappa = \frac{r}{r^2+h^2} $$
 * $$ \tau = \pm\frac{h}{r^2+h^2}. $$

The sign of the torsion is determined by the right-handed or left-handed sense in which the helix twists around its central axis. Explicitly, the parametrization of a single turn of a right-handed helix with height 2πh and radius r is
 * x = r cos t
 * y = r sin t
 * z = h t
 * (0 ≤ t ≤ 2 π)

and, for a left-handed helix,
 * x = r cos t
 * y = −r sin t
 * z = h t
 * (0 ≤ t ≤ 2 π).

Note that these are not the arc length parametrizations (in which case, each of x, y, and z would need to be divided by $$\sqrt{h^2+r^2}$$.)

In his expository writings on the geometry of curves, Rudy Rucker employs the model of a slinky to explain the meaning of the torsion and curvature. The slinky, he says, is characterized by the property that the quantity
 * $$ A^2 = h^2+r^2$$

remains constant if the slinky is vertically stretched out along its central axis. (Here 2πh is the height of a single twist of the slinky, and r the radius.) In particular, curvature and torsion are complementary in the sense that the torsion can be increased at the expense of curvature by stretching out the slinky.

Taylor expansion
Repeatedly differentiating the curve and applying the Frenet–Serret formulas gives the following Taylor approximation to the curve near s = 0 if the curve is parameterized by arclength:
 * $$\mathbf r(s) = \mathbf r(0) + \left(s-\frac{s^3\kappa^2(0)}{6}\right)\mathbf T(0) + \left(\frac{s^2\kappa(0)}{2}+\frac{s^3\kappa'(0)}{6}\right)\mathbf N(0) + \left(\frac{s^3\kappa(0)\tau(0)}{6}\right)\mathbf B(0) + o(s^3).$$

For a generic curve with nonvanishing torsion, the projection of the curve onto various coordinate planes in the T, N, B coordinate system at s = 0 have the following interpretations:

 * The osculating plane is the plane containing T and N. The projection of the curve onto this plane has the form:$$\mathbf r(0) + s\mathbf T(0) + \frac{s^2\kappa(0)}{2} \mathbf N(0) + o(s^2).$$This is a parabola up to terms of order $$O(s^2) $$, whose curvature at 0 is equal to κ(0). The osculating plane has the special property that the distance from the curve to the osculating plane is $$O(s^3)$$, while the distance from the curve to any other plane is no better than $$O(s^2) $$. This can be seen from the above Taylor expansion. Thus in a sense the osculating plane is the closest plane to the curve at a given point.

 * The normal plane is the plane containing N and B. The projection of the curve onto this plane has the form:$$ \mathbf r(0) + \left(\frac{s^2\kappa(0)}{2}+\frac{s^3\kappa'(0)}{6}\right)\mathbf N(0) + \left(\frac{s^3\kappa(0)\tau(0)}{6}\right)\mathbf B(0)+ o(s^3)$$which is a cuspidal cubic to order o(s3).
 * The rectifying plane is the plane containing T and B. The projection of the curve onto this plane is:$$\mathbf r(0) + \left(s-\frac{s^3\kappa^2(0)}{6}\right)\mathbf T(0) + \left(\frac{s^3\kappa(0)\tau(0)}{6}\right)\mathbf B(0)+ o(s^3)$$which traces out the graph of a cubic polynomial to order o(s3).

Ribbons and tubes
The Frenet–Serret apparatus allows one to define certain optimal ribbons and tubes centered around a curve. These have diverse applications in materials science and elasticity theory, as well as to computer graphics.

The Frenet ribbon along a curve C is the surface traced out by sweeping the line segment [−N,N] generated by the unit normal along the curve. This surface is sometimes confused with the tangent developable, which is the envelope E of the osculating planes of C. This is perhaps because both the Frenet ribbon and E exhibit similar properties along C. Namely, the tangent planes of both sheets of E, near the singular locus C where these sheets intersect, approach the osculating planes of C; the tangent planes of the Frenet ribbon along C are equal to these osculating planes. The Frenet ribbon is in general not developable.

Congruence of curves
In classical Euclidean geometry, one is interested in studying the properties of figures in the plane which are invariant under congruence, so that if two figures are congruent then they must have the same properties. The Frenet–Serret apparatus presents the curvature and torsion as numerical invariants of a space curve.

Roughly speaking, two curves C and C′ in space are congruent if one can be rigidly moved to the other. A rigid motion consists of a combination of a translation and a rotation. A translation moves one point of C to a point of C′. The rotation then adjusts the orientation of the curve C to line up with that of C′. Such a combination of translation and rotation is called a Euclidean motion. In terms of the parametrization r(t) defining the first curve C, a general Euclidean motion of C is a composite of the following operations:
 * (Translation) r(t) → r(t) + v, where v is a constant vector.
 * (Rotation) r(t) + v → M(r(t) + v), where M is the matrix of a rotation.

The Frenet–Serret frame is particularly well-behaved with regard to Euclidean motions. First, since T, N, and B can all be given as successive derivatives of the parametrization of the curve, each of them is insensitive to the addition of a constant vector to r(t). Intuitively, the TNB frame attached to r(t) is the same as the TNB frame attached to the new curve r(t) + v.

This leaves only the rotations to consider. Intuitively, if we apply a rotation M to the curve, then the TNB frame also rotates. More precisely, the matrix Q whose rows are the TNB vectors of the Frenet–Serret frame changes by the matrix of a rotation

 * $$ Q \rightarrow QM.$$

A fortiori, the matrix $dQ⁄ds$QT is unaffected by a rotation:

 * $$\frac{ \mathrm{d} (QM) }{ \mathrm{d} s} (QM)^\top = \frac{ \mathrm{d} Q}{ \mathrm{d} s } MM^\top Q^\top = \frac{ \mathrm{d} Q}{ \mathrm{d} s} Q^\top$$

since MMT = I for the matrix of a rotation.

Hence the entries κ and τ of $dQ⁄ds$QT are invariants of the curve under Euclidean motions: if a Euclidean motion is applied to a curve, then the resulting curve has the same curvature and torsion.

Moreover, using the Frenet–Serret frame, one can also prove the converse: any two curves having the same curvature and torsion functions must be congruent by a Euclidean motion. Roughly speaking, the Frenet–Serret formulas express the Darboux derivative of the TNB frame. If the Darboux derivatives of two frames are equal, then a version of the fundamental theorem of calculus asserts that the curves are congruent. In particular, the curvature and torsion are a complete set of invariants for a curve in three-dimensions.

Other expressions of the frame
The formulas given above for T, N, and B depend on the curve being given in terms of the arclength parameter. This is a natural assumption in Euclidean geometry, because the arclength is a Euclidean invariant of the curve. In the terminology of physics, the arclength parametrization is a natural choice of gauge. However, it may be awkward to work with in practice. A number of other equivalent expressions are available.

Suppose that the curve is given by r(t), where the parameter t need no longer be arclength. Then the unit tangent vector T may be written as

 * $$\mathbf{T}(t) = \frac{\mathbf{r}'(t)}{\|\mathbf{r}'(t)\|}$$

The normal vector N takes the form

 * $$\mathbf{N}(t) = \frac{\mathbf{T}'(t)}{\|\mathbf{T}'(t)\|} = \frac{\mathbf{r}'(t) \times \left(\mathbf{r}(t) \times \mathbf{r}'(t) \right)}{\left\|\mathbf{r}'(t)\right\| \, \left\|\mathbf{r}(t) \times \mathbf{r}'(t)\right\|}$$

The binormal B is then

 * $$\mathbf{B}(t) = \mathbf{T}(t)\times\mathbf{N}(t) = \frac{\mathbf{r}'(t)\times\mathbf{r}(t)}{\|\mathbf{r}'(t)\times\mathbf{r}(t)\|}$$

An alternative way to arrive at the same expressions is to take the first three derivatives of the curve r′(t), r′′(t), r′′′(t), and to apply the Gram-Schmidt process. The resulting ordered orthonormal basis is precisely the TNB frame. This procedure also generalizes to produce Frenet frames in higher dimensions.

In terms of the parameter t, the Frenet–Serret formulas pick up an additional factor of ||r′(t)|| because of the chain rule:

 * $$\frac{\mathrm{d} }{\mathrm{d} t} \begin{bmatrix}

\mathbf{T}\\ \mathbf{N}\\ \mathbf{B} \end{bmatrix} = \|\mathbf{r}'(t)\| \begin{bmatrix} 0&\kappa&0\\ -\kappa&0&\tau\\ 0&-\tau&0 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} \mathbf{T}\\ \mathbf{N}\\ \mathbf{B} \end{bmatrix} $$

Explicit expressions for the curvature and torsion may be computed. For example,

 * $$\kappa = \frac{\|\mathbf{r}'(t)\times\mathbf{r}''(t)\|}{\|\mathbf{r}'(t)\|^3}$$

The torsion may be expressed using a scalar triple product as follows,

 * $$\tau = \frac{[\mathbf{r}'(t),\mathbf{r}(t),\mathbf{r}'(t)]}{\|\mathbf{r}'(t)\times\mathbf{r}''(t)\|^2}$$

Special cases
If the curvature is always zero then the curve will be a straight line. Here the vectors N, B and the torsion are not well defined.

If the torsion is always zero then the curve will lie in a plane.

A curve may have nonzero curvature and zero torsion. For example, the circle of radius R given by r(t)=(R cos t, R sin t, 0) in the z=0 plane has zero torsion and curvature equal to 1/R. The converse, however, is false. That is, a regular curve with nonzero torsion must have nonzero curvature. This is just the contrapositive of the fact that zero curvature implies zero torsion.

A helix has constant curvature and constant torsion.

Plane curves
If a curve $${\bf r}(t) = \langle x(t),y(t),0 \rangle$$ is contained in the $$xy$$-plane, then its tangent vector $${\displaystyle {\bf T} = \frac{{\bf r}'(t)}{||{\bf r}'(t)||}}$$ and principal unit normal vector $${\displaystyle {\bf N} = \frac{{\bf T}'(t)}{||{\bf T}'(t)||}}$$ will also lie in the $$xy$$-plane. As a result, the unit binormal vector $${\bf B} = {\bf T} \times {\bf N}$$ is perpendicular to the $$xy$$ plane and thus must be either $$\langle 0,0,1 \rangle$$ or $$\langle 0,0,-1 \rangle$$. By the right-hand rule $$\bf{B}$$ will be $$\langle 0,0,1 \rangle$$ if, when viewed from above, the curve's trajectory is turning leftward, and will be $$\langle 0,0,-1 \rangle$$ if it is turning rightward. As a result, the torsion $$ \tau $$ will always be zero and the formula $$ \frac{|| {\bf r}'(t) \times {\bf r}''(t)||}{||{\bf r}'(t)||^3} $$ for the curvature $$ \kappa $$ becomes
 * $$ \kappa = \frac{|x'(t)y(t) - y'(t)x(t)|}{((x'(t))^2 + (y'(t))^2)^{3/2}}$$

title: Frenet–Serret formulas


text:
Talk:Player character

First line
The first paragraph, about a PC being a fictional character, is that correct? I have played many games where the PC was a famous real life character, such as Hanibal, Joan of Arc and Michael Jackson (although some could argue that MJ is a fictional character, for the sake of seriousness he isn't). I am going to change that, feel free to change it back and state your reasons why JayKeaton 02:17, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Not cool mate, I have reverted back to my edit though. Ta JayKeaton 08:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I've reverted your edit. From Fictional character: "A fictional character is any person who appears in a work of fiction."  So, although there was a real Hannibal, the Hannibal you played was a fictional character.  To assert that RPG characters are "real" is highly dubious, even when you're playing a historical person. Percy Snoodle 11:16, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Excuse me, you use the word "real" as an opposite to fictional, when the correct opposite is nonfictional. I think you are confusing real with nonfictional, it is like saying while watching Brave Heart that Sir William Wallace is a fictional character because he appears in a "work of fiction" (ie, a movie). Now I would like to bring to your attention the page Nonfictional character which says "A nonfictional character is a character in a story that was a real-life figure". I will not revert for 24 hours if you think you can justify your revert, but if you cannot before then I will change it back to my edit. JayKeaton 16:30, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

 * To use your example, I'd say William Wallace was real, but William Wallace wasn't really Mel Gibson. Mel Gibson played a fictionalised William Wallace, just as you played a fictionalised Hannibal.  They were both fictional characters - characters in fiction - based on hitorical people.  A nonfictional character is a character in nonfiction who is or was real - for example a character in a narrative history - one whose reported actions matched their real-life actions.  Player characters' actions, when they play historical characters, rarely do so; they are fictionalised hitorical characters - or to put it another way, they are hitorical fictional characters.  Percy Snoodle 21:27, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

 * But in Brave Heart it wasn't about Mel Gibson, it was about William Wallace. A book about William Wallace could be called fictional because it is ink on a page, or the writers imagination on page, but it is still William Wallace. Even if in a videogame you could control William Wallace, and time travel and battle aliens it would still be a nonfictional character, you are still William Wallace. It is still a nonfictional character in a fictional setting. JayKeaton 05:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Further to that, the Nonfictional character page goes on to say that the setting can be nonfictional but the main character can be fictional, in which case it would make him a fictional character. But why not the other way around? A fictional setting but with a non fictional character. Just because the controlable or playable actions are different, doesn't make the character fictional.

 * A William Wallace will always be a nonfictional character. In a book, a movie or videogame JayKeaton 06:02, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

 * False. A WIlliam Wallace character is nonfictional iff the story in which they appear is nonfictional.  If the actions of the character are determined by the player, then it is almost certain that the story will be a work of fiction, and as such the character s fictional, per the definition at fictional character.  Percy Snoodle 06:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

As per the nonfictional character definition, "A nonfictional character is a character in a story that was a real-life figure". Further, the definition of nonfiction states '''Non-fiction is an account or representation of a subject which is presented as fact. This presentation may be accurate or not; that is, it can give either a true or a false account of the subject in question'''. More so it goes on to say However, non-fiction need not be written text necessarily, since pictures and film can also purport to present a factual account of a subject. Are you trying to say that videogames cannot and have not used player characters to purport a factual account of a subject, whether it is accurate or not.

 * "Non-fiction is an account or representation of a subject which is presented as fact". Roleplaying games don't present their subject matter as fact. So, they're not nonfiction.  QED. Percy Snoodle 08:45, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

And please don't quote the first line from fictional character again, that will be the next thing I change. Please do try to back up that anyone in a work of fiction HAS to be a fictional character. JayKeaton 07:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Again I will add more, to quote the fictional character page '''A fictional character is any person who appears in a work of fiction. More accurately, a fictional character is the person or conscious entity we imagine to exist within the world of such a work.''' An entity we imagine to exist in the world of fiction, but if that entity was a real life person then we imagine that etnity to exist in our world, not just in the world of fiction. The fictional character page needs to be changed from "any person who appears" to something far less general. My key point here is that a fictional character must be someone we imagine to exist in a fictional world, but nonfictional characters we imagine to have existed in our real life world, not soley existing in a fictional world. JayKeaton 07:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Excuse me? I'm not allowed to quote fictional character, but you are?  I don't think it's reasonable for you to put restrictions on what I can or cannot say; Nor is it reasonable to alter that page just to support your argument here.  Percy Snoodle 11:59, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Inocorrect Percy, if you had bothered to look at what I changed you would have seen that I only added the following text In contrast, a non-playable character, often called a NPC,, so please check before making such accusations. Second I never said you couldn't quote fictional character, I only meant that I was sick of hearing your argument based soley on one line of text, rather than a range of different examples. I was not telling you what you can and cant do, I was only stressing that I understood that you were quoting that one line the first time. I think this discussion is reaching an end, if you have nothing further to add I would like to change it once and for all to my original edit JayKeaton 13:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

 * First off, apologies - I didn't mean to accuse you of a WP:POINT violation, but rather to say that to change fictional character in future to support your argument would be. It was a response to "that will be the next thing I change".
 * Although I agree that neither of us have much new to say, I don't see that you've established that your proposed edit isn't incorrect. Percy Snoodle 13:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Actually, having said I've nothing new to say, I'll point out the Unusual uses section of fictional character, which discusses real people as fictional characters. Percy Snoodle 13:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I do not believe that anything in that unusual uses section supports your argument and I do not believe that it is trying to say that real people are fictional characters, rather that a version of a real person, like the Harrison Ford we are used to seeing on screen, rather than the Harrison Ford that drinks, hangs out with his friends and is just a normal guy. Even still it comes under nonfiction meaning, Non-fiction is an account or representation of a subject which is presented as fact. This presentation may be accurate or not; that is, it can give either a true or a false account of the subject in question. Meaning that you may see John Malkavitch on the movie, presented as fact, even though it may not be how the real John Malkavitch acts, say it was wasn't accurate, or it was a false account of john malkavitch. JayKeaton 04:15, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

 * "Non-fiction is an account or representation of a subject which is presented as fact". RPGs are not presented as fact.  Therefore, RPGs are not non-fiction.  The "Unusual Uses" section isn't saying that real people are fictional characters, it's saying that characters in fiction who are based on real people are still fictional characters.  Much as I know you don't like to hear it, "A fictional character is any person who appears in a work of fiction."  Even if the person they're representing within fiction is real, the character is fictional.

 * I don't think you're making the correct distinction between the character and the real-life person they represent. To use an analogy, think of the character as a pointer to the real-life person; the pointer exists in fiction, so it's fictional; even though if you dereference it you get a real-life person, who isn't fictional.  Percy Snoodle 09:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

RPGs never really occured to me, I was talking about gaming in general, like the Michael Jackson games of the 2D era JayKeaton 10:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Fair enough. I doubt any game has been "presented as fact", though.  That the player can control the character means that the character's actions aren't constrained to factual ones.  In answer to your earlier question, "Are you trying to say that videogames cannot and have not used player characters to purport a factual account of a subject, whether it is accurate or not?", yes, I am saying that games cannot and have not used player characters to purport a factual account of a subject.  Percy Snoodle 10:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * How about Playboy: The Mansion?JayKeaton 10:53, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Nope - although the real Hugh Hefner did build the Playboy Empire, the player character Hefner can choose to do so differently, or even fail. The game doesn't present those alternate Hugh Hefners as fact, so the character is fictional.  If the game forced the player to build the empire in exactly one way, with no choices, it could present that way as fact; but then the character in it wouldn't be controllable by the player Percy Snoodle 11:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I also remember playing a game based on a character from the bible, going through his journy and making the walls of Jericho fall down (game made my christian organisation). Well, actually I personally do not believe in a God, so I think that is all fiction and fairytales anyway, but you get my point JayKeaton 10:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Likewise, if you could fail or diverge from the biblical story it wasn't presented as real (the Bible probably counts as "presented as real", irrespective of its actual reality), and if you couldn't then the character in it wasn't a player character. Percy Snoodle 11:18, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Actually, it was impossible to fail in the bible game, it was strictly linear. Presented as cold hard facts, although I am not a religious man by any means. Also there are a few sports games that let you play as a famous sportsman, but if you fail a season that he was meant to win, such as in road to glory, then you simply have to restart that game. Set path, cutscenes the same, the works JayKeaton 13:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * OK, so the character in the biblical game was (depending on your religious stance) non-fictional, but he wasn't a player character, as you couldn't control him. As regards road to glory, it would depend on whether you could play differently to the real-life sportsman within seasons as to which sort of character it was. If you can, it's a fictional character who's also a player character; if not, it's a non-fictional character who's not a player character.  A player passively observing a character doesn't make them a player character.  Percy Snoodle 14:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah, you could control him. I do firmly believe that player characters can be non fictional characters, but if only to keep this talk page and the player character page clean, attractive and easy to read I will leave it. For the next 3 years I will devote my life to creating an epic game where the player character meets your exact criteria for a non fictional character, until then take it easy, so long and all that JayKeaton 23:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

More First Line Problems
It read "A player character or playable character (PC) is a fictional character in a game who is controlled or controllable by the player via a game controller." For an entry that's supposed to be as applicable to roleplaying games as it is to video games, doesn't that seem a little one-sided? I don't remember using too many game controllers last time I sat down with my friends to play D&D. I'm removing the last four words from the sentence. Please feel free to revert if there's a true reason to imply that roleplaying games like D&D are played with "game controllers" while sitting around a tabletop rolling dice.

Fourth paragraph
Looking at this paragraph: ''In tabletop and live-action role-playing games, there is little advantage to be had by selecting consistently high attributes, as a gamemaster can make enemies and obstacles that the character must face more dangerous, or make the statistics irrelevant in other ways. More commonly, they will simply not allow the player to have high statistics. Also, role-playing can be about social interaction and imagination. Purely played on the basis of the numerical mechanics, it is a narrower activity, though many still enjoy this aspect. Many such players tire of this method of gameplay and either move on to more three-dimensional and realized characters or abandon the hobby entirely.''

This seems somewhat unclear or at least unfocussed, only semi-relevant, poorly written and somewhat POV. I don't see how it's contributing anything of value, but I am reluctant to delete it outright without some sort of discussion, perhaps with an eye toward a revision.

Also, the last sentence is false, or at least no more true than the exact opposite statement would be, according to what little market research has been done; though it's a common belief among players of certain RPGs that people start out playing mostly mechanically and move on to "deeper" character-based play, these styles don't in fact have any correlation to how long someone has been playing, according to the study; apparently people change in the other direction just as often (and in fact, it is moving from less mechanical to more mechanical play that I have seen in several of my own circle of gamers, including myself).

 * Agreed. I've removed those paragraphs.  If they belong anywhere, it's on Attribute (role-playing games). Percy Snoodle 11:22, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

What the heck?
Come on you guys, original research like this is no good. Not only was most of this article not interesting in the least, but most of it (particularly the information of characters in role playing games) is covered in greater detail in the articles concerning NPCs and role-playing games. I appreciate that you fond your own little niche on wikipedia to pontificate on the nature of what a 'character' is, but it's getting a little existential for what should be a concise article on what the hell a player character is. Server overload costs money, you know.

I took the liberty of shortening it to a clean paragraph. Johnny fog  01:48, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
 * You also made this page a stub in doing so. TTFN! BlackSlivers (talk) 10:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avatar_%28computing%29 70.156.244.8 (talk) 23:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me that the whole article is badly in need of better grammar/punctuation. And seriously, why is the talk page longer than the article itself? not a good use of server space. -guest

"unlockable character"
I was directed here by clicking on a link "unlockable character", but the term "unlockable character" is not mentioned anywhere in the article. This is not very helpful as one is left guessing whether it is simply a synonym of "player character", or a special type of "player character", or some other related concept. It would be helpful if this was explained. 86.130.66.40 (talk) 02:57, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

kotaku news
nice article. can i include it?
 * kotaku: Weirdest Soulcalibur VI Character Creations--PCistSchle (talk) 11:30, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The article doesn't seem to have any information about player characters in general. Though the way the player character is implemented in this specific game has found some media attention, I wouldn't include that information in this article. It's just too specific. ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat ) 11:49, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Player character


text:
Mitsuru Ushijima

Mitsuru Ushijima (牛島 満) was a Japanese general who served during the Second Sino-Japanese War and World War II. He was the commanding general of the 32nd Army, which fought in the Battle of Okinawa during the final stages of the war. Ushijima's troops were defeated, and at the end of the battle he committed suicide.

Early career
Ushijima was born in Kagoshima city, where his father had been a samurai in the service of Satsuma Domain and later a career officer in the early Imperial Japanese Army. He was the fourth son, and one of his elder brothers served as governor of Ibaraki Prefecture. The family relocated to Tokyo, but when his father died shortly after Ushijima was born, his mother moved the family back to Kagoshima. He graduated from school with honors and decided to follow in his father's footsteps for a military career. Ushijima graduated from the 20th class of the Imperial Japanese Army Academy in 1908 with honors, and was noted for his mastery of the Jigen-ryū school of Japanese swordsmanship. He graduated from the 28th class of the Army Staff College in 1916, where his classmates included Tomoyuki Yamashita and Shizuichi Tanaka.

In August 1918, Ushijima was assigned to the staff of the Japanese Expeditionary Force based at Vladivostok during the Siberian Intervention against Bolshevik forces during the Russian Civil War, where his duty was to coordinate the dispatch of troops and to arrange transportation of supplies. He was promoted to captain later that year. On his return to Japan, he was awarded the Order of the Golden Kite, 5th class.

In April 1919, Ushijima served as commander of the 4th Guards Regiment and became an instructor at the Army Infantry School in August 1920. When he was promoted to major in 1924, he took command of the IJA 43rd Infantry Battalion. In April 1925, he was assigned to his alma mater, Daiichi Kagoshima Junior High School as part of an experiment conducted by the Minister of the Army, Kazunari Ugaki to provide basic military education to students at universities, junior high schools, and normal schools nationwide. Ushijima stayed in this position for three years.

In 1928, Ushijima was promoted to lieutenant colonel and commander of the IJA 23rd Infantry Regiment. In 1930, he became chief-of-staff of Shimonoseki Fortress, and in 1932 became commandant of the elite Army's Toyama School, and was promoted to colonel. Around this time, young officers were increasingly influenced by the ultra right-wing writings of Kita Ikki, often talked about politics, but Ushijima strongly instructed instructors and students to concentrate on military service and publicly denounced Kita Ikka.

From 1933 to 1936, Ushijima served in administrative postings within the Army Ministry. During this time, political factionalism within the army was at its worst and Ushijima strove to avoid association with any faction. At the time of the February 26 incident in 1936, he was away in China on a business trip, and returned only after the rebellion was suppressed. However, he was selected to command the disgraced IJA 1st Infantry Regiment, which was sent to northern Manchukuo as punishment for its role in the uprising.

World War II
With the start of the Second Sino-Japanese War, Ushijima was promoted to major general and appointed commander of the IJA 36th Infantry Brigade, which consisted of the Miyakonojō-based IJA 23rd Infantry Regiment and the Kagoshima-based IJA 45th Infantry Regiment. The 36th Brigade departed Kagoshima in early August 1937 and took up positions at the Shanhai Pass in northern China.

He was ordered by General Hisao Tani of the IJA 6th Division to advance and destroy the three divisions of Chiang Kai-shek's elite Chinese 14th Army, which were threatening Japanese positions near Badaling. Although greatly outnumbered, Ushijima fought a series of battles from August 30 through September 13, breaking through the Chinese lines, and reaching the outskirts of Shijiazhuang by October 14, albeit with heavy casualties. Ushijima was noted for leading from the front lines, regardless of the personal risk.

The IJA 36th Brigade then assisted in breaking the deadlock in Shanghai and captured a large number of Chinese soldiers and their weapons fleeing the city for Nanjing. In December, the brigade captured Wuhu, where it overwintered. From July 1938, the brigade participated in the Battle of Wuhan.

In March 1939, he was ordered back to Japan and was promoted to lieutenant general in August. In December, he was given command of the IJA 11th Division and assigned to garrison duty in Hulin, Manchukuo, on the Soviet border. he returned to Japan in October 1941 as Commandant of the Non-Commissioned Officers Academy.

The attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941 caught Ushijima by surprise and he was vocal in his opposition to war with the United States, which he felt would only prolong the war in China and would weaken Japan against what he perceived to be Japan's true enemy, the Soviet Union. He was removed from his position in April 1942 for fear that he would influence his students and subordinates with ideas contrary to official government policy. However, Ushijima was reinstated instead as commandant of the Imperial Japanese Army Academy, largely at the recommendation of Kenji Doihara and Otozō Yamada, who shared his misgivings about the Pacific War. Ushijima felt that students at the Army Academy had become arrogant and "drunk with a sense of victory" after the fall of Singapore, and warned his students that the abundant natural resources and industrial capacity of the United States should not be underestimated.

Ushijima's warnings were prophetic, and despite his stated desire to remain an educator, he was ordered to take command of the newly formed 120,000 man 32nd Army, charged with the defense of the Ryukyu Islands against American invasion.

His predecessor, Masao Watanabe, had begun to implement a plan to evacuate the civilian population of Okinawa to mainland Japan or Taiwan. Ushijima's arrival with a large number of reinforcements made the evacuation more difficult as many civilians gained a false sense of security, while the Tsushima Maru incident, in which over 1600 civilians, many of them children, perished on an evacuation vessel sunk by an American submarine, caused a panic. Nevertheless, Ushijima managed to evacuate 80,000 people from Okinawa and about 30,000 people from the Yaeyama Islands prior to the American invasion.

However, he was less successful in his efforts to evacuate the remainder of the civilian population to the largely uninhabited northern half of the island due to lack of food supplies, malaria, and the need to conscript many able-bodied civilians to assist in the construction of trenches, bunkers and other defensive works, including his command headquarters in a network of tunnels under Shuri Castle in Naha. Ushijima was promoted to full general on June 20.

Ushijima led a skillful defense of the island based on a defense in depth as planned by his chief of staff, Colonel Hiromichi Yahara; however, he was constantly undermined by insubordination by his second in command, General Isamu Cho, who was pursuing a more aggressive policy encouraged by the Army General Staff in Tokyo for mass attacks against the invading American forces. After an offensive action urged by Cho led to a near massacre of the attacking Japanese troops by superior American firepower, and the turning of the Shuri Line by the American forces, he led a successful withdrawal of his troops to the extreme south of the island.

This defensive line lacked the carefully prepared underground defenses of the Shuri Line, and became a fragmented grouping of isolated defensive positions. Ushijima and Cho retreated to Hill 89 at the south coast. The command and control of the remnants of the 32nd Army soon quickly deteriorated as communication with the last defensive positions was cut. Record numbers of Japanese prisoners surrendered; many were Okinawan volunteers or conscripts.

Ushijima refused a plea via leaflets dropped on Japanese positions on the 11 June from the American General Simon Bolivar Buckner Jr. to surrender.

Death
By middle June the 32nd Army was effectively reduced to occupying two strongpoints, one beneath Kunishi Ridge and the other, the command headquarters inside Hill 89.

Realizing that the end of the battle was fast approaching Ushijima pledged in a farewell message to the Imperial headquarters that he would direct a final last stand “in which I will apologize to the emperor with my own death.” On the 18 June he directed his troops to make their way in small groups through enemy lines and join guerrilla groups in northern Okinawa. He then followed it with his final order: “My beloved Soldiers; You have fought courageously for nearly three months. You have discharged your duty. Your bravery and loyalty brighten the future.

The battlefield is now in such chaos that all communications have ceased. It is impossible for me to command you. Every man in these fortifications will follow his superior officer’s order and fight to the end for the sake of the motherland.

This is my final order.

Farewell” General Cho added a postscript on the order, in red ink ”Do not suffer the shame of being taken prisoner. You will live for eternity.”

Ushijima and Cho had decided to commit Seppuku (ritual suicide) and on the night of their planned departure held a banquet in the cave housing the command post with a large meal prepared by Ushijima's cook, Tetsuo Nakamutam, which was complemented with plenty of sake and Cho's remaining stock of captured Black & White Scotch whisky.

Later in the early hours of 22 June the staff in the command post lined up to pay their respects to Ushijima who was attired in his full dress uniform and Cho who wore a white kimono. Cho volunteered to go first and lead the way, "as the way may be dark,” but Ushijima insisted on going first. The men made their way onto an outside ledge overlooking the ocean, on which a white cloth had been laid over a quilt. Handed a knife by an aide Ushijima shouted and made a deep vertical cut in his bared abdomen before Captain Sakaguchi (who was regarded as a master swordsman) decapitated him with his sword. Cho followed Ushijima and the bodies of both men were buried by three orderlies in shallow graves.

Their deaths were witnessed by Yahara, who was the most senior officer captured by American forces. Yahara had asked Ushijima for permission to commit suicide, but the general refused his request, saying, "If you die there will be no one left who knows the truth about the battle of Okinawa. Bear the temporary shame but endure it. This is an order from your army commander." Yahara later authored a book entitled The Battle for Okinawa, describing Ushijima's last moments.

The bodies of Ushijima, and Cho, were buried under U.S. military auspices on 27 June 1945 near the cave where they died in the last hours of fighting on Okinawa. "The bodies of the two Japanese generals were lowered into graves almost above their cave headquarters which was sealed during the American flag service."

Ushijima was described as a humane man who discouraged his senior officers from striking his subordinates and who disliked displays of anger because he considered it a base emotion. American historian Hanson W. Baldwin regarded Ushijima as the greatest Japanese general of the Pacific War.

Decorations

 * JPN Zuiho-sho (WW2) 1Class BAR.svg Grand Cordon of the Order of the Sacred Treasure (1940)
 * JPN Kinshi-kunsho 2Class BAR.svg Order of the Golden Kite, 2nd class (1940)
 * JPN Kyokujitsu-sho 1Class BAR.svg Grand Cordon of the Order of the Rising Sun (1944)

title: Mitsuru Ushijima


text:
Habs (disambiguation)

Habs is most commonly used to refer to the Montreal Canadiens, a National Hockey League team, short for 'Les Habitants'

Habs or HABS may also refer to:

 * Habitants, the early farmers of Quebec
 * Haberdashers' School for Girls, (formerly Haberdashers' Aske's School for Girls) a renowned independent girls' day school in Elstree, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom
 * Haberdashers' Boys' School, (formerly Haberdashers' Aske's Boys' School and Haberdashers' Aske's School, Elstree) a British private school located in Hertfordshire
 * Historic American Buildings Survey, a program of the United States National Park Service
 * Harmful algal blooms, a dense proliferation of marine or freshwater algae causing negative impacts to other organisms
 * Trenton Habs, an International Junior Hockey League team based in Trenton, New Jersey
 * Habs (TV series), a 2022 Pakistani television drama series

title: Habs (disambiguation)


text:
User:Alpha1

I'm Alpha1,I'm form Zhengzhou,Henan,the People's Republic of China.

Signpost
zh:User:Alpha1

title: User:Alpha1


text: User talk:128.208.36.128

title: User talk:128.208.36.128


text:
El Sendero Luminoso

El Sendero Luminoso is the name of a big wall climbing bolted route at El Potrero Chico, Nuevo León, Mexico that rises over 1500 ft (~450 m) up the front side of El Toro mountain. It is one of the hardest big wall routes in the area and 11 of its 15 pitches are graded at over. The route was established by Jeff Jackson, Kurt Smith, and Pete Peacock and is graded 5.12+ V overall.

On January 15, 2014, Alex Honnold became the first person to free solo the route, taking just over three hours. On November 27, 2019, the American rock climber Brad Gobright fell approximately 300 meters to his death while descending from the route with his climbing partner, Aidan Jacobson, who fell between 20 and 30 meters but survived.

title: El Sendero Luminoso


text:
Genesis of the Daleks

Genesis of the Daleks is the fourth serial of the twelfth season of the British science fiction television series Doctor Who. It was written by Terry Nation and directed by David Maloney, and originally broadcast in six weekly parts from 8 March to 12 April 1975 on BBC1.

In the serial, the alien time traveller the Fourth Doctor (Tom Baker) and his travelling companions Sarah Jane Smith (Elisabeth Sladen) and Harry Sullivan (Ian Marter) are directed by the Time Lords to the planet Skaro at the time of the Daleks' creation to prevent them from becoming the dominant race in the universe.

Genesis of the Daleks was originally commissioned under producer Barry Letts and script editor Terrance Dicks, who believed that the outline submitted by Nation was too similar to his previous Dalek adventures, and encouraged him to explore the origin of the Daleks. The story introduces the Daleks' creator Davros (Michael Wisher), who had a unique visual design. The script was handed to Letts and Dicks' successors, producer Philip Hinchcliffe and script editor Robert Holmes, who made changes to the original script which gave it a darker tone. Nation, having intentionally modelled the Daleks on the Nazis, further explored the theme in Genesis. It also addresses the moral issues that come with time travel and genocide. The story was filmed over January and February 1975, with some location filming in a quarry in Betchworth.

Genesis of the Daleks premiered with 10.7 million viewers and concluded five weeks later with 9.1 million, with the least-watched episode being Part Three with 8.5 million viewers. Since its broadcast it has been widely praised as one of the series' best. The story was novelised in 1976 by Dicks, and released as a condensed LP in 1979, before being released on VHS in 1991 and DVD in 2006.

Plot
While travelling by transmat, the Fourth Doctor and his companions Sarah Jane Smith and Harry Sullivan are intercepted by the Time Lords. The Doctor is instructed to interfere with the creation of the Daleks so as to avert a future in which the Daleks rule the universe; he is given a Time Ring to return them to his TARDIS when the mission is complete. The three find themselves on the Dalek planet of Skaro. A generations-long war between the Thals and the Kaleds has left the planet inhospitable, and the two sides have congregated in their own domes for protection and continue the war.

A chemical weapon attack forces them to take shelter. Sarah is separated but meets the Mutos, mutated exiles of both sides, who try to help protect her before they are all captured by the Thals and forced to load radioactive material on a missile. The Doctor and Harry are captured by the Kaleds, their possessions confiscated, and are taken to a bunker to meet the scientific and military elite, including the lead scientist Davros, who unveils the "Mark III travel machine", or "Dalek", which the Doctor recognises as his nemesis. Ronson, one of Davros' scientists, secretly tells the Doctor that he knows Davros' experiments are unethical, and the Doctor is able to convince the Kaled leadership to put a halt to Davros' experiments. Davros learns of Ronson's actions, and covertly provides the Thal leaders a chemical formula that can weaken the Kaled dome and make it vulnerable to their missile attack, while preparing twenty more Daleks.

The Doctor and Harry make their way to the Thal dome and rescue Sarah. However, the Doctor is captured by the Thals as the missile strikes the Kaled dome, wiping out all but those in the bunker. Davros accuses Ronson of giving the Thals the chemical formula and then orders the Daleks to kill him, and convinces the remaining leaders to let him have his Daleks attack the Thal dome. The Dalek attack kills many of the Thals, and the Doctor, his companions, and the surviving Thals and Mutos make their way to the Kaled bunker. The Doctor instructs the Thals and Mutos to find a way to destroy the bunker while he and his companions go inside to recover the Time Ring. While there, the Doctor is captured by Davros, who discovers the Doctor knows of the future of the Daleks, and forces the Doctor to record all he knows, so that Davros can program the Daleks to avoid failure in the future.

Other scientists working for Davros, now aware of his plans, free the Doctor and give him enough time to rig the Dalek incubation room with explosives which would end the threat of the Daleks. As he is about to touch the two exposed wire ends to set them off, he hesitates, questioning whether he has the right to make that decision. He is relieved to learn that Davros has agreed to stop and allow the Kaled leaders to vote on the continuation of the project. As the leaders gather for this vote, the Doctor is able to recover the Time Ring and destroy the recordings he made, while learning that the Thals and Mutos have prepared the means to destroy the bunker. As the vote is called, Davros reveals this was all a decoy, giving the Daleks he sent to destroy the Thals time to return to the bunker and exterminate the remaining Kaleds. Harry and Sarah escape the chaos, while the Doctor returns to set off the incubator room's explosives, but a Dalek inadvertently completes the circuit and sets it off itself. The Doctor escapes before the Thal and Mutos' bomb caves in the bunker, trapping Davros and the Daleks. Inside, Davros realises the Daleks have gained a will of their own when they refuse to take orders from a non-Dalek. He attempts to stop the production line but is seemingly exterminated by his own creations.

While he suspects he has only managed to set back Dalek evolution by several centuries, the Doctor considers his mission complete: out of the Daleks' evil, good will always arise to challenge them. He and his companions say goodbye to the surviving Thals and Mutos before using the Time Ring to return to the TARDIS.

Conception and writing
When planning stories for season 12, producer Barry Letts and script editor Terrance Dicks felt that it was time for Terry Nation to return to the series and write another Dalek adventure. Letts and Dicks enjoyed the script Nation sent in, but found it too "reminiscent" of many of his previous Dalek stories. The two suggested that Nation instead write an origin story for the Daleks, originally titled Daleks – Genesis of Terror. The serial was commissioned on 1 April 1974, and the scripts accepted on 22 July. The stories lined up for the season were handed over to Letts and Dicks' successors, producer Philip Hinchcliffe and script editor Robert Holmes, with whom Genesis of the Daleks gained a darker tone. Holmes was not a fan of frequent appearances by the Daleks, and only allowed the story because it explored their origins. In an aim to make the series more adult, Hinchcliffe wanted the story to be "pacy" and make the Daleks appear more powerful. In a 2006 interview, Dicks said that he does not believe the story would have been much different if he and Letts had been in charge, though he remarked he would have added some lighter moments to soften the "grim" tone. Director David Maloney stated that the images of war at the beginning of the serial were intended to create atmosphere, and he had no intention of losing the younger audience.

The production of Genesis of the Daleks saw several changes from the script. Maloney altered the opening scene to show the soldiers gunned down by machine guns in slow motion. Nation was displeased with the change, and Maloney later felt that the violent addition was "a bit much". Hinchcliffe and Maloney were not keen on the Doctor's original meeting with the Time Lord, which took place in a lush garden, and changed it to the Skaro war-zone which they felt more appropriate. The Thal soldiers were originally supposed to be boys aged 15 or 16 to illustrate the youth of those fighting in the war, but this was later changed to make them appear more mature. In the Genesis of Terror script, Sarah Jane becomes ill in the third episode from radiation poisoning, and Bettan was a male who was introduced in the fourth episode. Part Five originally had more action in the Dalek incubator room and ended with the Doctor's question of whether he had the right to destroy them.

Casting and costumes
Maloney cast John Franklyn-Robbins as the Time Lord because he had worked with him before and intended his character to resemble Death in The Seventh Seal. Hilary Minster, who played a Thal soldier, had also played a Thal in Planet of the Daleks (1973). Minster had been considered for the role of Mogran. Peter Miles previously played Dr. Lawrence in Doctor Who and the Silurians (1970) and Professor Whitaker in Invasion of the Dinosaurs (1974). Stephen Yardley, who played the Muto Sevrin, later appeared in Vengeance on Varos (1985). During filming of Genesis, Yardley walked into the casting department on his lunch break in costume and asked for a job; because of his costume, they assumed he was a tramp from the street. Dennis Chinnery, who played Gharman, had previously been seen in The Chase (1965) and would later appear in The Twin Dilemma (1984).

The character of Davros was designed by Nation to have created the Daleks in his image, and to also be a "spokesperson" for the Daleks as he felt it was "boring" listening to Daleks giving speeches. The design was inspired by the Mekon, a comic book character with a small body and a large "green, dome-like head" which Hinchcliffe remembered from his childhood. Davros attracted the attention of BBC prosthetics designer John Friedlander who agreed to come off another show to make Davros' mask. The latex mask was moulded to Michael Wisher's face by make-up artist Sylvia James. Wisher could even eat while wearing the mask. Regular latex instead of the more mouldable foam latex was used because the latter was too expensive. The cast and crew regarded Davros' effects as a great technical achievement considering the budget and time period they worked in. Two children visiting Baker at the BBC studios were scared by Wisher in costume; they thought he was a statue at first. When sitting in Davros' Dalek-like base, Wisher wore knee pads and a kilt because trousers were too uncomfortable. To prepare during rehearsals, Wisher acted in a wheelchair with a paper bag over his head that only had slits cut out for his eyes so he would be used to the "disorienting" situation and be able to express himself without using his whole face. Wisher, a heavy smoker, put two holes in the top of the bag so he could smoke underneath it in rehearsals. Wisher also provided some of the voices for the Daleks with Roy Skelton; in some scenes, he was acting to his own pre-recorded dialogue. Stuntman and actor Terry Walsh appeared uncredited in several roles.

Filming and effects
Genesis of the Daleks was the last serial of the twelfth season to be filmed, after Revenge of the Cybermen. As Sarah Jane had been filmed in Revenge wearing a combat costume, it was added into Genesis that the Doctor would hand her the outfit, into which she changes by the next scene. The story was mainly filmed in January 1975, with some studio recording carried into February. Location filming for the serial took place at Betchworth quarry in Surrey, which represented the landscape of Skaro. Having had trouble with the Daleks on location in Planet of the Daleks (1973), Maloney scheduled shooting so that they only appeared in studio scenes. The three active Dalek props used in the serial were originals from the 1960s, and their wear was covered by new paint. Five "dummy" Daleks which could not be operated were also used. Hinchcliffe wanted the Daleks to appear more powerful, and intended to achieve this through low angles and lighting. Duncan Brown, who was responsible for studio lighting, used colours and dark lighting to make the Daleks seem as if they were "emerging from the shadows" and to suggest rather than show the world created to viewers.

The same model was used for both the Kaled and the Thal domes. The gas attack in Part One was achieved through dry ice and green lighting. Some of the Thal guns were re-used props from the First Doctor (William Hartnell) serial Galaxy 4 (1965). The electric trolley used by the Kaleds in Part One worked in tests, but collapsed when Baker and Marter boarded it. The creature Harry and the Doctor glimpse at the end of Part Two was mainly a reused Ice Warrior costume, while the Thal rocket ship was a reused model from The Ambassadors of Death (1970). During the filming of Part Two, Miles and Chinnery had trouble fitting the gun on the Dalek. As a result, the scene had to be filmed in two takes, bridged with a reaction shot of the Doctor. Part Two is unusual in that it is one of the very few episodes not to begin with a reprise, and also the first to end in a freeze frame. A stunt double for Elisabeth Sladen was hired for Sarah's fall from the scaffolding, but Maloney discovered that she would be falling eight feet, while Sladen had fallen ten feet in rehearsals. Maloney ultimately decided to conclude the episode with a freeze frame ending. Maloney would use the freeze frame technique again, most notably with The Deadly Assassin. The third episode overran its 25-minute limit and rather than cut material out the cliffhanger was changed from Davros' speech to the Doctor being electrocuted. The music for the serial was recorded on 3 March 1975 and the dubbing finished the day before Part One aired.

Themes and analysis
Nation, who grew up during World War II, intentionally based the Daleks on the Nazis, and this episode contains many deliberate parallels. The Kaleds dress in uniforms reminiscent of the Nazis and display "fascist salutes". The Kaleds look to "keep [their] race pure" by banishing the Thals and Mutos. Cast and crew members described it as a "warning to the world" about the danger of allowing authoritarianism to take over. Davros has been likened to Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler several times,  while physical comparisons have also been drawn between the appearance of Nyder and SS chief Heinrich Himmler; aside from the resemblance, both wear insignias and spectacles. As production of the third episode began, the producers decided to play down some of the Nazi symbolism, and took away Nyder's Iron Cross. It briefly reappears in a later scene that was filmed in the first recording block.

Ed Webb and Mark Wardecker, in a paper in Doctor Who and Philosophy, interpreted the Dalek history shown in Genesis of the Daleks as a warning that "scientists will be the one to bring about the ultimate destruction, the ultimate evil, and deliberately so". They also commented that the serial showed that the Daleks were evil by design, rather than evolution. Davros represents a mad scientist who creates a monster that then consumes him. Sarah Honeychurch and Niall Burr, in the same book, wrote that the corruption of the Daleks showed that creatures should not be created with "such limited moral reasoning," and that in our world we cannot "impose our own personal human standards on everybody else".

Genesis of the Daleks also displays a battle between good and evil. Letts enjoyed the fact that the story did not have clear heroes and villains, but rather a conflict of principle. The discussion between the Doctor and Davros about the hypothetical viral weapon demonstrates this. Hinchcliffe described it as the "hero meets antihero" moment, with the two engaged in "intellectual grappling". The episode also presents the "moral dilemma" of whether the Doctor should destroy the Daleks, resulting in the famous "Have I the right?" scene. The Doctor's comparison to knowingly killing a child who would grow up to be a dictator shows how the Doctor's ethics are influenced by his non-linear experience of time. He considers the good things that may come out of the Daleks, such as that "many future worlds would become allies". The Doctor's conclusion that he does not have the right is an example of utilitarian reasoning, and a "duty-based ethical" position. Sladen recalled that Baker took the scene very seriously, almost "agonising" over the dialogue.

Comparisons to other stories have been drawn. The Time Lord who appears at the story's beginning is intentionally costumed to resemble Death in Ingmar Bergman's film The Seventh Seal. Gareth Roberts has compared this character to the ghost of Hamlet's father, setting the protagonist (the Doctor) on a violent mission with which he has moral qualms. Martin Wiggins, senior lecturer and fellow at the Shakespeare Institute at Stratford-upon-Avon, suggests that the Doctor's indecision about destroying the Dalek embryos in the "have I the right?" scene is derived from The Brothers Karamazov.

Broadcast and reception
Genesis of the Daleks was first broadcast in six weekly parts from 8 March to 12 April 1975. Viewership varied from 8 to 10 million; Parts One and Two were watched by audiences of 10.7 and 10.5 million, Parts Three and Four were watched by audiences of 8.5 and 8.8 million, and Parts Five and Six were watched by audiences of 9.8 and 9.1 million. Audience Appreciation Indexes were taken for the second, fourth, fifth, and sixth episodes, scoring 57, 58, 57, and 56 respectively.

At the time of broadcast, there were some complaints about the level of violence portrayed. Mary Whitehouse, of the National Viewers' and Listeners' Association, complained that Genesis contained "tea-time brutality for tots". Scenes objected to included the depictions of war and Nyder hitting the Doctor. David J. Howe and Stephen James Walker, in their Doctor Who: The Television Companion (1998), recorded a positive reaction from fans in regards to creativity and Davros, though one writer noted the ending did not satisfyingly close the story. The BBC's Audience Research Report concluded, "A little more complex than some Doctor Who adventures, perhaps, and with underlying questions of conscience, the serial had been 'different' it was occasionally felt and, although dismissed in some quarters as far-fetched, long drawn-out, confused and/or predictable, had provided acceptable escapist entertainment for the majority." Howe and Walker themselves described the serial as "well-written and full of new ideas, while still remaining true to the Daleks' roots by effectively equating them with the Nazis", and particularly praised the production values, pacing, and moral dilemma. They considered it to have a few minor flaws, namely Harry being attacked by a giant clam, some "duff" cliffhangers, and "many of the scientist characters serve no other purpose than to act as Dalek-fodder".

In 2010, Mark Braxton of Radio Times awarded the serial a full five stars and hailed it as "Terry Nation's finest hour for the series", suggesting that Davros was "the greatest villain in Doctor Who history". He was also positive towards Dudley Simpson's score and Davros's allies, who were "impeccably written and played" from Nyder to Gharman, but was disappointed that Harry did not have much to do. The A.V. Club reviewer Christopher Bahn noted that it contradicted some aspects of The Daleks but that it "[hit] the emotional target dead-on". He particularly praised Davros and Skaro, but considered the "major problem" with the portrayal of the Daleks was that "we're not given any choice but to view them as psychopathic murderers", and the Doctor came across as a "catastrophically incompetent secret agent". DVD Talk's Stuart Galbraith gave Genesis of the Daleks four out of five stars, calling it a "real fan-pleaser" and writing that Wisher was "superb" as Davros. While noting that the story "is mostly concerned with action and suspense, which it does rather well", he wrote that it "isn't especially original" as it dealt with common time-travel issues, despite doing it in "intelligent ways". In 2009, SFX listed the scene where the Daleks receive their first blaster as the thirteenth scariest moment of Doctor Who. The magazine also named the scene where Harry is attacked by a giant clam as one of the silliest Doctor Who moments, noting "even the best Doctor Who stories have the occasional dropped stitch". Charlie Jane Anders of io9, in a 2010 article, listed the cliffhanger of Episode Four – in which the Doctor is forced to tell Davros how the Daleks will be defeated in the future – as one of the greatest Doctor Who cliffhangers.

Writing for BFI Screenonline, James Donohue thought Genesis of the Daleks "shows the series developing a more complex appreciation of the moral issues surrounding being a monster", but "the plot contrives to prevent the Doctor from having to make the difficult decision himself anyway. He delays Davros' plans, but he does not change the future. Lacking the courage to answer the questions it raises, Genesis shows how challenging, and how infuriating, children's TV can be."

Legacy
Genesis of the Daleks is one of the most widely known serials of the original run as it was repeated often. It was edited into an 85-minute omnibus version and broadcast on BBC1 at 3:00 pm on 27 December 1975, attracting 7.6 million viewers, and also was repeated in two edited 45-minute episodes as part of the "Doctor Who and the Monsters" on 26 July and 2 August 1982, which attracted audiences of 4.9 and 5 million. It was then repeated in its original serial form on BBC Two in 1993 (averaging 2.2 million viewers) and 2000 (averaging 1 to 1.5 million). In a 1998 poll of readers of Doctor Who Magazine, over 2500 voters placed Genesis at the top of a poll to find the greatest Doctor Who stories of all time. In the magazine's 2009 "Mighty 200" poll, asking readers to rank all of the then-made 200 stories, Genesis came in third place, behind The Caves of Androzani (1984) and "Blink" (2007). In a 2014 poll, the magazine's readers again placed the episode in third place. In 2008, The Daily Telegraph named Genesis of the Daleks one of the ten greatest episodes of Doctor Who.

Genesis of the Daleks is the first example in the history of Doctor Who of "outright revisionism"; the creation story of the Daleks is very different from that established in The Daleks (1963), where it was said they evolved from creatures known as Dals, who were once similar to the Thals. Here, the Dals from the original story are changed to Kaleds. The Official Doctor Who and the Daleks Book, co-authored by Terry Nation, suggested that The Daleks took place during the Daleks' 1000-year hibernation following Genesis of the Daleks, and that the Daleks seen in that story were the descendants of Kaled mutants who had sought refuge in the destroyed Kaled city and discovered Davros' prototypes and notes. Russell T Davies, who revived Doctor Who in 2005, suggested that the origins of the Time War, a conflict between the Time Lords and the Daleks which contributed to the storyline of the new series, began with the Time Lords' attempted genocide of the Daleks in Genesis.

Davros is resurrected in Destiny of the Daleks (1979), played by David Gooderson, and appears in the remaining three Dalek stories of the classic series played by Terry Molloy. He has also appeared in the revived series since "The Stolen Earth"/"Journey's End" (2008), played by Julian Bleach. In "The Magician's Apprentice" (2015), footage from the episode is used with its plot based on the Fourth Doctor's moral issue if one has the right to kill a child if they knew "that child would grow up totally evil." Davros' early life is additionally covered in the 2006 Big Finish Productions four-part audio series I, Davros, which saw Miles reprising his role as Nyder in the fourth episode, "Guilt".

In print
The Target novelisation of this serial, written by Terrance Dicks, was published by Tandem in 1976. It was re-released by Virgin Publishing in 1991, bearing its designated number of 27 in the novelisation range. The Genesis of the Daleks novelisation has the largest print run of any of the original series, selling over 100,000 copies.

Home media
In 1979, the BBC released a condensed audio version of the serial as an LP. In 1988, this recording was reissued on cassette by BBC Audio alongside a later radio play, Slipback. It was subsequently released on CD in a revised and expanded version by BBC Audio paired with Exploration Earth: The Time Machine in 2001. In February 2011, Audio Go reissued the one-hour condensed audio version of the LP as part of their "Vintage Beeb" range.

Genesis of the Daleks was released on VHS by BBC Enterprises in 1991 with The Sontaran Experiment, and again as part of a box set of stories featuring Davros in 2001. It was released on DVD as a two-disc special edition in the United Kingdom by BBC Worldwide on 10 April 2006 and in the United States by Warner Home Video on 6 June 2006. This DVD is also available as part of the limited edition 2007 release of The Complete Davros Collection box set along with Destiny of the Daleks, Resurrection of the Daleks, Revelation of the Daleks and Remembrance of the Daleks.

A 1080i upscaled remaster of the story was released on Blu-ray in the United Kingdom by BBC Studios as part of the 'Complete Season 12' box set on 11 June 2018, and in the United States by Warner Home Video (as 'Tom Baker: Season One') on 19 June 2018; This release contained both the original 6-episode version and the 85-minute abridged repeat. To promote the release, the repeat version (marketed as a 'Director's Cut') was screened theatrically in the United States via Fathom Events on 11 June 2018.

In November 2020, the story was released as part of the Time Lord Victorious: Road to the Dark Times blu-ray, along with Planet of the Daleks, The Deadly Assassin, State of Decay, The Curse of Fenric, "The Runaway Bride" and "The Waters of Mars".

title: Genesis of the Daleks


text:
User talk:Node ue/Language invite form letter

"Hi [person],

I found your e-mail address on the Internet when searching for [languagename] advocates.

I am part of a project that you may have heard of to build a free encyclopedia in many languages on the Internet. Anybody is allowed to contribute, and you don't have to register.

It's called Wikipedia, and it is very easy to help.

One of our main goals is to have a free encyclopedia in [languagename].

Wikipedia is already well-known around the world, with extensive versions in English, French, Spanish, German, Italian, Chinese, Japanese, and many more languages, including smaller ones such as Corsican and Low Saxon.

We really hope you can help us. At the same time, you'll be doing something good for [languagename], because soon a lot more information will be readily available in [languagename] on the Internet thanks to Wikipedia.

Best wishes, [sender]"

Sounds a bit too markety to me. How about something more like:

''Hello, [person],

As an advocate of [languagename], you may be interested in a project I'm involved with called Wikipedia. It is a project to build a free encyclopedia in many languages on the Internet. It's a collaborative project, and anyone who wants to contribute can do so without even registering.

We would very much like to have a complete free encyclopedia in [languagename]. Wikipedia is already well-known around the world, with extensive versions in English, French, Spanish, German, Italian, Chinese, Japanese, and many more languages, including smaller ones such as Corsican and Low Saxon.

We really hope you can help us. At the same time, you'll be doing something good for [languagename], because soon a lot more information will be readily available in [languagename] on the Internet thanks to Wikipedia.

Best wishes, [sender]''

Also, you don't tell them what to do... TreyHarris 04:38, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh geez... I can't believe I forgot that! How about something like "Sign up now or else, foo'!"... or... umm... not. Actually, what WOULD you ask them to do? Node

I don't know. Are you assuming that the lang.wikipedia.org already exists? If so, point them at it. If not... um... I don't know how that works. ;-) TreyHarris 06:26, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Well, either way. If it *does* exist, then we need a set of instructions for that. If it *doesn't*, the thing to do is ask Brion to create it.

 * I think the best idea is to ask people if they're interested first, and if they ask for more information, tell them all the stuff about how to get started. If they *are* interested, but a domain for their language doesn't exist yet, we can ask Brion to create a space for the language. Node