text:
Talk:Relative density

Physics Project template added <date?>

Major copy edit proposed
The problem with this article is that it goes in depth into related issues and this is not required. The density of water is not an issue to be discussed in any detail here. I (Paul) am proposing a major re-write which will say everything there is to be said about relative density directly, with links to air and water and density and other articles too. Therefore, the article will be MUCH SHORTER. Paul Beardsell 04:15, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with many of your points. However, I think the article should be re-named "Specific gravity" and re-written. The vast majority of readers having any knowledge whatsoever of chemistry, engineering or physics are much, much more familiar with the term "specific gravity" ... so why get involved in arcane terminology like "relative density"  ... and why introduce those who have no knowledge of chemistry, engineering or physics to an arcane term that is not commonly used? - mbeychok 06:12, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Just so you know, this has been a very valuable page for me especially regarding the detailed information on the exact density of water at 20° and at 4°C including the information on the densities according to different standards. It‘s actually the only page I‘ve found that has this information. Eliminating it would remove a valuable resource for no reason, so please do not re-write it as you suggest. 185.238.219.23 (talk) 09:38, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Having said how useful I thought this was, this section is mostly incorrect. The IPTS-68 density @ 20° is incorrect (it should be 0.9982041, not 0.9982071. see Kell!) . It is also incorrect that the ASBC tables on sugars and syrups use IPTS-68 values (if they were, then the SG(20°,4°) they cite would be 0.99823205, not 0.9982341), and the (20°,4°) relative density stated (0.9982341) is not the result of dividing the cited densities (0.9982071/0.99972=0.9982351). It‘s also not the result if dividing the correct densities (0.9982041/0.99972 = 0.99823205). 185.238.219.49 (talk) 10:03, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Continuing in this vein, the ITS-90 density values stated (0.998203 at 20° and 0.999840 at 4°) do not agree with the values (0.9982008 at 20° and 0.999972 at 4°) that are in the original source (Spieweck & Bettin) cited as being the source for the values, so actually none of the values in this section seem to be correct. 185.238.219.54 (talk) 11:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)

Kidneys
I suggest that the material relating to the kidney be moved to Kidney or to Kidney function or, if we must, to Specific gravity (kidney). The kidney is a machine (a living machine, an organ) and an important one but there are numerous machines (and organs) for which the specific gravity of a solution or suchlike is important. This article should say what RD / SG is and describe that BUT discussion of machine / organ function and medical treatment details / engineering maintenance instructions should be moved to the page about the organ / machine. Material should not be duplicated at WP - it should be linked to. Move imminent. What say you? Paul Beardsell 23:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Move to a subsection of Kidney function. This is so random an inclusion in this article it is laughable! SauliH 00:00, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

I've cut the material. I'll put it here in case anyone wants to rescue it for inclusion in a more appropriate article. Paul Beardsell 21:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, in the clinic, when we say "specific gravity", we are referring to specific gravity as it relates to kidney function and not "specific gravity" in a general sense. So, it's really not all that surprising (or laughable for that matter) that an editor included the renal discussion in this article, as anyone with a medical background will likely arrive at this article when searching for information on urinary specific gravity. Given that, I'd suggest moving the text in question to Specific gravity (kidney) and highly suggest linking to it from this article or from a disambiguation page. The article on Kidney function covers general issues of kidney physiology and would not be appropriate for a clinical concept like specific gravity. Jay  †  Litman  17:48, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and moved the text to Specific gravity (kidney). There are also several articles on WP that link readers to specific gravity for further information on urinary specific gravity. I'll try to fix as many as I can. Jay †  Litman  14:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

sink'n' float
relative densities are not about liquids (only). I will be removing the para that goes on about sinking and floating "in the reference [substance]" as if the reference could only be a liquid, as if the other substance is not itself another liquid, as if the the other substance would not dissolve! Too clever. Paul Beardsell 07:08, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Actually, the concept of "sinking and floating" also applies to the relative density of gases, as gases with a realtive density greater than 1.0 will "sink" below the reference gas. For example, if you have a mixture of nitrogen and carbon dioxide at room temperature, the carbon dioxide will "sink" to the bottom of the mixture. I'm not sure that removing the section will necessarily help, but I would suggest substituing the word "float" with "rise." I think "float" is little less descriptive, and possibly misleading for some people. Jay  †  Litman  15:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

 * You miss the point. Relative density is not only to do with fluids (which, by the way, includes both gases and liquids) but also with solids.  Paul Beardsell 21:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You're right. I don't see your point. I'm well aware that relative density applies to more phases than just liquid, as should be evident from my response above, but I still don't see why the paragraph on "sinking and floating in a reference substance" should be removed. I would rather see it revised. Perhaps an extra sentance or two expanding on relative density as it relates to different phases. Jay  †  Litman  22:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Sinking and floating depends upon gravity as well as relative density. In space relative density survives but there is no buoyancy.  What you want to write about is well covered at the buoyancy article.  That's the place for it.  Paul Beardsell 05:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Also: Light salt "sinks" past heavy stones.  This sinking and floating is a nonsense and should not be here.  Paul Beardsell 05:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Leave as is. It demonstrates a simple concept that most readers will be familiar with; but yes, you need gravity for it to be true, but I really don't think anyone will care since this concept really only is used on Earth. The same "float" "sink" concept applies for solids ... how do you think Plate tectonics works? The term "float" is not a toy concept term ... continents (or crust) really do float on asthenosphere, and none of these solids! +mwtoews 09:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * No. I'm removing.  It's buoyancy.  Paul Beardsell 10:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * You really didn't explain why you don't like it, and I'll argue that your "improvement" is in the wrong direction, as there was nothing inaccurate about "sink" and "float" (where there is gravity), and most readers can understand that concept better. Certainly yes, buoyancy is the force coupled with gravity that allows things to actually float, but now you've lost John Q Public as he is trying to figure out his alcohol content in his home-brew! Your initial argument about liquids is stale in this discussion since clearly the "float"/"sink" concept works for solids and fluids; so please elaborate why you made this change. +mwtoews 17:48, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I did explain why, and well enough. But that is not to say that more explanation is not possible.  I note however that you do not address arguments I have already made above.  But here goes: (i) What is happening, by bringing in "sink and float" here, is conflation of two separate albeit related concepts as if they were equivalent.  This, it goes without saying, is bad.  (ii) This is happening in the introductory paras of the article - the last place for it!  (iii) Sink and float does NOT work well for solids, see salt'n'rock arg above for just one example.  (iv) Sink'n'float requires gravitation (or other acceleration) but this is not mentioned in this article.  (v) What is being described is buoyancy but this is not referenced.  (vi) The home brew will dissolve in the reference substance and never float nor sink.  I could go on and on.  If you want to mention sink and float then please do so, later in the article, not in the intro, and clearly referening buoyancy.  Thanks.  Paul Beardsell 20:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * OK, thanks for specifying your exact reasons. I agree that it is a separate/related concept, so should not appear in the intro para, and we'll leave your edits as is. I may add it later (time-wise and article-wise), as an example behaviour, and spell out the conditions in which the related concept holds true. The only reason why I consider this detail important is in the interpretation of the numeric value of relative density, for $$d<1$$, $$d>1$$ and $$d=1$$. (In general, this article needs a bit of work.) Also, in the home brew example above, I was referring to one of these; dissolving does not apply here—its just a relative measure of sinking-ness or floating-ness to determine alcohol content. +mwtoews 21:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Yes, this article needs work. I certainly was not advocating the return to some previous version.  As happens so often at WP this article is improved by to and fro argument discussion that happens on the talk pages. Paul Beardsell 03:24, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Move?
If man would possess any sort of "logic" a whole new term would be derived "Gravitational Density" and both pages would be place under that and the whole goofy debate would be put to rest. Good grief. And by the way, Gravitational Density is what keeps each planet their exact distance from the sun. Must see EinsteinGravity.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.82.185 (talk) 19:43, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I think this page ought to be moved to Specific Gravity. The term relative density has meanings other than Specific Gravity - i.e. the denominator is not always the density of water. SG, however, is always relative to water. Toiyabe 19:07, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree wholeheartedly. The vast majority of readers having any knowledge whatsoever of chemistry, engineering or physics are much, much more familiar with the term "specific gravity" ... so why get involved in arcane terminology like "relative density"  ... and why introduce those who have no knowledge of chemistry, engineering or physics to an arcane term that is not commonly used? - mbeychok 06:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Coming from a gemology perspective, I would much prefer readers linking from gemology articles land on an article about SG not 'relative density'. SG is an article very much in need of writing, as it is used in various fields of study - relative density doesn't cut it. Can someone who knows the subject area take care of this please? SauliH 07:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I've written a short description of SG. SG is specific in that it intrinsically refers to the standard substance as water. To speak of just relative density, leaves the question of which standard substance used unanswered. The article on Relative density also seems to cover topics which to me seem better explained and covered elsewhere. Pae_nor Oslo, Norway, 18:48, 14 February 2007
 * The content from specific gravity has been merged into this article, and some distinctions have been made to try and point out the subtle differences between the terms. That is that SG has a reference density as water, while relative density is more general. Please feel free to expand on this. +mwtoews 20:59, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Inconsistent article
This article is in need of some cleanup. The article is inconsistent, inaccurate and somewhat verbose. E.g it states that relative density is both similar and the same as Specific gravity. Also, it is inaccurate to state that "quantify the buoyancy between two materials": Bouyancy is, simply stated, an upward force as experienced by an object wholy or partly immersed in a surrounding fluid (gas or liquid), i.e substances incapable of sustaining shear forces. Calculation of SG can be done irrespective of units used, as long as the units used are consistent, i.e. don't divide slugs/ft3 with kg/m3... When it comes to Specific gravity (SG) i still feel that the article I wrote is more accurate w.r.t SG and should not be redirected. Pae_nor 09:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'll agree that the article needs a good revision, and some of the content is questionable and needs references. However, splitting this article into Relative density and Specific gravity articles is not desirable, as these are very similar, as the only difference that I am aware of is:
 * $$G=\frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}}{\rho_\mathrm{reference}}\quad \mathrm{and}\quad SG=\frac{\rho_\mathrm{object}}{\rho_\mathrm{H_2O}}$$
 * Am I missing something? (Also, I'm unsure of what a more proper notation for relative density should be ... ideas?) +mwtoews 18:05, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Water density (Feb 2007)
since density of water is (approximately)  - I am no physics expert but I had been taught that the metric system was designed around the physical characteristics of wtaer - meaning the density of water would be precisely as stated and not approximate. Am I wrong? SauliH 18:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
 * The metric system was only sort-of based on 1kg=1L of water, and for many calculations, this assumption works just fine. However, as it turns out the density of water is not constant, as it is temperature dependent (everything is—not just water). That's why lakes stratify in the winter (4°C at the bottom, since it is densest). The metric system is now based on the wavelength by an atom of cesium-133 and the such.+mwtoews 01:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok. You learn something ne... Cheers!SauliH 01:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Overhaul of the page
I did a recent semi-overhaul of the page. But I'm not an expert, I'm just an engineering college graduate who got A's in his physics classes and math classes. I know the power of using natural units and I appreciate using unitless dimensions. Hence the large section for the unitless properties of RD. Also, my physics proff. wanted us to demonstrate the hydrometer problem shown. I figured it was important enough to be encyclopedic. I've got a second proof, showing that a hyperbolic cross sectional area would create a linear relationship between displacement and change in RD, but decided it was not encyclopedic enough to warrant placing it on here. Since it required the use of calculus, I doubt most readers would understand it as well. (Also, I'm not quite an expert, as I've said before.)

If anyone has grammar issues, spelling issues, etc... change up the page. I'm not a grammar expert, and I don't know how to program this math code for beans. If anyone thinks the math isn't important enough to warrant placing here, let me know and I'll just put it on my talk page. I don't have any source for the proof I listed concerning the hydrometers, but I did cite other wiki pages which had sources and used basic algebra for my proof. Let me know if you think this info is usefull or not. --Markozeta 01:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

"Peer Review" March 2007
Please see comments at Scientific peer review/Relative density (March 2007) Could this and other highly technical articles have a Basic, or Simple, paragraph, or a few, near the top? Because all I was looking for was to compare how dense water is to iron [as was discussed on a program about the universe]. It seems related to the issue that reality is very thin, it's practically a ghost world.24.165.104.209 (talk) 06:15, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Standard International Units.
While I understand the insignificance of units in the solution to a RD calculation, I think it would be more appropriate for the article to be consistent with the unit's it uses to describe RD. Presently, the movement between the SI and Imperial systems (namely in the 'Specific Gravity' section) may be confusing for those not familiar with the topic, and it may also create unnecessary difficulties for those who are attempting to make such calculations. It may also be wise to do so purely in the interest of maintaining a set standard, the SI. Psydexzerity 13:50, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Request #1,282 for a Separate 'Specific Gravity' Article
Can we just have a plain specific gravity article for those who need it? Just an explanation of what specific gravity is and how to measure it? At a pinch, where the measurement could be useful? This article is full of overly technical bollocks and is hence fairly useless. And it has no mention of pycnometer measurement of sg. Last time someone tried to do the right thing and separate the two they were merged again. I am happy to assist in creating an sg article (I am a chemist and know little about its application outside chemistry so would not volunteer to write it by myself).--218.214.57.78 04:52, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Relative density v Specific gravity
I think the use of these terms has changed over the years. The latest Macquarie Dictionary in Australia for relative density redirects to specific gravity. The definition of specific gravity states that it is the density relative to that of a standard, with the standard being water for liquids and solids and hydrogen or air for gases. We need to address this in detail looking at different definitions in different places at different times and have everything referenced. Does anyone have a number of different science or physics dictionaries to hand? --Bduke 23:10, 30 July 2007 (UTC) I also think that the terms are different. Specific gravity is density of substance by density of water at 4°C. But there is no mention of temperature in relative density. Density of water is maximum at 4°C. But in physics, density of water is always taken as 1 g/cm^3. So, I am confused. --Utsav Raj king 18:00, 24 November 2019 (IST)

Cleanup -lengthy mathematical derivations (Mar 2008)
I am tempted to remove some of the lengthy mathematical derivations in this article and just retain the key steps, concepts and results. At the moment it looks more like a textbook than an encyclopedia article. Does anyone object to this? 86.133.48.159 (talk) 02:34, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Since there have been no comments I have started by condensing the hydrometer explanation. 81.129.130.93 (talk) 23:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I ended up reorganising most of the article. I've cleaned it up as best I can and removed the cleanup tag. I left the "expert attention" tag because I am not an expert and I haven't actually changed the information content. 86.133.211.201 (talk) 15:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Hey, I added that textbook jargon you saw before - and I want to say - thanks for the summary, I think it's better this way. --Markozeta (talk) 00:06, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Equation image error?
Under the section Measurement, the second image showing an equation seems to introduce specific numeric values that come out of nowhere. I think these should be trimmed off, leaving the first bit, but wanted to ask if I was missing something. Thoughts? Edgehawk (talk) 15:19, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Merge discussion
Specific gravity and relative density cover almost exactly the same material. The either need to be made more distinct or merged. Not that long ago it was tried to merge it under relative density, but that failed. I am hoping that the reason it failed was because there wasn't enough discussion before hand. So lets form a consensus and get this thing done ;) .TStein (talk) 17:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

 * merge to specific gravity: My experience is that specific gravity (while easily confused with specific weight is the more common. And it is noted that the term 'specific gravity' is now often used more loosely to refer to using other fluids like gas.  Unless there is some technique used for other fluids and not water I see no reason to have relative density hanging around. TStein (talk) 17:57, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge to specific gravity, far more common term in my experience (geology/mineralogy); and check the what links here for each. Also note the relative density article uses specific gravity quite a bit -- perhaps a remnant of bungled merge? Way too much overlap in the two articles. Vsmith (talk) 00:25, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note re my comment about "what links here", many of those are mineral articles with the link in the mineral infobox. My brain just kicked in after posting that. Vsmith (talk) 00:45, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Specific gravity is the more widely recognized term. However, relative density is more appropriate.I agree the topics should be merged under Specific Gravity. ISAnerd (talk) 20:06, 2 November 2010 (UTC)ISANerd

I support the merging to specific gravity as well. I see little difference between the two, and in my studies I've almost always heard it referred to as specific gravity. While I agree "relative density" makes more sense in terms of words, we should use the most common term per WP:COMMONNAME. 71.113.43.168 (talk) 00:30, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

I am happy with the situation as is appears on the "relative density" page. The term "relative density" is usually used in the resources industry. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Johnhvisser 17:44, 19 March 2011 (Perth) Johnhvisser — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnhvisser (talk • contribs)

The term "Relative density" is used in European Pharmacopoeia and all nationals pharmacopoeias. The text explains also methods as they are mentioned in European Pharmacopoeia. I did not meet the term specific gravity in pharmaceutical sciences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.195.64.181 (talk) 15:35, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

make coherent set of density, relative density, etc Even in outer space, where there is no gravity, there is still mass, meaning that a heavier object needs more force to be accelerated ; So term 'specific gravity' is a bit misleading, what is meant is 'specific density of mass'. Word 'specific' means that it is a property of a material, but is in practice used as if it means 'relative to density of water'. A material that has specific density 1 has absolute density 1000 kg/m3, so these terms should not be mixed up. I think it would be best to have which explains that this is relative to density of water (which is 1000 kg/m3), and links to 'density' and 'water' pages. that mentions that this term is in common use, and is also known as 'specific gravity' and 'specific weight' but really means 'relative (mass) density', and links to 'relative density' page. Thusly organizing these articles seems not difficult, more work would be needed for removal of off-topic content, such as, in 'specific gravity', description of a flask that is said to be used for measuring specific gravity, while it really only allows to measure off a precise volume. Ofcourse this flask can be weighed, but it is still a tool for volume measurement ; to measure density directly one would need to measure buoyancy.Siwardio (talk) 11:00, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
 * one main article called 'density' (already exists)
 * one main article called 'relative density',
 * one small article called 'specific density',
 * a redirect from 'specific gravity' to 'specific density'
 * a redirect from 'specific weight' to 'specific density'
 * For the reasons you mentioned in the first lines, I also think relative density is the physically more precise term and (at least for me as a chemist) is pretty much self explanatory opposed to specific gravity (.."specific gravity" made me even wonder about things like Three-body problems and Einsteins Special Theory of Relativity .. ;) ). --Saimondo (talk) 18:26, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

 * I agree that these articles need be merged. I also agree with Relative density as the name of the united article. It seems that everybody agrees with this merging, isn't it? Is only the name of the united article in question? If so, maybe we need just merge the articles and then talk about renaming, if necessary?Ufim (talk) 15:25, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 21:48, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Temperature Dependence
Typo or in need of greater explanation:

I do not see the validity of a simple division used as was referenced:

"Taking into account different sample and reference temperatures we note that while SGH2O = 1.000000 (20°C/20°C) it is also the case that SGH2O = 0.998203/0.998840 = 0.998363 (20°C/4°C)."

Followed by:

"Here temperature is being specified using the current ITS-90 scale and the densities[4] used here and in the rest of this article are based on that scale. On the previous IPTS-68 scale the densities at 20 °C and 4 °C are, respectively, 0.9982071 and 0.9999720 resulting in an SG (20°C/4°C) value for water of 0.9982343."

Again the numbers do not agree. 0.999 362 260

0.998 207 1 / 0.999 972 0 = 0.998 235 050 The average is 0.999 089 55

Was there an interpolation done based on some criteria, a formula used, different numbers used from some other reference, or are these typographic errors?

As for an error in significant digits used, I do not care if they are just typo. But if another process is involved, I would like to know what process was used to generate the value for water of 0.998 234 3

Jamesbdunn (talk) 14:36, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Pycnometer article
pycnometer deserves a separate article. Editors should consider moving the Pycnometer section to a new page 182.69.180.130 (talk) 12:38, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

 * I agree. Wait for others people opinion.
 * Hu741f4 (talk) 08:20, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Relative density


text:
Hope, British Columbia

Hope is a district municipality at the confluence of the Fraser and Coquihalla rivers in the province of British Columbia, Canada. Hope is at the eastern end of both the Fraser Valley and the Lower Mainland region, and is at the southern end of the Fraser Canyon. To the east, over the Cascade Mountains, is the Interior region, beginning with the Similkameen Country on the farther side of the Allison Pass in Manning Park. Located 154 km east of Vancouver, Hope is at the southern terminus of the Coquihalla Highway and the western terminus of the Crowsnest Highway, locally known as the Hope-Princeton (Highways 5 and 3, respectively), where they merge with the Trans-Canada Highway (Highway 1). Hope is at the eastern terminus of Highway 7. As it lies at the eastern end of the Fraser Valley in the windward Cascade foothills, the town gets very high amounts of rain and cloud cover – particularly throughout the autumn and winter.

Hope is a member municipality of the Fraser Valley Regional District which provides certain municipal services to unincorporated settlements and rural areas.

The District of Hope includes Hope (the previous Town of Hope) and surrounding areas, including the communities of Kawkawa Lake, Silver Creek, Flood, and Lake of the Woods.

History
The Stó:lō have lived in the Fraser Valley since 8,000 to 10,000 years ago.

In late 1782, a smallpox epidemic among the Stó:lō killed thousands – an estimated two-thirds of the population.

Explorer Simon Fraser arrived in what is now Hope in 1808, and the Hudson's Bay Company created the Fort Hope trading post in 1848. The area was transformed by the Fraser Canyon Gold Rush, beginning in 1858. The following year Governor James Douglas laid out the Fort Hope town site. Hope became part of the new British colony of British Columbia when it was created on 2 August 1858. Along with the rest of British Columbia, Hope became part of Canada in 1871.

Late in 1859, Reverend Alexander St. David Francis Pringle arrived in Hope, and on 1 December of that year, founded the first library on the British Columbia mainland. Within two years, he also founded the Christ Church Anglican church, the oldest church on the British Columbia mainland that still holds services on its original site. It is a National Historic Site of Canada.

Hope incorporated as a village on 6 April 1929, became a town on 1 January 1965, and was reincorporated as a District Municipality named the District of Hope on 7 December 1992.

Naming
Fort Hope was established in 1848–49 by chief trader Henry Newsham Peers. He discovered a route through the mountains that did not dip below the 49th parallel, which had become the American border. Thus, the hope that his route would be workable was fulfilled.

World War II
During World War II an internment camp for Japanese Canadians was set up near Hope at Tashme, now known as Sunshine Valley, just beyond the 100-mile exclusion zone from the coast.

Recent history
In 2011, the metal Kawkawa Bridge was demolished; previously, it was featured in the 1982 Rambo film, First Blood. In 2020, a wood carved statue of Sylvester Stallone character John Rambo was erected in Hope.

Geography

Hope is at the easternmost point of British Columbia's lower mainland area and is usually considered to be part of the Fraser Canyon area or "eastern Fraser Valley" as "Lower Mainland" is commonly understood as synonymous with "greater Vancouver". There are relatively significant peaks to the north, east, and south of the townsite. Only to the west can flat land be seen, and that view is dominated by the broad lower reaches of the Fraser River. The segment from Lytton to Hope separates the Cascade Mountains and Coast Mountains, thereby forming the lower part of the Fraser Canyon, which begins far upriver near Williams Lake. At Hope, the river enters a broad flood plain extending 130 km to the coast and Vancouver. The Coquihalla and Sumallo Rivers and Silverhope Creek rise in the Cascade Mountains northeast and southeast and south of Hope, respectively, and empty into the Fraser River. The Skagit River begins south of Hope, across a low pass from the head of the Silverhope valley, which is the access to the Canadian shoreline of Ross Lake.

Climate
Hope has an oceanic climate (Köppen climate classification Cfb) with warm summers and moderately cold winters. Hope has a very cloudy climate for most of the year, with the cloudiest month December averaging only 4.4 monthly sunshine hours or 1.7% of possible sunshine. Late summer is the sunniest time of the year.

Demographics
In the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, Hope had a population of 6,686 living in 2,939 of its 3,243 total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of 6,181. With a land area of 40.87 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

Religion
According to the 2021 census, religious groups in Hope included:
 * Irreligion (3,375 persons or 53.3%)
 * Christianity (2,645 persons or 41.8%)
 * Hinduism (65 persons or 1.0%)
 * Sikhism (45 persons or 0.7%)
 * Buddhism (20 persons or 0.3%)
 * Judaism (20 persons or 0.3%)
 * Islam (15 persons or 0.2%)
 * Indigenous Spirituality (15 persons or 0.2%)

Economy
Hope's labour force works in a variety of industries. Almost 50 percent of the labour force is involved in four main industries: accommodation and food services (17.1 percent), health care and social assistance (12.8 percent), retail trade (10.3 percent), and transportation and warehousing (8 percent) (2006 data).

One of the town's largest employers is Nestlé Waters. Nestlé, the world's biggest bottler of water, packages more than 300 million litres of water from Hope aquifers annually. Nestlé pays C$675 to the provincial government for this quantity of water (C$2.25 per million litres). The Nestlé bottling plant employs approximately 75 people.

Economic planning
Hope's economic development planning is rooted in the community's strategic location, telecommunications infrastructure (high-speed internet), and strong support for new development and redevelopment. The 2014 Economic Profile identifies several sectors as significant areas of opportunity within the local economy: In addition, the Revitalization Tax Exemption Bylaw, adopted by the Hope District Council in 2013, encourages property owners who develop or redevelop their properties to apply for financial incentives in the form of tax relief.
 * Tourism: including development of tourism products attractive to the primary market coming from the west.
 * Virtual commuters: professionals able to serve their clientele from off-site locations, such as consultants, photographers, graphic designers, and software developers.
 * Natural resources: sustainable and responsible development of natural resource industries.
 * Lifestyle manufacturing or services: such as coffee roasters, sustainable agriculture, micro-brewery, and other clean water-based industries.
 * "Gap" retailers: independent, entrepreneurial retailers who can deliver niche services for local customers and travellers.

Chainsaw wood carving
Hope holds chainsaw wood carving competitions and exhibitions. From 4 to 7 September 2008 the Second Annual Hope Chainsaw Carving Competition took place. Chainsaw wood carvings are displayed and exhibited throughout the downtown core of Hope. Memorial Park in downtown Hope has a display of chainsaw wood carvings. Hope is home to carver Pete Ryan, who made a number of the chainsaw wood carvings exhibited in downtown Hope.

Hope Arts Gallery
The Hope Arts Gallery exhibits and sells a variety of art by local artists. It is located in downtown Hope and has several rooms displaying sculpture, pottery, paintings and drawings, jewellery, fabric arts, basketry, cards and gifts, and photography. The gallery is run by volunteers from the Hope Arts Guild. The gallery presents ART WALK, a self-guided tour to art and chainsaw wood carvings in Hope.

Hope Brigade Days
One of Hope's largest events of the year is Hope Brigade Days, which occurs the weekend after Labour Day every September. Events include a parade, fireworks display, midway, chainsaw carving competition, demolition derby, kids' carnival, and 4x4 racing.

Hope Museum
The Hope Museum shows the history, culture and heritage of Hope. In downtown Hope, together with the Hope Visitor Centre, the Hope Museum is open year-round. Exhibits include First Nations culture, early Fort Hope, the Fraser Canyon Gold Rush, the Kettle Valley Railway, pioneer life, logging, and mining.

Hope Recreation Complex
The Hope Recreation Complex includes a library, pool, arena, and fitness centre. The Hope and District Recreation Complex is run by the Fraser Valley Regional District.

Hope Slide
The Hope Slide was one of the largest landslides ever recorded in Canada. It occurred in the morning hours of 9 January 1965, near Hope, killing four people. A viewing site showing the Hope Slide is approximately a 15-minute drive east of Hope on Highway 3.

Memorial Park and Friendship Garden

Immediately adjacent to the District Hall in Hope is a Japanese garden called the Friendship Garden, dedicated to the Japanese-Canadians who were interned nearby at Tashme during World War II. It was built by local Japanese-Canadians and presented to Hope on 27 July 1991. Men from that camp were employed during the war building the Hope-Princeton Highway.

Hope Memorial Park, adjacent to the District Hall and Friendship Garden, is the site of a concert series on Sunday afternoons in July and August.

Memorial Park was granted to the then-village of Hope in 1932 by the province of British Columbia. It occupies roughly 7 acre in the heart of the town.

Othello Tunnels
Othello Tunnels is the popular name for the main human-made features of Coquihalla Canyon Provincial Park, east of Hope along the canyon of the Coquihalla River and a decommissioned railway grade, now a walking trail, leading eventually to Coquihalla Pass. Originally part of the Kettle Valley Railway, five tunnels and a series of bridges give views of the Coquihalla River as it passes through the river's narrow gorge.

There are two main options for hikers to explore Othello Tunnels. The Othello Tunnels portion of Kettle Valley Trail, 4 km to-and-back, is stroller-friendly and wheelchair-accessible. The Hope-Nicola Valley Trail Loop, a 5.5 km loop hiking trail, is relatively well-maintained but not accessible, nor recommended for people with mobility issues.

Curling
The Hope Curling Club is near the Hope Recreation Complex. The club sponsors bonspiels such as the Men's Bonspiel every January, and the Mixed Curling Bonspiel.

Golf
Hope has a golf course and club on the banks of the Coquihalla River.

Hope Icebreakers Junior Hockey Club
The Hope Icebreakers were a Canadian junior ice hockey team. They played in the Pacific International Junior Hockey League and the town of Hope from the 2003–2008 seasons, after which they were approved by BC Hockey to move to Mission, British Columbia. They subsequently changed their name to the Mission Icebreakers. The Icebreakers have a Sasquatch logo.

Government
The District of Hope is a district municipality that is part of the regional district called the Fraser Valley Regional District.

District municipality
The Mayor of Hope is Victor Smith.

Fraser Valley Regional District
The mayor of Hope also serves as a director on the board of the Fraser Valley Regional District. In addition to regional planning, the Fraser Valley Regional District (FVRD) works in collaboration with the District of Hope to provide recreational and cultural programs, ice arena and swimming pool, regional parks, mapping, air quality, mosquito control, weed control, E911 dispatch fire service, and search and rescue.

Province of British Columbia
Hope is in the Fraser-Nicola riding (electoral district) provincially. The current MLA for Fraser-Nicola is Jackie Tegart. Prior to the 2017 election, Hope was in the Chilliwack-Hope riding provincially, and represented by MLA Laurie Throness, who was elected in 2013.

Parliament of Canada
Hope is in the electoral district of Chilliwack—Hope, which is represented in the House of Commons of Canada by Mark Strahl.

Highways
The Trans-Canada Highway (Highway 1) passes through Hope. Hope is the southern terminus of the Coquihalla Highway (Highway 5), the western terminus of the Crowsnest Highway, locally known as the Hope-Princeton highway (Highway 3), and the eastern terminus of Highway 7.

Hope Aerodrome
Hope Aerodrome (IATA: YHE, ICAO: CYHE) is 2.6 NM west of the Hope Townsite (the previous Town of Hope) within the municipal District of Hope, British Columbia. The aerodrome is operated by the Fraser Valley Regional District. There is one turf runway 3960 ft long. The airfield is home to the Vancouver Soaring Association, a gliding club owning and operating school and recreational sailplanes and tow planes. Hope Aerodrome lies within the community of Flood in the District of Hope.

Railways
Both the Canadian Pacific and Canadian National railways pass through Hope. The Canadian, a Canadian transcontinental passenger train currently operated by Via Rail Canada, passes through Hope, calling at the Hope railway station.

Heliports
Hope Heliport is a private heliport at Fraser Canyon Hospital. It has charter helicopter service available that provides service for the natural resource industry, including forestry and mining exploration, as well as other industries including film, tourism, and public service.

Fraser Canyon Hospital
Fraser Canyon Hospital is a 10-bed hospital and provides services including 24/7 emergency care stabilization and triage and hospice beds and services. Emergency care stabilization and triage 24/7 is unique to the hospital due to its geographic isolation and emergency service requirements in an area where major highways converge. Fraser Canyon Hospital officially opened on 10 January 1959, and began as a 20-bed hospital, complete with delivery and operating rooms.

Education
The Fraser-Cascade School District #78 operates several schools in the District of Hope. There are two schools in Hope Townsite (the previous Town of Hope): Coquihalla Elementary School, which offers Kindergarten to Grade 6; and Hope Secondary School, which offers Grades 7–12. In addition, Silver Creek Elementary School, in the community of Silver Creek, offers grades Kindergarten to 7, with these students then attending Hope Secondary School for grades 8–12. The Fraser-Cascade School District also operates other educational programs such as the District Alternative Secondary Program. District enrollment declined from 1,993 students in the 2009–2010 school year to 1,615 in 2014–2015.

In popular culture
Hope has been a popular location to shoot films. First Blood (1982), the first Rambo film, starring Sylvester Stallone, Brian Dennehy, and Richard Crenna, was filmed almost entirely in and around Hope, as was Shoot to Kill (1988), starring Sidney Poitier, Tom Berenger and Kirstie Alley. K2 (1992) was also filmed nearby, with the area's mountains standing in for the Himalayas.

Hope Springs (2003), starring Colin Firth and Heather Graham, was filmed in and around Hope, but set in a fictional Hope, Vermont, in the United States.

Other films made in whole or in part in and around Hope have included Fire with Fire (1986), White Fang II (1994), Far from Home: The Adventures of Yellow Dog (1995), The Pledge (2001), The Stickup (2003, starring James Spader), Suspicious River (2004), Afghan Knights (2007), and Wind Chill (2007). Hope was the setting for a story by Todd McFarlane in Spider-Man #8-12.

Reality show contestant Ryan Jenkins from VH1's series Megan Wants a Millionaire was found dead in the Thunderbird Motel in Hope on 23 August 2009, of an apparent suicide after being charged with the murder of his wife in California.

In Spider-Man issues #8–12 (the "Perceptions" story arc), a Wendigo creature is blamed in the deaths of several children near Hope, British Columbia, and terrorizing the town. Spider-Man's alter ego, Peter Parker, is sent to take pictures during the media frenzy that follows.

The reality show Highway Thru Hell, shown on the Discovery Channel, is based in Hope and surrounding areas.

In the 2012 video game Deadlight, the protagonist, Randall Wayne, is from the town of Hope. A fictionalized version of the town and its denizens is presented via flashbacks.

A Dog's Way Home was partially filmed within the town.

Scenes of the 2021 wendigo horror film ‘’Antlers’’ were also filmed in hope.

Hope features as the final location in Rebuild: Gangs of Deadsville.

Notable natives and residents

 * Darren Huston, CEO of Priceline
 * John Weaver, sculptor

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

title: Hope, British Columbia


text:
Order of the Dannebrog

The Order of the Dannebrog (Dannebrogordenen) is a Danish order of chivalry instituted in 1671 by Christian V. Until 1808, membership in the Order was limited to fifty members of noble or royal rank, who formed a single class known as White Knights to distinguish them from the Blue Knights who were members of the Order of the Elephant. In 1808, the Order was reformed and divided into four classes. The statute of the Order was amended in 1951 by a Royal Ordinance so that both men and women could be members of the Order. Today, the Order of the Dannebrog is a means of honouring and rewarding the faithful servants of the modern Danish state for meritorious civil or military service, for a particular contribution to the arts, sciences or business life, or for working for Danish interests.

Insignia
The badge of the Order is a white enamelled Dannebrog cross (i.e., a cross pattée, the lower arm being longer than the others) with a red enamelled border, for the Knights in silver, and for everyone else in gold or silver gilt. At the top of this cross is the royal cypher of the bestowing monarch, crowned with the distinctive Danish royal crown On its front, the cross bears the royal cyphers of Christian V at its centre, as well as the motto of the Order: Gud og Kongen (God and the King) on its arms. On its reverse are found the crowned royal cyphers of Valdemar II Sejr, Christian V and Frederik VI, as well as the years 1219, 1671 and 1808, the years that each of them ascended the Danish throne. In each of the four angles of the cross is found a small Danish royal crown.

The collar of the Order is made of gold, with small enamelled Dannebrog crosses alternating with alternating crowned royal cyphers representing Kings Valdemar II Sejr and Christian V, the reputed and actual founders of the Order. When the collar is worn the sash is not worn.

The star of the Order is an eight-pointed silver star with straight rays with an enamelled Dannebrog cross (similar to the front of the badge but without the royal cypher above and the royal crowns between the arms of the cross) at the centre.

The breast cross of the Order is similar to the cross on the star but larger and with faceted silver instead of white enamel and without the silver rays of the star.

The ribbon of the Order is white silk moiré with red borders, the national colours of Denmark.

The Order originally had a distinctive habit worn by the knights (after 1808, by the Knights Grand Cross) on very solemn occasions. The habit consisted of a white doublet, white breeches, white stockings and white shoes, over which was worn a red mantle with a white lining and with the star of the order embroidered in silver on its left side. Over this red mantle was worn a short white shoulder cape with a standing collar embroidered in gold, upon which was worn the collar of the Order (the habit was always worn with the collar and never with the ribbon of the Order). The habit also had a black hat with a plume of white and red ostrich feathers. This habit was almost identical to that worn by the knights of the Order of the Elephant.

Grades
The Order is divided into six grades, which are grouped into four classes:
 * Special class
 * Grand Commander (Storkommandør; S.Kmd.) — wears the badge with diamonds on a necklet (gentlemen) or on a bow (ladies), plus the star on the left chest;
 * First Order class
 * Grand Cross (Storkors; S.K.) — wears the badge on a collar or on a sash on the right shoulder, plus the star on the left chest;
 * Second Order class
 * Commander 1st Class (Kommandør af 1. grad; K.1) — wears the breast cross on the left chest, plus (for gentlemen) the badge on a neck ribbon;
 * Commander (Kommandør; K.) — wears the badge on a neck ribbon (gentlemen) or on a bow (ladies);
 * Third Order class
 * Knight 1st Class (Ridder af 1. grad; R.1) — wears the badge on a ribbon (gentlemen) or on a bow (ladies) with rosette on the left chest;
 * Knight (Ridder; R.) — wears the badge on a ribbon (gentlemen) or on a bow (ladies) on the left chest.

The Grand Commander grade is reserved for persons of princely origin. It is awarded only to royalty with close family ties to the Danish Royal House. The Grand Cross grade can, as a special honor, be awarded 'with diamonds' (S.K.i diam., short for Storkors i diamanter). The Order also has a related decoration, known as the Cross of Honour (D.Ht., short for Dannebrogordens Hæderstegn). The insignia of the Order must be returned upon the death of the holder.

Cross of Honour
The Dannebrogordenens Hæderstegn (Cross of Honour of the Order of the Dannebrog) in modern times is only awarded to Danes on whom the Order of the Dannebrog has already been bestowed. It is also worn by members of the Danish royal family. Its badge is similar to the badge of the Order, but all in silver. It is worn on a ribbon (by gentlemen) or bow (by ladies), with rosette, on the left chest.

Recipients
Each Danish ministry has a quota of Knights and Knights 1st class that they may use at their discretion. It is most often given to high-ranking officers of the police, armed forces and emergency services.

Also used for politicians in Folketinget after 8 years of elected service. Ministers are given the rank of Knight 1st Class.

The rank of Commander is given to colonels, ministers and other high-ranking officials as a retirement-decoration after long service. Commander 1st class is given for admirals, generals, Supreme-court judges, ambassadors, and other governmental leaders as a retirement decoration.

The Grand Cross is most often used for admirals, generals, Supreme-court judges, ambassadors and similar as a reward for very meritorious service to Denmark.

Grand Cross with Breaststar with Diamonds is most often given to high-ranking officers of the Royal Court, such as Hofmarskals.

Finally, the Grand Commander grade is given only to 8 people. The reigning monarch is always a Grand Commander, and he/she may give the grade to 7 others, most often close family.

Diplomatic use
Award of the Order of the Dannebrog is often used as a tool of diplomacy. If a foreign country has an Order that they give to foreign diplomats in their country, then their diplomats in Denmark can be given an Order of the Dannebrog. To be eligible, the foreign ambassador must have resided in Denmark for at least three years.

Grand Commanders

 * 1) His Majesty Frederik X, King of Denmark, Master of the Order (1 January 2004)
 * 2) Her Majesty Margrethe II, former Queen of Denmark,  (14 January 1972)
 * 3) His Majesty Carl XVI Gustaf, King of Sweden (10 October 1975)
 * 4) His Majesty Harald V, King of Norway (28 October 1991)
 * 5) Her Royal Highness Benedikte, Princess of Denmark (27 January 1993)
 * 6) His Royal Highness Joachim, Prince of Denmark (16 April 2004)
 * 7) Her Majesty Mary, Queen of Denmark (26 May 2024)

With the death of King Constantine II of Greece in 2023, one Grand Commander position is available. The number of Grand Commanders never exceed 8.

Revocation
It is possible for membership in the Order to be revoked. Before 1808, membership had only been revoked on two occasions – Peder Griffenfeld who was charged with treason, and Samuel Christoph von Plessen (1640–1704) who was charged with looting and gross misconduct. In more recent times, it has been revoked on the basis of criminality, such as Peter Adler Alberti (1910), Erik Ninn-Hansen (1995), Peter Brixtofte (2008) and Christian Kjær (2019). Foreigners have also had their membership revoked. Several prominent Nazi officials, such as Hermann Göring and Konstantin von Neurath, were awarded the Order, but it was later revoked.

Jewelers and goldsmiths
Below is a list of jewelers who have made the insignia for the Order: Anton Michelsen was made a part of Royal Copenhagen A/S, which is now the supplier.

title: Order of the Dannebrog


text:
User:CES~enwiki

Wikipedian since June 2004.

Articles created:
 * Kawasaki Daishi
 * Naked festival
 * Utaki
 * Ōura Church
 * Hanging Temple
 * Orion Breweries
 * The Dancing Girl
 * Iya Valley
 * Ishikawa Tatsuzō
 * Nakagami Kenji
 * Hateruma
 * Taketomi
 * Ryōunkaku
 * Tumen, Jilin
 * Hatsuyume
 * Ishikawa Jun
 * Inagaki Taruho
 * Shōdoshima
 * Shikoku Pilgrimage
 * Nii Ōshima
 * Yosa Buson
 * Miyabe Miyuki
 * Hotta Yumi
 * Kuroda Iou
 * Kokuji later merged with Kanji
 * Shikokuchūō, Ehime

Where to find me:
 * Wikipedia talk:Japan-related topics notice board
 * Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (Japan-related articles)
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Japan

title: User:CES~enwiki


text:
De Standaard

De Standaard (, lit. 'The Standard') is a Flemish daily newspaper published in Belgium by Mediahuis (formerly Corelio and VUM). It was traditionally a Christian-Democratic paper, associated with the Christian-Democratic and Flemish Party, and in opposition to the Socialist Flemish daily De Morgen. In recent years De Standaard has renounced its original ideological ties.

History and profile
In 1911, Frans Van Cauwelaert founded Ons Volk Ontwaakt, the weekly journal of the Flemish Catholic student organization.

In 1914, Van Cauwelaert, Alfons Van de Perre, and Arnold Hendrix formed a publishing company, De Standaard N.V. ("The Standard, Incorporated": the Standard Group). Their goal was to publish a conservative, Catholic, Flemish daily newspaper in Brussels, to be called De Standaard. The motto of De Standaard was Alles voor Vlaanderen - Vlaanderen voor Kristus ("Everything for Flanders - Flanders for Christ"), abbreviated AVV-VVK. AVV-VVK appeared in De Standaard's front-page banner until 1999. The first edition was to appear on 22 November 1914, but publication was cancelled due to the outbreak of World War I. De Standaard did not appear until 4 December 1918, after the war ended. Gustave Sap, who joined the board of directors in 1919, provided the necessary capital for its initial expansion. The paper was started as a conservative daily with Catholic values.

In 1940, during the Second World War, Belgium was occupied by Nazi Germany. De Standaard again ceased publication. However, a new paper, Het Algemeen Nieuws ("The General News") was published with De Standaard's staff and presses, printing only what the Nazi occupation government permitted. After the liberation of Belgium in 1944, the management of Standard Group was accused of collaboration with the Nazi occupiers, and the company was banned for two years. A new company was therefore created: De Gids N.V. ("The Guide, Inc."), which began publishing De Nieuwe Standaard ("The New Standard") in November 1944. Older titles of the Standaard group were also continued by De Gids.

In 1947, the ban on Standard Group was removed, and with court permission the company reclaimed all its titles. De Nieuwe Standaard was immediately renamed De Nieuwe Gids, and then, as of 1 May, De Standaard again.

In the 1960s and 1970s, De Standaard was famous for its high-quality and independent foreign affairs coverage. For example, despite its Catholic and conservative ties, De Standaard was critical of American policy in southeast Asia.

However, the financial condition of Standard Group deteriorated, becoming critical in 1976. Standard Group declared bankruptcy on 22 June. De Standaard was rescued by André Leysen, a Belgian businessman, who formed Vlaamse Uitgeversmaatschappij N.V. (VUM - "Flemish Publishers Partnership"). VUM took over Standard Group's titles, and became the publisher of De Standaard. VUM changed its name to Corelio in 2006. The sister newspaper of De Standaard is Het Nieuwsblad.

Since 30 September 1999 the newspaper has stopped printing the lettercross AVV-VVK on its frontpage. In March 2004, De Standaard changed its format from traditional broadsheet to compact format. Unlike common practice for most of the newspapers this change occurred during its modernization process, not as a response to low circulation levels.

On 9 January 2017 De Standaard fired its controversial columnist, Dyab Abou Jahjah, after the latter made comments on Twitter that condoned the 2017 Jerusalem truck attack.

Circulation
In 2002 De Standaard had a circulation of 98,169 copies. The circulation of the paper was also reported to be 93,500 copies in 2002. The paper had a circulation of 79,000 copies in 2003 and 81,000 copies in 2004.

The circulation of the paper was 102,280 copies in 2007. During the first quarter of 2009 the paper had a circulation of 107,888 copies. In 2009 its paid circulation was about 98,000 copies.

Notable journalists

 * Gaston Durnez
 * Maria Rosseels (1916–2005), film critic and writer.

title: De Standaard


text:
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 30, 2004

The written History of Scotland largely begins with the arrival of the Roman Empire in Britain. Frequent conflict with England was followed by eventual Union. The subsequent Scottish Enlightenment and Industrial Revolution saw Scotland become one of the commercial and industrial powerhouses of Europe. Decline following the Second World War was acute, but recent decades have brought a cultural and economic renaissance, fuelled in part by a resurgent financial services sector, the proceeds of North Sea oil, and latterly a devolved parliament. (more...)

Recently featured: Radar – Mitochondrial Eve – Copyright


text:
USS Tortuga (LSD-26)

USS Tortuga (LSD-26) was a Casa Grande-class dock landing ship in the United States Navy. She was the first Navy ship to be named for the Dry Tortugas, a group of desert coral islets 60 miles west of Key West, Florida, which were discovered in 1513 by Spanish explorer Ponce de Leon.

Tortuga was laid down on 16 October 1944 by the Boston Navy Yard; launched on 21 January 1945; sponsored by Mrs. George T. Paine; and commissioned on 8 June 1945.

1945-1947
Commissioned during the final phase of World War II, Tortuga conducted shakedown in the Virginia Capes area and was at Colón, Canal Zone, en route to the Pacific combat area on 15 August 1945 when she received news of Japan's surrender. The dock landing ship soon proceeded to Buckner Bay, Okinawa, and subsequently operated in Korean and Chinese waters, repairing small craft and serving in the mobile support unit attached to Amphibious Forces, Pacific Fleet. Operating initially out of Jinsen (now Inchon), Korea, Tortuga subsequently conducted her support missions out of Tsingtao, Taku, and Shanghai, China; Hong Kong; and Yokosuka, Japan. In the spring of 1947, the ship returned to the west coast of the United States, via Guam and Pearl Harbor, and was decommissioned and placed in reserve at San Diego on 18 August 1947.

1950-1953
Following the outbreak of a civil war between North Korea and South Korea in the summer of 1950, Tortuga was recommissioned on 15 September 1950. Reactivated in response to the Navy's need for amphibious ships created by the Korean War, the landing ship dock underwent an abbreviated refitting and shakedown before she sailed for Japan on 29 December. Proceeding via Pearl Harbor and Eniwetok, she arrived at Sasebo on 3 February 1951. Tortuga participated in a feint landing which preceded the operation mounted to recapture the strategic port of Inchon.

About this time, intelligence reports indicated that the Chinese Communists might take advantage of American preoccupation with the war in Korea by mounting an invasion, across the Taiwan Strait, of Nationalist-held Formosa. American strategists felt that, in such an endeavor, the Communist Chinese would utilize many seagoing junks since, in operations off Korea, vessels of this type had proven to be almost unsinkable. Accordingly, Tortuga raised eight 60-foot junks from the depths of Inchon harbor and transported them to Yokosuka to be studied to determine what ordnance would be most effective against them.

Tortuga remained in the Far East through 1952 for two more Korean deployments. During the first, the landing ship provided support services at Inchon; and, in the second, she took part in the massive amphibious feint at Kojo, North Korea, from 13 to 16 October 1952, and in operations off Wonsan, supporting mine-craft in November and December. During 1953, Tortuga participated in the Korean prisoner-of-war exchange after the Panmunjom Armistice and also conducted landing exercises and maneuvers in the Far East and off the west coast of the United States.

1954-1964
Tortuga was deployed to the Western Pacific (WestPac) again in 1954. The signing of the Geneva Accords which ended the fighting between the French and Viet Minh resulted in the creation of two Vietnams — North and South. The former was to be in Communist hands; the latter was to be governed by non-Communist leaders. Diverted to Haiphong from Yokosuka, Tortuga arrived at her destination on 21 August 1954 to take part in the massive evacuation of French nationals, in "Operation Passage to Freedom", as well as the moving of Vietnamese who chose not to live in the north. The landing ship conducted four round trips from Haiphong in the north to Tourane (now Da Nang), Saigon, and Nha Trang in the south, before she returned to Yokosuka on 4 October. For the remainder of the year, she conducted minesweeper support operations in Korean waters.

During the 14 years from 1955 to 1969, Tortuga would remain employed in a regular schedule of deployments to WestPac. In 1958, Tortuga conducted operations in the Marshall Islands. She was based at San Diego until 30 June 1966, when her home port was changed to Long Beach. In between deployments — which included exercises and equipment lifts and labors to help maintain the 7th Fleet's readiness — Tortuga conducted local operations put of west coast ports and underwent progressive modifications during regular availabilities.

1964-1965
As American involvement in Southeast Asia deepened during the latter half of the 1960s, Tortuga's deployment schedule accordingly reflected her role in the buildup of Allied strength to attempt to check communist domination of Southeast Asia. Soon after receiving word of the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, Tortuga — combat-loaded — got underway from Buckner Bay. She remained underway in the South China Sea from 6 August to 19 September before returning to Subic Bay.

For the remainder of the year 1964, Tortuga operated out of Yokosuka and conducted troop and equipment lifts between Japan and Okinawa until she headed home and arrived back at San Diego on 18 December. In February 1965, the landing ship proceeded to Camp Pendleton, California, to participate in Exercise "Silver Lance," the largest peacetime landing exercise ever held. In June, she commenced a WestPac deployment. She proceeded to Buckner Bay and Da Nang and, after operating in the Orient through the early summer, returned to Long Beach in late August 1965. She subsequently conducted a lift to Okinawa before she returned to San Diego for refresher training.

1966-1967
Tortuga sailed for Vietnamese waters on 1 March 1966, arrived at Vung Tau on 18 April, and relieved USS Belle Grove (LSD-2) as support ship for Operation Game Warden — the Navy's operation designed to interdict the flow of Communist supplies along the coastlines of South Vietnam. Initially, Tortuga operated in the Rung Sat Special Zone between Saigon and Vung Tau, helping to guard the entrance to the shipping channels snaking through Viet Cong (VC) territory to the capital city.

Tortuga shifted to the Mekong Delta region on 12 June to serve as a floating base for the Navy's fast PBR's of Task Force 116 and for a detachment of Army Bell UH-1B Huey helicopter gunships. Initially, the helicopters were from the 145th Aviation Detachment, however, by the end of Tortuga's tour, they were Navy aircraft from Task Force "Sea Wolf."

During her support operations with the riverine assault groups, Tortuga received a number of distinguished visitors ranging from General William C. Westmoreland, Commander, Military Assistance Group; Rear Admiral Norvell G. Ward, Commander, Naval Forces Vietnam; as well as United States Ambassador to South Vietnam Henry Cabot Lodge; and news commentator Chet Huntley, who brought with him an NBC camera team to record a news story on Tortuga's river-patrol base activities.

Her deployment completed in the summer of 1966, Tortuga got underway on 30 August and steamed via Japan to the west coast. She arrived at San Diego on 7 November for leave, upkeep, and overhaul. The refit lasted through April 1967, modernizing the ship and preparing her for another WestPac deployment. Following a period of refresher training and amphibious exercises, Tortuga sailed on 21 July 1967 from San Diego and arrived, via Hawaii, Guam, and the Philippines, at Da Nang on 5 September.

Upon arrival, Tortuga relieved USS Monticello (LSD-35) with Amphibious Ready Group "Bravo" and operated with that unit into the fall of 1967. She took part in Operations Fortress Sentry and Formation Leader, before her detachment from ARG "B" on 9 November. Subsequently, Tortuga loaded a cargo of disabled or damaged CH-46 Sea Knight helicopters for transport from Da Nang to Okinawa, where they were repaired for further service. For the remainder of the year, from 3 to 31 December, Tortuga conducted cargo lifts from Japanese ports to Vietnam and vice versa.

1968-1969
Tortuga then returned to the west coast — via Yokosuka, Buckner Bay, Subic Bay, Hong Kong and Pearl Harbor — and arrived at Long Beach on 9 March 1968. For the remainder of the year, the landing ship conducted exercises and local operations put of Long Beach, until again deploying to WestPac in February 1969. On 17 February, while en route to Yokosuka, Tortuga conducted her first underway refueling — with USS Cook (APD-130) receiving 31,000 gallons of Navy Special Fuel Oil (NSFO). Upon arrival at Yokosuka, Tortuga's in-port time was extended to allow the on-loading of a complete destroyer radar system for transport to Subic Bay. Underway on 11 March with her special cargo, the landing ship soon reached Subic Bay, unloaded, and proceeded for Kaohsiung, Taiwan, en route to South Vietnam.

On the last leg of her Vietnam-bound voyage, Tortuga instituted a stepped-up shipboard defense program consisting of daily general quarters drills, exercising especially with the ship's guns and in damage control problems — for the ship had received intelligence reports that a VC rocket attack was expected to coincide with her arrival at Da Nang. When paraflares were sighted on the horizon at 02:00 on 14 March, Tortuga knew that she had arrived at her destination and went to general quarters. The expected attack failed to materialize, though, and Tortuga unloaded her cargo unmolested but at piers which, only the day before, had been rocketed by the VC. When the offloading was completed, Tortuga shifted her berth far away from most of the shipping in the harbor. There, boat crews bent to the task of loading old ammunition on the ship. Meanwhile, one boat crew, composed of one officer and five enlisted men, armed with rifles and Thompson submachine guns, kept a constant vigil in an LCVP which circled the ship at a distance of 60-70 yards. Periodically, at odd intervals, the boat's crew would drop percussion grenades in the water in an effort calculated to discourage enemy frogmen. When the task was completed, the ship got underway for the Philippines.

Reaching Subic Bay after an uneventful passage, the ship unloaded the explosives and soon received orders to transport a much-needed suction dredge up the Saigon River to Nhà Bè Base, through territory largely controlled by the VC. At Tan My, Tortuga embarked the dredge and a warping tug and got underway. During the transit of the Saigon River, the landing ship stood to general quarters, keeping a sharp eye for enemy attempts to impede the progress of the ship. The enemy failed to appear, however, and Tortuga, her dredge, and her tug arrived at Nhà Bè soon thereafter.

From 5 May to 20 May, Tortuga participated in Operation Daring Rebel, an operation mounted to seek out and destroy VC rest camps on Barrier Island, 15 mi south of Da Nang. Joining USS Duluth (LPD-6), USS Winston (LKA-94) and USS Okinawa (LPH-3), Tortuga closed the beachhead, while USS White River (LSM(R)-536) stood offshore to provide initial bombardment. When White River launched a heavy rocket barrage shoreward, the operation got underway. Landing craft splashed ashore while troop-carrying helicopters quickly airlifted troops ashore in the vertical-envelopment phase of the operation. For the next two weeks, Tortuga served as primary control ship for the operation which located and destroyed caches of food and ammunition and VC rest camps.

The landing ship again served as primary control ship (PCS) in Da Nang harbor during Operation Gallant Leader, a follow-up to Operation Daring Rebel. Relieved by Duluth on 23 May, Tortuga set sail soon thereafter for Buckner Bay and simulated combat landings during exercises with Assault Craft Unit 1 in late June. In July, Tortuga transported the first increment of Marines and their equipment for Operation Keystone Eagle, from Cửa Việt Base, South Vietnam, to White Beach, Okinawa, before returning up the Saigon River to Nha Be with a load of palletized cargo.

Subsequently supporting Operation Sea Float, delivering two pontoons and 32 pallets of ammunition from Nhà Bè to Tân Mỹ Base, Tortuga onloaded men and equipment from "Charlie" Battery, 1st Light Antiaircraft Missile Battalion (LAAM), 1st Marine Aircraft Wing, at Da Nang harbor for transport to the west coast of the United States. In this last operation, the second increment of Operation Keystone Eagle, Tortuga headed "stateside" for the last time, and arrived at Seal Beach, California, on 12 September 1969, unloading the 58 Hawk missiles of the 1st LAAM Battalion, USMC, and then proceeding to the Long Beach Naval Shipyard.

Tortuga disembarked her marines and proceeded to pier 7 where she was moored outboard of USS Carter Hall (LSD-3). On 3 January 1970, Tortuga got underway for the Inactivation Facility at Mare Island, where she was decommissioned on 26 January 1970. Transferred to the temporary custody of the Maritime Administration (MARAD) on 6 October 1970, the ship was berthed at Suisun Bay, California, where she was later placed in permanent custody of MARAD on 1 September 1971. She was struck from the Navy list on 15 October 1976.

Tortuga was awarded five engagement stars for her Korean War service and eight for service off Vietnam.

From 1983 to 1987 Tortuga was used as a target ship and based at Port Hueneme, California. During trials the ship was repeatedly hit by Tomahawk missiles. On 15 December 1987 Tortuga ran aground on San Miguel Island after breaking its tow during a storm. The ship was scrapped on site, with the process taking over eight months to complete.

title: USS Tortuga (LSD-26)


text:
User talk:Togo~enwiki/Holomovement

''In particular, more detailed information about holomovement itself would be appreciated. Please don't use Wikipedia to advertise your ideas but, rather, strictly as a means of reporting information, being as unbiased about it as possible.''
 * Well there is much written about holomovement! The inspiration of each Scientist wo may count themselves in are so broad and possibly never reported about. What we can tell is among which people supporting which other theories we most likely will find people carrying on the movement.

Article needs to be more informative
I don't have much sympathy for this article, but nevertheless, one would hope that a coherent picture of some part of holomovement is possible, particularly if you are going to write an encyclopedia article about it. I certainly would be interested in knowing what this stuff is, even if I might believe it's nonsense. (This is my opinion and that opinion should have no bearing on the existence of this article, granted) For instance, who believes in it? Is it eastern mysticism? Is it a physical theory? Is it a religion or spiritual movement? The remarks about Plato's cave say nothing about how they relate to this subject.

Also the English needs to be radically improved. Given that I think this is marginal science I refuse to improve the presentation, but that shouldn't prevent somebody else with a more sympathetic attitude to pitch in. CSTAR 18:42, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Agreed
Togo, what you have here is much closer Gene Ray's Time Cubewebsite than it is to an encyclopedia article. You haven't given a definitive statement as to what the holomovement is all about. The article should be centered around making such statements--not namedropping. Namedropping, to start with, is a weak form of argumentation. But that's beside the fact that you shouldn't be arguing for your views on Wikipedia in the first place. If you want to state a point of view, do so strictly in an informative manner. In reading the article, we shouldn't be able to tell what side you're on.

Why don't you start by making a simple one-to-three sentence statement of what the central viewpoint of the holomovement is and put it in after the first sentence of the article. A good idea would be to guide yourself by imagining what you would say to a person who came up to you casually and said, "So tell me, briefly, what's the basic idea of the holomovement?"

If you aren't able to put it into words, you should probably give up the project. Floorsheim

 * Thing is if you want to learn about something, you start and 'teach' about it... I have yet to find anything more than vague information about the subject myself, but I read about all of the mentioned theories and I know that Bohm (if the Holomovement is truly attributed first to him?) drew upon the implied theories, at least I read that about him and morphic fields and the eastern philosophies. I haven't even introduced my own interpretation which essentially says that subatomic particles move back and forth trough time stabilizing the moment and checking the possibilities. But you see I have no means to put that into a formula etc. so I start linking together what are known interpretations and while 'Holomovement' seems a good title for it, I don't mind if there was a better title to the article. You are right there are things that appear to be 'selling' like the promise of a release from that cave. At the same time it does belong into the article since it shows us how long people have felt or experienced that there is a deeper levels on which conscious beings can operate! I am hoping for somebody to enrich the article even if it pushed my contribution out of the center! I keep improving it as I receive intuition (visualization) about it! Togo 01:53, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Maybe you could find out what David Bohm actually believed. His book Dialogues may have something relevant. (Don't ask me. I haven't read it)CSTAR 02:32, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes I know the location of a few good books on the subject, I will ask the loaned of course the Article may also be a good location for a links collection, since its all very young science we have to be patient, after all we are talking about a subject where nobody really knows everything except the god consciousness that does not ask and creates in a definite way not abandoning its pure intuition; the question is just how wide and energetic is the reality field of the multidimensional fractal options and connections; are we zen enough? Togo 03:13, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

reality field = adjunct of Multiple reality theory based smeared out molecular level suspending Matter in the moment. god consciousness godhead seeing is creating thought creating seeing options and connections harmonically interacting evolving field with moderate depths of energy and stability (reality content). Even if it may sound like I am talking about programming this all happens voluntarily but who knows how many times the particle passes through the same moment, so there can be harmonization with higher intent. All a question of consciousness and if ya, Jesus really returns were in for it! AnyhowTogo 03:13, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Let me see if I've got this straight, Togo. "Holomovement" is a term that YOU have invented to refer to a trend that YOU think you see happening in science.  It is not something that there is any established consensus about.  Not only that, it's not even something you have a clear picture of in your mind.  Yet you've chosen to write an encyclopedia article about it so that you can "learn more."
 * I have to say I am disgusted that someone would be so arrogant and inconsiderate as to take advantage Wikipedia in the way that you have chosen to. This site is supposed to be an encyclopedia, not your personal sketchbook.  By putting this here, you give people the false impression that the holomovement is something a lot of people know about and have thought about as such—not your invention.  In the process, you damage Wikipedia's credibility, and that makes me angry.  If you want a place to broadcast your ideas, you should either get your own website or write a book.  This is not the place for it.  Floorsheim
 * You are clearly exaggerating! And you are giving me too much credit - I have not invented the term nor its set of associations, they are obvious, but probably incomplete! I doubt that people anywhere in the world believe the word of a single page in a constantly evolving Internet! Anyhow you should use your emotion to inspire your own research and improve on the level of visualization that the article has created for me and may create for others! As you know that is what wikipedia is for learning from each other, how do you get into a conversation with somebody who really has the trajectory to know more about the subject ? The way I see it most specialized Professors wont just go and start teaching to any old student without seeing that the mental ground is well prepared! I think its an illusion to expect that the ultimate authority will just walk up to an empty page and put it there to never more be changed. The wiki concept is tool to find the answers in each others heads! Togo 03:50, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Okay. Just ran an internet search and apparently this point of view does have a substantial following.  I'm sorry for suggesting that it was your invention, Togo.  Nevertheless, as I'm sure you're aware, not everyone in the world shares this point of view with you.  That being the case, no matter how convinced you are that it is the truth, it against Wikipedia's policy for you to represent it as the truth here.  Read the NPOV.  Floorsheim
 * It’s more difficult for one Person to be unbiased than for 2 or more! And yes the article is definitely open to neutrality! Improve it! Togo 17:06, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Need to be Rewritten...
This article needs to be rewritten. However, I'm not qualified to do it, seeing as I know nothing of the holomovement. I don't even know if it's proper to say "holomovement" or "the holomovement." I put the page on "Pages needing attention" hoping someone will come to the rescue. If they don't, it will be up to you, Togo, to rewrite this, getting rid of the non-NPOV stuff along with the tangentially-related stuff and putting in a concise, thorough statement of what the holomovement is--not visualization aids. If you do that, I'll come behind you and work on the readability. If you can't manage, though, I'll be placing it on the Vfd.

Some specific examples of NPOV problems:

"Like the fractal dweller may try, scientists are attempting to deduce a mathematical understanding of the underlying structure, seeing the repetitive patterns of reality."
 * There is no consensus among philosophers of science or scientists that this is what science is all about. Nor is it clear from what we know that there is anything resembling fractals that pervades the science we have discovered so far.  There may be specific examples of it.  But it is at the very least not clear that it is some sort of global property of reality.
 * "Like the fractal dweller would try, scientists may be attempting to deduce a mathematical understanding of the underlying structure, seeing the repetitive patterns of reality."
 * This softens it a bit if you think of no examples of 'repetitive patterns of reality' think about electromagnetic waves and frequency at least!

"the Holomovement [anticipates] that we will one day discover the interconnectedness of our universe."
 * First off, there's a clarity issue here, because it's unclear what "interconnectedness" quite means. But more importantly, the phrasing suggests that it is the case that the universe 'is' interconnected and we just haven't discovered it yet.  That isn't NPOV.  Whatever interconnected means, if it hasn't been discovered, then there will assuredly be people who don't believe in it.
 * "the Holomovement [anticipates] that we will one day discover new levels of interconnectedness of our universe."
 * Given that there are allready conventional levels of 'interconnectedness' (energy exchange by photons), (chemical bonds)...

"we consider that each individual consciousness creates on its path through dimensional reality many possible worlds..."
 * The many worlds interpretation is not accepted by all thinkers nor even all physicists. The phrasing here suggests that it is a fact.  That is not NPOV.
 * Just look at the MWT page its a mayority ! How about:
 * "Suppose each individual consciousness creates on its path through dimensional reality many possible worlds..."

"Meditating monks achieve great power over reality..."
 * I'm sure there are plenty who are skeptical of the various monks' purported abilities
 * Yes and there are also bunches of charlatan monks, On has to be very fortunate!
 * "Meditating monks may achieve great power over reality..."

Some tangential subject matter that should be removed:

"the legendary cave of Plato"
 * Most readers (I for one) don't know what the legendary cave of Plato is. Rather than go into an explanation, it should be removed as an obscure reference.
 * Plato's allegory of the cave

the fractal stuff
 * While it's interesting, I really don't think this belongs in the article. It doesn't make it any clearer what is claimed by people involved in the holomovement.
 * Do not agree! You probably don't know as most people never investigated how the iterations of the Mandelbrot calc jump around... Would be nice to find software that offers that type of trace feature! I had once written my own program to do that...

the many-worlds interpretation
 * I don't see how this discussion helps, either.
 * you don't have to; somebody will!

the Leibniz stuff
 * I'm unconvinced that there's a connection between this and the many-worlds interpretation, even less a connection to this article.
 * Same; its important to know and offer it to the consideration of the reader !

the "Links to Eastern and Alternative Religion" section
 * As presented, this section doesn't seem to be on topic. It may be the case that there is some overlap between the beliefs of those involved in the holomovement and those who hold Eastern or Alternative religious beliefs.  But this section does not effectively display them.
 * You would have to know about the levels of Order the Bohm discribes and mind matter interactions etc.

Accuracy issues

I don't think you have quite given an accurate picture the Bohm interpretation of quantum mechanics. For one thing, the quantum potential, under his interpretation, is a real thing not a mathematical construct.

I think your presentation of Leibniz's philosophy is a bit garbled as well. –Floorsheim 00:52, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * At the very least I would like to know if holomovement isn't really a theory of dynamics, rather than as Togo seems to suggest, a philosophical movement. I really suspect it's the former not the latter. Frankly this article, as currently written is too much in the realm of fantasy.

 * Many worlds and possible worlds, as I've tried to point out to Togo, are almost completely unrelated.
 * Disagree have you read Monad it indicates this isn't even Leibniz invention, and about the math of interference patterns...

 * If this article survives in anything resembling its current form, then RIP wikipedia.
 * Long live Wikipedia and Liberal Expression!
 * CSTAR 01:02, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Concerning Redirect to Implicate and Explicate Order
I think most people would agree that Implicate and Explicate Order provides a more encyclopedic discussion of the subject matter than this article does in its current state. I'm redirecting there. I have given prior notice of my plans to do this to all parties who have contributed to this discussion. –Floorsheim 10:17, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

From user talk:CSTAR: Yes, this new article is an enormous improvement. The previous holomovement article was worthless (IMHO).CSTAR 15:18, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

From user talk:togo: No I have no problem with your article. As long as you dont't redirect Holomovement! Holomovement brings in even more information and it will be even further improved. There is no reason to belive that Holomovement will not eventually evolve into a great Article! Congratulations on your decision to study the issue! Thats very progrssive and you know I'll take part of the credit for all great discoveries you may make ;^) Togo 18:12, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Sorry. Didn't see Togo's objection on his talk page. I'm reverting for now. Will place on RfC and await others' comments before taking further action. Togo, please leave the neutrality and accuracy dispute tags in the article while we are resolving this issue. –Floorsheim 04:09, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

From Talk:Implicate and Explicate Order: Lets face it Implicate and Explicate Order is not equal to Holomovement nor do you really explain it nor have nearly the completenes of the Holomovement article! Of course I dont mind if you contribute to Holomovement as long as I don't get any of those 'deleted because I don't understand'. If you were to try to formualte anything that you don't understand in a simpler way I'd help you! Togo 05:04, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Implicate_and_Explicate_Order"

Improving Holomovement and Implicate and Explicate Order Articles
It looks like this has been an ongoing issue. Hopefully I can add a fresh opinion to the mix. Although I think that both pages could use an expert explanation of the subject, I agree that Togo's page is especially troubling. No offense Togo, but I don't think you've really tried to be terribly neutral. You seem to be forcing your presumptions about the accuracy of shamanism and other things onto an impartial audience. You also introduce a ton of ideas without clearly connecting them or explaining them. I agree with the redirect until these problems with your article are worked out. Good luck with your work. Canthony 07:02, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks, however the accuracy of neither shamanism nor the other philosophies stands to debate! However you could suggest a way to indicate (word it) that there is a Experience based connection (that you could investigate if you like for example under erowid.org) between that which the holomovement is and the rare state of mind based visualization that people can gain. A redirect is out of the question because in any way each of the concepts deserves its own article! Togo 07:41, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Holomovement article misleading and contradictory
Although David Bohm's work was controversial and some of it dismissed by many, he was a serious physicist whose work deserves careful discussion. The current Holomovement article confuses many different subjects, including drug use, shamanism and classical philosophical metaphors with Bohm's theories. The article is badly written - - the stuff on fractals is just silly. I am upset at the way meaningless phrases are tossed around. CSTAR 13:11, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I should explain silly: Scale homogeneity of a space has nothing to do with the fractal nature of that space. The manifold Rn has also scale homogeneity. For some reason, the author of this article feels that bringing in Mandelbroit sets will add interest to this article.  It doesn't; in fact, this is why I called it silly. Why not bring in other irrelevant things -- (need I suggest any -- a perennial favorite is Godel's incompleteness theorem, and while you're at it throw in Schrodinger's cat or maybe even supply-side economics and the domino theory etc.).CSTAR 14:18, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * That's your personal interpretation and it misses the point! Are you sure you can say reality does not have the same holomorphic (see complex number theory) behaviours as the Mandelbrot set ? You probably haven't investigated Mandelbrot-set like I have. If you are poorly informed don't use that as an excuse to not contribute the little you know too! Togo 02:07, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Togo, may I request that you not use this ad-hominem argument? As a matter of fact I do know a fair amount about Fractal sets, (and have published on this) but that's beside the point, because I have no intention of using this kind of personal argument here. In your previous sentences, you are mixing two different things: (a) The local iterative structure of fractal sets and (b) The global iterative "limit" structure. This is beyond the totally dreadful confusion you are causing in your edits to this article by trying to claim there is some significance in the nature of space-time of purely mathematical facts about fractals.  This is at best philosophical idealism, and is more like pop-science. CSTAR 02:47, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Wrong again! It is exactly that that the holomovement implies! Not that nature is a Fractal (even though it is) but that every perceivable moment of conventional reality is connected in holographic depth through still existing space time flow (and not just one possibility) to all other Realities of the same moment (and really to all of the past and much of the Future). Of course I am not saying I could deliver the formula but I am seeking it in our Heads! Togo 03:39, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC) P.S. Did you miss to notice that there is no local iteration at least not in the Mandelbrot set ? Did you fail to notice that your accusation of 'my' ad hominem fallacy is your fallacy too ?

Links
Thes will help to complete the article in no time !
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Plato
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Leibniz
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Everett&spell=1
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Sheldrake&spell=1
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Lovelock&spell=1
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Margulis&spell=1
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Capra&spell=1
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Bohm&spell=1
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+fractal
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+shamanism
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+hinduism
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+entheogen
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+evolution
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+meditation
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+tank
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+flotation
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+drug
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+lsd
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+peyote
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+salvia
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+quantum
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+epr
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Schrödinger
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Heisenberg
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Planck
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Jesus
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+animal
 * http://www.google.com/search?num=50&q=Holomovement+Consciousness

Removed stuff
Had to remove stuff since it made no sense in the article:
 * Especially the aspect of the invisible underlying levels of order or the parallel universes suggest a connection between the holomovement and the Morphogenetic fields of Rupert Sheldrake and the Gaia Hypothesis of Lynn Margulis and James Lovelock.

Sentence is incomplete, and I coudn't reconcile it with earlier sentences. Also contains unqualified comparisons that need explanation (this is an encyclopedia, not a cocktail party). — siro χ  o  16:43, Aug 16, 2004 (UTC)

Be bold
Ok. I've done some more looking into things and apparently, according to Wikipedia's "Be Bold" policy, it seems we're supposed to actually have the imminent revert war over this redirect. Also, according to the three revert rule, it's against Wikipedia's policy for any of us to revert more than three times per 24-hour period. Guess I'll go ahead and start things off. –Floorsheim 05:03, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Togo~enwiki/Holomovement