text:
Maude system

The Maude system is an implementation of rewriting logic. It is similar in its general approach to Joseph Goguen's OBJ3 implementation of equational logic, but based on rewriting logic rather than order-sorted equational logic, and with a heavy emphasis on powerful metaprogramming based on reflection.

Maude is free software, and tutorials are available online. It was originally developed at SRI International, but is now developed by a diverse collaboration of researchers.

Introduction
Maude sets out to solve a different set of problems than ordinary imperative languages like C, Java or Perl. It is a formal reasoning tool, which can help us verify that things are "as they should", and show us why they are not if this is the case. In other words, Maude lets us define formally what we mean by some concept in a very abstract manner (not concerning ourselves with how the structure is internally represented and so on), but we can describe what is thought to be the equal concerning our theory (equations) and what state changes it can go through (rewrite rules).

Maude modules (rewrite theories) consist of a term-language plus sets of equations and rewrite-rules. Terms in a rewrite theory are constructed using operators (functions taking 0 or more arguments of some sort, which return a term of a specific sort). Operators taking 0 arguments are considered constants, and one constructs their term-language by these simple constructs. Maude lets the user specify whether or not operators are infix, postfix or prefix (default), this is done using underscores as place fillers for the input terms.

Reduction equations are assumed to be confluent and terminating. Rewrite rules do not have this restriction.

When Maude "executes", it rewrites terms according to the equations and rewrite rules. Maude rewrites terms according to the equations whenever there is a match between the closed terms that one tries to rewrite (or reduce) and the left hand side of an equation in our equation-set. A match in this context is a substitution of the variables in the left hand side of an equation which leaves it identical to the term that one tries to rewrite/reduce. Equations and rewrite rules can also be conditional rules, which means they have to fulfill some criteria to be applied to the term (other than just matching the left hand side of the rewrite rule).

The rules are applied at "random" by the Maude system, meaning that you can not be sure that one rule is applied before another rule and so on. If an equation can be applied to the term, it will always be applied before any rewrite rule. Maude's built-in search can look for unwanted states and show that no such states can be reached. Maude has the ability to control what rule applications should be attempted at each step using meta-programming, due to the reflective property or rewriting logic.

Usage
Maude has been used to validate security protocols and critical code. The Maude system has proved flaws in cryptography protocols by just specifying what the system can do, and by looking for unwanted situations (states or terms that should not be possible to reach) the protocol can be shown to contain bugs, not programming bugs but situations happen that are hard to predict just by walking down the "happy path" as most developers do.

title: Maude system


text:
Microsoft Research Maps

Microsoft Research Maps (MSR Maps) was a free online repository of public domain aerial imagery and topographic maps provided by the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The site was a collaboration between Microsoft Research (MSR), Bing Maps, and the USGS. It was in operation from June 1998 to March 2016. It had 30,000 to 50,000 visitors per day as of January 2010. The site was renamed in 2010, prior to which it had been known as TerraServer-USA (formerly Microsoft TerraServer).

The site had black and white USGS aerial photographs of approximately 97% of the United States. In 2000, the USGS launched the new Urban Areas program, which will ultimately take high-resolution color aerial photographs of about 100 major American cities. MSR Maps had Urban Areas data for 40 cities.

Microsoft had announced that the MSR Maps web site was going to permanently close on May 1, 2012, but later changed that decision based on requests from users of the site. As of March 2016 the site is no longer available.

History
Though it was online as early as December 1997, the site was formally unveiled June 24, 1998, as part of an 18-month agreement between Microsoft, Compaq, and Aerial Images of Raleigh, North Carolina. It was created as a demonstration system to advertise the scalability of Microsoft's Windows NT Server and SQL Server, and used images from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) and Sovinformsputnik (the Russian Federal Space Agency).

TerraServer was the brainchild of the Turing Award-winning researcher on database systems, Jim Gray. Before his death, Gray continued this work, developing Microsoft Virtual Earth and began a similar project that would become the Worldwide Telescope.

In January 2000, Microsoft and Aerial Images, now TerraServer.com, Inc., split their operations, creating two parallel TerraServer websites. The dualism caused confusion among web surfers until the Microsoft name change in 2010. TerraServer.com, Inc., which owns the trademark TERRASERVER, filed a lawsuit in 2008 in North Carolina federal court, seeking monetary damages and asking that Microsoft be stopped from using the TerraServer trademark.

The TerraServer name was a play on words, with Terra referring to the 'earth' or 'land' and also to the terabytes of images stored on the site.

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

title: Microsoft Research Maps


text:
Takekurabe

Takekurabe (たけくらべ), English titles including Growing Up and Child's Play, is a novella by Japanese writer Ichiyō Higuchi, first published in 1895–96. It depicts a group of youths growing up in Shitaya Ryūsenji-chō, Yoshiwara, Meiji era Tokyo's red light district, over a span of four months.

Characters

 * Midori – a 14-year-old girl whose family lives in the Daikokuya brothel. Her older sister, Ōmaki, works as a popular courtesan. Midori was born in Kishū and does not have direct ties to either of the gangs because her family is not under the protection of the Senzoku Shrine, nor does her family belong to the Ryūgeji temple parish. She is a bright and delightful child who loves to play with her friends. Once she becomes older, she is to follow in her older sister's footsteps and become a courtesan at the Daikokuya brothel.

 * Nobuyuki (Nobu) – a 15-year-old boy who is the son of the Ryūgeji temple's Buddhist priest. Nobu is a rather gloomy and introverted boy who is extremely devoted to his studies. He is Ryūgeji's heir but he is at odds with his family because he disagrees with his father's worldly ways and greedy profiteering, and does not intend to become a Buddhist priest.

 * Chōkichi – leader of the "Back Street Gang". He is the son of a construction crew foreman. He is a callous, hot-headed, and ill-mannered boy who often looks to pick fights with Shōta. He causes many conflicts in the story.

 * Shōta – leader of the "Main Street Gang" and son of the local pawnbroker. Shōta is a well-educated, but often naive and arrogant boy who was orphaned and has been raised by his grandmother. He appears to have grown up faster than all the other children as he takes on many adult responsibilities like collecting interest payments on the loans of clients. He is also Midori's best friend.

 * Sangorō – a supporting character in the story. Sangorō is the son of a rickshaw man whose family lives in a house owned by Chōkichi's father. Since Chōkichi's family owns Sangorō's home, Sangorō gets dragged into a lot of Chōkichi's messes.

Plot
The story takes place in the Meiji Restoration period in Tokyo, depicting the lives of a group of youths who live in Daionjimae, a fictional neighbourhood outside of the Yoshiwara red-light district. The story follows the characters Midori, Nobu, Chōkichi, and Shōta as they transition from adolescence into early adulthood. The events of the story are framed by two neighbourhood festivals: the Senzoku Shrine summer festival and the Ōtori Shrine Cock’s Fair (Tori no Ichi) in early winter.

On the eve of the Senzoku Shrine summer festival, Chōkichi, the "Back Street Gang" leader, intends to ambush Shōta, the "Main Street Gang" leader. However, Shōta never appears, and the ensuing brawl results in the beating of one of Shōta’s supporters, Sangorō, and Midori, Shōta’s best friend, being struck on the forehead by Chōkichi’s muddy sandal. Whilst all this chaos is brewing, Midori struggles with her identity and future as she is torn between her own freedom and her family’s wishes for her to become a courtesan like her older sister, Ōmaki. Midori takes an interest in Nobu, who hides his shyness behind dismissive behaviour towards her, which repels her. With Midori being slowly pushed towards becoming a courtesan and being caught in the crossfire of Chōkichi and Shōta’s feud, she finally makes a decision after Chōkichi fires a string of insults at her regarding her family’s background and her future as a “whore.”

The day after the festival, Midori leaves school. When Midori learns that Nobu may be working with Chōkichi, it comes as a huge shock to her because she had not thought that any of her peers were rivals. The flamboyant, lively, and beautiful Midori is too showy for the quiet, introverted Nobu to handle especially while he is dealing with the distasteful consumerism of his parents and sister. The two do not speak again before going their separate ways: Midori to the brothel to become a courtesan, and Nobuyuki to a seminary to train to become a priest, leaving their childhoods behind forever.

Loss of Childhood
As can be gathered from the English translations of the story, Growing Up and Child's Play, the story depicts four youths as they transition into early adulthood. Some, like Shōta, take this transition a bit better than others. Except for Nobu, no other youngster in Takekurabe seems to be committed to his studies or has the desire to leave the little universe defined by the Yoshiwara and Daionjimae, the fictional neighbourhood in Takekurabe set just outside the licensed quarter. These characters, like children before the Restoration, never question the sense of inheriting their families' professions and places in society, since the ancient, plebeian Shitamachi area lacked from the beginning any stimuli that promoted hopes of personal growth for them.

Societal Pressure on Children
Takekurabe demonstrates the societal and familial pressure that is placed on children for them to become successful adults who are able to carry on a legacy. This is best shown through the characters of Midori and Nobu. Midori, who is a pleasant child full of love to play is sadly turned into a quiet woman by the end of the story as her freedom is stripped from her. She gives in to the path laid out before her and decides to become a courtesan like her older sister, despite not wanting to. Similarly, Nobu, who despises the lifestyle of his family, decides to train to become a priest like his father, preparing to take on his role as heir to Ryūgeji temple. Examples of this theme are best seen through the characters being labelled by their parents’ social status or occupations: ‘‘Shōta of the Tanakaya’’; ‘‘Nobuyuki of Ryūgeji’’; ‘‘Chōkichi, the Boss’s son,’’ etc.

Publication & reception
Takekurabe was first published in the literature magazine Bungakkai in seven installments between January 1895 and January 1896. Higuchi's novella was read and commended by eminent literary figures including Mori Ōgai, Kōda Rohan and Saitō Ryokuu, who elevated Ichiyō Higuchi to the status of one of the era's most well-liked authors. It was complimented specifically for its in-depth and vivid account of Yoshiwara's distinctive traditions. The story and its adaptations were frequently utilized as literary works in primary and secondary schools to examine post-war society.

Translations
Takekurabe was translated into English as They Compare Heights by W.M. Bickerton in 1930, as Growing Up by Edward Seidensticker in 1956, and as Child's Play by Robert Lyons Danly in 1981. A translation under the title Teenagers Vying for Tops was provided by Seizo Nobunaga in 1953 or 1960, depending on the source.

Film

 * 1924: Takekurabe, directed by Genjirō Saegusa
 * 1955: Takekurabe, directed by Heinosuke Gosho

Manga

 * 1995: Takekurabe, adapted by Takeda Masao

Television

 * Takekurabe was also repeatedly adapted for Japanese television, including a puppet play version and an animated version (released as Growing Up in North America by Central Park Media).

title: Takekurabe


text:
Ł

Ł or ł, described in English as L with stroke, is a letter of the Polish, Kashubian, Sorbian, Belarusian Latin, Ukrainian Latin, Wymysorys, Navajo, Dëne Sųłıné, Inupiaq, Zuni, Hupa, Sm'álgyax, Nisga'a, and Dogrib alphabets, several proposed alphabets for the Venetian language, and the ISO 11940 romanization of the Thai script. In some Slavic languages, it represents the continuation of the Proto-Slavic non-palatal $⟨L⟩$ (dark L), except in Polish, Kashubian, and Sorbian, where it evolved further into. In most non-European languages, it represents a voiceless alveolar lateral fricative or similar sound.

Glyph shape Ł
In normal typefaces, the letter has a stroke approximately in the middle of the vertical stem, crossing it at an angle between 70° and 45°, never horizontally. In cursive handwriting and typefaces that imitate it, the capital letter has a horizontal stroke through the middle and looks very similar to the pound sign £. In the cursive lowercase letter, the stroke is also horizontal and placed on top of the letter instead of going through the middle of the stem, which would not be distinguishable from the letter t. The stroke is either straight or slightly wavy, depending on the style. Unlike $⟨l⟩$, the letter $⟨ł⟩$ is usually written without a noticeable loop at the top. Most publicly available multilingual cursive typefaces, including commercial ones, feature an incorrect glyph for $⟨ł⟩$.

A rare variant of the ł glyph is a cursive double-ł ligature, used in words such as Jagiełło, Radziwiłł or Ałłach (archaic: Allah), where the strokes at the top of the letters are joined into a single stroke.

Polish Ł
In Polish, $⟨Ł⟩$ is used to distinguish the historical dark (velarized) L [ɫ] from clear L [l]. The Polish $⟨Ł⟩$ now sounds the same as the English $⟨W⟩$, [w] as in water (except for older speakers in some eastern dialects where it still sounds velarized).

In 1440, proposed a letter resembling $$\ \ell$$ to represent clear L. For dark L he suggested "l" with a stroke running in the opposite direction to the modern version. The latter was introduced in 1514–1515 by Stanisław Zaborowski in his Orthographia seu modus recte scribendi et legendi Polonicum idioma quam utilissimus. L with stroke originally represented a velarized alveolar lateral approximant, a pronunciation that is preserved in the eastern part of Poland and among the Polish minority in Lithuania, Belarus, and Ukraine. This pronunciation is similar to Russian unpalatalised $⟨Л⟩$ in native words and grammar forms.

In modern Polish, Ł is usually pronounced (as [w] in English wet). This pronunciation first appeared among Polish lower classes in the 16th century. It was considered an uncultured accent by the upper classes (who pronounced $⟨Ł⟩$ as ) until the mid-20th century, when this distinction gradually began to fade.

The shift from to  in Polish has affected all instances of dark L, even word-initially or intervocalically, e.g. ładny ("pretty, nice") is pronounced, słowo ("word") is , and ciało ("body") is. Ł often alternates with clear L, such as the plural forms of adjectives and verbs in the past tense that are associated with masculine personal nouns, e.g. mały → mali ( → ). Alternation is also common in declension of nouns, e.g. from nominative to locative, tło → na tle ( → ).

Polish final Ł also often corresponds to Ukrainian word-final $⟨В⟩$ Ve (Cyrillic) and Belarusian $⟨Ў⟩$ Short U (Cyrillic). Thus, "he gave" is "dał" in Polish, "дав" in Ukrainian, "даў" in Belarusian (all pronounced ), but "дал" in Russian.

Examples
Notable figures

 * Marie Skłodowska Curie, a scientist awarded the Nobel prize in both physics and chemistry, who conducted pioneering research on radioactivity.
 * Karol Józef Wojtyła, John Paul II, Pope of the Catholic Church from 1978 to 2005
 * Kazimierz Pułaski, known in English as Casimir Pulaski, a Polish soldier and commander, a brigadier general in the Continental Army cavalry during American Revolutionary War
 * Ignacy Łukasiewicz, the inventor of the modern paraffin lamp
 * Jan Łukasiewicz, the inventor of Polish notation
 * Lech Wałęsa, Polish labor leader and former president
 * Stanisław Lem ( or ), Polish writer of science fiction, philosophy, and satire, and a trained physician
 * Wisława Szymborska, a Polish poet and recipient of the 1996 Nobel Prize in Literature
 * Witold Lutosławski, Polish composer
 * Wacław Sierpiński, Polish mathematician

Some examples of words with 'ł':

 * Władysław
 * Wisła (Vistula)
 * Łódź
 * Łukasz (Lucas / Luke)
 * Michał (Michael)
 * Złoty (zloty / golden)

In contexts where Ł is not readily available as a glyph, basic L is used instead. Thus, the surname Małecki would be spelled Malecki in a foreign country.

In the 1980s, when some computers available in Poland lacked Polish diacritics, it was common practice to use a pound sterling sign (£) for Ł. This practice ceased as soon as DOS-based and Mac computers came with a code page for such characters.

Other languages
In Belarusian Łacinka (both in the 1929 and 1962 versions), $⟨Ł⟩$ corresponds to Cyrillic $⟨Л⟩$ (El), and is normally pronounced  (almost exactly as in English pull).

In Navajo and Elaponke, $⟨Ł⟩$ is used for a voiceless alveolar lateral fricative, like the Welsh double L.

$⟨Ł⟩$ is used in orthographic transcription of Ahtna, an Athabaskan language spoken in Alaska; it represents a breathy lateral fricative. It is also used in Tanacross, a related Athabaskan language.

When transcribing Armenian into the Latin alphabet, $⟨Ł⟩$ may be used to write the letter $⟨Ղ⟩$, for example Ղուկաս => Łukas. In Classical Armenian, $⟨Ղ⟩$ was pronounced as, which morphed into in both standard varieties of modern Armenian. Other transcriptions of $⟨Ղ⟩$ include $⟨Ṙ⟩$, $⟨Ġ⟩$ or $⟨Gh⟩$.

==Computer usage ==

title: Ł


text: Category:Members of the U.S. Congress

title: Category:Members of the U.S. Congress


text: Category:Skinny Puppy albums

title: Category:Skinny Puppy albums


text:
Recreational drug tourism

Recreational drug tourism is travel for the purpose of obtaining or using drugs for recreational use that are unavailable, illegal or very expensive in one's home jurisdiction. A drug tourist may cross a national border to obtain a drug that is not sold in one's home country, or to obtain an illegal drug that is more available in the visited destination. A drug tourist may also cross a sub-national border (from one province, county or state to another) to do the same, as in cannabis tourism, or purchase alcohol or tobacco more easily, or at a lower price due to tax laws or other regulations.

Empirical studies show that drug tourism is heterogeneous and might involve either the pursuit of mere pleasure and escapism or a quest for profound and meaningful experiences through the consumption of drugs.

Drug tourism has many legal implications, and persons engaging in it sometimes risk prosecution for drug smuggling or other drug-related charges in their home jurisdictions or in the jurisdictions they are visiting, especially if they bring their purchases home rather than using them abroad. The act of traveling for the purpose of buying or using drugs is itself a criminal offense in some jurisdictions.

India
Malana, India is famous for its production of Indian hashish or so called Malana Cream, attracting foreign tourists. Indian pharmacies also sell many generic drugs at prices far lower than in the US.

Africa
In some places of north Morocco like Chaouen Cannabis is planted for Hashish production. There is a big attraction for some European and American consumers because of its low price.

Europe
In Europe, the Netherlands, and especially the Dutch capital, Amsterdam, is a popular destination for drug tourists, due to the liberal attitude of the Dutch toward cannabis use and possession. Drug tourism thrives because legislation controlling the sale, possession, and use of drugs varies dramatically from one jurisdiction to another.

Netherlands
In May 2011, the Dutch government announced that tourists would to be banned from Dutch coffeeshops, starting in the southern provinces at the end of 2011, and the rest of the country by 2012, though this was never made into law and thus coffeeshops throughout the Netherlands continue remain open to tourists as of May 2016. On 25 November 2014 two British tourists aged 20 and 21 died in a hotel room in Amsterdam, after snorting white heroin that was sold as cocaine by a street dealer. The bodies were found less than a month after another British tourist died in similar circumstances. At least 17 other people have had medical treatment after taking the white heroin.

North America
Drug tourism from the United States occurs in many contexts. Americans between the ages of 18 and 21 may cross the border into Canada or Mexico to purchase alcohol legally. Conversely, many Canadians travel to the United States to purchase alcohol at lower prices due to high taxes levied on alcohol in Canada. Americans living in dry counties also frequently cross county or state lines to purchase alcohol. Due to the fact that cannabis is now legal in Canada, Americans may cross the border to purchase it legally. Many US states also have legal cannabis, many Americans cross state lines to purchase legal cannabis to bring back.

Many Americans cross state lines to purchase cigarettes, crossing from a jurisdiction with very high cigarette taxes to a jurisdiction (such as another state or an Indian nation) with lower cigarette taxes. This occurs particularly in the Northeastern United States, where states levy among the highest tobacco taxes in the nation.

Canada
As of October 2018, Cannabis consumption and possession in limited amounts is legal in Canada.

United States
Since the legalization of Cannabis in Alaska, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, Montana, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington state and Washington D.C,  many drug tourists from states and countries where cannabis is illegal travel to these states to purchase cannabis and cannabis products.

Mexico
The sale and possession of psilocin and psilocybin are prohibited under the federal health law of 1984. However, this prohibition is mostly unenforced against indigenous users of psilocybin mushrooms. As a result, the towns of Huautla de Jiménez and San José del Pacífico (both in the southern state of Oaxaca) have gained notoriety for their association with magic mushrooms, and constitute a safe haven even for non-indigenous users.

South America
In South America, some tourists are attracted to Amazon basin villages to try a local religious sacrament called ayahuasca, which is a mixture of psychedelic plants that is used in traditional ceremonies. Similarly, tourists in Peru try hallucinogenic cactus called San Pedro which originally has been used by local tribes.

Bolivia
Route 36 is an illegal after-hours lounge in La Paz, Bolivia, and, according to The Guardian, the world's first cocaine bar. Although cocaine, an addictive stimulant derived from the coca plant, is illegal in Bolivia, political corruption and affordability of locally produced cocaine have resulted in Route 36 becoming a popular destination for thousands of drug tourists each year.

Colombia
Colombia's reputation as the cocaine capital of the world has attracted tourists, to the dismay of locals. In Medellín, a small industry has grown around sites related to Pablo Escobar. Drug dealers are cashing in too, selling cocaine to visitors at prices much cheaper than their homelands. There are also “make your own cocaine” tours in parts of the country; however they are highly illegal.

Oceania
In Australia, the Australian Capital Territory and South Australia have a more liberal approach to cannabis use, promoting interstate drug tourism, particularly from Victoria and New South Wales. In addition, some areas of northern New South Wales have a liberal recreational drug culture, particularly areas around Nimbin where the annual MardiGrass festival is held. Discreet Local Guides may also be a source of plants.

title: Recreational drug tourism


text:
TerraServer

Terraserver may refers to either of two databases for viewing geospatial imagery:
 * Terraserver.com, a commercial web site
 * TerraServer-USA, which hosts public domain United States Geological Survey aerial images on Microsoft servers

title: TerraServer


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Counter-smack

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was - redirect and merge

Counter-smack
94 Google hits, most of them irrelevant. Neologism, original research, POV. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 03:46, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge into Counter-Strike, like "EverCrack" in EverQuest. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 03:53, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Two comments have appeared on the talk page:
 * Counter-smack is a valid definition of what many people go through when they play online games. It would be a shame to delete it, as it could become a very real problem in the near future. Even today, many people are experiencing difficulties balancing school, work, and online gaming. (from User:128.211.226.114)
 * If you wish to write about the addictiveness of video games, you are welcome to contribute to video game controversy or to make a new article like video game addiction, but a practically unused term referring to one specific game's addiction potential is nothing special enough to merit an encyclopedia article. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 04:06, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * It's silly to ignore internet culture. Terms like 1337 (leet) and others are invading pop culture as we speak, and any real encyclopedia won't ignore this. Deleting this would be an error as egregious as when Wikipedia deleted the term "nubsauce". Damn you all to hell for ignoring internet culture. (from User:161.32.76.54)
 * It would indeed be silly to ignore such things. That's why we have an article callet leet, and other articles relating to Internet culture. We are not ignoring Internet culture; it's just that we can't have an article on every new word someone invents on the Internet, as it would be too confusing and impossible to maintain. Let's leave that to the folks at Urban Dictionary. If you want to write about the addictiveness of Counter-Strike or slang terms for it, you should do so at the Counter-Strike article, where everybody knows to go for information about that game. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 04:06, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Yet another comment from the talk page:
 * Please do not delete this article without some deliberation and discussion. It's not as if we're adding this term merely to be assholes, it's a real term emerging within the game of counter-strike itself and is used by THOUSANDS of players everyday. As a player of counter-strike who often plays for 8 or more hours per day, I can attest to this fact.

 * In addition, it cannot be ignored that counter is still the MOST POPULAR GAME IN THE ENTIRE WORLD. Check the statistics on valve's website, but amongst true internet users, not stuck-up wikipedia editors who have no knowledge of the digital world, it is widely known that counter-strike will continue to dominate rising internet culture. If wikipedia continues to arbitarily ban informations without any consideration at all, what will the encyclopedia be reduced too? Bush supporters and people who love 7th heaven?

 * Take the tenets of free speech on the internet seriously. That's all I ask. Give us some time for discussion.

 * The Article is quite relevant to a problem that has consumed a generation. It's important that it be discussed so that a solution may be found. (from User:12.210.176.182)
 * I can assure you we are not "arbitrarily banning information". We are giving it discussion. That's what the Votes for Deletion process is for. We discuss the merits of the articles here and decide whether the article meets encyclopedic standards. I'm no Bush or 7th Heaven fan by any stretch, but here I put all those biases aside and decide whether or not the article really belongs in an encyclopedia. A term used to describe people addicted to an online game that hardly appears anywhere online is not notable enough for an encyclopedia. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 04:16, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Also, there is no need to insult the urban dictionary. (from User:161.32.76.54)
 * The only reason I asked for discussion is because I placed the article up on the website tonight, and it was deleted within 12 minutes. I'm sure that other players will attest to the popularity of this term and its relevance to internet culture. I personally did not invent this word, it was grown and nurtured within the gaming environment. It has a history and popularity. Others will attest to this fact as long as you leave it up for discussion. Thanks.
 * It was not "deleted within 12 minutes". It was nominated for eventual deletion, which could occur 5 days from now at the earliest, if the consensus is to delete. Discussion will be open until then, as the procedures dictate. If you are right and lots of other Wikipedians do usher in and tell me about the great popularity of this term in Internet culture despite its low Google and Usenet search results, then I will concede my point and change my vote. However, I consider that rather unlikely. And I was not insulting the UrbanDictionary; I consider it a useful and interesting project, and was merely making the point that they keep the definitions of all sorts of newly-coined words, which is not something we cover (or should cover) here at Wikipedia. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 05:13, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Actually it was speedied once (from WP:DL):
 * 02:57, 7 Dec 2004 Postdlf deleted Counter-smack (nonsense about addictive qualities of particular video game)
 * That wasn't right, as it's not nonsense nor any valid CSD. User was right in re-creating it.  Now it will be VfD'd, which is the right process - and that result will stand. --Whosyourjudas (talk) 05:22, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Merge with redirect into Counter-Strike. -- Antaeus Feldspar 05:20, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I still stand by my earlier speedy deletion, as the degree of hyperbole in this "article" renders its content pure nonsense.  Unless we want to accept that people who try to stop playing the game exhibit visible withdrawal symptoms through vomiting and becoming violent.  There is nothing valid to merge.  Postdlf 05:33, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Postdlf: Please review WP:CSD and WP:PN. This article fits none of the criteria for CSD, and is not nonsense by WP's definition.  --Whosyourjudas (talk) 04:55, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Maybe tack a single sentence on to the Counter-Strike article explaining how some players use this word, but don't give it the medical credibility this article tries to. -R. fiend 07:12, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Edit out the exaggerations, and merge with videogame addiction or video game controversy or similar, with a pointer from Counter-Strike. Anthony Appleyard 07:20, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 17:43, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Article is exagerated (vomiting?), although the term should probably be mentioned over in Counter-Strike. Wyss 20:42, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge into counter-strike. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|(talk)]] 21:56, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge. Neologism. --Improv 22:01, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, don't redirect. I've played CS since 2000 and have never heard this term.  None of the first 10 results from Google are referring to Counter-Strike and a search that includes both "Counter-Smack" and "Counter-Strike" returns just 1 (irrelevant) page.  --Mrwojo 23:00, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge valid parts to Counter Strike. I've copied the BJAODN to, well... to BJADON... where else?  --L33tminion | (talk) 21:05, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Bolex

Bolex International S. A. is a Swiss manufacturer of motion picture cameras based in Yverdon located in Canton of Vaud, the most notable products of which are in the 16 mm and Super 16 mm formats. Originally Bol, the company was founded in 1925 by Charles Haccius and Jacques Bogopolsky (aka Bolsey or Boolsky), the company's name having been derived from Bogopolsky's name. In 1923 he presented the Cinégraphe Bol at the Geneva fair, a reversible apparatus for taking, printing, and projecting pictures on 35 mm film. He later designed a camera for Alpa of Ballaigues in the late 1930s.

Paillard-Bolex cameras were much used by adventurers, artists, as well as nature films, documentaries, and are still favoured by many animators. Over the years, notable Bolex users and owners include: Steven Spielberg, Ridley Scott, Andy Warhol, Peter Jackson, Jonas Mekas, Jean-Luc Godard, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, James Dean, David Lynch, Marilyn Monroe, Edmund Hillary, and Mahatma Gandhi

While some later models are electrically powered, the majority of those manufactured since the 1930s use a spring-wound clockwork power system. The 16 mm spring-wound Bolex is a popular introductory camera in film schools.

Early history
In 1927, Ukrainian-born Jacques Bogopolsky, who specialised in building cameras in Geneva, imagined a camera for the 16 mm format (Bolex Auto-Cine A,B,C), and created the Bolex S.A. with the help of Charles Haccius, a businessman from Geneva. Charles Haccius invested 250,000 Swiss francs in the company. The society did not produce any cameras. However, the Auto Ciné A and B were produced by Longines in Saint-Imier and the projector by Stoppani in Bern. As of 1929, the Longines company no longer wished to produce the cameras.

Bolex was bought by Paillard & Cie for 350,000 Swiss francs and Jacques Bogopolsky was hired as consulting engineer for five years. Soon Paillard realized that the cameras and projectors were not in fact the exceptional products promised by their partners, and after two years Jacque Bogopolsky was no longer welcome in Sainte-Croix.

The traditional version of the story tended to present the situation rather simply: Bolex is the name of a brand produced by the Paillard company, a brand represented mainly by a camera that was invented by Jacques Boolsky (another of Jacques Bogopolsky's names). In fact, the alleged inventor of the Bolex did not invent anything about the camera, which as early as 1935 would become known under this name. With the patents sold by Boolsky proving unusable and the machines defective, Paillard had to start from scratch to invent a Bolex which had only kept the name of Boolsky's "invention". The Bolex as we know it is the invention of the engineers at Paillard.

In 1932, Marc Renaud, a young engineer, inspired by the products of Paillard and assisted by Professor Ernest Juillard, began development of the Paillard H 16 camera.

In 1935, the H 16 camera was put on the market, the 9.5 mm version followed in 1936 and the Double-8mm version in 1938. The H 16 was highly successful. Paillard-Bolex introduced the L 8 for the market of pocket 8 mm film cameras. With the postwar boom in home movie making, Paillard-Bolex continued to develop its 8 mm and 16 mm ranges with the H16 increasingly adopted by professional film makers. The company also made a successful range of high-end movie projectors for all amateur film making gauges.

In 1952, during the golden era of 3D film, Bolex offered the Bolex Stereo: a 3D stereo kit for their H16 camera and model G projectors. Several technical changes were made to the H cameras in 1954, above all an entirely different claw drive together with a laterally inverted film gate and a 170 degrees opening angle shutter. In 1956, the first H16 reflex viewfinder model was brought out. In reaction to the upcoming use of heavier varifocal or zoom lenses and the bigger synchronous electric motors attached to the body Paillard gave it a big rectangular base, with three tapped bushings replacing the original single-tap “button” base in 1963 and soon afterward a protruding 1-to-1 shaft for the ESM motor. A saddle for a 400-ft. film magazine finally allowed the H 16 to be used like professional synch-sound cameras.

Following rapid expansion, Bolex employed circa 6000 people in the 1960s. In 1965, Kodak introduced the Super 8 mm format. Paillard Bolex was slow to introduce a Super 8 camera although they quickly modified the 18-5 Auto 8 mm projector for Super 8 as the 18-5 L. At about this time(1966), the Bolex 16 Pro Camera was introduced to compete with the Arriflex 16 BL camera, as a technically advanced professional camera more suited for television use than the H16. Nevertheless, the H 16 Standard camera was made until the last days of 1969. The H 16 and H 8 standard models afford the rackover critical focusing feature that had been first introduced with the Bell & Howell Standard camera in 1912. In 1971, Bolex released an even more affordable option: the Bolex 280 Macrozoom Super 8. The new model featured wide-range manual zoom and the ability to focus at close distances. It shot at 2 filming speeds, 18 and 24 fps, and was able to expose single frames. Unlike the classic mechanical Bolex Cameras, the 280 Macrozoom needed 5 1.5 volt batteries to operate.

Company restructuring
Effective January 1, 1970 Paillard sold the Bolex division to Eumig of Vienna. In 1971, Eumig rationalized the Super 8 range, and Super 8 equipment production in Switzerland was discontinued. The Bolex product brand was retained while being manufactured in Eumig or Chinon factories. The H16 cameras were still made in Switzerland.

Since 1981
In 1981, Eumig went into liquidation and Bolex was bought by René Ueter who set up Bolex International in 1982. Bolex International no longer serially manufactures its cameras, but does repair 16 mm and Super 16 cameras for customers on special order to this day.

Legacy
Many directors began their careers shooting on Paillard-Bolex Cameras, including Ridley Scott, David Lynch, Jonas Mekas, Peter Jackson, Terry Gilliam, Will Vinton, Maya Deren, Steven Spielberg and Spike Lee. It results as a development of a cult of using Paillard-Bolex for decades for beginner's camera in film schools worldwide.

Jules Schulback, a furrier and maker of home movies, filmed, with his 16-millimeter Bolex camera, Marilyn Monroe's white skirt billowing from a "gust" up through a subway grate, in a publicity stunt for The Seven Year Itch, around the corner from his apartment, in New York.

The Bolex cameras remain a strong status as an icon into cinema and intemporal beautiful objects as itself. Its production helps to give Swiss Made its reputation of quality, additionally of watchmaking.

It has been used in various advertising as a symbol. In 2015, it appeared in an Omega ad with George Clooney. Another time in 2015 various Bolex models, including P2/8 mm and Super Zoom/8 mm, appeared in a famous campaign for Chanel eyewear with Kristen Stewart

H 16
"The Bolex H 16 camera played a central role in the work of many avant-garde filmmakers from the 1940s through to the 1970s because of its precision and lightweight, robustness and range of facilities, and the high quality of its optics, especially the zoom lenses, and its simple operation, which made possible an infinite combination of creative cinematographic choices."

"The Bolex H 16 is probably the camera which most influenced a generation of experimental and documentary/ethnographic filmmakers."

Technical aspects of the Bolex
The camera's capacity is 100 ft. A 400-ft magazine (on the Rex 5 – or converted Rex 3 or 4) can be attached to the top of the camera. From the beginning, it offered automatic film threading, a clutch for disengaging the drive spring in order to crank the film by hand forward and backwards unlimited, and a cut-off turret disc that is not wider than the camera body in center position. Stepless speed control was available between 8 and 64 frames per second. Early cameras have a 190 degrees opening angle shutter. A few years after their introduction the H cameras could be equipped with an accurate single-frame counter. That accessory was incorporated into all H camera models since 1946.

As with a still reflex camera, the Bolex RX has a viewfinder, which allows the filmmaker to view what they are filming. This specific viewfinder is made up of a double prism that deflects 20 percent of the light going through the lens into the viewfinder.

The Paillard-Bolex H 16 usually has a turret for three C-mount lenses. Often, the camera was provided with a 16mm Switar or Yvar, a 25mm Switar or Yvar and the third lens was often a 75mm Yvar or 50mm Switar. Only lenses with the designation "RX" in 50 mm or less can be used on the RX models. RX corrected lenses were also manufactured by Schneider, Berthiot, Angénieux, and Rodenstock. The single lens port H 16 M(arine) was made in conjunction with the first underwater housing. A second, later marine housing was made for the electric drive models.

Some people had their H 16 camera converted to Super 16. This format is highly suited to telecine conversion, as Super 16 is close to the 16:9 electronic image format. Some conversions were more successful than others. Bolex (latterly) did offer a factory Super 16mm camera. This has the appropriate markings in the viewfinder and the film gate is machined and polished to professional standards.

Bolex did have a foray into purely professional cameras with the Bolex Pro 16. Again, they decided against a registration pin for mechanical simplicity, to keep the camera as quiet as possible for sync-sound filming. This camera was only offered with 400 ft magazine capacity.

Notable models: cameras and projectors
Swiss made with the year of introduction except for the Italian Silma made SM8

Jacques Bogopolsky and Charles Haccius
Models produced by Longines
 * Auto Cine (1925)
 * Auto Cine B (1926)
 * Auto Cine C (not released)

Paillard Bolex

 * H 16 (1935)
 * H 9 (1936)
 * Model G Projectors (1936)
 * H 8S (1936)
 * L 8 (1942)
 * M8 and M8R Projectors (1949)
 * B 8 (1952)
 * C 8 (1958)
 * B 8L (1952)
 * H 16 Reflex (1956)
 * D 8L (1958)
 * S221 Projector (1960)
 * P1 (1961)
 * 18-5 Projector (1961)
 * C 8SL (1961)
 * D 8LA (1961)
 * P2 (1961)
 * K1 (1962)
 * H 8RX (1963)
 * P3 (1963)
 * S1 (1964)
 * K2 (1964)
 * P4 (1965)
 * H 16 RX-5 (1966)
 * Bolex 16 Pro (1966)
 * 150 Super (1966)
 * SM8 Projector (made by Silma) (1967)
 * S321 Projector (1968)
 * 7.5 Macrozoom (1969)
 * H 16 SB, SBM (1970)
 * 155 Macro-zoom (1970)
 * 160 Macro-zoom (1970)
 * H 16 EBM (1971)
 * H 16 EL (1975)

Bolex Eumig

 * 660 Macro-zoom (1976)
 * 680 Macro-zoom (1978)

Artists

 * Andy Warhol, American artist, film director, and producer
 * Fernand Léger, French painter, sculptor, and filmmaker
 * Hans Richter (artist), German painter, graphic artist, avant-gardist, film-experimenter and producer.
 * Jean Cocteau, French poet, playwright, novelist, designer, filmmaker, visual artist and critic
 * Paul Sharits, visual artist, best known for his work in experimental, or avant-garde filmmaking, particularly what became known as the structural film movement
 * Robert Breer, American experimental filmmaker, painter, and sculptor

Filmmakers

 * Andrew Noren, Andrew Noren was an American avant-garde filmmaker
 * Brian de Palma, American film director and screenwriter
 * Brian Yuzna, Filipino-born American producer, director, and writer
 * Bruce Baillie, American experimental filmmaker
 * David Attenborough, British television executive, presenter and natural history producer
 * David Lynch, American director
 * George Kuchar, American underground film director and video artist, known for his "low-fi" aesthetic
 * Gregory Markopoulos, American experimental filmmaker
 * James Broughton, American poet and poetic filmmaker
 * Jean-Luc Godard, French-Swiss film director, screenwriter and film critic
 * Jonas Mekas, Lithuanian-American filmmaker, poet, and artist who has often been called "the godfather of American avant-garde cinema".
 * Kenneth Anger, Kenneth Anger is an American underground experimental filmmaker, actor and author
 * Marie Menken, American experimental filmmaker, painter, and socialite.
 * Maya Deren, Ukrainian-born American experimental filmmaker and important promoter of the avant-garde in the 1940s and 1950s.
 * Peter Jackson, New Zealand film director, screenwriter, and film producer
 * Quentin Tarantino, American filmmaker and actor
 * Ridley Scott, English filmmaker
 * Robert Beavers, American experimental filmmaker
 * Spike Lee, American film director, producer, writer, actor, and professor
 * Stan Brakhage, James Stanley Brakhage, better known as Stan Brakhage, was an American non-narrative filmmaker. He is considered to be one of the most important figures in 20th-century experimental film.
 * Steven Spielberg, American filmmaker. He is considered one of the founding pioneers of the New Hollywood era and one of the most popular directors and producers in film history.
 * Terry Gilliam, American-born British screenwriter, film director, animator, actor, comedian and former member of the Monty Python comedy troupe
 * Will Vinton, American animator and filmmaker
 * Wim Wenders, German filmmaker, playwright, author, and photographer. He is a major figure in New German Cinema.

Actors

 * James Dean, American actor
 * Marlene Dietrich, German-American actress and singer

Intellectuals

 * Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, French writer, poet, aristocrat, journalist and pioneering aviator. He became a laureate of several of France's highest literary awards and also won the United States National Book Award.
 * Mahatma Gandhi, Indian lawyer, anti-colonial nationalist, and political ethicist

Explorers

 * Edmund Hillary, New Zealand mountaineer, explorer, and philanthropist. On May 29, 1953, Hillary and Sherpa mountaineer Tenzing Norgay became the first climbers confirmed to have reached the summit of Mount Everest.
 * Haroun Tazieff, Polish, Belgian and French volcanologist and geologist. He was a famous cinematographer of volcanic eruptions and lava flows, and the author of several books on volcanoes.
 * Jacques Piccard, Swiss oceanographer and engineer, known for having developed underwater submarines for studying ocean currents.
 * Thor Heyerdahl, Norwegian adventurer and ethnographer with a background in zoology, botany and geography. Heyerdahl is notable for his Kon-Tiki expedition in 1947, in which he sailed 8,000 km across the Pacific Ocean in a hand-built raft from South America to the Tuamotu Islands.

Documentaries
There are two documentaries about the history of the Bolex camera. Beyond The Bolex, a biographical film about Bolex founder Jacques Bogopolsky (later anglicized to Bolsey), is directed by his great-grand daughter Alyssa Bolsey, and features an in-depth look at the original notes, schematics, prototypes of Bolex A and B cameras A second project that is currently in production, is being undertaken by Swiss director Alexandre Favre. Bolex was used exclusively to film Teeny Little Super Guy for Sesame Street in 1982.

Digital Bolex D16
In 2012, Cinemeridian, Inc. licensed the named Bolex from Bolex International to create a digital Super 16mm cinema camera called the Digital Bolex D16. Digital Bolex announced their collaboration with Bolex via the Kickstarter crowdfunding platform on March 12, 2012 at the SXSW Film Festival where they had a trade show booth.

title: Bolex


text:
User:Zenyu

I'm a computer scientist living in New York. My interests include Peru, Brazil, Raytracing, and lately, Canada. Zenyu 03:49, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

title: User:Zenyu


text:
Talk:Molecular mass

Dimensionless
Although relative molecular mass COULD be considered dimensionless, it is more widely quoted in the units of mass per unit amount (in SI, kg/kmol), where the amount of a substance is given by the total number of molecules divided by Avagadro's constant (approx 6 times ten to the power twenty three).

I move that this be struck from the list of dimensionless numbers on this site, as molecular mass (by it's very name) is not non-dimensional.

 * I concur. It is only with an additional modifier such as relative molecular weight that it could even be considered dimensionless.  Gene Nygaard 02:49, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Molar mass in SI
It is commonly beleived that in SI the molar mass of a substance is the mass of one kilomole, therefore it has the unit kg/kmol. This is against the very basic principle of SI. The unit of quantity is mol (defined as containing Avogadro number molecules), the unit of mass is kg, so the unit of molar mass is kg/mol (for instance 0.01802 kg/mol for water.) The molar mass of any substance can be obtained multiplying the relative molecular mass (often still called molecular weight and abbreviated as MW) by 0.001 kg/mol.

A similar mistake is often made in SI when giving the universal gas constant. Its unit should be J/(mol×K) that is Ru = 8.3145 J/(mol×K) is the correct specification and the use of kmol should be avoided!

It is not erroneus to give Ru = 0.0083145 kJ/(mol×K) though, because any unit can be multiplied by a multiplier kilo and the multiplier can be concatenated with the first term in the numerator. (However, it is difficult to see any advantage of the multiplier in this case.)

--Valko 22:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't really think this article is a stub, considering the tight focus of the subject. Opinions?
 * tweekus 02:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree. But, well, i could always be wrong.--Solasis 07:25, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand the use of an incorrect mass of oxygen for the sample calculation. Why use an erroneous value on this page, even if it is corrected later in the text? What if someone doesn't read that far? I didn't when I came here to look up the value.

 * It's not that one of the masses is incorrect, it's that one of the masses is the mass of a specific isotope, and the other mass is an average of the masses of all the isotopes, weighted by their prevalence. 72.34.3.81 01:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it's incorrect to say that the mass of a molecule is exactly the sum of the masses of its atoms. That ignores the binding energy - when the molecule was formed, energy was released or absorbed, which (due to the conservation of matter and energy, and E=mc2) slightly affects the mass. Granted the effect is very small and often ignored. 72.34.3.81 01:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Binding energy are O(eV), atomic mass O(GeV). As well as I know, that makes it within the uncertainty in the determination of atomic mass.  It is, at least, close enough for chemistry.  In quantum mechanics, there is always some uncertainty. Strictly, you should only use exact when it is part of the definition. Gah4 (talk) 23:18, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomenclature
I fear I am wading into a mess here. A few questions first:

 * I believe the IUPAC should be authoritative. However, molecular mass does not exist in the IUPAC Gold Book. What does exist is relative molecular mass. Should this page be moved?
 * Should molar mass and molecular mass should be merged because they are discussing the same concepts?
 * Does molecular mass refer to the mass (in kg or in u) of one single molecule? Or of one mole? Based on the Mr definition, it does not matter. But when you compare it with molecular weight or molar mass, the difference is very stark.

These is my proposed edit to the lede:

The relative molecular mass, Mr of a chemical compound is the mass of one molecule of that substance, relative to the unified atomic mass unit, u (equal to 1/12 the mass of one atom of carbon-12).

Since the relative molecular mass is a ratio of masses, it should be a dimensionless number. However, because the magnitudes of molecular mass (sometimes abbreviated M), molecular weight (abbreviated MW), and relative molecular mass are exactly identical, these three terms are often used interchangeably, and relative molecular mass may be seen quoted with the unit g/mol, similar to molecular mass/weight.

To be pedantic, weight is not a unit of mass, and the term, molecular weight, is not strictly correct. However, it is commonly used, even more so than Mr or molecular mass due to historic reasons. Most reference texts used in academia and industry use this term.

I feel very strongly that the term molecular weight should not be brushed aside as "former(ly) used" because it is still used in most reference texts. Comments please? --Rifleman 82 17:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I think the articles should be merged, because the different names are used interchangeably in practice. The differences between the terms are subtle and could be dealt with better in a unified article.
 * Molecular weight is definitely still in use, although it does not correspond to the physical concept of "weight". Something that should be mentioned if the articles are merged is that it is generally not considered correct to use "molecular mass/weight" for substances that are not made of molecules (such as ionic or covalent solids). Itub 19:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

 * This article certainly is a mess! Molar mass and Molecular mass should definitely NOT be merged IMHO, because this will only make people confuse these terms even more than they do already!  I don't think the difference in concept is subtle at all, it's like the difference between a molecule and a mole.  In practice people confuse them because the numbers are the same (e.g., water is 18 for both), causing the terms to be used interchangably in some informal settings (chatting in the lab!).  In designing the chembox, we had to make it clear we were recording molar mass - in the bad old days people often wrote "molecular weight" and "molecular mass" and there were edit wars between the purists and the pragmatics.

 * I note that Gram-molecular weight is currently a redirect to Mole (unit), whereas molecular weight redirects here. Does anyone object if I change the the Gram-molecular weight redirect so it goes here instead? Walkerma 21:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Go ahead with the redirect change. I agree, the articles are a real mess as well as the overall use of the terminology. Unfortunately some of the IUPAC definitions allow for confusion to persist. Rifleman's changes look positive. I also think we should not merge the articles but should extensively explain the difference in both articles. I am of the strong opinion, despite the IUPAC definition, that relative molar mass and relative molecular mass are not interchangeable. They are after all different numerical values. I think the definitions do not claim them to be interchangeable but simply reflects that they are used interchangeably. I think we should stick to the IUPAC definitions first but also reflect current usage and the errors of current usage. I will be very active in rewriting these articles but want to allow for some consensus building first.--Nick Y. 21:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I believe that relative molecular mass and relative molar mass are almost equivalent, because they are ratios (according to the Gold book definitions) and have the same numerical value. Basically, the relative molecular mass is the mass of the molecule divided by 1/12 of the mass of the carbon-12 atom, while the relative molar mass is the mass of a mole of a substance divided by 1/12 of the mass of a mole of carbon-12. Given that the number of molecules is proportional to the number of moles (which is part of the definition of mole), the two numbers will be absolutely identical and dimensionless. For practical use, yes, people often slap u or g/mol as a unit, but that doesn't make them different concepts IMO, any more than density in g/mL is a different concept than density in kg/L (or in lbs/gal, although in that case the numerical value will be different). I said almost equivalent at the beginning because there is one difference, which is that molecular mass implies the existence of molecules while molar mass doesn't. Itub 22:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd agree with Itub that relative molecular mass and relative molar mass are almost equivalent. In fact, I would call them exactly equivalent mathematically. Think about x/y = (exactly equal to) 6.02x / 6.02 y. Nick Y.'s list of definitions seem good. Should we merge everything to do with molecular or molar masses into one single article? Or should we split it into two, molecular mass and molar mass and highlight the close relations between the two? Or should everything have a separate article, all linked by see alsos? I'd prefer merging all into one, because it'll be easy for a user to miss the others if they were split. --Rifleman 82 04:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't mean to be disagreeable but I could not disagree more. Molar mass and molecular mass are almost never numerically identical except when addressing average molecular mass. Most molecules have masses that are not equal to the average of the molecules present and similarly not equal to the molar mass. To me molar mass implies the natural abundance of isotopes on earth as found on a standard periodic table whereas average molecular mass implies the local isotopic abundance or something which has been measured. The molar masses are never particularly accurate because the represent the center of a distribution of variable isotopic distributions found around the world often with an emphasis on laboratory settings. I know I am being really nit picking but this is the heart of the problem. Molecular mass is the mass of a molecule, a single molecule of a unique and even improbable isotopic distribution. The average moleular mass is the average mass of a collection of molecules. It is the sum of the molecular masses divided by the number of molecules present. Molar mass is the average of many average molecular masses sampled around the world with error statistics used to determine the number of significant figures. Of course this is actually done with atomic weights and then they are added to compute the molar mass. The number of significant figures today has much more to do with natural variation than with the ability to measure accurately. For example the atomic weight of sodium has many sig figs since it is monoisotopic.--Nick Y. 18:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Ah, thank you Nick, the mass spectrometrist for the clarification. --Rifleman 82 18:16, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 * You are right that molecules have different masses due to having different isotopes, etc. The problem is with the use of the terms. I'm sure we can find slightly different usage of these terms among different specialties and among different people, but I think the best option is to base our definitions on authoritative documents such as IUPAC. I think you are taking a usage that is common only in MS as the only usage, while everyone else is happy treating molecular mass/weight and molar mass as synonymous, including IUPAC in the Gold book (taken from the green book, the glossary of physical chemistry terms). Of course, for MS there are more precise terms, listed in the work I cited below, such as monoisotopic mass, exact mass, accurate mass, etc., but these terms should be put in context. I see no problem with saying in this article something like: "in general, molecular mass and molar mass are treated as synonymous. However, in the context of mass spectrometry, molecular mass is used more specifically for [...]" For this reason I still think the articles should be merged, so that the context of each of the dozen or so terms can be discussed in one place. Itub 18:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I thank you for your perspective and I agree that this should not get particularly mass spec centric. I also have no need to change definitions etc. I do however read the IUPAC definitions differently than you and I think this reflect the intentions of the authors. I beleive that IUPAC does intend to imply that molecular mass is the mass of one molecule when they say "a molecule". A single molecule is a single molecule and not an average. I am happy to be corrected and I absolutely think we should reflect all usages, including the incorrect ones. There are just many degrees of correctness and many different contexts. So don't think you are dealing with an over the top mass spectrometry zealot. The common chemistry uses are by far the most important. We should just do the best job that we can to explain all of the subtlties and technicalities in addition to reflecting that for the most part well educated people tend not to care and use them interchangeably.--Nick Y. 18:55, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Good, then I think we agree more than we disagree. :) This article is a good opportunity to explain all the little-known intricacies behind molecular mass. Itub 19:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Definitions
I propose that we come up with definitions for all the related terms and agree on what is synonymous with what and how they relate to each other:

Molar Mass:

Molar mass is the mass of one mole of a chemical element or chemical compound. This usually implies the use of standard earth average atomic masses to compute the molar mass.

 * Units: any units of mass with g/mol the most common.

 * Usage: Always used in this meaning

Relative Molar Mass:

The relative molar mass of a substance is the molar mass divided by 1 g mol–1 (one twelfth of the molar mass of pure 12C).

 * Units: unitless (commonly, incorrectly, used with units esp g/mol)

 * Usage: Mainly used in this meaning, although units are often included. Though technically incorrect to include units this is the common practice.

Molecular Mass:

The molecular mass of a substance is the mass of one molecule of that substance.

 * Units: u or Da

 * Usage: Occasionally misused to mean molar mass, commonly used to mean the relative molecular mass

Relative Molecular Mass:

The relative molecular mass is the ratio of the molecular mass to the unified atomic mass unit.

 * Units: unitless (commonly, incorrectly, used with units esp u or Da)

 * Usage: Infrequently misused to mean molar mass, commonly used with units u or Da. Though technically incorrect to include units this is the common practice.

Mean or Average Molecular Mass:

The mean of the molecular masses of a collection of molecules. (By synthesis, definition not needed, just for clarity)

 * Units: u or Da

 * Usage: Uncommon, mainly used in mass spectrometry where average molecular weight is more common, but since MW is deprecated this would be the correct replacement term.

Molecular Weight:

Officially a deprecated synonym of relative molecular mass.

 * Units: u or Da

 * Usage: Very commonly misused to molar mass (where the units g/mol are common).

Monoisotopic mass

The molecular mass of the a single molecule containing only the most common isotope of every element in the molecule.

 * Units: u or Da

 * Usage: Always this meaning. Primarily a mass spectrometry term.

Gram Molecular Mass

The molecular mass in the units of g/mol. Nearly synonymous with molecular mass.

 * Units: g/mol by definition

 * Usage: Always this meaning. Common, but more historical than current.

relative atomic mass (atomic weight)

The ratio of the average mass of the atom to the unified atomic mass unit.

Isotope mass

The mass of a single isotope of an element. (By synthesis, definition not needed, just for clarity)

standard atomic weights

Recommended values of relative atomic masses of the elements revised biennially by the IUPAC Commission on Atomic Weights and Isotopic Abundances and applicable to elements in any normal sample with a high level of confidence. A normal sample is any reasonably possible source of the element or its compounds in commerce for industry and science and has not been subject to significant modification of isotopic composition within a geologically brief period.

Some terms from the MS glossary:

Accurate mass

Experimentally determined mass of an ion that is used to determine an elemental formula.

Exact mass

Calculated mass of an ion or molecule containing a single isotope of each atom. This differs from monoisotopic mass in that it may contain the less abundant isotopes as well as contain a mixture of isotopes; however, only one isotope per atom.

Average mass

Mass of an ion or molecule calculated using the average mass of each element weighted for its natural isotopic abundance.

Nominal mass

Mass of an ion or molecule calculated using the mass of the most abundant isotope of each element rounded to the nearest integer value and equivalent to the sum of the mass numbers of all constituent atoms.

 * I have to run but please edit the above to improve. I know there are some errors primarily in molecular mass since it is often portrayed as a synonym of relative molecular mass.--Nick Y. 22:17, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Updated. Please jump in if you disagree.--Nick Y. 18:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I only disagree with saying "misused" or "deprecated", because as I've argued, it depends on the context. Mass spectrometrists may have a very specific definition for a given term, but it doesn't necessarily apply in "general chemistry". Itub 19:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 * By deprecated I mean officially by IUPAC. Misused I am trying to save for technically incorrect by the IUPAC definition. In teh actual article we can choose softer words depending. So for molecular weight we could say something like "Although officially deprecated by IUPAC this is still in very common, almost ubiquitous use." and for misuse we can say things like "although not technically the same according to the strict reading of the IUPAC definitions these terms are used interchangably in most contexts." --Nick Y. 19:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Updated Again. Please jump in to debate these issues and don't let me go it alone. Other perspectives are very useful and welcome.--Nick Y. 19:39, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Major Update
I have gone ahead and done a major revision. Please give feedback here.--Nick Y. 00:33, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Definition
Hi, right now the first parapraph contains the following two sentences: The molecular mass [...] is the mass of one molecule of that substance, relative to the unified atomic mass unit u (equal to 1/12 the mass of one atom of carbon-12). This is distinct from the relative molecular mass of a molecule, which is the ratio of the mass of that molecule to 1/12 of the mass of carbon 12 and is a dimensionless number. I'm sorry if I haven't understood the article and the discussion here, but to me "the mass of one molecule of that substance, relative to the unified atomic mass unit u (equal to 1/12 the mass of one atom of carbon-12)" is exactly the same as "the ratio of the mass of that molecule to 1/12 of the mass of carbon 12". A mass relative to another mass is a ratio, right?--Biologos (talk) 10:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

 * The only difference is that one has units and the other doesn't. The difference only matters to people who worry about things such as the molar mass constant (that is, people who care about "dimensional correctness"). --Itub (talk) 11:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Itub. I misunderstood the English: I interpreted "relative to u" as a ratio, such that the unit of molecular mass would be g/u (mass relative to u). I just found "relative to" as "with regard to, in connection with" in the Merriam-Webster. So it was a language problem. Would "expressed in terms of" instead of "relative to" bring the same message across? Might make it even clearer.--Biologos (talk) 07:29, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree it's confusing. Imagine if we had distincts concepts for "metric length" defined as the length of something in meters, and "relative metric length", defined as the dimensionless ratio of the measured length to the meter! ;-) --Itub (talk) 08:03, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

The German sister version of this article says, roughly translated: The relative molecular mass is the molecular mass normalized to 1/12 of the mass of carbon 12, and is therefore dimensionless. Would it make sense to change the "relative to" in the English article to "expressed in terms of" or "normalized to"?--Biologos (talk) 10:08, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I edited it to say "numerically equivalent" rather than "distinct". I think the previous phrasing was overly confusing, as evidenced by this discussion. I did a double-take upon coming here and reading that attempt at strongly differentiating them. Bworking (talk) 01:50, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

Probable typo in the formula
The formula below, copied from the article, might contain a typo: molar mass = average molecular mass * (6.022*10−²³g/u)*(6.022*10²³/mol). Check it for hydrogen (H2).

Not sure why no one fixed this but it's an obvious typo. I replaced the first 6.022 by 1/6.022 without expanding it to 0.1654 so as to make the math clearer. --Vaughan Pratt (talk) 07:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Molecular mass
So did we agree on the fact that the molecular mass is the mass of a molecule? Then how could this be?

Molecular mass differs from more conventional measurements by taking into account different isotopic compositions, and as a result Molecular mass is generally more accurate than molar mass, but less used.

Wasn't it the other way around? The definition of the molecular mass on the molar mass page is as follows:

The molecular mass (m) is the mass of a given molecule: it is measured in daltons (Da) or atomic mass units (u), where 1 Da = 1 u = 1.660 538 782(83)×10–27 kg).[3][4] Different molecules of the same compound may have different molecular masses because they contain different isotopes of an element. The molar mass is a measure of the average molecular mass of all the molecules in a sample, and is usually the more appropriate measure when dealing with macroscopic (weighable) quantities of a substance. --Ovi 1 (talk) 11:56, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Improvement
I plan to do quite a lot of work to this article in my userspace, and to bring it in later. Unless anyone objects :-P Yamakiri  TC     [ §]    07-31-2008 • 00:37:24

Unit type variation
As per the latest IUPAC publication, average hydrogen atomic weight is 1.007975, being its range from 1.00784 to 1.00811, this change some numbers, specially the average molecular weight of water to 18.01535 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.216.56.30 (talk) 10:44, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Lead section too short???
I don't think the lead section is too short. It contains a clear definition of the molecular mass and that's all that's needed. Adding more text here will only water down the consise description.--RolfSander (talk) 12:44, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Unless anyone complains now, I will remove the "lead too short" tag again next week.--RolfSander (talk) 13:33, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There were no objections. I have removed the tag again.--RolfSander (talk) 09:59, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Molecular Mass vs Molecular Weight
Sorry, but this entire section "Molecular mass is sometimes called molecular weight. However, this is incorrect because mass and weight are different (see Mass versus weight). Another possible source of confusion is that some older textbooks use the term "molecular weight" to mean the molar mass.[1] This terminology is not used in modern literature" is ridiculous. "Molecular Weight" is overwhelmingly favored in the literature, so however you may feel about the correctness of the term it's still fairly silly to imply that it's "not used in modern literature" when it is in fact the preferred descriptor in most scientific literature, especially anything involving macromolecules. (+)H3N-Protein\Chemist-CO2(-) 03:46, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, this entire article is quite odd:
 * The entire article seems to be about small molecules, going as far as suggesting that the only polydispersity that can be seen is from isotope effects. Which seemingly implies that this article isn't about macromolecules at all (so no polymers, proteins, nanoparticles, whatever..) and then it goes on to talk about using Mark-Houwink Parameters to measure molecular weight from dynamic light scattering! DLS can't resolve small molecules, so we're now suddenly switched to talking about polymers and colloids.
 * Not only that, there's a list of instrument manufacturers including Brookhaven, Malvern, and Horiba and it's not even clear whether they're being mentioned because they make DLS instruments or SLS instruments (they make both! but I don't know which this article is trying to refer to).
 * The previous sentence is about using Mark-Houwink relations to get MW from hydrodynamic properties, and now all of a sudden we're talking about absolute molecular weight determination (ie. from first principles, no standards) which would require static light scattering.
 * It's not clear at all what this article is about. The fact that it bends over backwards to not use the term "Molecular Weight" doesn't help, when literally 90% of current published papers, virtually all textbooks, and the very instrument manufacturers mentioned here all use this term.  Not to mention, there are virtually no relevant references in this entire article. (+)H3N-Protein\Chemist-CO2(-) 10:42, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

 * Well, I fixed it myself. (+)H3N-Protein\Chemist-CO2(-) 11:19, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

 * Hello Protein Chemist, you are right, the previous text was not okay. However, now we jump from one extrem to the other. It now says that "molecular weight" is used almost exclusively. That is not correct either. I did a quick search on google scholar and found 2500000 hits for "molecular weight" and 1130000 hits for "molecular mass". This shows that (unfortunately) a mix is used in the literature. I have edited the wikipedia text, trying to point out that both are currently used.--RolfSander (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:34, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. To be honest though, I was more bothered by the jumble of instrumental methods in the original version of the article, so as long as they don't get re-jumbled I don't really object to any additional changes. (+)H3N-Protein\Chemist-CO2(-) 11:03, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay. BTW: Thanks for adding the new text about the instrumental methods descriptions!--RolfSander (talk) 11:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Major revision
Proper definitions are now given. This is based on the current position in chemistry. A large amount has been deleted as useless unreferenced waffle, but editors might take a different view. If so some of it might be reinstated in an historical section, which might also include the old methods based on cryoscopy etc. Petergans (talk) 12:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Formula Mass
Formula mass currently redirects here. That's a little confusing. We should probably put in a subsection specifically addressing the difference between "formula mass" and "molecular mass" or we should stop redirecting. NickCT (talk) 19:52, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

molecular mass measurement
(1) The lead section describes the use of mass spectrometry for small to medium molecules. In fact, mass spectrometry has no theoretical upper limit while in practice it is capable of measuring a few hundred kDa (commercial instruments) on up to the 10s-100s of MDa range (e.g., Gary Siuzdak, Mark Bier, Wen-Ping Peng, etc.). (2) The lead section mentions that mass spectrometry can determine stoichiometry (elemental composition). In practice, this is not strictly true for all m/z measured, as mass measurement inaccuracy increases with increasing m/z. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dha250 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Clear Mistake in Definitions Section
I just edited the Definitions Section. First it stated that: "Relative atomic and molecular mass values are dimensionless but are given the "unit" Dalton (formerly atomic mass unit) to indicate that the number is equal to the mass of one molecule divided by the mass of one atom of 12C." That is wrong, as can be clearly seen from the definition of Dalton or from the discussions above. It should by divided by 1/12 of the mass of one atom of 12C. I don't know, why noone corrected this obvious mistake. 134.60.31.73 (talk) 11:14, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

formula mass
formula mass redirects here. Probably that is fine, but the page should explain the difference between the terms. (The redirect could point to an appropriate section or subsection.) Also, it seems that formula weight redirects somewhere else. Seems to me that they should redirect to the same place. Gah4 (talk) 23:24, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Another Proposed Edit for Relative Molecular Mass and Molar Mass
If we have a separate wikipedia page for relative atomic mass and atomic weight redirects to it, then why not create a separate page named relative molecular mass? then, molecular weight may redirect to it, and formula weight can be included as a section of the page. This would clear all the confusion regarding the terms. Ayushbiswal (talk) 02:38, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Molecular mass


text:
Emil Hansen

Emil Hansen can refer to:

 * Emil Hansen (footballer)
 * Emil Christian Hansen, Danish mycologist and fermentation physiologist.

title: Emil Hansen


text:
User:GothSanta~enwiki

Aspiring translator and linguist (fluent Spanish; native English; working on Mandarin Chinese and Russian).

title: User:GothSanta~enwiki