text:
Talk:Cherenkov radiation

Glow
This article states that "even very radioactive substances do not glow in air"; on the other hand. polonium claims, supported by LANL, that polonium does glow blue in air "by excitation of the surrounding air". Is this a different glow, or is this article wrong? --Andrew 18:07, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

Upon further research, a number of radioactive substances definitely glow (see the CRC handbook; eg. polonium, promethium, and radium). So I took out the claim:

 * The Cherenkov effect is used as a visual cue in Hollywood movies to announce radioactive materials. However, it should be noted that even very radioactive materials do not glow in air - the particles are simply too slow - and that even in water a source may be producing a dose of radiation lethal in seconds without easily visible Cherenkov radiation. A source itself would only glow if it was very strong, transparent, and an insulator.

 * I wrote that working from the basis that a particle would only produce a Cherenkov effect in air if it was faster than the speed of light in air (meaning it'd have to be at a highly relatavistic speed). This may be a misunderstanding of the physics involved on my part, however.  In any case, we should probably note that the glow cannot be counted on to identify a (perhaps dangerously) radioactive object.  I'd also note that "excitation of the surrounding air" could refer to excitation of electrons in air, by passing particles, which then produces light when the electrons return to the ground state.  This is different from Cherenkov radiation.  Pakaran 00:18, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I suspect that the ionization of air is what causes the blue glow of highly radioactive materials (see criticality accident). A beta particle would have to have about 6 MeV of kinetic energy to produce Cerenkov glow in air (rest mass is 0.511 MeV, refractive index of air is about 1.003); radium gives about 0.046 MeV. --Andrew 03:30, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)

Heaviside's prediction
Should we mention that Cherenkov radiation was predicted by Oliver Heaviside in 1888-1889?

Absolutely: in standard practice (calling an effect after the one who predicted it, starting with Halley) it would even be called Heaviside radiation. Thus it should be mentioned in the leading paragraph. Harald88 17:02, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Except that Heaviside's "prediction" concerned an hypothetical charged particle moving faster than light in the VACUUM. 79.32.63.99 (talk) 13:18, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * If I am not mistaken, he only considered this (in vacuum) as a hypothetical possibility. What would happen if...? There was nothing wrong with this. My very best wishes (talk) 14:47, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

I've referenced Paul J Nahin's book on Oliver Heaviside for this.
 * I also referenced a similar predictive work by Arnold Sommerfeld - it seems that due to the newly found restriction of Einsteins relativity in the early 1900s, any intellectual games with super-c particles were also quickly forgotten. --Gunnar (talk) 20:07, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Explicit definition
This may seem like an obvious question to those who are technically acquainted...

You say that the absence of Cherenkov radiation is not a sure sign of the absence of dangerous levels of radioactivity, but could it be said that the presence of Cherenkov radiation is a sure sign of the presence of dangerous radioactivity? --68.107.141.30 00:52, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, it's true that the presence of the Cherenkov's Radiation means that -to put things simply- you're in big trouble. But only if you are in the same medium as the one in which the radiation occurrs or and similiar and close to the source. If you're in a medium which stops the radiation then it's, of course, stopped. For example: imagine Cherenkov's Radiation occurring in a place fully isolated from the outside -- you're safe outside as long as the isolation is not destroyed. Isolation can anyting that doesn't meet the requirements for the radiation to take place. Another example: It's much harder to produce the radiation in the air than it is in water. If you produce weak radiation in water then you can make it powerful enough for it to visible in water, but at the same time weak enough for it to be harmful in air. Then, you'll be able to actually watch it, standing next to the water pool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.142.107.30 (talk) 23:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Tscherenkov / Cherenkov
In the Science and technology in the Soviet Union article, the name is spelled as Tscherenkov (assuming it's the same person). Should there be a redirect from Tscherenkov radiation to Cherenkov radiation? Googling suggests this is the german spelling of the name. --129.240.122.183 22:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Sure, why not? Done. -- Xerxes 04:17, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

 * This is a small point but it's noteworthy: while the man's name is Cherenkov, the phenomenon is called Cerenkov Radiation (without the 'h'). I've never seen it spelled with an 'h' in any physics text.  But this is a small point. Astrobayes 22:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

 * The spelling Cerenkov was frequently used in scientific papers in the past. (I have no idea why). According to Google ngrams, since about 1995 the majority of English-language works use "Cherenkov". --ABehrens (talk) 06:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

 * See Pavel Alekseyevich Cherenkov for further discussion. The guy's name was "Черенков", not any of the above. The current standard transliteration would seem to be "Cherenkov", but transliterations have been known to change over the years. "Čerenkov" does appear to dominate in science, but what that indicates is questionable. Probably it means that it was the favored spelling of someone who wrote a notable book. If someone is interested and has a lot more free time than I do, it would be a nice thing to track down. :) Andrew Rodland 22:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

 * There are at least a dozen standards for the Romanization of Russian. The Scholarly/Scientific system, which uses single characters to represent single Russian letters, would write "Čerenkov". So does the ISO-9 standard, and the Russian GOST 7.79(System A). Other standards would use "Cherenkov". --ABehrens (talk) 06:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

 * See V.P. Zrelov,Cherenkov Radiation in High Energy Physics, 1970, widely referred to physics text... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stuart Ponder 63.199.162.164 (talk) 08:54, 5 December 2006 (UTC).

In Russian Language does not exist letter -Č-, there it is -ч-. This way of writing -ch- comes from Czechoslovakia, and a couple of other balkan states. Probably the original article that this name was taken from was written by a Czech person. The sound that you are looking for (-ch- in English) is written the same way you write it in English language, namely -ch- (if you translate from Cyrillic alphabet into Latin, that is). The reason why, sometimes, you come across a -TCH- variation of it, is because in Russian language the sound -ch- is a shorter(!) AND "tougher"/stronger sounding -ch-. I.E. think of the Chicagoans (in the States) pronouncing the name of their city (Chicago), well, now make it, (the -ch-), sound "shorter" and sharper. That would be the difference in pronunciation. It is NOT a German way of spelling it. You see, there is no set standard in Russia how to write some of their sounds, that is why you get to see so many variations of spelling of the same sound. Eg.: Russian name Сергей, can be written as Sergei, Sergey, and Serguei, but in each variant it sounds the same. English language has 26 letters, Russian has 33. The sound -sh- is -ш-, however, you can come across -sh- way of spelling it almost as much as -sch-. Sound -я- can be written as -ya-, -ja-, and -ia-. Russian name Ваня, can be written as -Vanya- and -Vania-. Яблоня as -jablonya- (apple tree), and so on and so forth... So, you can send that link from Tcherenkov to Cherenkov with an easy heart. (And for the love of god, folks, remove this -Č- from his name in this one. This is the very reason I even got here in this discussion to let you know. It almost lookes like... blasphemy(?) the more I look at it). :) I'm sure the dude who created it meant well, it's probably that he used a Czech source for reference, or something. - Regards. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.205.115.91 (talk) 02:03, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

 * There are several official Russian standards for transcribing Cyrillic using the Roman alphabet. (You can see them at Транслитерация русского_алфавита латиницей). In one of those systems, "Ч" is transcribed as "Č". "Tch" is the French way of representing the "ch" sound. Since French was the international language of diplomacy, the "tch" Romanization was formerly (until about 20 years ago) used on Russian passports. --ABehrens (talk) 06:11, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Superluminal?
Could someone explain in the article what's meant by "faster than the speed of light in the medium"? I thought the speed of light was a constant, and nothing could go faster than it?
 * Nothing can go fater than Light in vacuum, however, you can go faster than light in a medium (like water or glass) because light is slowed down. --Falcorian (talk) 03:42, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

 * If you want a straightforward answer, consider this: The speed of any electromagnetic wave is, to first order, v = c/n, where n is the medium's index of refraction, c = 3*10^8 meters/sec.squared. For vacuum, n=1 so the speed of light (which is an electromagnetic wave) is v=c.  Nothing can exceed that speed.  But, for many material media n>1 so then v<c and light in that medium travels slower than light in vacuum.  It is therefore possible for something traveling faster than this speed to exceed the speed of light in that medium. Astrobayes 22:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * That, sir, is a terrible redefinition of "straight-forward" and you should be ashamed of yourself.--Healyhatman (talk) 02:10, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * That struck me as a very straight-forward explanation and I also consider the analogy of 'why' (in the article itself) to be a great one.96.52.176.113 (talk) 03:52, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Einstein's famous theorem states that no object can travel faster than the speed of light in a vacuum (or free space if you prefer) The omission of those all-important three words in most quotes is what causes the confusion. --Anteaus (talk) 23:19, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Luminal boom
Should I add "sometimes this is refered to as a "luminal boom" - because I've heard that before. 68.6.112.70 08:16, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Generally, made-up words and phrases should not be added to articles. The analogy to sonic booms is already in the article. -- Xerxes 15:54, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Where have you "heard that before?" If you cite a verifiable source, then what you're saying would carry some weight behind an edit or addition.  If not, then it's probably best to leave this phrase out as it would be more likely to garner a revert. Astrobayes 22:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

What we're dealing with here is an accumulation of emitted energy from a source which piles (adds) up slightly ahead of the source because the source is moving so fast that the radiated energy can't get away from it. which is analogous to the accumulated emitted sound energy of an airplane moving at the speed of sound.WFPM (talk) 00:52, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Definition
The definition mentions that this effect is when a "charged particle" goes through an "insulator". However, I would think that this effect should occur when ANY particle (charged or not) passes through ANY medium (inulator or not) at faster than the propogation speed of photons in that medium. 68.6.112.70 08:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

 * You're wrong about charged particles; a neutral particle has no impact on the electromagnetic fields inside the medium, so it cannot produce radiation. The bit about conductors is already explained in the article: no light is produced. -- Xerxes 15:54, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

 * In that case something else must be used to detect neutrinos since they do not carry a charge. I read that Cherenkov Radiation was used in the IceCube neutrino detector. Something must be contradicting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.226.68.10 (talk) 15:05, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

 * IceCube and other Cherenkov-based neutrino telescopes measure the reaction products of a neutrino interaction, such as electrons, muons, and tau's, which are charged particles and emit Cherenkov radiation. -- Questgame (talk) 10:35, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Accelerating 'matter' beyond speed of light.
"Colloquially and in chemistry, matter is easy to define because it is directly associated with mass." []

I think the use of the term 'matter' in the following sentence in this article on Cherenkov radiation is misleading: "Matter can be accelerated beyond this speed [the speed of light] during nuclear reactions and in particle accelerators."

The problem is that 'real', 'physical' matter can NOT be accelerated beyond the speed of light. Only theoretical particles like Tachyons (which do not have any mass) can go beyond the speed of light. 'Matter' suggests real particles with real mass, hence it is misleading. The problem of course is the loose definition of matter, but in this instance i think it pays to be pedantic since not going beyond the speed of light is a fundamental rule we all learn in physics class!

Instead i would suggest something like the following: "Certain special particles can be accelerated beyond this speed during nuclear reactions and in particle accelerators."

--Kavrod 14:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I disagree. It says: "For example, the speed of light in water is only 0.75c. Matter can be accelerated beyond this speed during nuclear reactions and in particle accelerators." which is true. Matter can be accelerated to faster then 0.75c in water. Further, it says right after that "Cherenkov radiation results when a charged particle, most commonly an electron, exceeds the speed of light in a dielectric (electrically insulating) medium through which it passes." Matter can't break 1c, but it can certainly go faster than the speed of light in certain mediums. --Falcorian (talk) 18:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 * As far as I have read here it has not been mentioned that while the index of refraction for visible light is approx 1.5 in water it may be close to one and even below one for high energy photons (X-rays/gamma) or short wavelength (de Broigl)/high energy particles. To be clear; I am referring to the real part of the index of refraction that is related to phase-shift, not the imaginary part that is related to absorption. Also, it is the average speed of light that is below c in a medium with n>1, between hand shakes/interactions the re-emitted photon always propagate at c. While Im at it, the closer to resonance the longer it takes before re-emitting the photon.

85.230.24.89 (talk) 20:34, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

When you say that "the re-emitted photon always propagates at c", you' re beginning to talk my language! So the propagation away from each atom is at c, yes? And that explains how the light can "speed back up" after being "slowed down" in the medium. But now consider the "first atom" transition. If it exits at c, then when does it ever travel at c/n? Maybe we're dealing with crossed light pathways rather than faster than medium speed pathways?WFPM (talk) 14:39, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

the angle is not 90 degrees.
The figure shows an 90 degree angle between wavefront and emission angle. Note that the pysical light front of photons are not in 90 degree angle with the emitted light. This is due to the difference between group and phase velocity. Read for example http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ex/0008001 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.237.208.86 (talk) 13:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Correct for the usual case of a dispersive medium. Maybe one should note that right angle the image is true for the ideal case of a non-dispersive medium (where phase and group velocity are the same). Maybe I come round to do this at some point. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 11:58, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Image change?
Just being proper and asking first, but I think we should change the current image with this one to the right. I feel it illustrates the phenomenon more obviously (for lack of a larger vocabulary). Any thoughts? -- RA  dialogue   observe  06:14, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

 * There has been no answer for a few days, so I'm just going to assume no one cares and change the image already. -- RA   dialogue   observe  07:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I missed it the first time, but no, no problem at all. New one looks good! --Falcorian (talk) 16:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

the overall blue image looks more impressive but I think this one is more explaining http://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bild:TrigaReactorCore.jpeg&filetimestamp=20050823070124 perhabs we can use both or combine them? (87.162.72.43 (talk) 09:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC))
 * I've placed it in the section about reactors, so now they're both in use! I think it fits better there since it shows a little Cerenkov and a lot of reactor. --Falcorian (talk) 18:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Speaking of images, do these images have a really slow shutter speed, or does it really look that bright to the naked eye? If it's a slow shutter speed, that should probably be mentioned in the captions or article.
 * I don't know, so I went to flickr and found some to compare. It seems like they are that bright. --Falcorian (talk) 17:37, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It depends on circumstances, how "hot" the environment is, but yes, the light can easily be that bright. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 12:03, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Energy loss
It is not mentioned, but I presume that particle loses energy during this radiation. If it is so, it should be mentioned in article. Is there relationship between deceleration X-ray radiation and Cherenkov-radiation? Thanks, V —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.0.210.214 (talk) 16:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes, this issue should be more stated explicitly. As stated in Frank–Tamm formula, the electron does not lose energy or momentum.
 * Uh, this isn't really true. The Frank-Tamm formula explicitly states how much energy the electron is losing, unless that energy is being pulled from somewhere else (such as the medium).  But as far as I know, cherenkov radiation doesn't locally cool down the medium.  Conservation of energy says that the energy  emitted must come from somewhere, my bet is that the particle slows down. Spott (talk) 01:24, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

 * As the charge travels at a constant speed, according to the Larmor formula it should not be radiating at all. Hermann Haus has explained the phenomena by pure classical Maxwellian electrodynamics using the nonradiation condition of a moving charge. I do not know whether the text in section Physical origin is supposed to describe some alternative quantum explanation, or whether it is just some physics mumbo jumbo. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 13:39, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

 * Maxwell's equations in medium, and if one computes the Poynting vector one acually sees that energy is transported. But other energy loss mechanisms for a moving charge in medium are much larger, hence one tends to neglect the Cherenkov radiation contribution. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 12:16, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Čerenkov / Cherenkov
Copied from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Archive May 2009. -- Crowsnest (talk) 09:41, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Why is it spelled Čerenkov radiation? I've only ever seen it spelled as Cherenkov radiation. 70.29.208.129 (talk) 07:49, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * A Google Scholar and Google Books search gives that "Cerenkov radiation" and "Cherenkov radiation" are far more common than "Čerenkov radiation". I will change it to "Cherenkov radiation", in agreement with Pavel Alekseyevich Cherenkov. See also WP:COMMONNAME. -- Crowsnest (talk) 09:13, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * While Cherenkov is most frequent, I say that Čerenkov as per Scientific transliteration of Cyrillic should remain being mentioned. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 14:08, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Cherenkov is a Russian name and therefore russian romanization rules apply. They do not contain transliteration to european special symbols for obvious reasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.42.45.137 (talk) 08:51, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

As there are many languages using the Roman alphabet and with different pronounciation, there are different romanization rules for the Russian language / Cyrillic alphabet. For instance: The Ч-sound and the v/w ending is different. In some languages there are some special accents and other signs, in other not - eg. we Germans have the ä/ö/ü-Umlaute which are also written as ae/oe/ue if you don't have a suitable keyboard. Often it is seen polite to use the original letters, e.g. to use the é/è/ê accents for French names. But for this case this does not apply, as the original Russian name written in the Cyrillic script has no háček. The question is: does the English language use a háček as standard feature? Answer: no. Therefore I see no use in using "Čerenkov" here in the English part of wikipedia. It would be different, if Paul had been born in Tallinn and and a birth certificate with "Tšerenkov". Then it would be polite to use his name in the original version with háček. But for the English transcription of Черенков, I agree that only one version should be presented here on this English page - the English romanization of the Russian language (not the French, not the German and also not the Turkish). BTW: Cherenkov seems to be fine when applying GOST 7.79 System B. --Gunnar (talk) 22:53, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * pt: Tcherenkov
 * es: Cherenkov
 * fr: Tcherenkov
 * it: Čerenkov
 * ro: Cerenkov
 * nl: Tsjerenkov
 * dk: Tjerenkov
 * no: Tsjerenkov
 * se: Tjerenkov
 * de: Tscherenkow
 * fi: Tšerenkov
 * hu: Cserenkov
 * po: Czerenkow
 * cs: Čerenkov
 * sk: Čerenkov
 * sl: Čerenkov
 * hr: Čerenkov
 * tr: Çerenkov
 * et: Tšerenkov
 * lv: Čerenkovs
 * lt: Čerenkovas

Gravitational Cherenkov Radiation
As there isn't an article on gravitational cherenkov radiation as far as I can tell I thought I should propose the creation of a section on it in this article. BarryFFFFFF (talk) 20:08, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Id really like a more comprehensive description of the actual source of the light it says The charged particles "polarize" the molecules of that medium

Thinking water, so basically the rapid particle effects the electromagnetic field of the h2o molecule as it travels near it, is there a distance from the atom effect on frequency as the nearness of the moving particle to the atom would effect the amount of excitation, that is how high up the waters electron goes, so water compared with ice would have different cherenkov radiation emission frequencies (colors) because the atom spacing is different between crystal n fluids.

Uses of Cherenkov radiation I have heard neutrinos are neutral, so that seems to suggest more could be written as to the way their presence produces cherenkov radiation when they pass near an atom or is it that neutrinos have a particularism where they have to actually meet the nucleus (which goes with their specialized detectors) to "polarize" an atom the move near Could a person measure the velocity of a chemical reaction like CH(twenty) -> 5CH4 live from the amount of larger amount of cherenkov radiation it produces

also it looks like a person could make a sort of amusing "what radiation is that" thing if materials engineers used something like CVD to create hundreds of particularly spaced micro refractors (kind of like a GRIN lens) the little |||||||||| side areas with the matching refractive ndex to the velocity of the particle would glow describing precisely the kind of radiation — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.185.2.34 (talk) 01:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

articles Cherenkov detector and Cherenkov radiation
There are articles Cherenkov detector and Cherenkov radiation. I think that an overlap in contents is unavoidable, but I wonder: should some content in Cherenkov radiation be better placed in the Cherenkov detector article?

I do not think that the two articles should be merged.

Waiting for other opinions. And I suggest Talk:Cherenkov detector for discussion. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 16:05, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Vacuum Cherenkov radiation - Proposed Deletion
I propose the deletion of this section, "Vacuum Cherenkov Radiation," because it describes an unobserved phenomenon supported by various unobserved phenomenon. Currently, "Vacuum Cherenkov radiation" is a pseudo-scientific supposition describing a yet unobserved phenomenon with no supporting empirical or solid theoretical evidence.

"Vacuum Cherenkov radiation is the conjectured phenomenon which refers to the Cherenkov radiation of a charged particle propagating in the physical vacuum."

This wouldn't be Cherenkov radiation, as Cherenkov radiation is caused by emission from the medium itself. The proposed "vacuum Cherenkov" radiation would be a different phenomenon entirely, one that has not been observed and according to special relativity and the Standard Model should not be observed in the foreseeable future, at least not by the mechanisms describing Cherenkov radiation in the main article.

The section goes on to explain the possible mechanics of the proposed effect. These explanations rely on altering fundamental physical constants, ignoring various rules of the Standard Model, ignoring special relativity, modifying the topology of space-time itself, discovered non-existent (thus far) superliminal particles, or discovering energy dependent velocities of those particles (again no evidence of that so far) ... it describes an unobserved phenomenon backed by unobserved phenomenon and unsupported theoretical models.

In short, this section is not science. Interesting perhaps, but not science and because of this I do not feel it belongs in this article. If there are no major objections, I would like to delete this section but thought I would discuss it first.

Vcfahrenbruck (talk) 22:00, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Gamma rays
I can't find any mention here of gamma rays inducing Cherenkov radiation, even though that was how the original discovery was made. The original research paper of 1934 was entitled, "Visible Emission of Clean Liquids by Action of γ Radiation." http://web.ihep.su/owa/dbserv/hw.part2?s_c=CERENKOV+1934 http://web.ihep.su/dbserv/compas/src/cerenkov37/eng.pdf Zyxwv99 (talk) 00:31, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

"In Popular Culture" section
I'm dubious about some of these claims, and the cited sources don't back them up:
 * In popular culture[edit]The typical association of Cherenkov radiation with accelerated particles from radioactive materials and processes, as well as its perceived other-worldly glow, have made it a common popular-culture hallmark of radioactivity. It determined the colour of Doctor Manhattan in Watchmen,[10][11] as well as the radioactive glow of products from the nuclear power plant in The Simpsons (where it was inaccurately portrayed as green[12]). The classic blue glow that is usually given off by Godzilla's spines before he fires his Atomic Breath, and the normally-blue colour of the beam itself, can also be attributed to Cherenkov radiation.

Source [10] talks about Cherenkov radiation, but doesn't say anything about doesn't say any thing about Dr Manhatten, or pop-culture depictions of radiation in general. ([11] does say that his colour was inspired by Cherenkov radiation). [12] says that the typical depiction of radioactive materials as glowing green (e.g. in the Simpsons) is based on the commonest colour of radium paint. I'll have a go at rewriting the section to better reflect the sources. Iapetus (talk) 09:37, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Cherenkov Big Bang Cycles (Cherenkov Big Bang)
We detect netrinos via emitted "Cherenkov radiation" produced when they collide with atoms in the water. Photons are the particles that travel inside the void faster than any other particle. This is the case only in the pure void. In water other particles travel faster than photons, for example electrons.

Our Universe is expanding - if we compare relativistically afar galaxies - faster than the speed of light in the void. The universal expansion is an accelerative one, thus in the future each single point, will ubiquitously diverge (rip apart) faster than light - a non relativistic - therefore absolute, ubuquitous and scalar (adiabatic "scalar field" expansion - thus homogeneity is not an issue/conondrum) (expansion)-explosion due to humongous speed.

During the "Cherenkov Big Bangs" (plural because "cosmic inflation" predicts infinite ones), not electrons, but the "chromodynamic noise of the void" the "fabric of space-time" itself, will explode faster than light, and that event will produce (if we solve the maths) the observable energy levels, if we extrapolate backwards in time.

Hence the Universe never dies, it only experiences infinite "Cherenkov Big Bang" consecutive events (we don't know if the "Cherenkov Big Bang Cycles" are totally ubiquitous - because our "visible horizon" is negligible if compared to the Megaverse).

---

read also:

/Wilczekian Noise/

Empty space is not empty. It's full of chromodynamic noise or quantum noise or the Wilczekian field. Empty parts of the Universe are filled with normal noise or normally arranged noise or normally distributed noise (there are no forced patterns-no directivity). Matter is looping noise. Gravity is elongated chromodynamic noise, that seeks a lower energy overall arrangement, in order the gravitational group consumes less space and thus less energy. Dark matter is like the ripples of a pool. Some chromodynamic noise patches become elongated and others compressed, not only the observed surfaces cause the gravitational effect, but the overall dark matter regions. Dark matter is NOT something different from the rest of space. All the pool we call Universe is full of water/Wilczekian noise, simply only some parts of the Universal pond are wavy, that doesn't mean water exists only in the wave. "Wavy chromodynamic noise" or "dark matter", means that the noise of the void at the specific regions (we observe the phenomenon) has become non-omnidirectional thus exhibits three-dimensional (3D) directionality (not totally polarized directionality, because the "wilczekian grid" of the dark matter - chromodynamic noise has to be parallel to the shape of the "dark matter" region).

Dark energy is way more fundamental. Dark enegy is one with space-time itself. If you let alone space with no galaxies at all, it (space-time) instantaneously explodes faster than the speed of light in the void. (I use the term "lightspeed" or "light-speed", it is acceptable in dictionaries, it means many things, I mean "faster than the speed of light in the void")

Dark energy in a huge volume of space with nothing inside causes Big Bangs. But, Big Bangs after that Big Rip, generate a huge amount of matter.

Nowadays many afar galaxies are relativistically diverging faster than the speed of light in the void. In the future, when "dark energy" will prevail, each single point of the Universe will diverge from itself (it will rip apart it's viscera). That will not be a "relativistic light-speed divergion" but an "absolute/fundamental/ubiquitous light-speed divergion" phenomenon of each Universal point.

That explosion (Big Bang) will transform energy into matter, thus the acceleration will be reduced after a while. Note 1: Huge amounts of energy, generate new particles. Note 2. Particles are non-omnidirectional phenomena of the chromodynamic noise (wilczekian grid), and decelerate the affects of "dark energy"

Dark energy due to entropy always prevails at last, and a new circle of creation begins.

Cherenkov: add pronunciation
Cherenkov: add phonetic characters please! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4109:3E00:1CA5:C59E:60BC:4528 (talk) 07:35, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Black hole's Cherenkov radiation
'''note that the whole "black hole system" is not only the core, but (noted from the extrerior to the interior)
 * 1) the black hole disk and the polar geysers
 * 2) the "range of the event horizon" which isn't absolute, but relativistic according to the relative speed and position of the observer
 * 3) normal matter after the event horizon (it exists in huge black holes)
 * 4) neutron plasma (80% neutrons, 10% protons, 10% electrons)
 * 5) the quark-gluon plasma before the core
 * 6) the "feresingularity particle" the almost-point-like indivisible core particle

Where the Cherenkov radiation occurs in a black hole? (because there, particles of its non central layers, travel faster than light)

 * a theoretical black hole has a neutral charge (actual ones usually consume something by decaying it and that generates charge, if they're alone they still vomit an astronomically negligible amount of matter)
 * in a huge black hole, the "normal matter layer region" inside the black hole, doesn't generate Cherenkov radiation, but "observed Cherenkov radiation" to an observer who is less deep inside the black hole, but sees things, because he/she travels fast enough towards the object of observation

Cherenkov radiation occurs to all layers of the "black hole system", except the core (feresingularity particle = it is a fundamental particle, it isn't a point, it reaches the maximum degeneracy level of the universe, with more pressure we either have a bigger particle [the pressure fails to compact more energy], or some energy escapes as radiation [again, a failure of compression] [the feresingularity's maths offer explaination why the Big Bang blasted, using parts of the Roger Penrose's looping universe mechanism])

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Cherenkov radiation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071022200847/http://dbserv.ihep.su:80/hist/owa/hw.move?s_c=VAVILOV+1934&m=1 to http://dbserv.ihep.su/hist/owa/hw.move?s_c=VAVILOV+1934&m=1
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304081226/http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Articles/4-4/AR.pdf to http://www.journaloftheoretics.com/Articles/4-4/AR.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:44, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Speed at which light propagates
Hello all

I have made a recent change to the article by editing one of the sections to explain the speed at which light propagates and why it is slower than the actual speed of light. Please comment on my changes

Shadowstone1 (talk) 09:05, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Misconceptions
The article says "There are some misconceptions about Cherenkov radiation. For example, it is believed that the medium becomes electrically polarized by the particle's electric field. If the particle travels slowly, then the disturbance elastically relaxes back to mechanical equilibrium as the particle passes. But when the particle travels, the limited response speed of the medium means that a disturbance is left in the wake of the particle, and the energy contained in this disturbance radiates as a coherent shock-wave. Such conceptions do not have any analytical foundation, as electromagnetic radiation is emitted when charged particles move in a dielectric medium at subluminal velocities which are not considered Cherenkov radiation."

I've had three or four shots of vodka, so I could be wrong, but as far as I can tell, the third and fourth sentences combined with the last sentence don't seem to connect to the first two? If they do, I suspect there needs to be more explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dstar3k (talk • contribs) 23:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)

I double that even without vodka. What is the actual misconception? What is described in the text below or is that the explanation how things actually work? Especially the last sentence does not make any sense to me at all as I was taught in my physics studies that this is exactly how Cherenkov light works. Looking online for physic lectures, this is also what is taught(i.e. ). So is the misconceptoion that non coherent light might also be called Cherenkov light? I do not get it, please add some explanation or remove the section outright.P91 (talk) 13:15, 11 September 2020 (UTC)

Curie, Heaviside, Sommerfield
From Quora:

''The first person to see it was Marie Curie in 1910. Since she didn’t pursue the observation, so she clearly didn’t think much about it. Heaviside and Sommerfeld predicted it independently in 1888 and 1904 respectively''

This is not any of it in our current article and should be. I have asked there for sources. Or can someone here provide them? Andrewa (talk) 00:17, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

 * Forget the above, it's there and I missed it somehow. Andrewa (talk) 06:42, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cherenkov radiation


text:
Corynebacterium

Corynebacterium is a genus of  Gram-positive bacteria and most are aerobic. They are bacilli (rod-shaped), and in some phases of life they are, more specifically, club-shaped, which inspired the genus name (coryneform means "club-shaped").

They are widely distributed in nature in the microbiota of animals (including the human microbiota) and are mostly innocuous, most commonly existing in commensal relationships with their hosts. Some, such as C. glutamicum, are commercially and industrially useful. Others can cause human disease, including, most notably, diphtheria, which is caused by C. diphtheriae. As with various species of microbiota (including their relatives in the genera Arcanobacterium and Trueperella), they usually are not pathogenic, but can occasionally opportunistically capitalize on atypical access to tissues (via wounds) or weakened host defenses.

Taxonomy
The genus Corynebacterium was created by Lehmann and Neumann in 1896 as a taxonomic group to contain the bacterial rods responsible for causing diphtheria. The genus was defined based on morphological characteristics. Based on studies of 16S rRNA, they have been grouped into the subdivision of Gram-positive Eubacteria with high G:C content, with close phylogenetic relationship to Arthrobacter, Mycobacterium, Nocardia, and Streptomyces.

The term comes from Greek κορύνη, korýnē 'club, mace, staff, knobby plant bud or shoot' and βακτήριον, baktḗrion 'little rod'. The term "diphtheroids" is used to represent corynebacteria that are nonpathogenic; for example, C. diphtheriae would be excluded. The term diphtheroid comes from Greek διφθέρα, diphthérā 'prepared hide, leather'.

Genomics
Comparative analysis of corynebacterial genomes has led to the identification of several conserved signature indels (CSIs) that are unique to the genus. Two examples of CSIs are a two-amino-acid insertion in a conserved region of the enzyme phosphoribose diphosphate:decaprenyl-phosphate phosphoribosyltransferase and a three-amino-acid insertion in acetate kinase, both of which are found only in Corynebacterium species. Both of these indels serve as molecular markers for species of the genus Corynebacterium. Additionally, 16 conserved signature proteins, which are uniquely found in Corynebacterium species, have been identified. Three of these have homologs found in the genus Dietzia, which is believed to be the closest related genus to Corynebacterium. In phylogenetic trees based on concatenated protein sequences or 16S rRNA, the genus Corynebacterium forms a distinct clade, within which is a distinct subclade, cluster I. The cluster is made up of the species C. diphtheriae, C. pseudotuberculosis, C. ulcerans, C. aurimucosum, C. glutamicum, and C. efficiens. This cluster is distinguished by several conserved signature indels, such as a two-amino-acid insertion in LepA and a seven- or eight-amino-acid insertions in RpoC. Also, 21 conserved signature proteins are found only in members of cluster I. Another cluster has been proposed, consisting of C. jeikeium and C. urealyticum, which is supported by the presence of 19 distinct conserved signature proteins which are unique to these two species. Corynebateria have a high G+C content ranging from 46-74 mol%.

Characteristics
The principal features of the genus Corynebacterium were described by Collins and Cummins, for Coryn Taylor in 1986. They are gram-positive, catalase-positive, non-spore-forming, non-motile, rod-shaped bacteria that are straight or slightly curved. Metachromatic granules are usually present representing stored phosphate regions. Their size falls between 2 and 6 μm in length and 0.5 μm in diameter. The bacteria group together in a characteristic way, which has been described as the form of a "V", "palisades", or "Chinese characters". They may also appear elliptical. They are aerobic or facultatively anaerobic, chemoorganotrophs. They are pleomorphic through their lifecycles, they occur in various lengths, and they frequently have thickenings at either end, depending on the surrounding conditions.

Some corynebacteria are lipophilic (such as CDC coryneform groups F-1 and G, C. accolens, C. afermentans subsp. lipophilum, C. bovis, C. jeikeium, C. macginleyi, C. uropygiale, and C. urealyticum), but medically relevant corynebacteria are typically not. The nonlipophilic bacteria may be classified as fermentative (such as C. amycolatum; C. argentoratense, members of the C. diphtheriae group, C. glucuronolyticum, C. glutamicum, C. matruchotii, C. minutissimum, C. striatum, and C. xerosis) or nonfermentative (such as C. afermentans subsp. afermentans, C. auris, C. pseudodiphtheriticum, and C. propinquum).

Cell wall
The cell wall is distinctive, with a predominance of mesodiaminopimelic acid in the murein wall and many repetitions of arabinogalactan, as well as corynemycolic acid (a mycolic acid with 22 to 26 carbon atoms), bound by disaccharide bonds called L-Rhap-(1 → 4)--D-GlcNAc-phosphate. These form a complex commonly seen in Corynebacterium species: the mycolyl-AG–peptidoglican (mAGP). Unlike most corynebacteria, Corynebacterium kroppenstedtii does not contain mycolic acids.

Culture
Corynebacteria grow slowly, even on enriched media. In nutritional requirements, all need biotin to grow. Some strains also need thiamine and PABA. Some of the Corynebacterium species with sequenced genomes have between 2.5 and 3.0 million base pairs. The bacteria grow in Loeffler's medium, blood agar, and trypticase soy agar (TSA). They form small, grayish colonies with a granular appearance, mostly translucent, but with opaque centers, convex, with continuous borders. The color tends to be yellowish-white in Loeffler's medium. In TSA, they can form grey colonies with black centers and dentated borders that either resemble flowers (C. gravis), continuous borders (C. mitis), or a mix between the two forms (C. intermedium).

Habitat
Corynebacterium species occur commonly in nature in soil, water, plants, and food products. The non-diphtheroid Corynebacterium species can even be found in the mucosa and normal skin flora of humans and animals. Unusual habitats, such as the preen gland of birds, have been recently reported for Corynebacterium uropygiale. Some species are known for their pathogenic effects in humans and other animals. Perhaps the most notable one is C. diphtheriae, which acquires the capacity to produce diphtheria toxin only after interacting with a bacteriophage. Other pathogenic species in humans include: C. amycolatum, C. striatum, C. jeikeium, C. urealyticum, and C. xerosis;    all of these are important as pathogens in immunosuppressed patients. Pathogenic species in other animals include C. bovis and C. renale. This genus has been found to be part of the human salivary microbiome.

Role in disease
The most notable human infection is diphtheria, caused by C. diphtheriae. It is an acute, contagious infection characterized by pseudomembranes of dead epithelial cells, white blood cells, red blood cells, and fibrin that form around the tonsils and back of the throat. In developed countries, it is an uncommon illness that tends to occur in unvaccinated individuals, especially school-aged children, elderly, neutropenic or immunocompromised patients, and those with prosthetic devices such as prosthetic heart valves, shunts, or catheters. It is more common in developing countries It can occasionally infect wounds, the vulva, the conjunctiva, and the middle ear. It can be spread within a hospital. The virulent and toxigenic strains produce an exotoxin formed by two polypeptide chains, which is itself produced when a bacterium is transformed by a gene from the β prophage.

Several species cause disease in animals, most notably C. pseudotuberculosis, which causes the disease caseous lymphadenitis, and some are also pathogenic in humans. Some attack healthy hosts, while others tend to attack the immunocompromised. Effects of infection include granulomatous lymphadenopathy, pneumonitis, pharyngitis, skin infections, and endocarditis. Corynebacterial endocarditis is seen most frequently in patients with intravascular devices. Several species of Corynebacterium can cause trichomycosis axillaris. C. striatum may cause axillary odor. C. minutissimum causes erythrasma.

Industrial uses
Nonpathogenic species of Corynebacterium are used for important industrial applications, such as the production of amino acids and nucleotides, bioconversion of steroids, degradation of hydrocarbons, cheese aging, and production of enzymes. Some species produce metabolites similar to antibiotics: bacteriocins of the corynecin-linocin type, antitumor agents, etc. One of the most studied species is C. glutamicum, whose name refers to its capacity to produce glutamic acid in aerobic conditions.

L-Lysine production is specific to C. glutamicum in which core metabolic enzymes are manipulated through genetic engineering to drive metabolic flux towards the production of NADPH from the pentose phosphate pathway, and L-4-aspartyl phosphate, the commitment step to the synthesis of L-lysine, lysC,, , and. These enzymes are up-regulated in industry through genetic engineering to ensure adequate amounts of lysine precursors are produced to increase metabolic flux. Unwanted side reactions such as threonine and asparagine production can occur if a buildup of intermediates occurs, so scientists have developed mutant strains of C. glutamicum through PCR engineering and chemical knockouts to ensure production of side-reaction enzymes are limited. Many genetic manipulations conducted in industry are by traditional cross-over methods or inhibition of transcriptional activators.

Expression of functionally active human epidermal growth factor has been brought about in C. glutamicum, thus demonstrating a potential for industrial-scale production of human proteins. Expressed proteins can be targeted for secretion through either the general secretory pathway or the twin-arginine translocation pathway.

Unlike gram-negative bacteria, the gram-positive Corynebacterium species lack lipopolysaccharides that function as antigenic endotoxins in humans.

Species
Corynebacterium comprises the following species:

 * C. accolens Neubauer et al. 1991

 * C. afermentans Riegel et al. 1993
 * C. alimapuense Claverias et al. 2019
 * "C. alkanolyticum" Lee and Reichenbach 2006
 * C. ammoniagenes (Cooke and Keith 1927) Collins 1987
 * C. amycolatum Collins et al. 1988
 * C. anserum Liu et al. 2021
 * C. appendicis Yassin et al. 2002

 * C. aquatimens Aravena-Román et al. 2012
 * C. aquilae Fernández-Garayzábal et al. 2003
 * C. argentoratense Riegel et al. 1995
 * "C. asperum" De Briel et al. 1992
 * C. atrinae Kim et al. 2015
 * C. atypicum Hall et al. 2003
 * C. aurimucosum Yassin et al. 2002
 * C. auris Funke et al. 1995
 * C. auriscanis Collins et al. 2000

 * C. belfantii Dazas et al. 2018

 * C. beticola Abdou 1969 (Approved Lists 1980)

 * "C. bouchesdurhonense" Ndongo et al. 2017
 * "C. bouchesdurhonense" Lo et al. 2019
 * C. bovis Bergey et al. 1923 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. callunae (Lee and Good 1963) Yamada and Komagata 1972 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. camporealensis Fernández-Garayzábal et al. 1998
 * C. canis Funke et al. 2010
 * C. capitovis Collins et al. 2001
 * C. casei Brennan et al. 2001
 * C. caspium Collins et al. 2004

 * C. choanae Busse et al. 2019

 * C. ciconiae Fernández-Garayzábal et al. 2004
 * C. comes Schaffert et al. 2021
 * C. confusum Funke et al. 1998
 * C. coyleae Funke et al. 1997
 * C. crudilactis Zimmermann et al. 2016

 * C. cystitidis Yanagawa and Honda 1978 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * "C. defluvii" Yu et al. 2017
 * "C. dentalis" Benabdelkader et al. 2020
 * C. deserti Zhou et al. 2012
 * C. diphtheriae (Kruse 1886) Lehmann and Neumann 1896 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. doosanense Lee et al. 2009
 * C. durum Riegel et al. 1997
 * C. efficiens Fudou et al. 2002
 * C. endometrii Ballas et al. 2020

 * C. epidermidicanis Frischmann et al. 2012

 * C. faecale Chen et al. 2016
 * C. falsenii Sjödén et al. 1998

 * C. felinum Collins et al. 2001

 * C. flavescens Barksdale et al. 1979 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. fournieri corrig. Diop et al. 2018

 * C. frankenforstense Wiertz et al. 2013
 * C. freiburgense Funke et al. 2009
 * C. freneyi Renaud et al. 2001

 * C. gerontici Busse et al. 2019

 * C. glaucum Yassin et al. 2003
 * C. glucuronolyticum Funke et al. 1995
 * C. glutamicum (Kinoshita et al. 1958) Abe et al. 1967 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. glyciniphilum (ex Kubota et al. 1972) Al-Dilaimi et al. 2015

 * C. gottingense Atasayar et al. 2017

 * C. guangdongense Li et al. 2016

 * "C. haemomassiliense" Boxberger et al. 2020
 * C. halotolerans Chen et al. 2004
 * C. hansenii Renaud et al. 2007
 * C. heidelbergense Braun et al. 2021
 * C. hindlerae Bernard et al. 2021

 * C. humireducens Wu et al. 2011

 * "C. ihumii" Padmanabhan et al. 2014
 * C. ilicis Mandel et al. 1961 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. imitans Funke et al. 1997
 * "C. incognitum" Boxberger et al. 2021

 * C. jeddahense Edouard et al. 2017
 * C. jeikeium Jackman et al. 1988
 * C. kalinowskii Schaffert et al. 2021
 * "C. kefirresidentii" Blasche et al. 2017
 * C. kroppenstedtii Collins et al. 1998
 * C. kutscheri (Migula 1900) Bergey et al. 1925 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. lactis Wiertz et al. 2013
 * "C. lactofermentum" Gubler et al. 1994

 * C. jeikliangguodongiiium Zhu et al. 2020

 * C. lipophiloflavum Funke et al. 1997

 * C. lizhenjunii Zhou et al. 2021
 * C. lowii Bernard et al. 2016
 * C. lubricantis Kämpfer et al. 2009
 * C. lujinxingii Zhang et al. 2021
 * C. macginleyi Riegel et al. 1995
 * C. marinum Du et al. 2010
 * C. maris Ben-Dov et al. 2009
 * C. massiliense Merhej et al. 2009
 * C. mastitidis Fernandez-Garayzabal et al. 1997
 * C. matruchotii (Mendel 1919) Collins 1983

 * C. minutissimum (ex Sarkany et al. 1962) Collins and Jones 1983

 * C. mucifaciens Funke et al. 1997
 * C. mustelae Funke et al. 2010
 * C. mycetoides (ex Castellani 1942) Collins 1983
 * C. nasicanis Baumgardt et al. 2015

 * "C. neomassiliense" Boxberger et al. 2020

 * C. nuruki Shin et al. 2011
 * C. occultum Schaffert et al. 2021
 * C. oculi Bernard et al. 2016

 * C. otitidis (Funke et al. 1994) Baek et al. 2018
 * "C. pacaense" Bellali et al. 2019
 * "C. parakroppenstedtii" Luo et al. 2022
 * "C. parvulum" Nakamura et al. 1983

 * C. pelargi Kämpfer et al. 2015

 * C. phocae Pascual et al. 1998
 * "C. phoceense" Cresci et al. 2016
 * C. pilbarense Aravena-Roman et al. 2010
 * C. pilosum Yanagawa and Honda 1978 (Approved Lists 1980)

 * C. pollutisoli Negi et al. 2016
 * C. propinquum Riegel et al. 1994
 * "C. provencense" Ndongo et al. 2017
 * "C. provencense" Lo et al. 2019
 * C. pseudodiphtheriticum Lehmann and Neumann 1896 (Approved Lists 1980)

 * "C. pseudokroppenstedtii" Luo et al. 2022
 * C. pseudopelargi Busse et al. 2019
 * C. pseudotuberculosis (Buchanan 1911) Eberson 1918 (Approved Lists 1980)

 * C. pyruviciproducens Tong et al. 2010
 * C. qintianiae Zhou et al. 2021

 * C. renale (Migula 1900) Ernst 1906 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. resistens Otsuka et al. 2005
 * C. riegelii Funke et al. 1998
 * C. rouxii Badell et al. 2020

 * C. sanguinis Jaén-Luchoro et al. 2020
 * "C. segmentosum" Collins et al. 1998

 * "C. senegalense" Ndiaye et al. 2019

 * C. silvaticum Dangel et al. 2020

 * C. simulans Wattiau et al. 2000
 * C. singulare Riegel et al. 1997
 * C. sphenisci Goyache et al. 2003
 * C. spheniscorum Goyache et al. 2003
 * C. sputi Yassin and Siering 2008
 * C. stationis (ZoBell and Upham 1944) Bernard et al. 2010
 * C. striatum (Chester 1901) Eberson 1918 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. suicordis Vela et al. 2003
 * C. sundsvallense Collins et al. 1999
 * C. suranareeae Nantapong et al. 2020
 * C. tapiri Baumgardt et al. 2015
 * C. terpenotabidum Takeuchi et al. 1999
 * C. testudinoris Collins et al. 2001

 * C. thomssenii Zimmermann et al. 1998
 * C. timonense Merhej et al. 2009
 * C. trachiae Kämpfer et al. 2015

 * C. tuberculostearicum Feurer et al. 2004

 * C. tuscaniense corrig. Riegel et al. 2006
 * "C. uberis" Kittl et al. 2022
 * C. ulcerans (ex Gilbert and Stewart 1927) Riegel et al. 1995
 * C. ulceribovis Yassin 2009

 * C. urealyticum Pitcher et al. 1992
 * C. ureicelerivorans Yassin 2007
 * "C. urinapleomorphum" Morand et al. 2017

 * C. urinipleomorphum corrig. Niang et al. 2021
 * C. urogenitale Ballas et al. 2020
 * C. uropygiale Braun et al. 2016
 * C. uterequi Hoyles et al. 2013

 * C. variabile corrig. (Müller 1961) Collins 1987

 * C. vitaeruminis corrig. (Bechdel et al. 1928) Lanéelle et al. 1980

 * C. wankanglinii Zhang et al. 2021
 * C. xerosis (Lehmann and Neumann 1896) Lehmann and Neumann 1899 (Approved Lists 1980)
 * C. yudongzhengii Zhu et al. 2020
 * C. zhongnanshanii Zhang et al. 2021

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

title: Corynebacterium


text:
Talk:Pennsylvania Railroad K4 class

Oooops!
Folks, my apologies for accidentally removing the section on streamlined K4s loco's. I have no idea how I managed that, but it certainly wasn't intentional. I shall be more careful in future. Sorry once again! Zzrbiker 11:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As a penance, I have put in the beginnings of an infobox, based on the details at steamlocomotive.com. Feel free to add/modify/remove altogether Zzrbiker 12:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

The "in fiction" section
Okay, time to take this to discussion. I've seen this information added and removed many times in the past, and now it's been readded right after being removed. I'm of the mind that this is trivial information that doesn't help to explain the topic and is only marginally relevant, and therefore it should be removed from the article. Thoughts? Slambo (Speak) 15:31, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

 * The section is also completely unreferenced, both here and at the linked article. That alone, IMO, means it should go.  I suspect the information should exist at the Thomas article rather than here. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 21:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Further searching turned up no references other than fan speculation. Furthermore, that season of the TV show hasn't even aired yet. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 21:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I think these Thomas references in general do nothing for the article. They introduce a fictional element to what is otherwise a non-fiction article and skew the focus away from actual rail transport. I also have the same problem with articles on locomotives that get peppered with details of all the manufacturers who offer scale models of that class. My compromise suggestion would be a "See also" section with a single line reference to where such information exists in another page, assuming that we do in fact establish the Pennsy K4s exists in the Thomas universe. - Zzrbiker (talk) 00:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

 * I have a lot less of a problem with the modelling information, except inasmuch as it's hard for Wikipedia to keep it correct, up-to-date and comprehensive, without it becoming a how-to section. Ideally I'd rather external-link to a site that discusses the model information in more detail.  NPOV also makes it hard to be really helpful here; a site more free to editorialize would do better with this.

 * Furthermore, for such a popular locomotive as the K4s, the history of it in model form may be just as long as that of the full-size locomotive. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 01:35, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

 * OK - given that the removal of Thomas detail seems to continue to invite reinstatement with yet more unreferenced and speculative non-facts, I've gone with my suggestion of a "see also" section which hopefully might 'deflect' rather than 'block' these edits. -Zzrbiker (talk) 03:19, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on PRR K4s. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041216073707/http://www.steamlocomotive.com:80/pacific/prr/ to http://www.steamlocomotive.com/pacific/prr/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:34, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pennsylvania Railroad K4 class


text:
User:Emily97

hello i am emily97 i am a junior at high school i love painting if you would like to learn more about me then you can email me at babygirl4me1988@yahoo.com

title: User:Emily97


text:
Talk:Soviet crewed lunar programs

Discussion
Under the "Korolev's Soyuz concept" section, there is a sentence that says, "Chelomei's project had the lead until 1964 when a change of Soviet leadership swung behind Stalin."

Stalin died in 1953. Is this statement a typo, or has someone tampered with the actual article?

209.124.55.236 12:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It is corrected now. It is "swung behind Korolev". Ricnun 21:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Article needs cleanup? Steady! I only just started writing it...

There were four failed launch, not two... 194.100.185.1 08:02, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Given that, the following quote needs to be changed somewhat: "Four N1 launches were attempted but both were failures and the second destroyed the launch complex." --cfmdobbie

Complexity not weakness
The N1 was actually powerful enough to send men to the Moon, but with 30 small engines slapped together, it greatly magnified the complexity and risk of failure. That's why it blew up on the launchpad. LeoO3 03:10, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Early Soviet Plans
There are records of papers in 1955 commissioning the N1 studies for a lunar landing after 1970 using Earth Orbit Rendevous. This should change the line about the Soviets not having serious plans before 1964. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.239.194 (talk) 10:03, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Why was it kept secret???
Just out of curiosity, why was this kept "heavily secret"? At least, why before they "lost" .. what's the point of a space race if not to inflame your population with a desire to compete?
 * The point, ultimately, was prestige (at least on a political level), little of which would be gained by finishing second in a two man race. Better (from the Soviet perspective) to hedge your bets by denying there was a race to the Moon unless you could be absolutely confident of success.172.190.13.225 (talk) 06:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

 * Do you remember the Cold War, or were you born afterwards? The Soviets kept everything secret. Nothing was announced until after it was successfully completed. 65.94.45.160 (talk) 10:44, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

 * The soviets weren't really interested in what their own people thought of them... That's what guns are for. It was what the rest of the world thought of them that mattered. Drewder (talk) 17:30, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

"LK-1" and "LK-700" spacecraft
May be not the best source (I'm short on time to search for other sources), but here and here a "LK-1" and "LK-700" spacecraft is described, which is basically a the predecessor of the VA spacecraft (or actually the VA spacecraft), designed by OKB-52, launched by a Proton. Don't know how this fits in here, but I haven't seen much descriptions or any images of LK-1 and LK-700 spacecraft here on wikipedia, only the countless Soyuz derivates designed by OKB-1.

Furthermore, there are images of an assembled VA based lunar spacecraft (LK-700?), so it was more than a "proposal" by Chelomey. --Tony Mach (talk) 17:19, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Where can I find photographs?
Where can I find photographs, published studies and other material about the Soviet moon landings? Why is it kept in secrecy? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.182.84.238 (talk) 08:26, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

 * What landings? If you mean the Luna and Lunokhod landers, I suggest you start with the Wikipedia articles and follow the links/references.  If you mean the manned program, there were no Russian manned landings!  If they'd persevered they would have sorted the issues and made it, but the Kremlin decided it wasn't worth the expense to be second in the race to put a man on the moon, and publically always denied they were in the race at all!  It was only after the collapse of the USSR that it was finally confirmed that the Russians were seriously in the race.  The USSR, despite their successes, didn't even televise a launch until 1971.  The equivalent would be asking to see pictures and details of the tests of the U2 and SR-71 prototypes or the Aurora (if it even exists!).  Remember the N1 never had a successful launch, and the other equipment (Soyuz apart) was never used for the purpose for which it was designed.  So there was no reason for the USSR to release pictures of a cancelled program.  No doubt relatively few pictures were taken, and they would have been classified.  Doubtless there is a lot more material in the Russian archives, but you'd have to go over and dig them out, and have time and permission to do so.  Many of the people who were involved are now dead, and much of the material is likely buried or was shredded when the program was cancelled.  There isn't some "conspiracy" it's just that there is likely not a lot of material, and it's hard to access.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.161.78.193 (talk) 06:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Work still needed after requested copy edit
I spent an exhausting 20 minutes making a requested copy edit on part of the article.

Going to the French Wiki article that was apparently the source, I find much additional information, not all necessarily encyclopedic. Someone who is an enthusiast and fairly fluent in reading/translating French needs to pick up the ball, here.

This is an important part of human history. Had the Soviet launches succeeded, the United States might very well have responded by continuing the Apollo Program. Leptus Froggi (talk) 19:08, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Graphics issues
The graphics such as Tmk-mavr.jpg are generated by 3D software rendering, decades after the fact, and without establishing accuracy. It's one thing for the Russian space agencies to produce and release an official rendering, it's another for a random, uncredited person such as Eberhard Marx to create a simplified and possibly significantly inaccurate image, as with MondraumLOK.jpg.

Obviously someone is trying to do Wikipedia a good turn, but my guess is any number of renderings could be done given the specifications. A misrepresentation here could have significant consequences, since inevitably when new lunar expeditions are planned, people will look at previous references such as Wikipedia. Leptus Froggi (talk) 19:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 06:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Crewed
I have moved this article from "manned" to "crewed" in line with the official NASA History Style Guide: http://history.nasa.gov/styleguide.html. But I am having trouble with an alternative to the iconic phrase "land a man on the moon" - I wonder whether this should stay, in line with being an explicit quotation, or is there a good alternative? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dicaeopolis (talk • contribs) 08:58, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

I note this has been changed to "person". I find that dishonest. There were no female astronauts or cosmonauts in either moon programme. I'd like to see this changed back to "men". It's no good trying to be politically correct at a time when the concept hadn't been invented and things like rocketry were considered men's work.

Marchino61 (talk) 00:41, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

 * I mostly agree, except for the last bit about "a time when rocketry was considered men's work." the USSR had already sent a woman into space by this time; however, the fact is simply there were no female cosmonauts (or astronauts) in either moon program. This just simply IS what it IS, and like you said, trying to pretend that it wasn't what it was is dishonest and historical revisionism. (Besides, what say we about the current Artemis program? That it intends to send the "next persons" to the moon? Nay, we say that it intends to send the first woman and the next man to the moon.) Firejuggler86 (talk) 00:38, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Soviet crewed lunar programs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131208200041/http://www.astronautix.com/craft/lekmplex.htm to http://astronautix.com/craft/lekmplex.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140107164731/http://www.astronautix.com/craft/dlbodule.htm to http://astronautix.com/craft/dlbodule.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:32, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Support Lunokhods source
Is there a source for the two Lunokhods? Couldn't find it anywhere, although it seems somewhat reasonable. SpacePilotMax (talk) 18:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

RfC concerning the article content
Was the Soviet plan of crewed lunar mission attempted by a single program or by a series of programs? The Wikipédia en français says that it was attempted by a single program, while this article says that it was attempted by a series of programs. --Soumyabrata stay at home wash your hands to protect from coronavirus 06:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Space Race Denial
Uhh, could the denial be a context issue? From what I learned, the Soviet Union had already achieved lunar/space missions long before Kennedy ever said a peep...could they have meant that it was in fact the other way around? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.238.16.219 (talk) 23:14, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Soviet crewed lunar programs


text: Category:Austrian astronomers

title: Category:Austrian astronomers


text:
Rea Brook

The name Rea Brook can refer to either of two brooks in Shropshire, England.

One of the brooks, which eventually becomes the River Rea, is in southern Shropshire. It is to the east of Brown Clee Hill.

The other, described here, is a minor river that begins at Marton Pool, near the Wales-England border. This runs northeast for 40 km past the villages of Minsterley, Pontesbury, Hanwood, Hook-a-Gate and Bayston Hill to Shrewsbury, where it joins the much larger River Severn at Coleham Head. It is noted in the county for its wildlife, such as otters and kingfishers. Previously in history, it was known as the "Meole Brook", and gives its name to two villages near Shrewsbury – Meole Brace and Cruckmeole.

Rea Brook has changed dramatically since the start of the 21st century with a downturn in the recorded numbers of coarse fish. The Environment Agency put this down to the brook changing from a high capacity watercourse into a fast flowing one. It has been noted that the brook is still plentiful with salmonid type fish.

When the brook reaches Shrewsbury, it flows through a local nature reserve designated in 1994 as the Reabrook Valley Country Park. The valley is noted for its wildlife, specifically otters and orchids that are rare in that part of Shropshire. In its final reaches it curves westwards to its confluence with the River Severn just off Coleham Head in the town. The brook flooded extensively in 2000, 2007 and 2010.

After the flooding in 2000, it was suggested that a tunnel and culvert be created to divert water away from Rea Brook eastwards where it would enter the River Severn a point further downstream and out of the environs of Shrewsbury. As the cost of this work would have exhausted the funds put aside for flood defences in the town, it was discounted.

The 2007 flooding destroyed a bridge which was rebuilt in 2008 with additional archaeological excavations on the leat that ran alongside the Rea Brook in the valley at Shrewsbury. The leat (or mill race) had existed since the medieval period, and was disused at the time of the flooding. The bridge repairs necessitated diverting the Rea Brook into the former leat.

The pronunciation of "Rea" varies between  and. The pronunciation most used by locals for the Shrewsbury river is ; the pronunciation may have been introduced by incomers from Birmingham, where a different River Rea is pronounced that way.

title: Rea Brook


text:
Alicia Ostriker

Alicia Suskin Ostriker (born November 11, 1937 ) is an American poet and scholar who writes Jewish feminist poetry. She was called "America's most fiercely honest poet" by Progressive. Additionally, she was one of the first women poets in America to write and publish poems discussing the topic of motherhood. In 2015, she was elected a Chancellor of the Academy of American Poets. In 2018, she was named the New York State Poet Laureate.

Personal life and education
Ostriker was born in Brooklyn, New York, to David Suskin and Beatrice Linnick Suskin. She grew up in the Manhattan housing projects during the Great Depression. Her father worked for New York City Parks Department. Her mother read her William Shakespeare and Robert Browning, and Alicia began writing poems, as well as drawing, from an early age. Initially, she had hoped to be an artist and studied art as a teenager. Her books, Songs (1969) and A Dream of Springtime (1979), spotlight her own illustrations. Ostriker went to high school at Ethical Culture Fieldston School in 1955.

She holds a bachelor's degree from Brandeis University (1959), and an M.A. (1961) and Ph.D. (1964) from the University of Wisconsin–Madison. In Ostriker's first year of graduate school, she attended a conference where a visiting professor commented on her poetry by saying, "'You women poets are very graphic, aren't you?'" This comment caused her to reflect on the meaning of being a woman poet. She had never thought of that term before and she realized that men were uncomfortable when women wrote about their own bodies. This encounter became a defining moment in her life and from that moment on, she wrote poems discussing the various facets of a woman: sexuality, motherhood, pregnancy, and mortality. On the other hand, her doctoral dissertation, on the work of William Blake, became her first book, Vision and Verse in William Blake (1965). Later, she edited and annotated Blake's complete poems for Penguin Press.

She is married to astronomer Jeremiah P. Ostriker, who taught at Princeton University (1971–2001). They have three children: Rebecca (1963), Eve (1965), and Gabriel (1970). She has been a resident of Princeton, New Jersey.

Career and work
She began her teaching career at Rutgers University in 1965 and has served as an English professor until she retired in 2004. Ostriker decided to pursue a career while also taking care of her children which was very uncommon during this time. Ostriker's ambition, desire to live a life different from her mother's, and her husband's refusal to let her become a housewife influenced her to make that choice. In 1969, her first collection of poems, Songs, was published by Holt, Rinehart and Winston. This collection contained poems that she wrote while she was still a student. Her poems reflect the influence poets such as Gerard Manley Hopkins, John Keats, W.H. Auden, William Blake, and Walt Whitman have had on her and her poetry.

Her second collection of poems published was Once More Out of Darkness. Majority of the poems were written in free verse. While she was writing this collection of poems, Ostriker became aware of her feminist views. The poems that compose this collection were based on her first two experiences of pregnancy and childbirth as she had her first two children 18 months apart. Discussing these topics in her poems made her cognizant of the fact that she had not previously read poems about these topics and that she was breaking a taboo. Her third volume of poems, A Dream of Springtime, had poems that demonstrated her growth by discussing her emerging from her past and discovering herself and her identity.

Her fourth book of poems, The Mother/Child Papers (1980), a feminist classic, was inspired by the birth of her son during the Vietnam War and weeks after the Kent State shootings. Throughout, she juxtaposes musings about motherhood with musings about war. She also discusses her husband and her other two children in her poems. This collection allowed her to explore her identity as a woman by examining her role as a mother, wife, and professor. It did take her ten years to write the poems that make up this collection as she gained more inspiration from events that were happening in society such as the American Feminist movement.

Ostriker's books of nonfiction explore many of the same themes manifest in her verse. They include Writing Like a Woman (1983), which explores the poems of Sylvia Plath, Anne Sexton, H.D., May Swenson and Adrienne Rich, and The Nakedness of the Fathers: Biblical Visions and Revisions (1994), which approaches the Torah with a midrashic sensibility. She wrote the introduction to Giannina Braschi's Empire of Dreams, a postmodern poetry classic of the Spanish Caribbean (1994).

Ostriker's sixth collection of poems, The Imaginary Lover (1986), won the William Carlos Williams Award of the Poetry Society of America. The poems included in this collection had a feminist voice, probably due to fact that at the same time, she was doing research for her second feminist criticism book, Stealing the Language: the Emergence of Women Poets in America. In The Imaginary Lover, Ostriker examines the fantasies associated with womanhood by discussing topics such as mother-daughter relationships and marriage. The Crack in Everything (1996) was a National Book Award finalist, and won the Paterson Poetry Award and the San Francisco State Poetry Center Award. The Little Space: Poems Selected and New, 1968–1998 was also a 1998 National Book Award finalist.

Green Age (1989) was Ostriker's most visionary and successful collection of poems. Themes analyzed in this collection was time, history and politics, and inner spirituality and how these helped her heal. Ostriker highlights how there is a lack of feminist spirituality in traditional religions.

Ostriker's most recent nonfiction book is For the Love of God (2007), a work that continues her midrash exploration of biblical texts begun with Feminist Revision and the Bible (1993) and The Nakedness of the Fathers: Biblical Visions and Revisions (1994). Dancing at the Devil's Party (2000) examines the work of poets from William Blake and Walt Whitman to Maxine Kumin. Early in the introduction to the book, she disagrees with W. H. Auden's assertion that poetry makes nothing happen. Poetry, Ostriker writes, "can tear at the heart with its claws, make the neural nets shiver, flood us with hope, despair, longing, ecstasy, love, anger, terror".

Ostriker's poems have appeared in a wide variety of periodicals, including The New Yorker, The Nation, Poetry, American Poetry Review, Paris Review, The Atlantic, Yale Review, Kenyon Review, Iowa Review, Shenandoah Review, Antaeus, Colorado Review, Denver Quarterly, Boulevard, Poetry East, New England Review, Santa Monica Review, Triquarterly Review, Seneca Review, Ms., Ontario Review, Bridges, Tikkun, Prairie Schooner, Gettysburg Review, Lyric, Fence, and Ploughshares.

A variety of Ostriker's poems have been translated into Italian, French, German, Spanish, Chinese, Japanese, Hebrew and Arabic. Stealing the Language has been translated into Japanese and published in Japan. Her fifty-year poetry career is the subject of a collection of essays by American poets and feminist literary scholars, entitled "Every Woman Her Own Theology".

Honors, fellowships, and awards

 * 1964-1965 American Association of University Women Fellowship
 * 1966 Rutgers University Research Council summer scholar grant
 * 1967 American Foundation for the Advancement of Humanities Younger Scholar Grant
 * 1974, 1976, 1985, 1997, 2000 MacDowell Colony Fellow
 * 1976-1977 National Foundation for the Arts Fellowship in Poetry
 * 1977 Breadloaf Writers' Conference Fellowship
 * 1977 New Jersey Arts Council Award in Poetry
 * 1979 A Dream of Springtime selected as one of the best small press titles
 * 1982 Rockefeller Foundation Fellowship for Research in the Humanities
 * 1984-1985 Guggenheim Foundation Fellowship for Poetry
 * 1986 Strousse Poetry Prize, Prairie Schooner
 * 1986 Poetry Society of America William Carlos Williams Prize for The Imaginary Lover
 * 1987 Rutgers University Trustees Award for Excellence in Research
 * Summer 1987 Djerassi Foundation Resident
 * 1992 New Jersey Arts Council Award in Poetry
 * 1994 Edward Stanley Award, for poems published in Prairie Schooner
 * 1994 Judah Magnes Jewish Museum, Berkeley, Anna David Rosenberg Award for Poems on the Jewish Experience. First Prize for "The Eighth and Thirteenth."
 * 1995 Rutgers University Faculty of Arts and Sciences Award for Distinguished Contributors to Undergraduate Education
 * 1995-6 Fellow, Rutgers Center for Historical Analysis
 * 1996-7 Associate Fellow, Rutgers Center for Historical Analysis
 * 1996 Poem in The Best American Poetry
 * 1996 Poem in Yearbook of American Poetry
 * 1997 Paterson Poetry Prize for The Crack in Everything
 * 1998 San Francisco State Poetry Center Award for The Crack in Everything
 * 1998 Readers’ Choice Award for poems published in Prairie Schooner
 * February 1999 Residency at the Villa Serbelloni, Bellagio Study and Conference Center, Italy
 * 1999 Poem in Pushcart Prize Anthology
 * 2000 San Diego Women's Institute for Continuing Jewish Education: Endowment Award
 * Fall 2001 Visiting Fellowship, Clare Hall, Cambridge
 * 2002 Larry Levis Prize for poems published in Prairie Schooner
 * 2003 Best American Essays Notable Essay for “Milk.”
 * 2003 Geraldine R. Dodge Foundation Fellow
 * 2007 Anderbo Poetry Prize distinguished poem
 * 2008 Outstanding Academic Title, Choice June 2008, for For the Love of God.
 * 2009 National Jewish Book Award in Poetry for The Book of Seventy
 * 2010 Prairie Schooner Virginia Faulkner Award for Excellence in Writing, for poems published in the summer 2009 issue.
 * 2010 Paterson Award for Sustained Literary Achievement for The Book of Seventy
 * 2011 Named in the list of “10 Great Jewish Poets” in Moment
 * 2017 National Jewish Book Award in the Poetry category for Waiting for the Light
 * 2018 Named 11th New York State Poet

Finalists

 * 1996 The Crack in Everything finalist of the National Book Award for Poetry
 * 1998 The Little Space finalist of the National Book Award for Poetry
 * 1999 The Little Space finalist for Lenore Marshall Prize, Academy of American Poets

Collections
The Book of Life: Selected Poems 1979-2011, Pittsburgh: The University of Pittsburgh Press, 2012
 * Once More Out of Darkness and Other Poems. Berkeley: Berkeley Poets' Press, 1974. ISBN 9780917658006
 * A Dream of Springtime: Poems 1970–1978. New York: Smith/Horizon Press, 1979. ISBN 9780912292533
 * The Mother/Child Papers. Los Angeles: Momentum Press, 1980. Rpt. Beacon Press, 1986, Pittsburgh, 2008. ISBN 9780822960331
 * The Imaginary Lover. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1986. ISBN 9780822935438
 * Green Age. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1989. ISBN 9780822936244
 * The Crack in Everything. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1996. ISBN 9780822939368
 * The Little Space: Poems Selected and New, 1968–1998. 1998, University of Pittsburgh. ISBN 9780822956808
 * The Volcano Sequence. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2002. ISBN 9780822957843
 * No Heaven. Pittsburgh:  University of Pittsburgh Press, 2005.  ISBN 9780822958758
 * The Book of Seventy. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2009, ISBN 9780822960515
 * At the Revelation Restaurant and Other Poems, Marick Press, 2010, ISBN 9781934851067
 * The Book of Seventy. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2009, ISBN 9780822960515
 * At the Revelation Restaurant and Other Poems, Marick Press, 2010, ISBN 9781934851067
 * The Old Woman, the Tulip, and the Dog, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2014, ISBN 9780822962915
 * Waiting for the Light, University of Pittsburgh Press, 2017, ISBN 9780822964520

Critical and scholarly books

 * Vision and Verse in William Blake. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1965,
 * William Blake: the Complete Poems. New York: Penguin Books, 1977.  Edited with Notes, pp. 870–1075. ISBN 9780140422153
 * Stealing the Language: The Emergence of Women's Poetry in America. Boston: Beacon 1986, ISBN 9780807063033
 * Feminist Revision and the Bible: the Bucknell Lectures on Literary Theory. London and Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell 1993. ISBN 9780631187981
 * Empire of Dreams, poetry by Giannina Braschi; introduction by Alicia Ostriker, Yale University Press, 1994.
 * Dancing at the Devil’s Party: Essays on Poetry, Politics and the Erotic. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press Poets on Poetry series 2000.
 * Dancing at the Devil’s Party: Essays on Poetry, Politics and the Erotic. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press Poets on Poetry series 2000.
 * Dancing at the Devil’s Party: Essays on Poetry, Politics and the Erotic. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press Poets on Poetry series 2000.

Popular culture

 * Alicia Ostriker's poem “A Young Woman, a Tree” appears in Kurt Cobain's posthumously published Journals.
 * in Giannina Braschi's Spanglish novel Yo-Yo Boing! (1998), poets and philosophers discuss the state of American poetry and mention Stealing the Language.

title: Alicia Ostriker


text:
Steam distillation

Steam distillation is a separation process that consists of distilling water together with other volatile and non-volatile components. The steam from the boiling water carries the vapor of the volatiles to a condenser; both are cooled and return to the liquid or solid state, while the non-volatile residues remain behind in the boiling container.

If, as is usually the case, the volatiles are not miscible with water, they will spontaneously form a distinct phase after condensation, allowing them to be separated by decantation or with a separatory funnel.

Steam distillation can be used when the boiling point of the substance to be extracted is higher than that of water, and the starting material cannot be heated to that temperature because of decomposition or other unwanted reactions. It may also be useful when the amount of the desired substance is small compared to that of the non-volatile residues. It is often used to separate volatile essential oils from plant material. for example, to extract limonene (boiling point 176 °C) from orange peels.

Steam distillation once was a popular laboratory method for purification of organic compounds, but it has been replaced in many such uses by vacuum distillation and supercritical fluid extraction. It is however much simpler and economical than those alternatives, and remains important in certain industrial sectors.

In the simplest form, water distillation or hydrodistillation, the water is mixed with the starting material in the boiling container. In direct steam distillation, the starting material is suspended above the water in the boiling flask, supported by a metal mesh or perforated screen. In dry steam distillation, the steam from a boiler is forced to flow through the starting material in a separate container. The latter variant allows the steam to be heated above the boiling point of water (thus becoming superheated steam), for more efficient extraction.

History
Steam distillation is used in many of the recipes given in the ('Book of Gentleness on Perfume'), also known as the  ('Book of the Chemistry of Perfume and Distillations'), attributed to the early Arabic philosopher al-Kindi (c. 801–873). Steam distillation was also used by the Persian philosopher and physician Avicenna (980–1037) to produce essential oils by adding water to rose petals and distilling the mixture. The process was also used by al-Dimashqi (1256–1327) to produce rose water on a large scale.

Principle
Every substance has some vapor pressure even below its boiling point, so in theory it could be distilled at any temperature by collecting and condensing its vapors. However, ordinary distillation below the boiling point is not practical because a layer of vapor-rich air would form over the liquid, and evaporation would stop as soon as the partial pressure of the vapor in that layer reached the vapor pressure. The vapor would then flow to the condenser only by diffusion, which is an extremely slow process.

Simple distillation is generally done by boiling the starting material, because, once its vapor pressure exceeds atmospheric pressure, that still vapor-rich layer of air will be disrupted, and there will be a significant and steady flow of vapor from the boiling flask to the condenser.

In steam distillation, that positive flow is provided by steam from boiling water, rather than by the boiling of the substances of interest. The steam carries with it the vapors of the latter.

The substance of interest does not need to be miscible water or soluble in it. It suffices that it has significant vapor pressure at the steam's temperature.

If the water forms an azeotrope with the substances of interest, the boiling point of the mixture may be lower than the boiling point of water. For example, bromobenzene boils at 156 °C (at normal atmospheric pressure), but a mixture with water boils at 95 °C. However, the formation of an azeotrope is not necessary for steam distillation to work.

Applications
Steam distillation is often employed in the isolation of essential oils, for use in perfumes, for example. In this method, steam is passed through the plant material containing the desired oils. Eucalyptus oil, camphor oil and orange oil are obtained by this method on an industrial scale. Steam distillation is a means of purifying fatty acids, e.g. from tall oils.

Steam distillation is sometimes used in the chemical laboratory. Illustrative is a classic preparation of bromobiphenyl where steam distillation is used to first remove the excess benzene and subsequently to purifiy the brominated product. In one preparation of benzophenone, steam is employed to first recover unreacted carbon tetrachloride and subsequently to hydrolyze the intermediate benzophenone dichloride into benzophenone, which is in fact not steam distilled. It one preparation of a purine, steam distillation is used to remove volatile benzaldehyde from nonvolatile product.

Equipment
On a lab scale, steam distillations are carried out using steam generated outside the system and piped through the mixture to be purified. Steam can also be generated in-situ using a Clevenger-type apparatus.

title: Steam distillation


text:
James Lucas Yeo

Sir James Lucas Yeo,, (7 October 1782 – 21 August 1818) was a British naval commander who served in the War of 1812. Born in Southampton, he joined the Royal Navy at the age of 10 and saw his first action in the Adriatic Sea. He distinguished himself in combat multiple times, most notably during the Portuguese conquest of French Guiana, earning knighthoods in the Portuguese Order of Aviz and the British Order of the Bath. He was given command of the frigate HMS Southampton (1757), in 1812, but his ship was wrecked in the Bahamas although he was acquitted of blame for its loss. Yeo was then given command of the squadron on Lake Ontario and commanded it during several engagements with the Americans.

Early life and career
Yeo was born in Southampton, England on 7 October 1782 to a naval victualling agent. Yeo was sent to an academy near Winchester for his formal education. Yeo joined the Royal Navy as a midshipman aboard HMS Windsor Castle (1790) at the age of 10, thanks to his patron, Admiral Phillips Crosby. In 1796, he was made acting-lieutenant and placed in command of the 16-gun sloop HMS Albacore (1793). He was made lieutenant permanently on 20 February 1797. The vessel was deployed to the West Indies, where Yeo contracted Yellow fever and was ordered home to England to convalesce in 1798. By 1802, Yeo was first lieutenant aboard HMS Genereux in the Adriatic Sea. He distinguished himself during the siege of Cesenatico in 1800, when thirteen merchant vessels were burned or sunk. Following the Peace of Amiens in 1802, Yeo was demoted to half-pay.

Napoleonic Wars
Once war began again between Britain and France in 1805, Yeo became first lieutenant of the frigate HMS Loire (1798). The frigate was patrolling off the northwest coast of Spain when Loire's commanding officer, Captain F.L. Maitland, chose to attack shipping in Muros Bay, Spain. Lieutenant Yeo led fifty men ashore to attack a shore battery that was firing on the frigate. Once there, they found a second, more powerful emplacement and captured that one too. During the battle, Yeo was stabbed with a bayonet. The Spanish suffered over forty casualties in the engagement, the British six. Loire captured three vessels at Muros Bay including the 22-gun corvette Confiance. As a reward, he was promoted to commander on 21 June and given the command of the captured Confiance, which had been taken into Royal Navy service.

In 1807, Confiance was part of Admiral Sidney Smith's fleet off Portugal. Confiance transported Percy Smythe, 6th Viscount Strangford to Lisbon to negotiate an alliance with Britain. Lord Strangford also negotiated the passage of the Portuguese Prince Regent Dom João and the Portuguese royal family to Brazil. Yeo was ordered by Admiral Smith to bring word of Strangford's success to Britain, an honour that led Yeo being named to the list of post-captains. Due to his rank, Confiance was reclassified as a post-ship. The following year, Confiance was part of Smith's fleet stationed off Brazil.

Yeo was ordered by Smith to bring dispatches to a Portuguese general from whom he learned of French privateers based at Cayenne, French Guiana. On 6 January 1809, he took command of a small force consisting of Confiance, two Portuguese brigs, and 550 Portuguese soldiers. With them he captured Cayenne, a fortified position of two hundred guns, and took a thousand prisoners. The conquest of French Guiana would remove the French from their last South American colony. During the operation, Yeo was among the many British who became sick. In 1810, he was knighted for his services at Cayenne, both by the Portuguese who decreed him a member of the Order of Aviz and the British, who decreed him a knight commander of the Order of the Bath and was given his own coat-of-arms. Yeo was the first Protestant to be made a member of the Order of Aviz.

In 1811 Yeo was given command of the frigate HMS Southampton (1757). The frigate was ordered to Jamaica where it joined the fleet of Vice Admiral Charles Stirling. In 1812, he was stationed in the Bahamas. There he captured the privateer Heureuse Réunion, a brig and a corvette in the action of 3 February 1812, and the American brig USS Vixen (1803) in November 1812. However, shortly afterwards Southampton and Vixen were wrecked in the Crooked Island passage, although there were no deaths. As was customary in the case of the loss of a ship from any cause, Yeo was court martialled, but the court accepted that the reef on which he was wrecked was not charted, nor were the local currents documented, and Yeo was exonerated.

War of 1812
The importance of the naval warfare on the Great Lakes raised "The Lakes Service" to the status of a Flag Command and Kingston was the Commodore's headquarters. Yeo was sent to Canada in 1813 aboard HMS Woolwich (1785) to command the British naval forces in the Great Lakes. He was appointed commodore of the fleet on Lake Ontario. Sir James's use of his small navy was always determined and skillful, but he was hampered by a lack of cooperation from the British army. The commander of these forces, Sir George Prevost, failed to follow up key advances made by Sir James at Sackett's Harbour and elsewhere that might have resulted in major British victories. On the whole, historians regard the war on Lake Ontario as having been a draw. During 1814 both Yeo and Isaac Chauncey, the American commander, tried to out build the other. Yeo captured Oswego, New York and then blockaded Sacketts Harbour on 6 May 1814, when reinforced by two frigates built on Point Frederick. During the final months of the war, Yeo ensured British control of the lake by the 1814 launch of HMS St. Lawrence (1814), a 112-gun first rate ship of the line built in Kingston specifically for use on the lake, a three-decker man-of-war, and he had two more building. The Americans also had two first line men-o'-war on the stocks.

In August 1815, Yeo was posted to HMS Inconstant (1783), 36 guns, at Plymouth. After the British-American War, Yeo held important commands on the West African and Caribbean stations, but saw no further action. He died in 1818 at the age of 35, while returning from Jamaica to England.

Legacy
The Yeo Hall at the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston, Ontario was named in his honour in 1936. This multifunctional building houses the Cadet Dining Hall and the Cadet Mess. The barber and Canadian Forces Exchange System (CANEX) are located in the basement. A plaque erected by the Historic Sites and Monuments Board of Canada at the Royal Military College of Canada states "Born in Southampton, England, Yeo entered the British Navy, served throughout the Napoleonic Wars and won rapid promotion by his ability. In 1813, already a Commodore, he came to Canada to command British forces on the Great Lakes. Yeo successfully blockaded the American fleet in Sackett's Harbour for some months and subsequently commanded the naval forces at the capture of Oswego in 1814. Returning to England after the war he was posted to the West African Coast and died at sea while returning from that tour of duty."

Yeo was one of the actual historical officers on whom C. S. Forester modeled his fictional naval hero Horatio Hornblower. Forester briefly mentions him in the 1946 novel Lord Hornblower. The opening scene is a church service for members of the Order of the Bath, attended by a number of prominent historical naval officers, including Yeo, although the novel is set in 1813, when Yeo was in Canada and before he became a Knight of the Bath.

title: James Lucas Yeo


text:
MSQL

Mini SQL (abbreviated mSQL) is a lightweight database management system from Hughes Technologies.

History
In 1993–94 David Hughes developed a network monitoring and management system called Minerva. The design of this system required a database management system to store its configuration and working data. To enable future portability, Hughes elected to use a Structured Query Language interface between the application and the database management system, despite the fact that at the time there was no free or inexpensive SQL database management implementation available. Hughes therefore developed a translation program which provided an SQL interface to the free Postgres DBMS (which did not use SQL ). This product was named miniSQL, or mSQL. In time it became clear that Postgres did not perform adequately on the low-specification systems used to run Minerva, so mSQL developed into a lightweight database management system in its own right, implementing a limited subset of the SQL standard, but performing well on minimally specified hardware.

mSQL was the first low-cost SQL-based database management system. Combined with the free Linux operating system, the availability of relatively powerful low-cost PC hardware, and the development of World Wide Web standards and technologies, mSQL was an important factor in the early development of interactive, dynamic web applications, particularly in the period 1994–1997, after which it was increasingly supplanted by the more highly featured MySQL. mSQL had a large and widespread install base by the late 1990s.

License
Despite being offered in source code form, and being strongly associated with open source software, mSQL itself has never been offered under an open source license.

mSQL is provided free for non-commercial use. A typical license for commercial use in 1997 would cost $170, compared to a "five-digit purchase price" for its full-featured competitors.

Current status
By 1996, development on mSQL began to stagnate and MySQL arose to fill that void. By 1999, MySQL had surpassed mSQL in popularity and today mSQL has less visibility. At this time the database system is more often licensed by other companies for use in their products than used by end-users directly. mSQL is actively maintained and developed primarily to support its licensees and internal use within Hughes Technologies products and projects. It is still provided under a license that allows its use free of charge for non-commercial, educational and charitable activities. mSQL 4.4 was released in October 2021.

Host languages
mSQL originally supported several host languages:

 * C, included with the software
 * Perl
 * Java via mSQL-JDBC
 * Delphi
 * Tcl
 * PHP

title: MSQL