text:
Central Freeway

The Central Freeway is a roughly one-mile (1.5 km) elevated freeway in San Francisco, California, United States, connecting the Bayshore/James Lick Freeway (US 101 and I-80) with the Hayes Valley neighborhood. Most of the freeway is part of US 101, which exits at Mission Street on the way to the Golden Gate Bridge. The freeway once extended north to Turk Street, and initially formed part of a loop around downtown (along with the Embarcadero Freeway), but was damaged along with the Embarcadero in the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake; both highways have since been replaced with the surface-level Octavia Boulevard (north of Market Street) and Embarcadero, respectively.

Route description
The Central Freeway begins at a directional "Y" interchange at the west end of Interstate 80 in the South of Market neighborhood, and travels west above Division Street and 13th Street. This interchange also includes access between the Bayshore Freeway, which carries US 101 to the south, and the one-way pair of 9th and 10th Streets. As it approaches the end, US 101 exits onto Mission Street to access Van Ness Avenue, which it follows north to Lombard Street and the Golden Gate Bridge. The remainder of the freeway is signed as exit 434B from US 101, and comes to the surface at Market Street and Octavia Boulevard, the latter continuing north to Oak and Fell Streets, a one-way pair west to Golden Gate Park. No traffic from Market Street is allowed to turn onto the freeway, but traffic from the freeway may turn right onto Market. The first opportunity for traffic that instead continues onto the boulevard to leave it is east on Page Street.

Before the Loma Prieta earthquake, the freeway continued beyond Fell Street and then curved northeast, with the northbound side ending at a ramp to Golden Gate Avenue and Franklin Street, and the southbound level touching down to the northwest at Turk and Gough Streets. Until 2007, this land remained mainly undeveloped, filled primarily by parking lots. However, the parcels were sold off to developers in the 2010s and as of 2020, most of it has been converted into a mix of affordable and market-rate housing.

Plans and original freeway
The 1948 Transportation Plan for San Francisco, prepared by De Leuw, Cather and Company, included the Central Freeway. This elevated roadway would begin at the Bayshore Freeway – the approach to the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge – near Division Street and head west and north around the periphery of downtown San Francisco. This portion would include junctions with the Mission Freeway (south and southwest along Mission Street to Daly City) at the southwest corner and the Panhandle Freeway (west through the Panhandle into Golden Gate Park) along the west side. After swinging northeast and back north to the east side of Van Ness Avenue (continuing as a double-decked structure between Van Ness Ave. and Polk Street), a pair of ramps would split to the east, taking downtown traffic to and from the one-way pair of Bush and Pine Streets. At Clay Street, the freeway would descend to meet the rising terrain, ending at Broadway just east of Van Ness Avenue as a single level depressed roadway. A short tunnel would curve northwest to a portal in Van Ness Avenue north of Broadway, taking traffic onto Van Ness Avenue towards the Golden Gate Bridge. Along with the Embarcadero and Broadway Tunnel, which were listed for rebuilding as ground-level expressways rather than the freeway (Embarcadero Freeway) that was later partially built and demolished, the Central Freeway would have provided a full traffic distributor loop around downtown.

The route was also included in the 1955 city master plan, by then extending north beyond the former Broadway terminus to the proposed Golden Gate Freeway near Lombard Street. The first piece, connecting the Bayshore Freeway with Mission Street, opened March 1, 1955, at about the same time as the Bayshore. The part of the Central Freeway to the one-way pair of Golden Gate Avenue and Turk Street opened in April 1959, and became part of U.S. Route 101 (and Legislative Route 2) via this one-way pair to the old route on Van Ness Avenue. In January of that year, as one of the opening events in the freeway revolts, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed Resolution 45-59, removing the remainder of the Central Freeway and most other proposed freeways from the city's highway plan. Interstate 80, which had been assigned to the Central Freeway southeast of the proposed Panhandle Freeway, was truncated by the Federal Highway Administration in August 1965 and by the state in 1968.

There was a plan promulgated in February 1962 to relieve traffic congestion on the Golden Gate Bridge by constructing a "San Francisco-Tiburon Bridge" from Van Ness Ave. at Aquatic Park in San Francisco north across the Golden Gate Strait to Tiburon to connect with the Redwood Highway, which would have been anchored on Angel Island. Had this bridge actually been constructed, it would have probably been eventually necessary to construct the proposed northern section of the Central Freeway from Turk Street north to Aquatic Park in order to adequately funnel traffic to it.

Truncation
In 1989, the Loma Prieta earthquake damaged the northern part of the elevated roadway, and in 1992 Caltrans removed the freeway north of Fell Street and rerouted U.S. 101 to exit at Mission Street and onto the portion of Van Ness Avenue between the Central Freeway and Turk Street/Golden Gate Avenue. That year the Board of Supervisors banned any new freeway construction north of Market Street; a city task force recommended its replacement with a surface boulevard in 1995. Caltrans closed the double-deck freeway north of Mission Street for rebuilding in late 1996.

A fight began between the primarily Chinese American residents of western San Francisco (the Richmond District and the Sunset District), who favored the Caltrans plan to rebuild it because it provided easy access for prospective customers to get to their businesses in the Richmond and Sunset districts, and the primarily White and Black Hayes Valley local residents, who regarded the freeway as urban blight, and were supported by Mayor Willie Brown. Caltrans reopened the northbound (lower) deck to Fell Street in 1997, but did not put a route designation on that deck; several initiatives were passed to remove the lower deck. The final compromise took a two-way freeway down to ground level at Market Street, where Octavia Boulevard – a widened Octavia Street on the former freeway right-of-way — would continue to Fell Street. The completed project opened on September 9, 2005. Unfortunately, this compromise design has resulted in creating one of the most dangerous intersections in the city. Furthermore, the South of Market neighborhood actually got a wider freeway, closer to ground level, in the space where the double-decked road had been. The newer section of the Central Freeway between Mission Street and Market Street still remains unsigned, but is maintained by Caltrans.

Between early 2010 and 2013, when it was partially redeveloped for housing, a 2.2-acre site between Laguna, Oak, Fell, and Octavia Streets in Hayes Valley that had been ramps for the elevated freeway was temporarily converted into Hayes Valley Farm. With a grant from the Mayor's Office of Economic and Workforce Development, raised beds using cardboard as mulch were constructed on the road bed and potted fruit trees and bee hives added.

In 2022, State Senator Scott Wiener submitted a letter to a Caltrans district director requesting a study to investigate demolition of the Central Freeway and other nearby elevated freeways.

title: Central Freeway


text:
The Vibrations

The Vibrations were an American soul vocal group from Los Angeles, California, active from the mid-1950s to 1976. Most notable among the group's hit singles were "My Girl Sloopy" (1964) and "Love in Them There Hills" (1968). They also had a hit with the up-tempo song “Surprise party for baby” (1971) in the UK on the Northern Soul scene. The quintet's members included Don Bradley, Carl Fisher, Dave Govan, James Johnson and Ricky Owens.

History
The group initially began recording as The Jay Hawks, and had a hit in 1956 with "Stranded in the Jungle" (US No. 18). After a few lineup changes, the group had another hit with the song "The Watusi" in 1961 (US No. 25); concurrently, they had a hit under the name The Marathons with "Peanut Butter", a rewritten version of the Olympics' "Hully Gully" with new lyrics by Hidle Brown Barnum and Martin Cooper (No. 20).

The group recorded a couple of Northern soul classics since their initial hit on Atlantic Records in 1963. A cover version of their song "My Girl Sloopy", retitled "Hang On Sloopy", was a hit for the McCoys in 1965.

Their 1968 track "Cause You're Mine" (Epic Records 5-10418, although originally on Okeh Records) is listed at number 48 in The Northern Soul Top 500 by Kev Roberts. Roberts stated: "This track knocks you sideways by the 4th bar and continues to race against time, leaving you collapsed in a heap of delight!".

A later single, "Surprise Party for Baby" attributed to The Vibrating Vibrations (Neptune Records N-28) is listed at number 188 in The Northern Soul Top 500, and was practically a new single when used in the Northern soul scene at Blackpool Mecca in 1971. Roberts added: "The intro and subsequent 'Hey, Hey, Hey, Hey' harmony works a treat into dragging you onto the dance floor. A further hook, 'Hope She's Going to Show Up' is typical Gamble and Huff, being reminiscent of the Intruders cuts a couple of years later".

The Vibrations briefly broke up in 1971. At this time, Owens became a member of the Temptations, although he was let go after his first few engagements. Owens and the other Vibrations regrouped and continued, eventually becoming a nightclub act in the mid-1970s, before officially dissolving the group in 1976. Ricky Owens died in 1995.

Albums

 * Watusi! (Checker Records, 1961)
 * Peanut Butter (Arvee Records, 1961) (as the Marathons)
 * Misty (Okeh Records, 1964)
 * Shout! (Okeh Records, 1965)
 * New Vibrations (Okeh Records, 1966)
 * Taking a New Step (Mandala Records, 1972)

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

title: The Vibrations


text:
Hot springs in Taiwan

Taiwan is part of the collision zone between the Yangtze Plate and Philippine Sea Plate. Eastern and southern Taiwan are the northern end of the Philippine Mobile Belt.

Located next to an oceanic trench and volcanic system in a tectonic collision zone, Taiwan has evolved a unique environment that produces high-temperature springs with crystal-clear water, usually both clean and safe to drink. These hot springs are commonly used for spas and resorts.

Soaking in hot springs became popular in Taiwan around 1895 during the 50-year long colonial rule by Japan.

History

The first mention of Taiwan's hot springs came from a 1697 manuscript,, but they were not developed until 1893, when a German businessman discovered Beitou and later established a small local spa.

Under Japanese rule, the government constantly promoted and further enhanced the natural hot springs. The Japanese rule brought with them their rich onsen culture of spring soaking, which had a great influence on Taiwan.

In March 1896, from Osaka, Japan opened Taiwan's first hot spring hotel, called Tenguan (天狗庵). He not only heralded a new era of hot spring bathing in Beitou, but also paved the road for a whole new hot spring culture for Taiwan. In the Japanese onsen culture, hot springs are claimed to offer many health benefits. As well as raising energy levels, the minerals in the water are commonly suggested to help treat chronic fatigue, eczema or arthritis.

During Japanese rule, the four major hot springs in Taiwan were in modern-day Beitou, Yangmingshan, Guanziling and Sichongxi. However, under Republic of China administration starting from 1945, the hot spring culture in Taiwan gradually lost momentum. It was not until 1999 that the authorities again started large-scale promotion of Taiwan's hot springs, setting off a renewed hot spring fever.

In recent years, hot spring spas and resorts on Taiwan have gained more popularity. With the support of the government, the hot spring has become not only another industry but also again part of Taiwanese culture.

Taiwan has one of the highest concentrations (more than 100 hot springs) and greatest variety of thermal springs in the world varying from hot springs to cold springs, mud springs, and seabed hot springs.

Geology
Taiwan is located on a faultline where several continental plates meet; the Philippine Sea Plate and the Eurasian Plate intersect in the Circum-Pacific seismic zone.

Types of springs

 * Sodium carbonate springs
 * Sulfur springs
 * Ferrous springs
 * Sodium hydrogen carbonate springs
 * Mud springs
 * (spring water contains alkaline and iodine, is salty and has a light sulfuric smell)

 * Salt or hydrogen sulfide springs

Partial list of hot springs in Taiwan

 * Jiaoxi
 * Dakeng
 * Beitou - is considered the "hot spring capital of Taiwan".
 * Zhiben
 * Tai-an - is an odorless and colorless alkaline carbonate hot spring.
 * Yangmingshan
 * Guguan
 * Guanziling - is known for its mud baths.
 * Sichongxi
 * Wulai
 * Ruisui, Hualien - this hot spring has a high iron content, consequently the water has a brownish tint.
 * Zhaori

title: Hot springs in Taiwan


text:
Seoul Metropolitan Rapid Transit Corporation

Seoul Metropolitan Rapid Transit Corporation (SMRT) was established in 1994 to operate the Seoul Subway lines 5, 6, 7, 8 in Seoul, South Korea.

The corporation operated a total of 201 subway trains at 148 stations on lines 5-8. The operation intervals are from 2.5–6 minutes during rush hours and 5–10 minutes during non-rush hours. The combined daily ridership of subway lines 5-8 is 2,037,000.

The company merged with Seoul Metro in 2017.

Lines
Seoul Subway Line 2: Kkachisan station

Seoul Subway Line 3: Garak Market station

Seoul Subway Line 5: Banghwa station - Sangil-dong station / Macheon Station (Except for Ogeum station controlled by Seoul Metro)

Seoul Subway Line 6: Eungam station - Bonghwasan station (Except for Yeonsinnae station controlled by Seoul Metro

Seoul Subway Line 7: Jangam station - Bupyeong-gu Office station

Seoul Subway Line 8: Amsa station - Moran station

Administration
In January 2013, the Transit Corporation published free guidebooks in three languages: English, Japanese and Chinese (simplified and traditional), which features eight tours as well as recommendations for accommodations, restaurants and shopping centers. These were distributed from information centers in 44 subway stations, namely Itaewon Station on line 6 and Gwanghwamun Station on line 5. The eight tours are designed with different themes, e.g. Korean traditional culture. Which goes from Jongno 3-ga Station to Anguk Station and Gyeongbokgung Station on line No 3 that showcases antique shops and art galleries of Insa-dong.

Stations
The stations for Lines 5-7 are designed to fit in 8 cars on each platform, however subway stations operated on Line 8 is designed to fit 6 cars on each platform. Most stations have 2 tracks, but can have 1 or 3 tracks in some cases. Each platform on every station operated by the Seoul Metropolitan Rapid Transit Corporation is equipped with a PSD, or Platform Screen Doors which help prevent suicide, and eliminate dust particles created by trains running in the tunnels. Each station's platform is also equipped with many large LCD television screens that are parallel to the Platform Screen Doors which displays the information on the trains locations, live news, and video instructions in case of an emergency. There are also 2 panels, covered with 2 large LCD television screens on each side of the panel (so a total of 4 screens on each flat panel, and there are 2 flat panels on each platform.) There is one display on each side of the panel that display the current time, arrival of the next two trains, at what door to transfer, (if at a transfer station) and the train's locations. The second screen displays advertisements, weather, and news. Regular panels without television screens attached to them serve as guides for exits, surrounding landmarks and exit locations and where the train will lead them to.


text:
Binjai

Binjai (English: or, Jawi: ), formally Kota Binjai (Binjai City), is an independent city in the North Sumatra province of Indonesia, bordered by Deli Serdang Regency to the east and Langkat Regency to the west. Binjai is connected to Medan (the provincial capital), about 22 km to the east, by the Sumatra highway that goes to Banda Aceh, and effectively forms a part of Greater Medan. The city's population was 181,904 in the 1990 Census, 224,516 in the 2000 Census, 246,154 in the 2010 Census, and 291,842 in the 2020 Census; the official estimate as of mid-2023 was 303,272, comprising 151,627 males and 151,645 females. In mid-2023, a further 49,217 inhabitants lived in Binjai District of Langkat Regency, outside the city limits but immediately north of the city.

History
The origin of Binjai when it established itself as a city is unknown. Historically, the Binjai area was situated between two Malay kingdoms, Deli and Langkat. Binjai grew from a small village on the edge of the Bingai River.

According to both oral and written accounts of the history of the area, the city of Binjai grew from a small village located on the edge of the Bingai River, approximately where the Pekan Binjai village is located today. Traditional ceremonies were held to lay the foundations of the small village in the shade of a large binjai tree at the edge of the Bingai River, which flows into the Wampu River, which is navigable for a large portion of its length.

Around the tree were built several houses, which were gradually enlarged, until finally a village hall was built. A lively port also developed, visited by barges from Stabat, Tanjung Pura, and the Strait of Malacca. Over time, the Binjai tree gave its name to the growing city.

Geography
Binjai is located between the Mencirim, Bangkatan, and Bingai rivers. On average, it is 28 m above sea level. As the crow flies, Binjai is only 8 km from Medan, although Kabupaten Deli Serdang separates the two. However, the route of the Sumatara Highway increases the effective distance between the two cities to 22 km.

The two nearby rivers, the Bingai and Mencirim Rivers satisfy the needs of the city for clean water, which is distributed by the local water company. However, on wells for their water supply.

Climate
Binjai has a tropical rainforest climate (Af) with heavy rainfall year-round.

Government
Binjai City is divided into five districts (kecamatan), which are further divided into 37 villages (kelurahan).

The mayoral office is located in the Town Hall, at General Sudirman Road No. 6. In 2009, Muhammad Idhaham, Msi was elected to this position for the period 2009–2014.

Formerly, Binjai was the location for the headquarters of the Langkat Police Force, which had responsibility for policing both the city of Binjai and Kabupaten Langkat. However, in 2001 the police force was split, with the creation of a Binjai police force, while the headquarters for the Langkat Police Force moved to Stabat.

Directly in front of the town hall is the Lapangan merdeka (Freedom Square), a civic open space, as well as the Pendopo Umar Baki, a building used for a variety of official and unofficial functions.

Administrative districts
The city of Binjai is divided into five administrative districts (Indonesian: kecamatan), tabulated below with their areas and their populations at the 2010 Census and the 2020 Census, together with the official estimates as at mid-2023. The table also includes the number of administrative villages (all classed as urban kelurahan) in each district and its postcodes.

Note: (a) mainly suburban districts of Langkat Regency, outside the city's administrative boundaries.

Demographics
Binjai is a multi-ethnic city, with Javanese, Batak, Chinese, Indian, and Malay citizens. This complex ethnic mix gives Binjai a rich cultural and religious life. The total population for the city of Binjai was 291,842 in the 2020 Census, and the official estimate as of mid-2022 was 300,009. Along with Deli Serdang Regency, the city functions effectively as a commuter town for Medan.

The majority of the population is Islamic, mainly of Javanese and Malay origin. The largest mosque is located in Kapten Machmud Ismail Street. The Christian population is the next largest and is mainly made up of Sumatran Christians, while the majority of Buddhists are of Chinese origin. There is one Hindu temple in Binjai, located on Ahmad Yani Street, and the Hindu population is mainly made up of ethnic Indians.

Economics and commerce
The commercial centre is located in the heart of the city. The industrial area is in the north, while farming is concentrated in the east, south, and west of the city, with the west being the main area for animal husbandry. There is a 3 km2 business park in the Kelurahan Cengkeh Turi. There is also oil and gas exploration occurring in the Tandam Hilir region, to the north of the city.

In 1999, 29% of economic activity consisted of trade in goods and services, while the industrial sector contributed 23% of economic activity. The per capita income for Binjai was 3.3m rupiah, below the average for North Sumatra Province as a whole, which stood at 4.9m rupiah.

The most important agricultural sector is rambutan production, which covers 4.25 km2 with a production capacity of 2,400 tons per year. At present, the industry consists solely of the sale of fresh rambutan fruit; there is plenty of scopes to modernise this industry, for instance by the introduction of canning processes and more sophisticated marketing.

There are four traditional markets in Binjai serving buyers and sellers from both Binjai and Kabupaten Langkat. These are: Tavip, Kebun Lada, Brahrang and Rambung markets. There are also several modern shopping centres, including Suzuya, Mini Market Tahiti, Toserba Ramayana, the Ramayana Mall, Asia King and Binjai Supermall.

General Sudirman Street and Ahmad Yani Streets are the main shopping avenues, while the biggest and food court in Binjai is Bangkatan with Chinese and Indonesian food as specialities.

Education
As of 2005, there are 154 primary schools, 37 middle schools, 9 Islamic middle schools, 31 high schools and 10 Islamic high schools, 4 academy and 5 university. Approximately 78,000 children are attending these 241 schools.

Transport
The major forms of public transport within the city are becak, a three-wheeled motorised vehicle, and small minibusses called "Angkot" (Angkutan Kota, Eng.="City Transport"). Aside from road transport out of the city, there is also a commuter train Sri Lelawangsa connecting Binjai with Medan; the continuing line to Kuala Bingai, Langkat Regency. Binjai also have a bus line called Trans Binjai that connecting the whole city.

The nearest airport is Medan's Kuala Namu International Airport, and the nearest harbour is Port of Belawan, Medan.

Other items of interest
An important icon for the city is the Struggle of 1945 Statue, which welcomes visitors from outside the city. Binjai also used to have as historic water fountain built by the Dutch, which was used a water source for the local population, however, this was demolished and replaced by shops several years ago.

Binjai is also an important transit point for visitors to Bukit Lawang, in the Gunung Leuser National Park, an important site for the conservation of the red orangutan. Bukit Lawang is located 68 km west of Binjai.

Binjai is also the site of a nationally important military cemetery.

There are three large hospitals serving the needs of the population of Binjai. These are Korem Hospital, Binjai Public Hospital, and PTP IX Hospital.

title: Binjai


text:
2005 Los Angeles mayoral election

The 2005 Los Angeles mayoral election took place on March 8, 2005, with a run-off election on May 17, 2005. In a rematch of the 2001 election, Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa defeated the sitting mayor, James Hahn, becoming the city's first Hispanic mayor since the 19th century.

Municipal elections in California, including Mayor of Los Angeles, are officially nonpartisan; candidates' party affiliations do not appear on the ballot.

Background
Philanthropist Eli Broad endorsed Hahn. State Senator Gil Cedillo, Councilman Eric Garcetti, and Councilman Cindy Miscikowski, who all endorsed Villaraigosa in 2001, switched sides and endorsed Hahn.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger promised Hahn that he would not participate in the election. As such, Schwarzenegger did not endorse any candidates, however he has expressed broad support for Hertzberg's plan to break up the Los Angeles Unified School District. His Education Secretary, and former mayor of Los Angeles, Richard Riordan campaigned heavily for Hertzberg.

Results
Although Villaraigosa garnered the plurality of votes in the general election, his lack of an outright majority forced a special election between him and the incumbent Hahn. With less than 34% of registered voters participating, Villaraigosa won the runoff.

With his election, Villaraigosa became the first Latino mayor of Los Angeles since 1872. Hahn became the first incumbent to lose re-election in 32 years since Sam Yorty lost to Tom Bradley in the 1973 Los Angeles mayoral election.

title: 2005 Los Angeles mayoral election


text:
Frederick William Piesse

Frederick William Piesse (10 December 1848 – 6 March 1902 ) was a member of the first Australian federal parliament.

Born in Hobart, Tasmania, Piesse worked in law, conveyancing, shipping and horticulture before being elected to the Tasmanian House of Assembly as the Member for North Hobart in 1893. In April 1894, Piesse resigned from the House of Assembly as part of an arrangement to swap seats with Legislative Council member for Buckingham, Philip Fysh, to enable Fysh to take the role of Treasurer in Edward Braddon's ministry. Piesse served as an Honorary Minister from 1899 to 1901.

Piesse was elected as a Free Trader to the first federal Australian Parliament as one of the five members for Tasmania. His tenure as a federal parliamentarian would be short lived, however, as he died less than a year after his election. He was the first serving Tasmanian Member of the House of Representatives to die.

Piesse died of septic pneumonia at his home in New Town on 6 March 1902, aged 53, having been ill for three months.

title: Frederick William Piesse


text:
User:Interslice

Hello I am Interslice.

I currently reside in Nevada. I mostly edit and read articles on history, especially warfare. I hold Caesar Augustus, Napoleon Bonaparte, and Ronald Reagan in very high regard.

I don't edit very much, and I so far haven't gotten into any flame wars.

title: User:Interslice


text:
User talk:Orockthro

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 05:33, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Orockthro


text:
Talk:Hellenic Armed Forces

Reservists
The figure for the reserves on the sidebar seems excessive, but I have not found any reliable sources that report this figure. Npfo (talk)
 * It is not excessive, because they count all men up to age of 40. Older men are assigned to the National Guard and its reserve up to the age of 60. SV1XV (talk) 15:53, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 January 2021
2603:8001:9900:704B:E028:4BD6:344F:F0D9 (talk) 23:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC) Greece active personnel are 220,000 and it’s reserve are 550,000. It’s military spending is 5.5 billion 2.3% of Greece economy.
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ◢  Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 00:37, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hellenic Armed Forces


text:
Todros, Blow

Todros, Blow or Todres the Trombonist (original Yiddish title Todros, Blos or Todres, Bloz) was an 1878 light comedic play by Abraham Goldfaden, now lost. The story centers around a man living beyond his means who has ordered his servant, Todros, to blow a trombone whenever one of his creditors approaches.

Writing his memoirs some 40 years later, Jacob Adler recalled seeing it as a young man, only a few months into his own acting career. He describes it as "a foolish comedy [translated] from the German" and adds that at the time he first saw it in Odesa, Ukraine, he, well versed in Russian theater, viewed it as an example the shortcomings of the then-nascent Yiddish theater: "Why if we must steal, I asked myself, must it always be something old and stale? Gogol's Inspector General is also about a young man with debts."

title: Todros, Blow


text:
Virginia Jetzt!

Virginia Jetzt! was a German Indie-Pop band founded in the small town of Elsterwerda in Brandenburg in 1999; the quartet dissolved in October 2010.

The band has released four albums so far, their 2003 debut album Wer hat Angst vor Virginia Jetzt? — a reference to the Edward Albee play Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? — followed by Anfänger (English: Beginner) in 2004, Land Unter (English: Land Under) in 2007, and "Blühende Landschaften" (English: "Blooming Landscapes") in 2009.

Anfänger spawned three single releases; "Ein ganzer Sommer" (German Charts # 28, 2004), "Das ganz normale Leben" (# 72, 2004) and "Wahre Liebe" (# 49, 2005).

In 2005, the band represented Brandenburg in the Bundesvision Song Contest 2005, with the song "Wahre Liebe", placing 8th with 54 points.

January 2007 saw the band release their album Land Unter, containing the singles "Bitte bleib nicht, wenn du gehst"(German Charts # 54, 2006) (English: "Please don't stay, if you leave") and "Mehr als das" (# 75, 2007) (English: "More than that").

Discography

 * Virginia jetzt! (2000)
 * Pophymnen (2001)
 * Wer hat Angst vor Virginia Jetzt! (2003)
 * Anfänger (2004)
 * Anfänger Tour Edition (2005)
 * Land Unter (2007)
 * Blühende Landschaften (2009)

title: Virginia Jetzt!


text: User talk:128.39.244.113

title: User talk:128.39.244.113


text:
Germplasm

Germplasm refers to genetic resources such as seeds, tissues, and DNA sequences that are maintained for the purpose of animal and plant breeding, conservation efforts, agriculture, and other research uses. These resources may take the form of seed collections stored in seed banks, trees growing in nurseries, animal breeding lines maintained in animal breeding programs or gene banks. Germplasm collections can range from collections of wild species to elite, domesticated breeding lines that have undergone extensive human selection. Germplasm collection is important for the maintenance of biological diversity, food security, and conservation efforts.

In the United States, germplasm resources are regulated by the National Genetic Resources Program (NGRP), created by the U.S. congress in 1990. In addition the web server The Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) provides information about germplasms as they pertain to agriculture production.

Regulation
In the United States, germplasm resources are regulated by the National Genetic Resources Program (NGRP), created by the U.S. congress in 1990. In addition the web server The Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) provides information about germplasms as they pertain to agriculture production.

Specifically for plants, there is the U.S. National Plant Germplasm System (NPGS) which holds > 450,000 accessions with 10,000 species of the 85 most commonly grown crops. Many accessions held are international species, and NPGS distributes germplasm resources internationally.

As genetic information moves largely online there is a transition in germplasm information from a physical location (seed banks, cryopreserving) to online platforms containing genetic sequences. In addition there are issues in the collection germplasm information and where they are shared. Historically some germplasm information had been collected in developing countries and then shared to researchers who then sell the donor country the original germplasm that they altered. There is a lack of compensation to the donor countries and this is an issue.

Storage methods
Effective Germplasm work includes the collection, storage, analysis, documentation, and exchange of genetic information. This information can be stored as accessions, which is DNA sequence information, or live cells/tissues that can be preserved. However, only about 5% of current germplasm resources are living samples. For live cells/tissues, germplasm resources can be stored ex situ in seed banks, botanic gardens, or through cryopreservation. Cryopreservation is the process of storing germplasm at very low temperatures, such as liquid nitrogen. This process ensures that cells do not degrade and keeps the germplasm intact. In addition, resources can be stored in situ such as the natural area the species was found.

Conservation efforts
About 10,000 years ago is when humans began to domesticate plant species for the purpose of food, seeds, and vegetation. Since then, agriculture has been a staple for human civilizations and plant breeding has allowed more genetic diversity and a more diverse gene pool. Germplasm resources allow for more genetic assets to be used and integrated for agricultural systems for plant breeding and bringing about new varieties. In addition, researchers are looking at crop wild relatives (CWRs) that could expand gene pools of crop species and provide more ability to select target traits.

Furthermore, we are currently facing a biodiversity crisis event that is caused by human activities and industrialization. Many plants and animals have gone extinct due to losing their habitat, their habitat being degraded with contaminants, and climate change. Germplasm resources are a way to conserve the pre-existing biological diversity and to possibly regenerate habitats. By storing this genetic information there is data about what species are present including plants, animals, bacteria, and fungi and what a complete ecosystem in specific areas look like.

title: Germplasm


text:
Vowel hiatus

In phonology, hiatus or diaeresis (also spelled dieresis or diæresis) describes the occurrence of two separate vowel sounds in adjacent syllables with no intervening consonant. When two vowel sounds instead occur together as part of a single syllable, the result is called a diphthong.

Preference
Some languages do not have diphthongs, except sometimes in rapid speech, or they have a limited number of diphthongs but also numerous vowel sequences that cannot form diphthongs and so appear in hiatus. That is the case of Japanese, Nuosu, Bantu languages like Swahili, and Lakota. Examples are Japanese aoi (青い) 'blue/green', and Swahili eua 'purify', both with three syllables.

Avoidance
Many languages disallow or restrict hiatus and avoid it by deleting or assimilating the vowel or by adding an extra consonant.

Epenthesis
A consonant may be added between vowels (epenthesis) to prevent hiatus. That is most often a semivowel or a glottal, but all kinds of other consonants can be used as well, depending on the language and the quality of the two adjacent vowels. For example, some non-rhotic dialects of English often insert to avoid hiatus after non-high word-final or occasionally morpheme-final vowels.

Contraction
In Greek and Latin poetry, hiatus is generally avoided although it occurs in many authors under certain rules, with varying degrees of poetic licence. Hiatus may be avoided by elision of a final vowel, occasionally prodelision (elision of initial vowel), synizesis (pronunciation of two vowels as one without a change in spelling), or contractions such as αει->ᾷ.

Glide formation
The first of the two vowels may be converted to a glide to prevent hiatus. This differs from epenthesis as described above, since only the second vowel is retained in its original form. For example, in Luganda, is realised as. In some cases, this may result in the transfer of accent and/or length from the first to the second vowel, e.g. Icelandic sjá ← *sé + a.

Diaeresis
In Dutch and French, the second of two vowels in hiatus is marked with a diacritic (or tréma) if otherwise that combination could be interpreted as a single vowel (namely either a diphthong, a long vowel, or as having one of the vowels silent, etc.). Examples are the Dutch word poëzie ("poetry") and the French word ambiguë (feminine form of ambigu, "ambiguous"). This usage is occasionally seen in English (such as coöperate, daïs and reëlect) but has never been common, and over the last century, its use in such words has been dropped or replaced by the use of a hyphen except in a very few publications, notably The New Yorker. It is, however, still sometimes seen in loanwords such as naïve and Noël and in the proper names Zoë and Chloë.

Other ways
In German, hiatus between monophthongs is usually written with an intervening h, as in ziehen "to pull"; drohen  "to threaten"; sehen  "to see". In a few words (such as ziehen), the h represents a consonant that has become silent, but in most cases, it was added later simply to indicate the end of the stem.

Similarly, in Scottish Gaelic, hiatus is written by a number of digraphs: bh, dh, gh, mh, th. Some examples include abhainn "river"; latha  "day"; cumha  "condition". The convention goes back to the Old Irish scribal tradition, but it is more consistently applied in Scottish Gaelic: lathe (> latha). However, hiatus in Old Irish was usually simply implied in certain vowel digraphs óe (> adha), ua (> ogha).

Correption
Correption is the shortening of a long vowel before a short vowel in hiatus.

title: Vowel hiatus


text:
John Jenrette

John Wilson Jenrette Jr. (May 19, 1936 – March 17, 2023) was an American lawyer, businessman, and politician from South Carolina, best known for his involvement in the Abscam corruption scandal, and being the husband of actress and model Rita Jenrette. He was in the U.S. House of Representatives as a Democrat from January 1975 until December 1980. He was convicted of accepting a bribe in the FBI's Abscam sting operation, and served more than a year in prison.

Biography
Jenrette was born in Conway, South Carolina, in 1936, the son of Mary Herring and John Wilson Jenrette. He grew up in Loris, South Carolina. He was a descendant of French Huguenot refugees who settled in northeastern South Carolina in the 1700s. Jenrette graduated from Loris High School, where he was a three-sport athletic star, in 1954. He then earned a B.A. at Wofford College in 1958. He served on active duty as a U.S. Army officer and then served several years in the South Carolina National Guard. After graduating from law school at the University of South Carolina in 1962, he founded an influential law firm in Ocean Drive, which soon became part of the newly formed City of North Myrtle Beach.

South Carolina House of Representatives
Jenrette was elected to the South Carolina House of Representatives as a Democrat in 1964, where he represented Horry County, South Carolina, which includes Myrtle Beach. He retired from the state house to run for a seat in the U.S. House in 1972. While in the state legislature, he spearheaded the transformation of a small two-year University of South Carolina branch into a full-service four-year college that is now Coastal Carolina University. He initiated the effort to convert the old post office building in Columbia into a facility for the State Supreme Court, and persuaded the U.S. Air Force to allow commercial air traffic at the Myrtle Beach Air Force Base. This marked the beginning of what is now Myrtle Beach International Airport.

U.S. House of Representatives
In the 1972 contest Jenrette defeated the seventeen-term Congressman John L. McMillan in the primary, but lost the general election to the Republican, Edward Lunn Young. Undaunted, he again ran for the seat in 1974. This time he won, in part because of the extreme unpopularity of Republican Richard Nixon and the Watergate scandal.

Jenrette was fairly liberal by South Carolina standards of the time. He seemed out of place representing a rather conservative and mostly rural congressional district in northeastern South Carolina. However, he was locally well-known and benefited from enthusiastic African-American support. Additionally, the South Carolina Republican Party was not especially well-organized at the time in that part of the state. Jenrette performed well in his first two years in Congress and easily defeated Young again in 1976. In 1978, he received only token primary opposition and faced no major-party opposition.

Jenrette was selected to join the House Majority leadership team as a Deputy Whip shortly after arriving in Washington in 1975, and he served on the Democratic leadership team as a Deputy Whip for all six years he served in Congress. He served first on the House Agriculture Committee and then on the prestigious House Appropriations Committee. He was the founder and first Chairman of the Congressional Travel and Tourism Caucus. Jenrette placed great emphasis on constituent service, and he and his staff were widely recognized as the most responsive office the Sixth District had ever seen. Among his many constituent services was securing federal funding for a high span bridge over the Sampit River in Georgetown, South Carolina, allowing sea-going vessels to travel upstream. Jenrette was the first Member of Congress to endorse Jimmy Carter for President. Carter campaigned in South Carolina for Jenrette, and Jenrette campaigned for Carter in South Carolina and elsewhere, and persuaded a large number of congressional colleagues to support Carter during the nominating process.

Jenrette is most famous for two things during his days as a Congressman. First, he allegedly had sex with his then-wife, Rita Jenrette, behind a pillar on the steps of the Capitol Building during a break in a late night session of Congress (The comedy group "Capitol Steps" take its name from this escapade). Rita later posed nude in Playboy and published a tell-all memoir.

Second, he was charged with and convicted of accepting a bribe in the FBI sting operation known as Abscam which was conducted in 1980. He was recorded saying he had been given a cash loan by an associate. Jenrette was sentenced to two years in prison, of which he served 13 months.

Later career
Jenrette was defeated for re-election in 1980 and resigned from Congress on December 10, just days before the end of his term. He subsequently ran a public relations firm called Lehuguenot, Ltd., in Myrtle Beach and developed property in nearby Cherry Grove.

His wife, Rita, separated from him in January 1981 and they divorced later the same year.

In 2017, the book Capitol Steps and Missteps: The Wild, Improbable Ride of Congressman John Jenrette was published. It was written by two of Jenrette's former aides, John F. Clark and Cookie Miller VanSice. While promoting the book, Jenrette described his years since Congress as including "marketing an experimental balloon-operated flotation device; running (and then folding) a national chain of timeshares; breeding horses in Bulgaria; and selling Phillip Morris cigarettes in Eastern Europe immediately after the fall of the Soviet Union". He also imported wine from Hungary and antique furniture from Eastern Europe. He became a developer of major coastal property in North Myrtle Beach, and lived with his third wife Rosemary in a beachfront home in Myrtle Beach.

Death
After several years of declining health, Jenrette died in Conway on March 17, 2023, at the age of 86. South Carolina congressman James Clyburn issued a statement of tribute following Jenrette’s death.

title: John Jenrette


text:
Fin field-effect transistor

A fin field-effect transistor (FinFET) is a multigate device, a MOSFET (metal–oxide–semiconductor field-effect transistor) built on a substrate where the gate is placed on two, three, or four sides of the channel or wrapped around the channel (gate all around), forming a double or even multi gate structure. These devices have been given the generic name "FinFETs" because the source/drain region forms fins on the silicon surface. The FinFET devices have significantly faster switching times and higher current density than planar CMOS (complementary metal–oxide–semiconductor) technology.

FinFET is a type of non-planar transistor, or "3D" transistor. It is the basis for modern nanoelectronic semiconductor device fabrication. Microchips utilizing FinFET gates first became commercialized in the first half of the 2010s, and became the dominant gate design at 14 nm, 10 nm and 7 nm process nodes.

It is common for a single FinFET transistor to contain several fins, arranged side by side and all covered by the same gate, that act electrically as one. The number of fins can be varied to adjust drive strength and performance, with drive strength increasing with a higher number of fins.

History
After the MOSFET was first demonstrated by Mohamed Atalla and Dawon Kahng of Bell Labs in 1960, the concept of a double-gate thin-film transistor (TFT) was proposed by H. R. Farrah (Bendix Corporation) and R. F. Steinberg in 1967. A double-gate MOSFET was later proposed by Toshihiro Sekigawa of the Electrotechnical Laboratory (ETL) in a 1980 patent describing the planar XMOS transistor. Sekigawa fabricated the XMOS transistor with Yutaka Hayashi at the ETL in 1984. They demonstrated that short-channel effects can be significantly reduced by sandwiching a fully depleted silicon-on-insulator (SOI) device between two gate electrodes connected together.

The first FinFET transistor type was called a "Depleted Lean-channel Transistor" (DELTA) transistor, which was first fabricated in Japan by Hitachi Central Research Laboratory's Digh Hisamoto, Toru Kaga, Yoshifumi Kawamoto and Eiji Takeda in 1989. The gate of the transistor can cover and electrically contact the semiconductor channel fin on both the top and the sides or only on the sides. The former is called a tri-gate transistor and the latter a double-gate transistor. A double-gate transistor optionally can have each side connected to two different terminal or contacts. This variant is called split transistor. This enables more refined control of the operation of the transistor.

Indonesian engineer Effendi Leobandung, while working at the University of Minnesota, published a paper with Stephen Y. Chou at the 54th Device Research Conference in 1996 outlining the benefit of cutting a wide CMOS transistor into many channels with narrow width to improve device scaling and increase device current by increasing the effective device width. This structure is what a modern FinFET looks like. Although some device width is sacrificed by cutting it into narrow widths, the conduction of the side wall of narrow fins more than make up for the loss, for tall fins. The device had a 35 nm channel width and 70 nm channel length.

The potential of Digh Hisamoto's research on DELTA transistors drew the attention of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which in 1997 awarded a contract to a research group at the University of California, Berkeley to develop a deep sub-micron transistor based on DELTA technology. The group was led by Hisamoto along with TSMC's Chenming Hu. The team made the following breakthroughs between 1998 and 2004.

 * 1998 – N-channel FinFET (17 nm) – Digh Hisamoto, Chenming Hu, Tsu-Jae King Liu, Jeffrey Bokor, Wen-Chin Lee, Jakub Kedzierski, Erik Anderson, Hideki Takeuchi, Kazuya Asano
 * 1999 – P-channel FinFET (sub-50 nm) – Digh Hisamoto, Chenming Hu, Xuejue Huang, Wen-Chin Lee, Charles Kuo, Leland Chang, Jakub Kedzierski, Erik Anderson, Hideki Takeuchi
 * 2001 – 15 nm FinFET – Chenming Hu, Yang-Kyu Choi, Nick Lindert, P. Xuan, S. Tang, D. Ha, Erik Anderson, Tsu-Jae King Liu, Jeffrey Bokor
 * 2002 – 10 nm FinFET – Shibly Ahmed, Scott Bell, Cyrus Tabery, Jeffrey Bokor, David Kyser, Chenming Hu, Tsu-Jae King Liu, Bin Yu, Leland Chang
 * 2004 – High-κ/metal gate FinFET – D. Ha, Hideki Takeuchi, Yang-Kyu Choi, Tsu-Jae King Liu, W. Bai, D.-L. Kwong, A. Agarwal, M. Ameen

They coined the term "FinFET" (fin field-effect transistor) in a December 2000 paper, used to describe a non-planar, double-gate transistor built on an SOI substrate.

In 2006, a team of Korean researchers from the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST) and the National Nano Fab Center developed a 3 nm transistor, the world's smallest nanoelectronic device, based on gate-all-around (GAA) FinFET technology. In 2011, Rice University researchers Masoud Rostami and Kartik Mohanram demonstrated that FinFETs can have two electrically independent gates, which gives circuit designers more flexibility to design with efficient, low-power gates.

In 2020, Chenming Hu received the IEEE Medal of Honor award for his development of the FinFET, which the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) credited with taking transistors to the third dimension and extending Moore's law.

Commercialization
The industry's first 25 nanometer transistor operating on just 0.7 volts was demonstrated in December 2002 by TSMC. The "Omega FinFET" design, named after the similarity between the Greek letter "Omega" and the shape in which the gate wraps around the source/drain structure, has a gate delay of just 0.39 picosecond (ps) for the N-type transistor and 0.88 ps for the P-type.

In 2004, Samsung demonstrated a "Bulk FinFET" design, which made it possible to mass-produce FinFET devices. They demonstrated dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) manufactured with a 90nm Bulk FinFET process.

In 2011, Intel demonstrated tri-gate transistors, where the gate surrounds the channel on three sides, allowing for increased energy efficiency and lower gate delay—and thus greater performance—over planar transistors.

Commercially produced chips at 22 nm and below have generally utilised FinFET gate designs (but planar processes do exist down to 18 nm, with 12 nm in development). Intel's tri-gate variant were announced at 22 nm in 2011 for its Ivy Bridge microarchitecture. These devices shipped from 2012 onwards. From 2014 onwards, at 14 nm (or 16 nm) major foundries (TSMC, Samsung, GlobalFoundries) utilised FinFET designs.

In 2013, SK Hynix began commercial mass-production of a 16nm process, TSMC began production of a 16nm FinFET process, and Samsung Electronics began production of a 10nm process. TSMC began production of a 7 nm process in 2017, and Samsung began production of a 5 nm process in 2018. In 2019, Samsung announced plans for the commercial production of a 3nm GAAFET process by 2021. FD-SOI (Fully Depleted Silicon On Insulator) has been seen as a potential low cost alternative to FinFETs.

Commercial production of nanoelectronic FinFET semiconductor memory began in the 2010s. In 2013, SK Hynix began mass-production of 16nm NAND flash memory, and Samsung Electronics began production of 10nm multi-level cell (MLC) NAND flash memory. In 2017, TSMC began production of SRAM memory using a 7 nm process.

title: Fin field-effect transistor


text:
Talk:Hot springs in Taiwan

Photo needed
We need a photo to add on this article. Please generously donate and contribute!! :) Mababa 05:44, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * There are photos already inside the article, and I've attached the Wikimedia Commons of it. Chongkian (talk) 10:19, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Map and list
Please feel free to complete or add another location you know onto the list. We also need a map for the location of the hot springs too.Mababa 06:13, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"Onsen"?
Onsen is the Japanese term for hot spring. Why, in an English language work about a nation in which both English and Japanese are foreign languages, use a Japanese term? Why not use "hot spring", or whatever is the commonest term in Taiwan for "hot spring"? (Or is this really onsen?) -- Hoary 07:00, 2005 Feb 16 (UTC)

Most Taiwanese hot springs are generally following the Japanese Onsen culture (the internal designs) and I would probably say some of them would be close to "onsen." But, you are right, there could be some differences, I have not been to many of them enough to say the real difference. Many of them have the meals served as well, not necessarily Japanese cuisine though. However, the old ones before 1945 must be authentic onsen though, since they were ran under Japanese rule. Perhaps change onsen to Hot spring might be a good idea.Mababa 04:15, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Done! -- Hoary 07:48, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)
 * Thanks!Mababa 01:33, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Taiwanese hot springs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080222000527/http://www.taiwanzen.com:80/ to http://www.taiwanzen.com
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051223093025/http://www.taipei.org:80/teco/cicc/currents/03-0400/journal.htm to http://www.taipei.org/teco/cicc/currents/03-0400/journal.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060522195804/http://202.39.225.132:80/jsp/Eng/html/travel_tour/subject_introduce.jsp?subject_id=11+13&update=2004-04-19 to http://202.39.225.132/jsp/Eng/html/travel_tour/subject_introduce.jsp?subject_id=11+13&update=2004-04-19

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 20:30, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hot springs in Taiwan


text:
Millhouses

Millhouses is a neighbourhood in the City of Sheffield, England. It is located in Ecclesall ward; in the south-western portion of the city on the northwest bank of the River Sheaf. Its origins lie in a small hamlet that grew around the Ecclesall Corn Mill. It has a population (2006 estimate) of 4,424.

The agriculture and industries of this area are now largely gone, leaving Millhouses as a mostly residential area. Local amenities include three schools, a 12.87 ha park, three pubs, three supermarkets, three churches and numerous small shops.

Geography
Millhouses is set in 1.55 km2 of the part of the Sheaf valley known as Abbeydale. It is bordered to the southeast by the River Sheaf and Hutcliffe Wood, to the west by Ecclesall Woods, Millhouses Lane and Button Hill, and to the north by Carter Knowle Road and Bannerdale Road. Running directly alongside the River Sheaf is the long and thin Millhouses Park. The main road through the area is the A621 Abbeydale Road/Abbeydale Road South. The Midland Main Line also runs through Millhouses. Residential development was in a fan-shape focused on the junction of Abbeydale Road and Millhouses Lane. Most houses in the area were built in the 1920s although there are some that date from the late 19th century.

History
In ancient times this area was part of the Barnsdale Forest that, together with Sherwood Forest, made up the forest of the Robin Hood legends. The River Sheaf marked the boundary between the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms of Mercia and Northumbria. In fact the earliest historical record of this area refers to the submission of the Northumbrian army to Egbert of Wessex at nearby Dore in 829.

In the late 12th century Robert Fitz Ranulf gave land for the establishment of an abbey, just south of Millhouses at Beauchief. Over time most of the area now covered by Millhouses had been given to the abbey by the De Ecclesall family. One of the gifts to the monks was the Ecclesall Corn Mill. This mill existed at least as early as 1280 and considerable remnants of it can still be seen at the north end of Millhouses Park.

Millhouses remained mostly agricultural until the 19th century, although two cutlery works had been established in the area: Moscar Wheel, which may originally have been a corn mill, was making cutlery by 1496, and Bartin Wheel was built as a cutler's wheel in 1631. In 1805 a turnpike road was built from Sheffield to Bakewell (now Abbeydale Road), this passed through the area and led to some growth, but it was only with the extension of the Midland Main Line through the valley in 1870 (with a railway station at Millhouses) and the subsequent arrival of trams in 1902 that Millhouses began to develop as an affluent residential suburb. As well as a railway station, an engine shed was built in 1901. This closed in the 1962, but the shed building is still in use as an industrial site and the shed's sidings are now Tesco supermarket's Park and Ride.

Noteworthy buildings in Millhouses include the Grade II listed parish church, Holy Trinity, which was constructed in 1937, and the former Millhouses police station building that dates from 1893. The Robin Hood and Wagon and Horses public houses are amongst the neighborhood's older surviving buildings, both dating from earlier than 1822.

Millhouses Park

Between Abbeydale Road South and the River Sheaf lies a mile-long public park, with a mixture of green spaces, planted areas and leisure facilities. These include tennis courts, a boating lake and a cafe serving gourmet food.

title: Millhouses


text:
User:Lady Byron/Sandbox

Sigfrid Karg-Elert (1877-1933) was a German composer of considerable fame in the early twentieth century, best known for his choral lieder, chamber music, and compositions for piano, organ, and harmonium. Born in Oberndorf-on-Neckar, Germany, he studied music at the Leipzig Conservatory, where he would become a staff member in 1919. Notable influences of his work include composers Claude Debussy, Aleksandr Scriabin, and Arnold Schoenberg. His favorite instrument to compose for was the Kunstharmonium, a versatile French creation that allowed him the range of colors he preferred.

Karg-Elert's works, especially those written for organ, enjoyed reasonable popularity in the United States, England, and France. His performance skills were less admired, and his single tour of the United States in the early 1930s was not well-received. He succumbed to a long illness in 1933, and is buried in Leipzig. The popularity of his compositions declined for a period before a successful revival in the late 1970s.

Notable works

 * 66 Chorale improvisations
 * 33 Stylistic studies for harmonium
 * 30 Caprices for flute
 * 20 Chorale preludes and postludes
 * Nun danket alle Gott for Organ

The 30 Caprices for flute were written specifically for a friend of Karg-Elert's, a flutist bound for service in the war. These short exercises were designed to challenge linear one-staff thinking and, in short, keep the friend from becoming bored. They are now a standard set of technical, dynamic, and phrasing exercises for young flutists all over the world.

title: User:Lady Byron/Sandbox


text:
Sigfrid Karg-Elert

Sigfrid Karg-Elert (November 21, 1877 – April 9, 1933) was a German composer in the early twentieth century, best known for his compositions for pipe organ and reed organ.

Biography
Karg-Elert was born Siegfried Theodor Karg in Oberndorf am Neckar, Germany, the youngest of the twelve children of Johann Jacob Karg, a book dealer, and his wife Marie Auguste Karg, born Ehlert (sic). According to another account, however, his father was a newspaper editor and publisher. The family finally settled in Leipzig in 1882, where Siegfried received his first musical training and private piano instruction. At a gathering of composers in Leipzig, he presented his first attempts at composition to the composer Emil von Reznicek, who arranged a three-year tuition-free scholarship at the Leipzig Conservatory. This enabled the young man to study with Salomon Jadassohn, Carl Reinecke, Alfred Reisenauer and Robert Teichmüller.

From August 1901 to September 1902 he worked as a piano teacher in Magdeburg. It was during this period that he changed his name to Sigfrid Karg-Elert, adding a variant of his mother's maiden name to his surname, and adopting the Swedish spelling of his first name.

Having returned to Leipzig, he started devoting himself to composition, primarily for the piano (encouraged by Edvard Grieg, whom he greatly admired); and in 1904 he met the Berlin publisher Carl Simon, who introduced him to the harmonium. From then on until his death he created one of the most significant and extensive catalogs of original works for this instrument. Encouraged by the organist Paul Homeyer, he reworked several of these harmonium compositions for organ, before composing his first original organ piece, 66 Chorale Improvisations, Op. 65 in 1909.

In 1910, Karg-Elert married Luise Kretzschmar (1890–1971); four years later their daughter Katharina was born.

After having served as a regimental oboist during World War I, Karg-Elert was appointed instructor of music theory and composition at the Leipzig Conservatory in 1919.

From 1924, Karg-Elert gave weekly harmonium recitals on the radio from his home, through which he performed his second sonata for harmonium as part of his 50th birthday celebrations in 1927.

The cultural climate in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s was very hostile to the internationally oriented, French-influenced Karg-Elert; and although his works were admired outside Germany, especially in the U.K. (the Organ Music Society of London held a twelve-day festival in his honour in 1930, which he attended) and in the United States, in his home country his music was almost completely neglected. All this led to him accepting an invitation for an organ concert tour of America in the spring of 1932. The tour proved to be a disastrous mistake, musically, due to heavy smoking, neuralgia and heart failure. Moreover, he was suffering from the diabetes which would soon kill him, and his limited powers as an organist compared unfavourably to the virtuoso standard of organ performance (set by the likes of Marcel Dupré and Louis Vierne) to which American audiences had grown accustomed. For many years it was thought that Karg-Elert was offered the position of organ chair at the Carnegie Institute in Pittsburgh, which he was forced to decline due to his failing health; however there is no evidence for this statement.

After his return to Leipzig, his health started deteriorating rapidly. He died there in April 1933, aged 55. His grave is in the Südfriedhof in Leipzig. The popularity of his compositions declined for a period after World War II, before a successful revival in the late 1970s; today his works for the organ are frequently included in recitals.

Music
Karg-Elert regarded himself as an outsider. Notable influences in his work include composers Johann Sebastian Bach (he often used the BACH motif in Bach's honour), Edvard Grieg, Claude Debussy, Max Reger, Alexander Scriabin, and early Arnold Schoenberg. In general terms, his musical style can be characterised as being late-romantic with impressionistic and expressionistic tendencies. His profound knowledge of music theory allowed him to stretch the limits of traditional harmony without losing tonal coherence.

His favourite instruments for composition were the Kunstharmonium and the pipe organ. He also composed for small ensembles or the piano, including vocal music. His music for flute became very popular during his lifetime. He also took a considerable interest in the saxophone.

Notable works

 * 66 Chorale improvisations for organ (including no 59 "Nun danket alle Gott") Op 65
 * Passacaglia in E-flat minor for harmonium or organ
 * Cathedral Windows for organ
 * Symphony in F-sharp minor op. 143 for organ (orchestral version by Franklin Stöver)
 * 33 Stylistic Studies for harmonium
 * Jugend for clarinet, flute, horn & piano
 * 30 Caprices for flute solo
 * Sonata for clarinet solo
 * 20 Chorale Preludes and Postludes for organ
 * 25 Caprices and an Atonal Sonata for saxophone

The 30 Caprices for flute were written specifically for a friend of Karg-Elert's, a flautist bound for service in the war. These short exercises were designed to challenge linear one-staff thinking and in short, keep the friend from becoming bored. They are now a standard set of technical, dynamic, and phrasing exercises for young flute students all over the world.

Books
Karg-Elert published, in addition to articles in Die Musik-Woche, a number of books and papers, latterly including:
 * 'Die Grundlagen der Musiktheorie'. (tr. "The basics of music theory ") Leipzig (1920/1921).
 * 'Orgel und Harmonium. Eine Skizze'. In: Musik-Taschenbuch für den täglichen Gebrauch (Edition Steingräber Nr. 60), Leipzig o. J. (ca. 1920/1925), Pp. 275–301.
 * 'Wie ich zum Harmonium kam'. In: Der Harmoniumfreund. I/1 (1927), P. 4f.
 * 'Konservatorium und Musikerziehung'. In: Deutsche Tonkünstler-Zeitung. 27/5 (1929), Pp. 433–436.
 * 'Akustische Ton-, Klang- und Funktionsbestimmung'. (tr. "Acoustic tone, tone and function determination"), Leipzig (1930).
 * 'Polaristische Klang- und Tonalitätslehre (Harmonologik)' (tr. "The logic of harmony"), Leipzig: Leuckart, 1930.

title: Sigfrid Karg-Elert


text:
Talk:Scalar

Scalars in computer programming
In computer programming, scalars are variables that can hold only one value at a time, as distinct from arrays which are variables that can hold many values at the same time. Some languages such as Pascal and Perl narrow this definition somewhat, but the underlying principal holds true.

 * That is of course a new concept of scalar that did not exist until the 20th century, and is still not what most people think of when they hear the word scalar. Perhaps another page could be titled scalar (computing). Michael Hardy 22:42, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm. One could argue that the computer based definition above is simply an extension of the idea presented in - and corresponds closely to - the article's statement "In physics a scalar is a quantity that can be described by a single number", in contrast with the physics concept of a vector which intrinsically entails several values at the same time, viz. magnitude and direction. Hence we have vector vs. array.

I've just been going through a few disambiguations, and have found the need for a scalar (computing) page as well. I don't agree that the physical scalar is close enough to the concept behind scalar computer terms to be used. The mathematical scalar is closer (for me), but still doesn't fit well. At the moment, I'm not ready to build such a page, but perhaps at a later date, if there is more support for one. WhiteHatLurker 04:17, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't know enough computer science to build that page either, but I'm going to be bold and make it anyway. It'll be better off as an independent stub than as a paragraph sitting here. --Smack (talk) 22:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Discussion of scalars in physics
Several sections from this page have been moved to Talk:Scalar (physics).

Merge
There appear to be three articles on scalars, scalar (physics), scalar (mathematics) and scalar (computing), all talking about the same concept. They should be merged. Sigh. Cruft patrol is endless, isn't it? linas 03:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I support the merger. It seems like a section should be added to the mathy article which discusses representations; a scalar (under some group, perhaps implicit) is an element of the trivial representation.  That description seems like it would subsume any use of the term in physics, right?  -lethe talk [ +] 04:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Partial support. The physics version and mathematics version are probably better merged, but the computing version would need greater care as it has little to do with the algebra of vector spaces. The articles on superscalar and scalar processors may give a feel for some of the ways the term has been used in computing. Perhaps the computing article should be merged with primitive type instead of scalar, though that's awkward for the processor classification usage. Ah well, as many words as mathematics has borrowed and redefined — and in multiple ways — we can't complain if computer science does the same. --KSmrqT 05:21, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, I could back off on scalar in computing; note however, the historical origin of this term is "opposite of vector", coming into use in the 70's when "vector processors" such as the the Cray were all the craze. linas 13:57, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * They were split some time ago from a common base - see the physics talk section. The idea is that the abstract mathematical form, the physical form and the (somewhat) in between form for computing were distinct enough to require separate pages. I'm not in favour of remerging these back into one. In fact there are more terms which are to be explained - more on vector vs scalar processing, scalar particles, and probably a lot of work on scalar fields as well. WhiteHatLurker 19:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I do not find a discussion at talk:scalar (physics) about a split. Can you help me find it? -lethe talk [ +] 19:55, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I re-wrote scalar field (quantum field theory) from scratch, so that should no longer be an issue in this debate. linas 01:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Linas - Okay, and I see your comments in the physics one relating to Lorentz Scalars. WhiteHatLurker 03:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Lethe, the thing I misremember on the physics page was a reference to moving from the scalar page. I may have read too much into it. I don't have time at the moment to do much on this - I was drawn in by a desire to help on the disambiguation thing and that was a page or two at a time. I still feel the differences are there, but if the consensus is to merge the scalar pages, good luck. WhiteHatLurker 03:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Oppose. The three scalars are, very confusingly, identical and different at once.  A physical or computer scalar is, indeed, necessarily a mathematical scalar (and, vice versa, a math scalar can be represented as a CS scalar).  Furthermore, in all three cases, 'scalar' is the antonym of 'vector.'
 * However, vectors in math, physics, and CS are not the same! For instance, in mathematics, a function is a vector (it is a member of a vector space).  However, neither physics nor computer science consider it a vector.  Because the three kinds of scalars have three different antonyms, I believe they should be kept separate. --Smack (talk) 04:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure. The fact that functions are vectors is a bit abstract and far away from this discussion, where the relevant fact is that vectors in CS, physics, and math (and including functions) are lists of numbers, whereas scalars are single numbers.  It takes some abstract thinking perhaps to think of a function as a list of numbers perhaps, but any CS student who's ever studied a function by looking at a table of its values will get it right away.  Vectors are all the same thing.  Scalars are all the same thing.  Separate articles obfuscate this fact, which rather needs further explanation and clarification. -lethe talk [ +] 05:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Functions are vectors in a very concrete way, which has nothing to do with lists of numbers. Vector space gives eight properties that define a vector space, and Examples of vector spaces shows that functions fit right in.  This is straightforward math, not trickery with tables of values.  I learned it in an introductory course on linear algebra.  --Smack (talk) 16:16, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Being a vector by virtue of satisfying algebraic axioms is exactly what I mean when I say "in an abstract way". So you confirm the abstract way of thinking.  But I want to reiterate the concrete fact that functions are lists of numbers, which is why the abstract fact that they satisfy some axioms is true.  This big difference about vectors in mathematics being different that you mention as a reason not to merge is simply not true.  Well, OK, it's only true in the most abstract sense, where a vector is regarded purely as an atomic element of a set satisfying axioms, and the vector space is infinite-dimensional, and the axiom of choice is not assumed.  In that case, you can make an argument that vectors are not lists of numbers.  But as I say, such abstract chicanery is quite far from this article, which still needs to be merged.  I would really like for you to consider my argument and come around to my way of thinking.  Do you really have a reason to believe that vector spaces made of functions are somehow different from vector spaces made of arrays of numbers?  Please tell me what it is. -lethe talk [ +] 16:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Smack is right. Vectors are not lists of numbers, they are things that obey the eight properties. Lists of numbers may behave as vectors if the proper operations on those lists are defined. Physical vectors in particular are not lists of numbers. They are entities which, once you pick your coordinate system, may be described as a weighted sum of the coordinate vectors. These weights (components) form a list of numbers, but they are not the vector. If you change your coordinate system, the list changes, but the vector does not. A physical scalar is an entity which does not change its value under a change of coordinate system. An element of a list of vector components is a single number, but it is not a physical scalar, because its value changes when the coordinate system is changed. I also agree that functions may be treated as vectors in a very concrete way, just as lists may be treated as vectors if the proper operations are defined. Again, their vector nature has nothing to do with lists. However, since functions are infinite dimensional vectors, they are more abstract. It is "chicanery" to imply that the subset of vectors called lists are any more than one of many examples. PAR 16:50, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * About physical vectors. They are not just elements of a vector space, they are elements of a representation of some group.  Thus of course you have to pay attention to how they transform.  I've already mentioned how that needs to be handled.  We're talking about vectors in a vector space now (what some splitter decided to call "mathematical vectors").  There is a theorem that every vector space has a basis.  Thus every vector is a list of numbers.  Thus, not only is it not chicanery to say that the "subset of vectors called lists" is more than an example.  It's actually a theorem (as soon as I replace the notion of "subset of vectors" with a statement with meaning).  I don't really appreciate having my argument referred to as "chicanery" either.  It seems slightly uncivil.  Just because I referred to my own arguments that way doesn't mean I want you to do it too.

 * Let me summarize and reiterate. I certainly agree that everyone things of vectors differently: mathematicians consider abstract elements satisfying axioms, physicists consider a list of numbers which transform in some way under coordinate changes, computer scientists think of simple lists of numbers or other scalar data.  I think we all agree on that.  But where we differ is whether these ideas are somehow different.  I argue that they are all the same idea.  Having them all in the same article emphasizes their unity.  I am a mergist, and I always think that articles than can be merged should be.  There are benefits to splitting (emphasize the different ways of thinking, keep information relevant to a specific kind of reader), but I think the benefits of a merged article (the article makes it clear to the reader that a vector, in any sense, is a list of numbers (group actions are just a footnote)) are more than the benefits of a split article. -lethe talk [ +] 19:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Forget the chicanery remark, I don't mean any incivility.

 * You say "physicists consider a list of numbers which transform in some way under coordinate changes". This is wrong. Physicists consider a physical entity and some operations which form a vector space. They then choose a coordinate system and represent that vector by a list. If they change coordinate systems, they come up with a new list to represent the vector. But they should never confuse the list with the vector.

 * What you said and what I said are the same thing.

 * To condense the argument - An element of a list of physical vector components is not a scalar, since it changes with coordinate system. This points out clearly the fact that a vector is not the same as the list of its components, while at the same time addressing the topic of this article. Do you agree?

 * Regarding the merge, I have no opinion. I just don't want it done or not done on the basis of wrong arguments. PAR 00:34, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

 * An element of a list of physical vector components is not a scalar, since it changes with coordinate system yes, I agree if we're talking about group representations. A component of a vector of a nontrivial representation does not live in the trivial representation, so is not a scalar in the physicists' sense.  However, a component of a vector is a scalar in the more general sense.  This points out the fact that a vector in a representation is not a list of its components (you also need transformations).  It does not change the fact that a vector in a vector space is a list of numbers.  I will also point out that a component can be a scalar even in the physicists' sense.  For example, in Kaluza-Klein theory, one of the components of the metric tensor is a scalar field.  It is of course not a scalar under the full extra-dimensional Lorentz group, but it is a scalar under the 4 dimensional Lorentz group.  The point is that as far as vectors are concerned, their components are scalars, and the vectors themselves are lists of numbers.  Whether they live in appropriate representations depends very much on which group we're representing, as this example shows. -lethe talk [ +] 04:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Ok, I've stated my position as clearly as I can, and my suspicion is that you have too. I am willing to let the record of our conversation speak for itself. Again, I am neutral on the merge, but I will actively oppose any description of a physical vector being defined as simply a list of numbers, or a physical scalar as a single number unless there is an unfortunate consensus to the contrary. PAR 05:32, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Well we may not actually be in disagreement. I certainly agree that to describe a vector in a representation as "simply a list" is not sufficient.  The main purpose of my argument was to demonstrate that math vectors, physics vectors, and CS vectors are all the same thing.  I didn't mean that they have contain exactly equivalent information, that some couldn't have additional information (like changes under transformations), or more abstract ways of thinking.  But whatever additional information or other ways of thinking, the underlying idea of a list of numbers is still there in every case.  Rather, I only want to refute the idea that math vectors are somehow intrinsically different from physics or CS vectors, which Smack cites as a reason to keep the articles separate.  Of course there are differences between the ways of thinking, but it is the samenesses that matter.  To set your mind at ease, I promise not to write in any article that every vector is nothing more than a list of numbers.  -lethe talk [ +] 06:42, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

 * ← Carriage return
 * User:Lethe claims that since any vector can be represented as a linear combination of basis vectors, it is actually a "list of numbers" (coordinates). Because I have never studied analysis, I have never seen this for myself, but there's enough information in the wiki to disprove this argument.
 * According to Vector space, coefficients must belong to a field. According to Field, we can have a field of functions.  Thus, the "list of numbers" conception of a vector becomes a "list of functions." --Smack (talk) 01:08, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Nothing in what you've said contradicts anything I've said, as far as I can see. So what's the point?  Some sets of functions constitute fields.  Vector spaces over those fields will be lists of elements of those fields.  Is there any disagreement? -lethe talk [ +] 04:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I guess my last post doesn't actually disprove anything. However, I still agree with PAR that physics vectors and math vectors are not the same thing.  For instance, consider the electric field vector.  It's a physical entity.  Physicists choose to represent it as a mathematical vector, a list of numbers, if you insist.  However, the physical entity does not become the list of numbers.
 * Consider the way we represent abstractions in verbal language, such as English. We use a term, 'electric field,' to denote a certain physical entity.  However, the physical entity and the word remain distinct.  Math is a language, too.  The "list of numbers" that we use to represent the electric field is not the same thing as the field itself. --Smack (talk) 22:04, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Of course, I also agree. In physics, vectors are not just lists of numbers.  We also have to know how they transform.  We might call them equivalence classes of lists of numbers, whatever.  The point is that the concept of a list of numbers underlies the idea and intuition of all vectors.  The argument that we have to have separate scalar articles because the idea of vectors is different in each case doesn't appeal to me, because in fact the idea of vectors is not different.  Each different idea of a vector (math, CS, physics), is just a variation on a theme. -lethe talk [ +] 00:33, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * A vector is defined by the eight properties. Everything else is derived. The fact that you can pick a set of basis vectors and represent a vector by a list of field elements is derived. Again, I agree with Smack - a list of numbers is not part of my intuition about vectors any more than the english language is. The list is a description of the vector in a particular language - the chosen basis. The fact that each manipulation of a vector has a corresponding manipulation of the list is nice. It is however, less intuitive, and not fundamental.PAR 02:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I think we're going in circles. I'm putting in a WP:RFC.

Request for comment
To summarize: Lethe wants to merge Scalar (mathematics), Scalar (physics), and Scalar (computing), because he (she?) thinks that they're really all the same thing. Smack (talk) and PAR disagree, based on a (somewhat nuanced) argument that the three alleged kinds of scalars are actually different. --Smack (talk) 05:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I endorse this summary and confirm that it summarizes my position. (PS, feel free to use the pronoun "he" with reference to me). -lethe talk [ +] 05:17, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't understand the argument Smack and PAR make. I think they basically say: "Vector" has different meanings in mathematics, physics and computing. Therefore, by analogy, "scalar" (the opposite) also has a different meaning. Pardon me, but this is a logical fallacy. If I am not right, why is then 90% of the previous discussion about vectors? Samohyl Jan 05:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Huh?? But vectors in physics and vectors in math are the same thing. The vector space in physics is usualy R^3, and physicists frequently confuse vector spaces with affine spaces, but glossing over these errors, fundementally, its the same thing. In particular, the vector in the "electric vector field" is a true mahematical vector. linas 18:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I would disagree with a merger. But I would think that it would be a good idea to not have scalar as a disambig, rather a small or medium size article describing how the concepts of scalar are similar/different in mathematics/physics/compsi. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 06:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I find Oleg's proposal to be a solid middle ground to build on. linas 18:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Not sure about the scalars point, but on the idea of a vector being 'a list of numbers', I would have to say, that despite being a pure mathematician, I tend to agree with the scientists that a vector is not just a list of numbers. In particular, when dealing with infinite dimensional topological vector spaces, very few mathematicians would think of the elements (which are often functions) as lists of numbers, and since the dimension might be uncountable, a 'list' isn't the right concept anyway! Madmath789 06:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 Recall that Hamilton, who gave us the original "scalar" and "vector" as aspects of a quaternion, was a mathematical physicist. Further recall that it was the physicists Heaviside and (especially) Gibbs who revolted and began to give us vectors in a more modern sense. This suggests that separating the mathematics from the physics is somewhat artificial. Computer science is a different matter.

In linear algebra, a vector space comes with a field of scalars. The algebra of the scalars is an important part of the definition. For example, if we have only a ring of scalars, we can make a module but not a vector space. The most commonly encountered vector spaces use real numbers or complex numbers as scalars; but we also make a module of polynomials, which themselves form a vector space! Or consider matrices as modules; the idea of a block matrix depends on using matrices themselves as the scalars.

Such examples of fancy scalars are violently at odds with the computer science meaning of scalar (and perhaps with the way many physicists conceive the term as well). Also, it is simplistic to say that computer science contrasts scalars with vectors; it also distinguishes arrays (which may be multidimensional) and structures and other composite types, as well as function objects. Note especially that the elements of a composite type can themselves be composite, but they do not therefore become "scalars"!

It is dangerous to talk of (mathematical) vectors as lists, because that implies a countable basis. It is a mathematical mistake to say that an arbitrary function (from what to what?) is a vector, without reference to a vector space. Consider, for example, the function that maps rational numbers to 0 and irrational numbers to 1. Or consider a function from the family of functions mapping natural numbers to their residue modulo n.

Let’s be kind to our readers. The typical computer science reader wants a scalar to be something that can be fetched from memory in constant time, and has no interest in algebraic issues. The typical mathematics reader cares only about algebraic issues. The typical physics reader will be somewhat confused by the abstract algebra, but it's good for them (!) and we can begin more concretely. (And don't forget pseudoscalars, in both physics and geometric algebra.)

Therefore I (again) support merging mathematics and physics, but not computer science. And if we do this, the mathematicians must tolerate the concrete needs of the physicists and the physicists must tolerate the abstract needs of the mathematicians. Be prepared for grumbling! If these camps cannot achieve mutual satisfaction, then I would support Oleg's proposal of a "springboard" page. --KSmrqT 09:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes. Both the mathematicians and the physicists view of a vector is contained in the "eight properties". The fact a "list" can sometimes be used to specify a vector by choosing a particular basis is also common to the mathematician and physicist. I'm not sure what a mathematician would call a scalar, but to a physicist the idea that a scalar does not change under a coordinate transformation is fundamental. This is what makes it "real" rather than an artifact of one's arbitrary choice of coordinate system. The clearest difference between a physical scalar and a computer science scalar is the fact that an element of a "list" representing a physical vector is not a scalar, while (I believe) in computer science it is. PAR 12:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * A list is never a scalar. -lethe talk [ +] 13:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I did not say "list" I said "element of a list". If a physical vector is represented by the list [1,2,3], then "2" is an element of that list, and it is not a physical scalar. PAR 14:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * My mistake. -lethe talk [ +] 14:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * "2" [here] is so a physical scalar. It's the scalar product with the constant vector (or, if you want to be fancy, covector) [0,1,0].  —Blotwell 23:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Do you agree that if I rotate my coordinate system 90 degrees counterclockwise about the z axis, then that physical vector will be represented by the list [2,-1,3]? PAR 01:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The vector gets rotated covariantly, the covector gets rotated contravariantly. So the new vector is what you say, but the result of the pairing between the vector and the covector, which is 2, does not change. -lethe talk [ +] 01:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I did not say that the vector gets rotated, I said the coordinate system gets rotated. Let's assume the usual right-handed orthogonal set of axes xyz so we don't need to keep track of covariant and contravariant components. I think you will agree that the physical vector in the rotated coordinate system will be represented by the list [2,-1,3]. Notice that the value of the second entry in the list has changed when the coordinate system changed. This is proof that the second entry in the list is not a physical scalar. In particular, the value of "2", which it assumed in the original coordinate system, is not a scalar. Blotwell said it is the scalar product of the physical vector with the constant vector [0,1,0]. But what has he done? He has introduced a "constant vector" which is therefore a physical vector. Of course the scalar product of two physical vectors will be a scalar. His example misses the point. I am not talking about the product of two physical vectors, I am talking about the product of a physical vector and a coordinate vector, which has no physical significance. physical scalars have physical significance. The fact that the scalar product of a physical vector and some arbitrary coordinate vector that you pull out of thin air happens to be "2" has no physical significance. However, the length of that physical vector is independent of which coordinate system you happen to choose, and therefore it has real, physical significance: It is a physical scalar. I think what a physicist calls a scalar, a mathematician calls an "invariant" under a particular set of coordinate transformations. PAR 04:44, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

 * This idea of "no physical significance" is relative (and therefore probably meaningless). For example, energy is a scalar under rotations, so we might conclude that energy has physical significance.  But energy is not a scalar under Lorentz rotations.  From that point of view, it's just a component of a vector, just like the number 2 in this example.  Should we now conclude that energy has no physical significance?  Or the length of a vector, you correctly mention is a scalar under orthogonal rotations, so it should have significance, right?  But it is not a scalar under dilatations.  The magnetic field is a scalar in 2d solid state systems, but not under the 3d rotation group.  Should we a lot it physical significance?  Second derivatives of tensors (like the Christoffel symbols) do not transform covariantly under any linear group, but they do under the jet bundle structure group.  The point of the story is that there are many different symmetry groups and many different representations.  We cannot decide without knowing much more about the system what the transformation laws are.  This adds a complication to the idea of vectors and scalars, but doesn't change the underlying idea. -lethe talk [ +] 05:00, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Point by point
 * "For example, energy is a scalar under rotations, so we might conclude that energy has physical significance. But energy is not a scalar under Lorentz rotations.  From that point of view, it's just a component of a vector, just like the number 2 in this example.  Should we now conclude that energy has no physical significance?"
 * Answer - Exactly right. In a Newtonian universe, yes energy has physical significance. In an Einsteinian (relativistic) universe, yes, energy has no physical significance, just as the distance between two events has no physical significance, while the space-time distance does have significance. This was Einstein's whole point!
 * Energy changes under boosts in Newtonian mechanics just as well as it does under Lorentz transformations. This does not address the issue at all. -lethe talk [ +] 10:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

 * "Or the length of a vector, you correctly mention is a scalar under orthogonal rotations, so it should have significance, right? But it is not a scalar under dilatations."
 * Answer - If it is a physical vector, then a dilatation must take into account the change of units. If I change my measuring system from inches to centimeters, the length of a measured physical vector does not change.
 * A dilatation changes physical lengths even if you keep your units fixed. So this does not address the issue. -lethe talk [ +] 10:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

 * "The magnetic field is a scalar in 2-d solid state systems, but not under the 3d rotation group. Should we alot it physical significance?"
 * Answer - There is no known physical universe that has 2 dimensions. Talking about 2d solid state systems is a mathematical technique which ignores the third dimension of the magnetic field. The combination of the 2-d part and the ignored part does have physical significance.
 * So "physical significance" is a function of the dimensionality of spacetime? I find this point of view disturbing.  God forbid the string theorists turn out to be right, it might be that all physical concepts are insignificant! -lethe talk [ +] 10:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

 * "Second derivatives of tensors (like the Christoffel symbols) do not transform covariantly under any linear group, but they do under the jet bundle structure group.
 * Answer - Christoffel symbols are not tensors, because they do not transform covariantly under any linear group.
 * So to you, only tensors are physical quantities? Can you say why? -lethe talk [ +] 10:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm speechless. PAR 13:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm not. They're not tensors, they're elements of the jet bundle. Its an excellent example of the confusion that results when you think that there's some concept in physics that does not have a rigorous, closely-defined counterpart in mathematics. Comm'on guys, this argument is absurd. linas 18:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

 * It's not hard to find examples of physical concepts which do not have rigorous counterparts in mathematics. Just consider the Feynman path integral for a Yang-Mills field, for example.  What does that have to do with it though?  My question is: what is so special about SO(n) that makes it so that only vectors in its irreps are called physical? -lethe talk [ +] 18:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Comment: Suprisingly (to me), I understood both the physics article and have a good idea of where the programming stub is going. The math article, on the other hand, seemed (to me) to lack a certain "plain English quality", though after reading the physics article I had a better grasp of it on a second read. If the meanings really are more or less the same, combining might help clarify the mathematics part, since it "paints a picture" which (again, for me) helps explain the more abstract language of the math usage. Hope that helps a bit. SB Johnny 10:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose merger, particularly merging the computer science version with the other two. Even if I grant that the concepts described by the three articles are really "the same", the articles are aimed at three different audiences and need to have different emphases. I think scalar should remain a disambiguation page, and that the three articles should link to each other more prominently than what is presently there. Dmharvey 11:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose any merger (different audiences). I like the idea of expanding Scalar to s short stub which explains the conection between the three in language accessable to all readers. --Salix alba (talk) 12:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose merging the CS scalar. I can see a physics/math merge working, but I don't think it's imperative. I definitely agree that scalar should be more than a simple disambig. — Laura Scudder ☎ 17:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Oppose a direct merge, but I do like Oleg Alexandrov's suggestion that the main article be expanded beyond a disambig, perhaps with pointers to the sub-articles for those who want more detail. --Alan Au 02:27, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Consensus
Based on the above discussion, there appears to be a general consensus that the right thing to do is to:
 * 1) Expand this article to discuss how scalars in physics are related to those in math, reviewing the simlarities and differences.
 * 2) Leave the three scalar articles unmerged,allowing for further expansion and verbosity as needed.

Can we close the debate on this issue now? linas 18:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I can agree to that. Writing and maintaining this page will be a bit of a chore, though.  Do we have any eager volunteers?  I don't feel qualified in the physics and math departments. --Smack (talk) 00:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

 * The major proponent of a merger is lethe, who has just begun a two-week or more wikibreak. I'd prefer he was able to assent to this conclusion to make it more conclusive, but at this point the consensus is overwhelmingly opposed to a merger. Perhaps, as Oleg suggests, lethe (or others) will be able to edit this article to include the material he sees in common between the three specialized articles. So I agree: No merger, Expand, Close debate. --KSmrqT 05:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I can see that the consensus is against a merger. I have said my piece and will consent to let the debate be closed. -lethe talk [ +] 20:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I just came over from the RfC listings, but seeing as this one is resolved I'm going to strike the entry over there (i.e., please reinsert it if it's not in fact dead). siafu 05:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. --Salix alba (talk) 07:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

concensus or no the physics explanation is wrong
This "A scalar (physics), a physical quantity that can be completely characterized by just one number." is plain wrong. The one number could be a vector, scalar or some more complicated tensor according to its transformation properties. See Vector_field for an explanation. --MarSch 13:32, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Scalar