text:
Déanta

Déanta is an Irish traditional music band from Northern Ireland. The name of the band is the Irish word for done or made. The band was formed in the late 1980s in County Antrim and played until 1997, then regrouped in 2008. The band comprised members of the Irish traditional music scene in Ireland. They signed to Green Linnet and released three albums which blended traditional tunes and songs with arrangements sometimes veering towards a contemporary setting.

In 1990 and 1991 they were selected to represent Ireland at the Lorient Interceltic Festival, in Brittany, where they won the Trophée Loïc Raison for best band (1990).

In September 2007, the former members played at the 8th Gig 'n The Bann Festival. Their first performance after regrouping took place in October 2008 for BBC Two Northern Ireland's Blas Ceoil series.

Déanta's line-up included Mairead Walls who was later replaced by Mary Dillon (vocals, keyboard, guitar, harp), Paul Mullan (flute, whistles), siblings Eoghan (guitar, harp) and Kate O'Brien (fiddle, viola), and Clodagh Warnock (bouzouki, fiddle, bodhran, percussion). Mullan was later replaced by Deirdre Havlin and Rosie Mulholland (keyboard, fiddle) was added.

In 1995, Kate O'Brien married Paul McSherry of Tamalin. Mary Dillon, from Dungiven, is married to Paul McLaughlin of Óige. She is the second eldest of six (five sisters and a brother), her youngest sister being Cara Dillon.

Discography

 * Déanta (1993)
 * Ready for the Storm (1994)
 * Whisper of a Secret (1997)

title: Déanta


text:
Carl-Michael Edenborg

Carl-Michael Edenborg (formerly surnamed Strömberg), born 1967, is a Swedish writer, critic, editor, publisher and historian of ideas and literature.

Academic career
Edenborg has studied the history of alchemy, and completed a PhD in the History of Ideas at Stockholm University in 2002 with a dissertation on alchemy in Sweden in the age of Enlightenment, The shame of alchemy: expulsion of the alchemical tradition from the public sphere. The work was awarded with the Paracelsus prize by the Swedish Paracelsus Society and was published in an extended second edition in 2004. He had previously touched on the subject in his biography of Gustaf Bonde, a Swedish 18th century statesman known for his political memoirs, who was also a pseudo-historian in the Rudbeckian tradition and an alchemist, and in an article on another Swedish alchemist, Fabian Wilhelm af Ekenstam, both from 1997. He teaches at Stockholm University.

Other intellectual activities
Edenborg was one of the founding members of the Stockholm Surrealist Group in 1986 and published several books on its publishing company Surrealistförlaget. During the 1990s he started his own publishing company, Vertigo, which, among other things, has published a Swedish translation of Horace Walpole's The Castle of Otranto ("Borgen i Otranto, 1996) in Paul Soares' translation. Edenborg has taken an interest in early pornography and other literature beyond the mainstream canon. He has written a short article in the bibliographic journal Biblis on "the first Swedish pornography". Vertigo has published the Marquis de Sade in Swedish translation, and a series of books called the "Classics of transgressions" (Överträdelsens klassiker), including works by Dennis Cooper, Samuel R. Delany, Georges Bataille, Gabrielle Wittkop, Pauline Réage and more in the same tradition.

In 2011, he co-wrote a graphic novel with his then wife, the illustrator Loka Kanarp: Hungerhuset. It was translated to French: La Maison de la Faim by French editor Actes Sud, and in 2014 into English: Hunger House published by Borderline Press. In 2012, Edenborg's novel Mitt grymma öde about the life of composer George Frideric Handel was published to some critical acclaim. In the same year he wrote a manifesto, Det parapornografiska manifestet, which was published in the U.S. by Action books under the title The Parapornographic Manifesto. Recently, he has revealed that he also wrote the novels and short stories that were published under the pseudonym Gunnar Blå.

In 2014, his novel Alkemistens dotter was nominated for the August Prize.

Edenborg works as a critic for the Swedish daily newspaper Aftonbladet and runs a café that was first located in Stockholm's Old Town but now is in Södermalm.

Selected publications

 * Bortom lustprincipen: Titlar av Sigmund Freud. A collage by Bruno Jacobs and C.-M. Strömberg; texts by H. Christian Werner (Stockholm: Surrealistförl., 1988)
 * Ett brott: Det är: tankar, fantasier, drömmar, förbannelser och lögner... Octavia, with illustrations by Kajsa Bergh (Stockholm: Surrealistförl., 1988)
 * Blodstrupe (Stockholm: Surrealistförl., 1989)
 * Runornas erotik (Stockholm: Surrealistförl., 1989)
 * "Fabian Wilhelm af Ekenstam – romantiker och alkemist", Personhistorisk tidskrift 93 (1997), pp. 90–115.
 * "Wallenska vissamlingen och den första svenska pornografin", Biblis 2000(3):3/4 = nr 11/12, pp. 22–24.
 * Gull och mull: Den monstruöse Gustaf Bonde, upplysningens fiende i frihetstidens Sverige: Historien om hans exkrementalkemi, hans krets och värld: försedd med psykoanalytiska, Batailleska och historiematerialistiska reflexioner, samt ett utkast mot döden. (Lund: Ellerström, 1997)
 * Alkemins skam: Den alkemiska traditionens utstötning ur offentligheten ("The shame of alchemy: Expulsion of the alchemical tradition from the public sphere"). (Univ. of Stockholm 2002, 2nd ed. 2004)
 * Hungerhuset ("House of Hunger"). (Stockholm: Kolik bokförlag 2011)
 * Mitt grymma öde ("My cruel fate"). (Stockholm: Natur & Kultur, 2012)
 * Det parapornografiska manifestet ("The Parapornographic Manifesto"). (Stockholm: Ink bokförlag, 2012)

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

title: Carl-Michael Edenborg


text:
File:Nord and Bert box art.jpg

Box art for Nord and Bert Couldn't Make Head or Tail of It. Source: http://gallery.guetech.org, used with permission.

title: File:Nord and Bert box art.jpg


text:
Talk:Barcelona Metro

Untitled
will be the longest metro line in Europe at 42.6km and with 46 stations.

Isn't the Central Line (54.84km from Epping to West Ruislip) longer? Or does this claim refer to mainland Europe, or some other qualification that L9/10 has but not the Central Line? edd 16:12, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't know anything much about the London Underground, but is the Central Line perhaps partially above-ground? The 'longest metro line in Europe' claim comes from the ca:Metro de Barcelona in the Catalan Viquipèdia, so I'm unsure of its provenance. --Ngb 16:35, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * It is above ground for most of its length (West Ruislip to White City and then from Leyton to Epping), but it is definately a metro line... edd 09:41, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I've edited the article so that it says L9/10 will be the longest underground metro line in Europe as this seems unquestionable. (Actually, though, that assumes L9/10 is to be all-underground, which is unclear from the source.) --Ngb 11:59, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * L9/10 will be elevated through the idustrial area of zona franca, don't know how far but it's not all-underground.

L9 color
What color will L9 be?? Orange seems most likely per process or elimination. Georgia guy 01:16, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Guys, the article clearly lies about the longest underground line. First of all the L9 will not be fully underground and hence is not undeground line as it is claimed if you want to focus on being below ground level. Secondly it is definitely shorter than 5 London Underground lines. Thirdly, even if we talk about underground section it is very unlikely to be longest as Moscow has one line that is fully underground all the way and is 41.5km long. Moscow also by the end of the year will extend another line to 46.1km that is mostly underground. Forthly, the guy who edited that part and commented in the discussion that it comes from Catalan wiki accepts that this claim is unverified ("I'm unsure of its provenance").

I do believe that such unverified and most likely completely wrong claim shall be removed as it is misleading and is not based on proven fact. Please correct the article and remove the unverified and misleading claim until it is known for a fact and fair comparison and justification are provided. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.10.38.140 (talk) 07:05, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Colours of lines
I got the following colours from an official ATM map: Physchim62 (talk) 14:25, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

That's a pretty cool template, but it would be even nicer if you could adapt it so you make the numbers/names of the lines and the names of the stations clickable so you can be redirected to their pages.

For instance:
 * Fondo metro station or Paral·lel metro station (Written as Fondo, Paral·lel)
 * Barcelona metro line 1 or Barcelona metro line 11 (Written as L1, L11, following the convention used in the official Barcelona metro map)

Kitten86 23:48, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Otherwise you're redirected to the pages concerning the Besòs river, the hill of Montjuïc or the thoroughfare called Passeig de Gràcia instead of the station (just to name a few examples). 8)

Kitten86 23:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Also (and excuse me for adding so many comments), the FGC L series should be listed together as metro lines, separated from the suburban lines that have an S in their name. Kitten86 23:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

---

Names
Following the pattern of (e.g.) Berri-UQAM (Montreal Metro) and Cité (Paris Métro), I'd like to suggest that we move the station pages to (e.g.) Liceu (Barcelona Metro). This makes for easier disambiguation and allows us to use the pipe trick. - Montréalais 18:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

 * 1) Qualified agree. With a few exceptions (principally London, which uses eg Oxford Circus tube station), this bracketed diasmbiguation style of naming rapid transit stations seems to be the norm. But I think the name needs to make clear we are talking about a station, which this proposal doesn't. So I would suggest either (e.g) Liceu station (Barcelona Metro) or Liceu (Barcelona Metro station). My only other comment is that by using a disambiguation style like this, you need to be aware of many Wikipedian's dislike of 'preemptive disambiguation'. So if you were to rename a station to xyz (Barcelona Metro) and there wasn't already an article called xyz, you may get reverted on the grounds this is premptive disambiguation. -- Chris j wood 10:39, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your input! I understand your comment regarding the word "station," but I think it may be a bit excessive: the other examples I give don't do it, and I can't really think of what else a proper noun would be in reference to a metro system. - Montréalais 15:17, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

-It makes sense. Maybe we should use the most general pattern, as in Montréal or Paris. It's actually much better since there are other subway systems, both present and planned, which use Catalan as its official language (Palma de Mallorca, Sabadell, Terrassa...) and may have stations with the same or very similar names. Kitten86 00:35, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Good point. (There are also a few near-disambs with other systems, such as Tetuán/Plaza de España/Urgel in Madrid and Tetuan/Espanya/Urgell in Barcelona.) In a few days I'll start changing things over.
 * As another point, I note that of late, TMB has been writing composed stations with a pipe rather than a dash: Ciutadella | Vila Olímpica. As this would obviously cause problems with our links, I plan to stay with hyphens for the article titles: Ciutadella-Vila Olímpica. Besides, it seems to me to be more in the nature of a typographical idiosyncracy rather than serious punctuation. - Montréalais 17:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Goody. I can start changing some things over now I have some time LOL Kitten86 19:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The sources are false
The sources listed are old and incorrect, the news article about line 9 from 2000 is inacurate, the other article from 2002 is also inacurate. The new line 9/10 has gone through several redesigns since that article and the other lines to, here is a link to a offcial page from October 2007 that states the L9 will be 46,6 km http://www.atm-transmet.org/cat/apartado3/apart3_011.htm. And the line is still going through redesigns acording to this article published 29-03-2008 (spanish) http://www.elperiodico.com/default.asp?idpublicacio_PK=46&idioma=CAS&idnoticia_PK=495745&idseccio_PK=1022&h=

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Barcelona Metro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111114042430/http://www.ine.es/jaxiBD/tabla.do?per=01&type=db&divi=ETV&idtab=2 to http://www.ine.es/jaxiBD/tabla.do?per=01&type=db&divi=ETV&idtab=2#nogo

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Barcelona Metro. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100924091922/http://www.tmb.cat/en_US/barcelona/bonviatge/llistatestacionsmetro.jsp to http://www.tmb.cat/en_US/barcelona/bonviatge/llistatestacionsmetro.jsp

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:21, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Font TMB used?
Does anyone know what's the name of the font TMB used for their logo and printing for their 2014 Logo? (The font with the lines through all the characters) DASL51984 (Speak to me!) 03:06, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Someone needs to change the FGC logo to the current one.
FGC some years ago changed its logo put a green background because they wanted to show the people that they are eco friendly. ALZH08 (talk) 19:34, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Barcelona Metro


text:
Talk:Emile Griffith

Untitled
Griffith did what no other man had done he killed a man on tv infront of millions and got away with it

Griffith -- Champ
The death of Benny "The Kid" Paret, of course, was a very unfortunate occurrence that traumatized the boxing world as well as Emile Griffith. Nevertheless, it is also important for boxing historians and afixcionados to remember the career and accomplishments of Emile Griffith, a real winner, phenomenal champion, and great boxer. His career cannot be encapsulated by this event.

rm LGBT cat
Since Griffith himself is a little vague on the subject, I've removed him from the LGBT people from the United States category. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 02:49, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

random comment
All tedious and stupid - Emile fought most of his career without boxing people going on about his sexuality and the Paret tragedy - now people who only know him because of the recent documentary are 'experts' and moralists...

-- "I keep thinking how strange it is: I kill a man and most people understand and forgive me. However, I love a man, and to so many people this is an unforgivable sin; this makes me an evil person. So though I never went to jail, I have been in prison all my life." - Emile Griffith

Hardly sounds the man himself thinks either subject is tedious and stupid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.173.64.24 (talk) 18:04, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Not sure about this line
Quote: Paret was the first of only two people ever to be killed at the hands of another on live, over-the-air, national television, the other occurring just a year and a half later with the slaying of Lee Harvey Oswald by Jack Ruby on November 24, 1963.

Paret wasn't the only person to be "killed" on live television; he wasn't even the only boxer--the Ray Mancini-Duk Koo Kim fight was also live, as I recall. Plus, he didn't die in the ring, so is it accurate to say that he was "killed on live television"? Any thoughts?Mcglotda (talk) 05:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Dennis

 * I noticed the same thing and agree. There are several examples of this. Look through the talk page and you'll see several examples of the emotion this fight evokes in people, even half a century later. It's that emotion that drove that the quote you linked above but I agree that it's factually inaccurate. 208.71.235.4 (talk) 16:45, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

Gay sportspeople category
He's listed in the Gay sportspeople category, yet from the referenced comment in the article, he sounds more bi than gay. Does that category cover bi people as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.143.2.238 (talk) 09:42, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

How early was prior insult widely known?
I recall someone talking about such an insult and boxing death, within a few years after (or before!) the date of that fight, so i would bet that SI covered the story including either the word "maricón" or a phrase like "Spanish gutter slang for homosexual" within a week following the event, and not first in '05. --Jerzy•t 22:59, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * A GoogleBooks search for
 * maricon griffith turnbuckle OR ropes
 * produced, inter alia,

 * 1) a snippet from Newsweek - Volume 59, Issues 14-26 (issue and page not ID'd, but year of publication stated as "1962"), and
 * 2) two lines from page 132 of ''TV Book - The Ultimate Television Book" by Judy Fireman, 1972, reading
 * (apparently as a heading giving the title and author of one selection included in the book)
 * "The Griffith-Paret Fight" and "David Trainer"
 * (tho not, without paying Google, what we want for refs), and someone's local libraries will have the complete items or microforms. Likewise
 * maricon griffith paret
 * produced 3 pages (pp. 54-6) of mostly text from Jet, Apr 19, 1962, including
 * Impartial sources have established that Paret called Griffith some unpleasant names, among them maricon, Spanish slang for a homosexual.
 * Perhaps none of these are adequate sources for what happened at weigh-in and fight, but they should suffice to establish as absurd the article's present insinuation that Griffiths' 2005 version broke completely new ground.
 * --Jerzy•t 01:49, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Joe Frank covered the fight in his NPR show (with some factual liberties taken in places) back in 1978 and included the substance of the accusation but not the slur itself. The story's general outlines appear to have been widely known in the boxing community long before 2005. 208.71.235.4 (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emile Griffith. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120826002343/http://www.cbssports.com/boxing/story/5981685 to http://www.cbssports.com/boxing/story/5981685

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:15, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Emile Griffith


text: Category:American travel writers

title: Category:American travel writers


text:
Giannitsochori

Giannitsochori (Γιαννιτσοχώρι) is a village in the municipality of Zacharo, southern Elis, Greece. It is situated in the narrow coastal plains along the Ionian Sea, 2 km north of the mouth of the river Neda, at the foot of the western extensions of the mountain Minthi. It is a known beach resort. It is 2 km north of Elaia, 5 km southeast of Neochori and 11 km southeast of Zacharo. The Greek National Road 9/E55 (Pyrgos - Kyparissia) and the railway from Pyrgos to Kalamata pass through the village.

title: Giannitsochori


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nanjing Massacre (no images)

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. — Xezbeth 19:54, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Nanjing Massacre (no images)
POV fork of Nanjing Massacre. Delete. Postdlf 16:13, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC) see these images,for you crudity or brutal evidence.i sugest why mantain these option,if totally well,still apareing redundant but are well!(Wlad K)
 * Delete. There must be a better solution than forking every article with potentially objectionable images. Wmahan. 17:13, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. People should copy the entire WP database to their own server and censor away to their heart's delight. --Lee Hunter 17:35, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete POV fork. RickK 21:52, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * i am considered correct why exist one page how this,for why certain persons can t to

Comment. Does javascript work on wiki pages? -- Natalinasmpf 22:59, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete; forks are bad for the project. This is a good example.  Better to use the talk page and work for consensus and compromise if necessary. Antandrus 01:18, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete POV forks. Jayjg (talk) 03:06, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, PoV fork. Megan1967 05:57, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, no point70.49.38.235 23:03, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete not needed Sabine's Sunbird 04:53, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. Ditto with the above. Can't this be supplemented with javascript? -- Natalinasmpf 00:51, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, if you don't like the images you can always turn them off before viewing the page, or write a JavaScript engine as suggested above. Are we going to have a similar "no guts" page for Auswitz (sorry if I've spelled it wrong) and other massacres? No? Then not for this either. If all else fails, the image thumbnails/frames could be replaced with text-links saying "the corpses of the victims (WARNING: potentially objectionable content)" or something like that. Master Thief Garrett 03:33, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete — POV Fork. — Davenbelle 17:03, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. POV fork. --Viriditas  | Talk 07:13, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I would like however, a function to disable images on all articles. RustyCale 12:20, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd certainly support that, if it's 100% user-controlled. It would certainly eviscerate any rationale for taming down "inappropriate" images or creating "alternative" versions like this one.  The only concerns that should guide us in illustrating articles is whether it is informative and relevant to the article, regardless of whether it's on Sesame Street or autofellatio.  Postdlf 18:38, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
User:Kosta~enwiki

Stefan ist doof.

title: User:Kosta~enwiki


text:
Cahaba

Cahaba may refer to:

Places

 * The Cahaba River in Alabama
 * Cahaba River National Wildlife Refuge
 * Cahaba River Wildlife Management Area
 * Cahaba Basin, is a geologic area of central Alabama
 * Cahaba, Alabama (or Cahawba), a ghost town in, and the former capital of, Alabama
 * Cahaba Prison (or Cahawba Prison), a Confederate prison
 * Cahawba County (see Bibb County, Alabama)
 * Cahaba Heights, Vestavia Hills a neighborhood of Vestavia Hills, Jefferson County, Alabama, United States

Flora

 * Cahaba lily, an aquatic, perennial flowering plant species
 * Old Cahaba rosinweed, Silphium perplexum
 * Cahaba torch, Liatris oligocephala

Fauna

 * Cahaba shiner, a rare species of cyprinid fish
 * Cahaba pebblesnail, a species of very small freshwater snail
 * Cahawba elimia, a species of freshwater snail

Artifacts

 * Cahaba, Marion and Greensboro Railroad
 * USS Cahaba (AO-82), an Escambia-class replenishment oiler

title: Cahaba


text:
User talk:C12H22O11

Spam
Why did you write me to say I was spamming? I was simply trying to add an article about Faith Christian Reformed Church of Elmhurst. Please explain. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gregschuringa (talk • contribs) 21:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC).

Swadhyay pariwar
(comments left by cut due to enormity)

Thanks
Thanks and apologies Swadhyayee 14:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Could you tell me?
Do you have idea that the time mentioned in history of an article is what time? Is it U.S. time?

Swadhyayee 17:48, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Suvi-Anne Siimes.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Suvi-Anne Siimes.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Chowbok  ☠  06:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Untagged image
An image you uploaded, Image:Naantali coat of arms.gif, was tagged with the coatofarms copyright tag. This tag was deleted because it does not actually specify the copyright status of the image. The image may need a more accurate copyright tag, or it may need to be deleted. If the image portrays a seal or emblem, it should be tagged as seal. If you have any questions, ask them at Media copyright questions. -- 16:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Nottingham Trent University tram
Thanks for moving Nottingham Trent University tram station to Nottingham Trent university tram stop. Unfortunately, the latter page does not actually exist, so the result was the effective deletion of the article. I would be grateful if you could rectify the situation. Best regards, FrFintonStack 00:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Album cover, 'Du rire aux larmes'.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Album cover, 'Du rire aux larmes'.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 07:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Album cover, 'Gravé dans la roche'.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Album cover, 'Gravé dans la roche'.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. This is an automated message from BJBot 07:18, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

List of railway lines in Finland
fi:Riihimäen rautatieasema (which I translated as Riihimäki railway station) says that only local and cargo trains travel between Riihimäki and Lahti. However, every long-distance route listed at List of railway lines in Finland (even those to Russia) going via Lahti also goes via Riihimäki. Is the information on the Wikipedia article obsolete? J I P | Talk 07:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)  J I P  | Talk 07:27, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of page for "David Dill", 25 December 2005
Apparently, the reason I don't have a Wikipedia page is that you deleted it. Why was that? The log doesn't seem to have any explanation (forgive me if I failed to find it -- this is the first time I've tried to research a deletion). DavidLDill (talk) 22:55, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Review for David Dill
An editor has asked for a deletion review of David Dill. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. DavidLDill (talk) 20:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of the "Hypnogaja" page.
I dont see any reason for the band page to be taken away.

This deleting inactive stuff, will make this site into a pop-pedia in a few years. Stupid, stupid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.49.134 (talk) 22:17, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Leopold Wolfsohn
I hate it how you guys deleted him. Aaron Copland was his student, and I was doing research on him. Now I can't because he is gone. I looked at why you deleted him and it read that the content was: poopy What's that supposed to mean?

- 71.162.177.207 (talk) 13:33, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

>?> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.162.177.207 (talk) 13:34, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello C12H22O11! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 4 of the articles that you created  are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to insure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. if you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the list:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:08, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Keith Armstrong -
 * 2) Jeffrey Beard -
 * 3) Shurik'n -
 * 4) Olavi Mäenpää -

Nomination for deletion of Template:Kuntainfo
Template:Kuntainfo has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:26, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Suspension of admin privileges due to inactivity
Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative privileges of users who have been inactive for one year, meaning administrators who have made neither any edits nor any logged actions in over one year. As a result of this discussion, your administrative privileges have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these privileges reinstated, please post to the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. RL0919 (talk) 20:11, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Metro station head
Template:Metro station head has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Secondarywaltz (talk) 19:27, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Metro station
Template:Metro station has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Secondarywaltz (talk) 19:27, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Metro station2
Template:Metro station2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Secondarywaltz (talk) 19:27, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

File:Naantali coat of arms.gif listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Naantali coat of arms.gif, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 19:30, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Notice of change
Hello. You are receiving this message because of a [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Administrators&oldid=526254016#Restoration_of_the_tools_.28proposal.29 recent change] to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2014 Finnish Cup, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages ESC, EBK and KPS (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:00, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2014 Finnish Cup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tammela (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:07, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2014 Finnish Cup, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Salo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Funchal.jpg
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Funchal.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:52, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Jeteur de pierres

The article Jeteur de pierres has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * No references, no claim of notability, fails WP:NSONG and WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Richhoncho (talk) 12:25, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Turku coat of arms.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Turku coat of arms.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Iazyges  Consermonor   Opus meum  23:08, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Category:VR commuter rail has been nominated for discussion
Category:VR commuter rail, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to see if it abides with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Marcocapelle (talk) 04:24, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

"PK-35" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect PK-35. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 29 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed,Rosguill talk 06:54, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of postal codes in Finland

The article List of postal codes in Finland has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "WP:NOTDIRECTORY: consensus to delete 'just a list of postal codes' articles demonstrated in previous AfDs . The non-list content of this article is already covered at Postal codes in Finland."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. asilvering (talk) 06:42, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of George Walker (educator) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article George Walker (educator) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/George Walker (educator) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. JFHJr (㊟) 17:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:C12H22O11


text:
Talk:Lorentz factor

Rather Technical
I'm not going to tag it as such, but, as someone with just a passing knowledge of astrophysics and cosmology, this article is pretty unreadble to the layman. Perhaps a little more background on exactly what the equation means before diving into the details? --JD79 23:13, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

-- I agree. I skimmed through this article and the only thing that hinted at what the damn thing actually was, was from the equation! I had to go to the simple english article for a layman. I think a description of what it represents would be helpful. 89.241.255.57 (talk) 21:26, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

-- 100%. Even the opening line doesn't really tell us what the Lorentz factor is, only where it is found (in special relativity). I found out more about Lorentz factors by taking the definition and plugging numbers in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.251.177.224 (talk) 16:00, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect stuff?
According to Einstein, the Lorentz transformation is: t'=t(1-v/c)/√(1-v²/c²) which is not equal to what this page says.

Also, regarding the "proof", if A holds the laser beam parallel to his direction of travel, then following the same logic one would obtain ct'=ct-vt thus t'=t(1-v/c), where is this wrong? --Lucian 20:24, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

 * It seems that the article has t' and t switched. Perhaps the classic mirror-clock example would be better.
 * If you have the light going in the same direction that A is, I don't think you can derive the Lorentz factor. You'd have to know about length contraction. - mako 04:42, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Merge from Lorentz term
These articles are talking about the same thing, so they should be merged. "Factor" gets 196,000 Google hits, while "term" gets 384, so they should be merged here. There is a reason for the terminology; you add terms and you multiply factors.

Finally, let me note that gamma is not ambiguous. Possibly this article should include a discussion of which powers of gamma appear most often, and where; but there is only one gamma. Melchoir 02:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I merged the talk page and the article. I kept in the note about ambiguoity - simply because I don't know about that. Feel free to edit. Fresheneesz 10:03, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Not Suitable Content for Wikipedia Article
This article is not suitable for Wikipedia. It is just another example of Eric Baird writing his musings about special relativity. "Lorentz term" is not standard usage (and of course, it's a factor, not a term), and there is no need for Wikipedia articles to be making up new terminology. The article contains no actual informative content. It ought to be deleted.130.76.32.15 18:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

response
the Wiki page term says:
 * "A term (mathematics) is a basic component of a mathematical expression."

While term (mathematics) says:
 * "In elementary mathematics, a term is either a single number or variable, or the product of several numbers and/or variables."

In equations such as the relativistic Doppler equation, the overall equation can be broken down into two compoenents, a propagation component or term, and a Lorentz component or term.

Lorentz terms crop up all over special relativity's mathematics, and also show up in other branches of mathematics, in other contexts.

Where the Lorentz term occurs alone on one side of an equation, it might be more usefully referred to as a factor, a ratio that can be multiplied into a starting value to obtain the desired end result. However, often it's not just the Lorentz component in play, for instance, the "relativistic Doppler" equation can be broken into two parts, an explicit propagation term and a Lorentz term. In this case, "Lorentz term" is a natural form of words, not a neologism.

If we look at the wiki page Lorentz factor, we see that the opening sentence is
 * "The Lorentz factor is a convenient term to define in special relativity." (emphasis added)

, so if the complainant is really sure that the piece of mathematics is not a term, he or she ought to also be complaining about the "Lorentz factor" page.

Now, distinctions ... the "Lorentz factor" is widely invoked in discussions of special relativity when the physical consequences of special relativity are being discussed. Which is most of the time. A Google search throws up thousands of occurences of the phrase "Lorentz factor". The phrase "Lorentz term" only throws up about 290, and these tend to be more discussions of the mathematics rather than physics. That was the context that this short article was meant to address: most specifically the issue of using gamma as a replacement for the Lorentz term.

What the article was trying to say was that, as a technical issue to do with the way that equations are written, although writing the term as "gamma" is shorter, the fact that "gamma" can mean either a Lorentz increase or a Lorentz decrease means that the use of "gamma" is not a good idea unless part of the article is set aside to explicitly state which version gamma is standing in for.

The use of an undefined "gamma" can cause confusion, as can switching between the two versions of the Lorentz term. I think that there was an article in Am. J. Phys on this topic, but I don't have a reference.

While writing the article on Doppler equations, I could have put this in as a footnote about the usage and appearance of Lorentz terms, but I thought that since the subject of correct usage crops up so frequently it might as well be a separate page, with a listing under the "equations" category, where anyone interested in the more "equationy" issues might find it.

While it might be argued that perhaps "Lorentz term" ought to be merged into "Lorentz factor", I didn't feel like being responsible for making a page about physics get sidetracked into issues of correct equation writing.

While this page might not beconsidered to have any useful physics content, it does make a useful point about the usage of terms ... at least a mainstream journal thought that it was enough of a point to publish a piece on the subject. Dry? Boring? Perhaps, but still worth documenting.

PS: Perhaps requests for page deletions ought to be done from a signed-in account, especially when they make a fuss about the author's identity and complain about that person's actions elsewhere, otherwise it can start looking as if the request masy be motivated by personal dislike rather than about the actual content of the article.

Wikipedia is supposed to be a friendly place, and I think it would be a shame if it looked as if some people were trying to get individual articles deleted based on personal antipathy towards certain authors. The value (or otherwise) of an article should be assessed neutrally according to content and context, not according to who wrote it. Using a consistent signiture in these fraught situations helps avoid suspicions that someone may be deliberately posting delete requests under alternative ID's to settle a personal grudges incurred under their main ID: I understand that sockpuppetting is frowned upon in Wikiland. Sometimes Wiki logs a user out and they end up posting anonymously by accident, but in cases like this, I think its in the complainant's interest to take special care not to give the impression that they may be deliberately using multiple ID's in bad faith. ErkDemon 05:12, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Another way to calculate the Lorentz factor
I have just discovered that the Lorentz factor can also be calculated as follows:

$$ \gamma = \sqrt{\beta \left(\frac{1}{\beta} + \sum_{n=1}^\infty \beta^{2n-1} \right)} $$

GoldenBoar 12:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

 * $$ \sqrt{\beta \left(\frac{1}{\beta} + \sum_{n=1}^\infty \beta^{2n-1} \right)} = \sqrt{\sum_{n=0}^\infty \beta^{2n}} $$
 * --Anareth (talk) 17:22, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Yet another, scientific calculator (and Sci-Fi) friendly, way to calculate the Lorentz factor
I have one, too, and it puzzles me to no end, for its implications (OTOH, admittedly, it significantly shortens calculations when you use a scientific calculator):

$$ \gamma = \frac{1}{cos(arcsin(\beta))} = \frac{1}{sin(arccos(\beta))} = \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{\mathrm{d}\tau} $$

If we rearrange it, reciprocal of gamma is "time rate" of moving object relative to observers time rate, just as v is velocity relative to observer,

$$ \frac{1}{\gamma} = \frac{\mathrm{d}\tau}{\mathrm{d}t} = cos(arcsin(\beta)) = sin(arccos(\beta))$$

In other words, *like* if there was a single, complex velocity vector with constant modulus of exactly c, for each, observer and the observed alike. In other words, not only is c *maximum velocity*, it is also *the only velocity* as well!

Observed speed, relative speed of observed in observer's frame of reference is v and relative time rate of observed in observer's frame of reference is reciprocal of gamma (note that gamma is relative, per observer).

Further implication is that each object without acceleration is actually traveling through spacetime along its own time axis, with complex velocity, modulus of which is always c. An object is at rest from the standpoint of an observer if their c-vectors are parallel, if they are "traveling futurewards together" (they agree on the direction where future lays).

v is observed object's c-vector's "spatial component" (projection of object's c-vector on an straight line laying completely in observer's 3d space, i.e. 3d space perpendicular to observer's c-vector direction) and reciprocal of gamma is its "temporal component" (projection of object's c-vector on observer's c-vector direction).

Further on, acceleration of an object is equivalent to rotation (inclination) of its c-vector from its original direction. Therefore, acceleration is rotation of c-vector and if object is constantly accelerated, not by adding energy from another reference frame (as in particle accelerators), but through use of conservation of momentum (reactive propulsion, as in... rocket ships), then c-vector can be "driven" to be perpendicular to observer's c-vector (rocket ship, theoretically, could reach 1.0 c) or even to point backwards (180 degrees angle) to observer's c-vector - travel backward in (observer's) time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.91.1.45 (talk) 13:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Rapidity
Currently rapidity is redirected to Lorentz factor. The rapidity concept is so integral to the spacetime models that it needs to be set out early in relativity study. Even before the physical models are considered there should be a mathematical foundation, such as split-complex numbers. Attempts to make informed instruction without the rational underpinnings run into problems for understanding. Please, if you can help write so people understand by appropriately staged learning, it could make a difference along the line. Thank you ahead of time.Rgdboer 23:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I think that the point here is that rapidity is a special relativity concept worth of its own page, and doesn't seem to have any particular reason to be tacked on to the Lorentz Factor article. Why it is not mentioned in the special relativity article at all is beyond me. cleverless 4:00, 30 April 2007 (EST)

 * Rapidity now has its own article. Editors may be interested in the discussion at Talk:Rapidity. Mathematical transparency is the issue.Rgdboer (talk) 01:14, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Derivation
I'm having trouble understanding the derivation of the Lorentz factor. First, which light are we talking about? I assume we are talking about light that A emits at the starting time, not further light that is emitted as A travels, but I wasn't sure, because I didn't understand the rest. It would seem to me that B would see A and the light L travelling both leaving the starting point P perpendicular to each other, while from the frame of reference of A, the light L would be travelling back at an angle. This is the reverse of what the article says, so I am wondering what I am missing.

Thanks for any help, vivacissamamente 16:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I think an illustration would be useful here, so that everyone can easily see the Pythagorean Theorem at work. I have not diagrammed it to see if the derivation is correct, but a picture would make it easier for everyone to understand the derivation. I'm new. I hope I am not breaking any talk page guidelines. Thanks.

Vidigod 02:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

The claim "This distance is the same distance that A sees the light travel" is preposterous! Why in the hell would I assume that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.73.79.100 (talk) 23:31, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Not at rest in co-moving frame?
The gamma factor can have various different values. a) If a particle is at rest in the moving frame then there is only one gamma= 1/(1- (v/c)^2)^(1/2). Here v is both the particle speed (in the lab frame ) and the moving frame speed with respect to the Lab.

b)However a particle may have a speed v'in the S' frame, a speed v in S frame (the Lab)and the frame S'move with Vs with respect to S .... the composition of velocity gives

v'= (v'-Vs)/( 1- v*Vs/c^2) no gammas appear. However as written v and v' are not the components of a four vector.

To write four vectors there will be at least three gammas

gamma1 = 1/(1- (v/c)^2)^(1/2). v is the particle velocity in the S frame

gamma2= 1/(1- (v'/c)^2)^(1/2). v' is the particle velocity in the S' frame

gamma3=1/(1- (Vs/c)^2)^(1/2). Vs is the speed of frame S' wr to S gamma 3 would enter in the LorentZ transformation along with (Vs/c)gamma3

www.geocities.com/serienumerica2 reibaretti2004@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.89.32.22 (talk • contribs)

wrong identity
In all presentations of SRT that I know of, gamma is a substitute for c/sqrt(c^2-v^2) - thus that's the mathematical identity. According to physics theory, gamma is equal to (but not identical to) dt/dtau.

Harald88 13:59, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

 * I now correct it Harald88 17:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

lorentz factor
i requested you to have an example on how to solve lorentz factor with an explanations

requesting about lorentz factor
i requested you to have an example on how to solve lorentz factor with an explanations —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.1.53.49 (talk) 09:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

\equiv sign
Hello, what does $$\equiv$$ sign mean in this formula $$\gamma \equiv \frac{c}{\sqrt{c^2 - u^2}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1 - \beta^2}} = \frac{\mathrm{d}t}{\mathrm{d}\tau}$$ ? Wht is it not simply =? Thanks Pamputt (talk) 21:22, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Here, and often, it means “is thereby defined as equal to.” It was used here to make more explicit the fact that $$\gamma$$ was being defined. Sometimes, it may mean instead “is equivalent to.”
 * --Anareth (talk) 17:38, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

velocity addition formula with velocity expressed as gamma
the velocity addition formula with velocity expressed as gamma is:
 * z = x y + sqrt(x^2 - 1) sqrt(y^2 - 1)
 * http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3036746#post3036746 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Just granpa (talk • contribs) 17:36, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Expansion
This article could do with some expansion and organization. I propose adding a coule of new sections
 * one for different Representations of it, in terms of velocity v and rapidity φ (already included) and momentum p:
 * $$\gamma = \sqrt{1+\left(\frac{p}{mc}\right)^2} \,\!$$

Here we could incorperate the power series expansion and approximations can be under a sub-heading in this section.
 * one for Applications - in the Lorentz transforms, its ubiquity in length contraction, time dilation, mass defecit (which follow from lorentz transformations anyway but still), and its use in the Maxwell-Juttner distribution. All loose ends of its use hinted in the first few paragraphs can be fully organized under this section. Of course links to all articles (at least the most important/useful ones) that need γ will be included. Also really this type of section should come before approximations (as it will comprise exact formulae) - approxm's are a last-resort endevour, i'm sure anyone will agree.

Also the Derivation section is purley about time dilation - which has its own article. γ arises naturally when deriving Lorentz transformations which are more general. Perhaps this section could be deleted (though I'd rather not since its someone else's work, and is a correct and fair attempt to show how γ arises) and a sentence somewhare (introduction?) should say that γ arises in the Lorentz transformations and link to the derivations there?

What are other opionions?--F=q(E+v^B) (talk) 15:22, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

 * It seems no one has replied in a week. I'll just do it - it can't be a big deal. Further issues not previously mentioned are:

 * There is an inconsistency in the rapidity section: r suddenly becomes y. I'm not sure if r or y is standard for rapidity. Its probably better to use the more standard φ - consistent with the main article.
 * There is also some inconsistency when the article says "actual time" and "actual distance" of some object - there is no such thing. "Actual" space and time could imply "absolute" space and time... which is definitley not good...
 * The following sentences:
 * " v is the velocity as observed in the reference frame where time t is measured,"
 * "An object moving with respect to an observer will be seen to move in slow motion given by multiplying its actual elapsed time by gamma."
 * "Its length is measured shorter as though its local length were divided by γ."

 * need (at a minimum) to be re-written to:
 * " v is the relative velocity between inertial frames,"
 * "An object moving with respect to an observer will be seen to move in slow motion, an elapsed time measured in the observer's frame t ' is related to elapsed time in the objects frame t, by the factor γ,
 * $$t' = \gamma t \,\!$$ "
 * "The length of an object (along the direction of motion) with respect to an observer appears contracted, the measured length in the observer's frame is related to the length in the object's frame, through the factor of 1/γ,
 * $$x' = x/\gamma \,\!$$ "
 * (embedded in a list of formulae so the reader can see how). Currently these are not clear eneogh. I have tried to keep the explaination of what these effects and formulae are and how γ contributes to them - since they are explained in the linked articles and will detract from this article's meaning.

 * It would be better to render all of the formulae as LaTeX rather than inline and buried in the text. Also its not good to have links in a formula such as "tanhr = γ", it appears odd and much less professional.
 * Some of the greek letters are italicized and some are not. It should be one or the other, so i'll italic them (matches appearance with formulae).
 * Why is this definition of rapidity used in particle physics included?
 * $$y = \frac{1}{2} \ln \left(\frac{E+p_L}{E-p_L}\right)$$
 * It serves no purpose. Really it should be transferred to the main article - but i'll leave that for now.

 * Shouldn't this be in the lead paragraph?
 * "Sometimes (especially in discussion of superluminal motion) γ is written as γ (uppercase-gamma) rather than γ (lowercase-gamma)."

--F=q(E+v^B) (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * For good measures:
 * Added more sources,
 * I corrected as many obvious spelling mistakes using the microsoft word processor.

Wrong Order
This article is written in the wrong order. The Lorentz factor γ is something that comes out of solving the relativistic equations

x = γ(x' + vt' ) and x'  = γ(x – vt). To use relativistic equations (from which the Lorentz factor was derived) as an application of the Lorentz factor is ridiculous. I propose a rewrite of the article. — Fly by Night  ( talk )  00:57, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

 * Well, lets change "applications" to occurance and "formulae involving the factor". I'll have a quick look at re-writing.-- F = q(E + v × B) 08:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Actually - what is so wrong about the order??? First is the lead, then the definition (which it is a defined factor), then it immediately shows where it is used, so that readers immediately get the idea that its not for the sake of it and where it occurs, then come the alternative forms it takes - but these are less often used and also just contains the series expansion. It would help if you said why you think the article is disordered and what to re-write, instead of just stating it. -- F = q(E + v × B) 08:30, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Never mind - it has been dealt with.-- F = q(E + v × B) 00:32, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Removal of content
I removed the derivation, since there are links to the main articles on the Lorentz transforms, time dilation etc where the derivations of the formulae, including how the factor arises, are all there. No use repeating content essentially in other articles.-- F = q(E + v × B) 09:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Large gammas
There are a remarkable number of 9's in a large gamma. Perhaps we should extend the table. Frank Layden (talk) 02:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Approximate gamma
Would like to know how to approximate gamma for very very large values of v. Just granpa (talk) 06:26, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

 * Something for wp:Reference desk/Science or better, for wp:Reference desk/Mathematics. Good luck. - DVdm (talk) 07:04, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

reciprocal Lorentz factor
I would suggest changing the notation used here for the reciprocal Lorentz factor (γ−1) to τ (tau) and not α (alpha). Using alpha for the reciprocal Lorentz factor is confusing, since in the Bohr model, the speed of an electron in neutral hydrogen is given by β = α (where β = v/c and α is the Sommerfeld constant). Using tau for the reciprocal Lorentz factor is particularly notable from the title of Poul Anderson's novel Tau Zero, which should probably be mentioned in the article as a popular-culture reference for the Lorentz factor (technically the spaceship in Tau Zero is moving at an incommensurably small [effectively infinitesimal] tau, and not at a tau of zero). Nicole Sharp (talk) 18:39, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
 * If using α causes confusion, using τ will cause even more confusion, as α is nowhere used in the article, whereas τ is used for proper time. Too bad for Anderson. - DVdm (talk) 21:15, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Special Theory Of Relativity
In what velocity is reached,will be sufficient for showing on the relativistic effects, just like time dilation, length contraction, relativistic mass, relativistic energy, relativistic force, relativistic momentum, relativistic power are starting to appear, because, i.e. E=Mc². If v<Mc²=M0C² {1+1/2(v²/c²)} =>Mc²=M0c²+1/2×M0v² Soumik Mondal (Subhra) (talk) 08:39, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Please, see Special relativity, Time dilation, Length contraction, Relativistic mass, Relativistic energy and Relativistic momentum (as mentioned avobe). Relativistic power and Force doesn't make sense. regards, —  A. Shohag (pingme or Talk) 10:45, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Please don't use article talk pages to chat about the subject. Here we discuss the article, not the subject. See wp:Talk page guidelines. Thanks. - DVdm (talk) 11:52, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Hfj
Bjjjdjgf dc f f g g hd wgy h g ts d g ff h ddh d nf t gfdnsznfisnjckdhkdrkfvjsjfnd dcfsx c d g — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.34.22.227 (talk) 15:26, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lorentz factor


text:
Derived type

In computer science, derived type can mean:

 * a composite data type, one built out of other types
 * a subtype
 * a derived class

title: Derived type


text:
Accelerating change

In futures studies and the history of technology, accelerating change is the observed exponential nature of the rate of technological change in recent history, which may suggest faster and more profound change in the future and may or may not be accompanied by equally profound social and cultural change.

Early observations
In 1910, during the town planning conference of London, Daniel Burnham noted, "But it is not merely in the number of facts or sorts of knowledge that progress lies: it is still more in the geometric ratio of sophistication, in the geometric widening of the sphere of knowledge, which every year is taking in a larger percentage of people as time goes on." And later on, "It is the argument with which I began, that a mighty change having come about in fifty years, and our pace of development having immensely accelerated, our sons and grandsons are going to demand and get results that would stagger us."

In 1938, Buckminster Fuller introduced the word ephemeralization to describe the trends of "doing more with less" in chemistry, health and other areas of industrial development. In 1946, Fuller published a chart of the discoveries of the chemical elements over time to highlight the development of accelerating acceleration in human knowledge acquisition.

In 1958, Stanislaw Ulam wrote in reference to a conversation with John von Neumann: "One conversation centered on the ever accelerating progress of technology and changes in the mode of human life, which gives the appearance of approaching some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs, as we know them, could not continue."

Moravec's Mind Children
In a series of published articles from 1974 to 1979, and then in his 1988 book Mind Children, computer scientist and futurist Hans Moravec generalizes Moore's law to make predictions about the future of artificial life. Moore's law describes an exponential growth pattern in the complexity of integrated semiconductor circuits. Moravec extends this to include technologies from long before the integrated circuit to future forms of technology. Moravec outlines a timeline and a scenario in which robots will evolve into a new series of artificial species, starting around 2030–2040. In Robot: Mere Machine to Transcendent Mind, published in 1998, Moravec further considers the implications of evolving robot intelligence, generalizing Moore's law to technologies predating the integrated circuit, and also plotting the exponentially increasing computational power of the brains of animals in evolutionary history. Extrapolating these trends, he speculates about a coming "mind fire" of rapidly expanding superintelligence similar to the explosion of intelligence predicted by Vinge.

James Burke's Connections
In his TV series Connections (1978)—and sequels Connections² (1994) and Connections³ (1997)—James Burke explores an "Alternative View of Change" (the subtitle of the series) that rejects the conventional linear and teleological view of historical progress. Burke contends that one cannot consider the development of any particular piece of the modern world in isolation. Rather, the entire gestalt of the modern world is the result of a web of interconnected events, each one consisting of a person or group acting for reasons of their own motivations (e.g., profit, curiosity, religious) with no concept of the final, modern result to which the actions of either them or their contemporaries would lead. The interplay of the results of these isolated events is what drives history and innovation, and is also the main focus of the series and its sequels.

Burke also explores three corollaries to his initial thesis. The first is that, if history is driven by individuals who act only on what they know at the time, and not because of any idea as to where their actions will eventually lead, then predicting the future course of technological progress is merely conjecture. Therefore, if we are astonished by the connections Burke is able to weave among past events, then we will be equally surprised to what the events of today eventually will lead, especially events we were not even aware of at the time.

The second and third corollaries are explored most in the introductory and concluding episodes, and they represent the downside of an interconnected history. If history progresses because of the synergistic interaction of past events and innovations, then as history does progress, the number of these events and innovations increases. This increase in possible connections causes the process of innovation to not only continue, but to accelerate. Burke poses the question of what happens when this rate of innovation, or more importantly change itself, becomes too much for the average person to handle, and what this means for individual power, liberty, and privacy.

Gerald Hawkins' Mindsteps
In his book Mindsteps to the Cosmos (HarperCollins, August 1983), Gerald S. Hawkins elucidated his notion of mindsteps, dramatic and irreversible changes to paradigms or world views. He identified five distinct mindsteps in human history, and the technology that accompanied these "new world views": the invention of imagery, writing, mathematics, printing, the telescope, rocket, radio, TV, computer... "Each one takes the collective mind closer to reality, one stage further along in its understanding of the relation of humans to the cosmos." He noted: "The waiting period between the mindsteps is getting shorter. One can't help noticing the acceleration." Hawkins' empirical 'mindstep equation' quantified this, and gave dates for (to him) future mindsteps. The date of the next mindstep (5; the series begins at 0) he cited as 2021, with two further, successively closer mindsteps in 2045 and 2051, until the limit of the series in 2053. His speculations ventured beyond the technological:

"The mindsteps... appear to have certain things in common—a new and unfolding human perspective, related inventions in the area of memes and communications, and a long formulative waiting period before the next mindstep comes along. None of the mindsteps can be said to have been truly anticipated, and most were resisted at the early stages. In looking to the future we may equally be caught unawares. We may have to grapple with the presently inconceivable, with mind-stretching discoveries and concepts."

Vinge's exponentially accelerating change
The mathematician Vernor Vinge popularized his ideas about exponentially accelerating technological change in the science fiction novel Marooned in Realtime (1986), set in a world of rapidly accelerating progress leading to the emergence of more and more sophisticated technologies separated by shorter and shorter time intervals, until a point beyond human comprehension is reached. His subsequent Hugo award-winning novel A Fire Upon the Deep (1992) starts with an imaginative description of the evolution of a superintelligence passing through exponentially accelerating developmental stages ending in a transcendent, almost omnipotent power unfathomable by mere humans. His already mentioned influential 1993 paper on the technological singularity compactly summarizes the basic ideas.

Kurzweil's Law of Accelerating Returns
In his 1999 book The Age of Spiritual Machines, Ray Kurzweil proposed "The Law of Accelerating Returns", according to which the rate of change in a wide variety of evolutionary systems (including but not limited to the growth of technologies) tends to increase exponentially. He gave further focus to this issue in a 2001 essay entitled "The Law of Accelerating Returns". In it, Kurzweil, after Moravec, argued for extending Moore's Law to describe exponential growth of diverse forms of technological progress. Whenever a technology approaches some kind of a barrier, according to Kurzweil, a new technology will be invented to allow us to cross that barrier. He cites numerous past examples of this to substantiate his assertions. He predicts that such paradigm shifts have and will continue to become increasingly common, leading to "technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history". He believes the Law of Accelerating Returns implies that a technological singularity will occur before the end of the 21st century, around 2045. The essay begins:

"An analysis of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential, contrary to the common-sense 'intuitive linear' view. So we won't experience 100 years of progress in the 21st century—it will be more like 20,000 years of progress (at today's rate). The 'returns,' such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. There's even exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth. Within a few decades, machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, leading to the Singularity—technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history. The implications include the merger of biological and nonbiological intelligence, immortal software-based humans, and ultra-high levels of intelligence that expand outward in the universe at the speed of light."

The Law of Accelerating Returns has in many ways altered public perception of Moore's law. It is a common (but mistaken) belief that Moore's law makes predictions regarding all forms of technology, when really it only concerns semiconductor circuits. Many futurists still use the term "Moore's law" to describe ideas like those put forth by Moravec, Kurzweil and others.

According to Kurzweil, since the beginning of evolution, more complex life forms have been evolving exponentially faster, with shorter and shorter intervals between the emergence of radically new life forms, such as human beings, who have the capacity to engineer (i.e. intentionally design with efficiency) a new trait which replaces relatively blind evolutionary mechanisms of selection for efficiency. By extension, the rate of technical progress amongst humans has also been exponentially increasing: as we discover more effective ways to do things, we also discover more effective ways to learn, e.g. language, numbers, written language, philosophy, scientific method, instruments of observation, tallying devices, mechanical calculators, computers; each of these major advances in our ability to account for information occurs increasingly close to the previous. Already within the past sixty years, life in the industrialized world has changed almost beyond recognition except for living memories from the first half of the 20th century. This pattern will culminate in unimaginable technological progress in the 21st century, leading to a singularity. Kurzweil elaborates on his views in his books The Age of Spiritual Machines and The Singularity Is Near.

Limits of accelerating change
In the natural sciences, it is typical that processes characterized by exponential acceleration in their initial stages go into the saturation phase. This clearly makes it possible to realize that if an increase with acceleration is observed over a certain period of time, this does not mean an endless continuation of this process. On the contrary, in many cases this means an early exit to the plateau of speed. The processes occurring in natural science allow us to suggest that the observed picture of accelerating scientific and technological progress, after some time (in physical processes, as a rule, is short) will be replaced by a slowdown and a complete stop. Despite the possible termination / attenuation of the acceleration of the progress of science and technology in the foreseeable future, progress itself, and as a result, social transformations, will not stop or even slow down - it will continue with the achieved (possibly huge) speed, which has become constant.

Accelerating change may not be restricted to the Anthropocene Epoch, but a general and predictable developmental feature of the universe. The physical processes that generate an acceleration such as Moore's law are positive feedback loops giving rise to exponential or superexponential technological change. These dynamics lead to increasingly efficient and dense configurations of Space, Time, Energy, and Matter (STEM efficiency and density, or STEM "compression"). At the physical limit, this developmental process of accelerating change leads to black hole density organizations, a conclusion also reached by studies of the ultimate physical limits of computation in the universe.

Applying this vision to the search for extraterrestrial intelligence leads to the idea that advanced intelligent life reconfigures itself into a black hole. Such advanced life forms would be interested in inner space, rather than outer space and interstellar expansion. They would thus in some way transcend reality, not be observable and it would be a solution to Fermi's paradox called the "transcension hypothesis". Another solution is that the black holes we observe could actually be interpreted as intelligent super-civilizations feeding on stars, or "stellivores". This dynamics of evolution and development is an invitation to study the universe itself as evolving, developing. If the universe is a kind of superorganism, it may possibly tend to reproduce, naturally or artificially, with intelligent life playing a role.

Other estimates
Dramatic changes in the rate of economic growth have occurred in the past because of some technological advancement. Based on population growth, the economy doubled every 250,000 years from the Paleolithic era until the Neolithic Revolution. The new agricultural economy doubled every 900 years, a remarkable increase. In the current era, beginning with the Industrial Revolution, the world's economic output doubles every fifteen years, sixty times faster than during the agricultural era. If the rise of superhuman intelligence causes a similar revolution, argues Robin Hanson, then one would expect the economy to double at least quarterly and possibly on a weekly basis.

In his 1981 book Critical Path, futurist and inventor R. Buckminster Fuller estimated that if we took all the knowledge that mankind had accumulated and transmitted by the year One CE as equal to one unit of information, it probably took about 1500 years (or until the sixteenth century) for that amount of knowledge to double. The next doubling of knowledge from two to four 'knowledge units' took only 250 years, until about 1750 CE. By 1900, one hundred and fifty years later, knowledge had doubled again to 8 units. The observed speed at which information doubled was getting faster and faster. In modern times, exponential knowledge progressions therefore change at an ever-increasing rate. Depending on the progression, this tends to lead toward explosive growth at some point. A simple exponential curve that represents this accelerating change phenomenon could be modeled by a doubling function. This fast rate of knowledge doubling leads up to the basic proposed hypothesis of the technological singularity: the rate at which technology progression surpasses human biological evolution.

Criticisms
Both Theodore Modis and Jonathan Huebner have argued—each from different perspectives—that the rate of technological innovation has not only ceased to rise, but is actually now declining.

title: Accelerating change


text:
Template:Cfd top

 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

 * The result of the discussion was:

title: Template:Cfd top


text:
Template:Cfd bottom

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

title: Template:Cfd bottom


text: User talk:67.51.202.238

title: User talk:67.51.202.238