text:
Fernando Fernández Martín

Fernando Fernández Martín (born 29 May 1943 in Santa Cruz de La Palma, Tenerife) is a Spanish politician who was the president of the Canary Islands between 1987 and 1988. He is now a Member of the European Parliament with the People's Party, part of the European People's Party, and sits on the European Parliament's Committee on Development.

He is a substitute member of the Committee on Regional Development, a vice-chair of the Delegation for relations with the countries of the Andean Community and a substitute member for the Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly.

Education

 * 1965: Graduate in medicine and surgery (Navarre)
 * 1966: Diploma in Neurology (Barcelona)
 * 1967: Paris
 * 1968: Specialist in clinical neurophysiology and neurology (Navarre)
 * 1975: Doctor of medicine

Career

 * 1965-1968: Assistant lecturer in neurology (Navarre)
 * 1969-1979: Senior lecturer in medical pathology (La Laguna)
 * 1984: Deputy professor in neurology (La Laguna)
 * 1971-1999: Head of the Neurology Department at the University Hospital of the Canary Islands
 * 1994-1999: Member of the PP Regional Executive Committee (Canary Islands, 1991–2004) and of the PP National Executive Committee
 * 1983-1994: Member of the Canary Islands Regional Parliament
 * 1983-1989: Regional President of the Social Democratic Centre party (CDS) in the Canary Islands
 * 1991-1994: Chairman of the PP parliamentary group
 * 1987-1990: President of the Autonomous Government of the Canary Islands
 * since 1994: Member of the European Parliament
 * 1999-2001: Vice-Chairman of the Committee on Development
 * 1994-2004: Member of the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly
 * 2001-2004: Vice-Chairman of the Delegation for relations with the countries of South America and Mercosur
 * 2004: Chairman of the ad hoc delegations for Venezuela (2003) and for Bolivia
 * Member of election observation missions for various electoral processes in Africa and Latin America

Decorations

 * Chain of the Order of the Canary Islands
 * Medal of the Spanish Senate and other national and foreign decorations

title: Fernando Fernández Martín


text:
Zenit (camera)

Zenit (Зени́т) is a Soviet camera brand manufactured by KMZ in the town of Krasnogorsk near Moscow since 1952 and by BelOMO in Belarus since the 1970s. The Zenit trademark is associated with 35 mm SLR cameras. Among related brands are Zorki (Watchful) for 35 mm rangefinder cameras, Moskva (Moscow) and Iskra (Spark) for medium-format folding cameras and Horizon for panoramic cameras. In the 1960s and 1970s, they were exported by Mashpriborintorg to 74 countries.

The name is sometimes spelled Zenith in English, such as the manuals published by the UK Zenit-importer TOE. However, TOE's imported camera bodies as from 1963 retained the "Zenit" badges. The early Zorki-based models before that time were labelled "Zenith" in a handwritten style of script.

Digital models
During the 2018 Photokina expo, Zenit announced that it was resuming camera and lens production for the M-mount, as well as for unspecified Nikon and Canon mounts in 2019.

Zenit M
The digital Zenit M camera was released in a limited edition set with the Zenitar-M 35mm F/1.0 lens. The camera was produced in partnership with Leica, and the digital components derived to some extent from the full-frame Leica M (typ 240) series. The edition comprised 500 units: fifty units with a black finish and 450 in silver. Russian firmware drives the camera, and the chassis was designed in Krasnogorsk.

Zenitar-M
Two further M-mount Zenitar lenses are set for release circa March 2019: the Zenitar-M 21mm F/2.8 and the Zenitar-M 50mm F/1.0.

Zenit-Leica Collaboration
A second digital camera of an entirely new design is planned for release by 2020; also in collaboration with Leica. This camera will make use of a different lens line.

Early years
The above Zenit was based on the Zorki rangefinder camera (a copy of the Leica II). In transforming the Zorki into an SLR, the simplest approach was taken: the rangefinder housing was removed from the top and replaced by a plain ground-glass screen and prism; a mirror was added below with a lever operated mirror setting system and the M39×1 thread mount was pushed forward to make room for the mirror inside.

During the first years of production (until the Zenit-E of 1967) Zenit camera development coincided with that of the Zorki cameras. The Zenit-S had PC-synchro for external flash units (almost like the Zorki-S) and the Zenit-3M also had an RF-sibling, the Zorki-6. For an SLR, the Pentaprism of all classical Zenits was undersize, with the viewfinder showing about two-thirds of the actual frame-size. On the Zenit-S the mirror setting lever mechanism of the original Zenit was replaced by a cord and pulley system.

Zenit-E and its successors
During 1967 through 1969 KMZ built an automatic die-cast moulding line, allowing mass camera production. Camera production switched to the M42×1 thread (also known as Praktica thread) and an instant-return mirror was also developed. This led to one of the most famous Zenits — Zenit-E which saw (including its subtypes) over 12 million produced. A heavy and tough camera which gained a reputation of being ‘bomb proof’, with a mechanism that was of exceedingly simple design along the lines of "what isn't there, can't go wrong". Automatic diaphragm functionality was not available until the introduction of the Zenit-EM, which used a direct mechanism linking the shutter release button to the aperture mechanism, significantly increasing the effort required to release the shutter. Production included both M39×1 and M42×1 mounts for the Zenit E and Zenit B models. Later models were only produced in the M42×1 with the Pentax K mount available for the latest models.

Towards the end of the 20th century, the Zenit-E heritage became an obstacle to the development of more modern Zenit models. This was because almost all low-end Zenits until the recent 412DX have been based on the Zenit-E die-cast chassis, complying with the local philosophy that a crude but affordable camera was better than no camera.

The major events of the further development of Zenit-E line was:
 * Introduction of an automatic 'jumping' diaphragm on the Zenit-EM
 * TTL metering system (instead of a non-coupled Selenium-cell lightmeter) on the Zenit-TTL
 * Switching to the Pentax K mount — Zenit-122K
 * DX-code introduction (instead of manual ISO-speed switch) — Zenit-412DX

The Zenit-E was also sold with the Moscow 1980 Olympics emblem.

Advanced models
The first attempt to make high-end professional camera by KMZ was the Start in 1958. This camera had a full set of shutter speeds (from 1 sec to 1/1000), a lens with an automatic diaphragm in a unique breech-lock mount, and even a knife for cutting-off part of the unexposed film. The photographer could choose between a pentaprism and waist-level finders. The grave disadvantage of the Start is blamed on lack of lenses; only one lens (the Helios-44 f2/58) was ever made for the proprietary Start mount directly.

With the success of the Zeiss-Ikon Contaflex of the mid-1950s and its follow-ups in form of the Bessamatic, Retina- and Paxette-reflex, Zenit's next attempt was the Zenit-4 (1964), -5 and -6 cameras. These were based on a Voigtländer Bessamatic-type mount with Compur-type iris-shutter near the lens elements. The poor durability and high manufacturing cost of this concept in contrast to the classical barebone Zenit design based on ultimate simplicity showed KMZ to have taken a wrong track: Nevertheless, the Zenit-5 was the first electric motor-driven SLR camera in the world, and the first Soviet zoom lens (Rubin-1c 2.8/37–80, based on Voigtländer Zoomar design) featured in the Zenit-6.

Following this, there were two more attempts to make high-end photographic equipment, namely the Zenit-7 (1968) and Zenit-D (1969). Both were based on the completely new cloth-curtain shutter construction. The Zenit-D had automatic exposure mode. Its shutter was sped up to achieve X-sync at 1/125. Each of these had its own bayonet mount ("mount 7" and "mount D" respectively) which helped to utilize the camera's most advanced features. There were plans to develop a full line of optics for these cameras but the new shutter was too complicated and unreliable. Production was cancelled shortly after, and the only lens made for new mounts were the standard types. The Start, Zenit-7 and Zenit-D utilized the same normal lens — a Helios-44 2/58. The Zenit-D is one of the rarest Zenit cameras — only 63 cameras were produced.

The Zenit 12-XP With its Helios f2/58mm lens and cloth shutter was widely sold by US Eastern camera stores. Many with the Zenit name covered with their "USA" brand. This Metallic re-badge was easy enough to gently pry off to see the true name Zenit. The TTL meter was fairly accurate and took decent shots. The 1981 price was $110 usa. The Russians believed that 58mm more closely matched the Human normal range than the standard 50mm used worldwide as a normal lens. It also had a T setting for timed exposures making it a good choice for yearly fireworks displays. The "T" setting locked the shutter open allowing a tripod mounted camera to be used with an index card to manually open for few bursts of fire works and then close and reset.

After one more unsuccessful camera (Zenit-16) which was produced in very small quantities, in 1979 production of the Zenit-19 began. This was a camera with an original electromagnet-driven focal-plane shutter, M42 lens mount, and shutter speeds from 1 sec to 1/1000. X-sync at 1/60 or 1/125 (camera was modified during production). The camera has only manual shooting mode (with a TTL-meter and a needle indicator of the proper exposition in the viewfinder). The Zenit-19 was, perhaps, the top-of-the-line Soviet M42 lens mount camera.

Pentax-K mount series
In 1984 the Zenit-automat entered production. This had a Pentax K mount (which was proposed as an open standard by Pentax and distributed freely) and a focal shutter with horizontal-travel cloth curtains. The only operation mode was aperture-priority. The camera was modified in 1988, to include shutter FZL-84 with vertical-travel metal curtains, and was reissued as the Zenit-AM. The Zenit-AM2 was a cheaper version of the AM without the self-timer.

Next in line was the Zenit-APK. Its distinguishing feature was the introduction of a manual shutter mode in addition to aperture-priority. The original FZL-84 shutter was also changed to a licensed 'Copal Square' shutter.

The most recent model is the Zenit-KM of 2001. This is the second microprocessor-controlled camera in the Zenit range (the first one was the second variant of the Zenit-automat camera), and the second (after the Zenit-5) motor-driven SLR camera built by KMZ. Shutter speeds range from 1/2000 to 1 sec (and up to 16 sec in Auto mode). X-sync is 1/125 sec, and the camera includes both manual shutter and aperture-priority modes as well as DX-coding from 50 to 3200 ISO. In 2004, the KM received some improvements and was renamed to the Zenit-KM Plus

The Zenit-KM Plus was the final Zenit camera to be produced; all SLR camera production at the Krasnogorsk factory ceased. These highly interesting ultimate Zeniths would have been major sellers on Western markets during the "SLR-decade" of the 1970s. However, they appeared at a time when their market-segment was saturated with second-hand equipment, so no major importer looked at them. One of the characteristics of Soviet camera manufacture was that the capability of its designers was well ahead of that of its policy-makers. The 20-year overdue replacement of the external selenium cell of the Zenit E by TTL-metering is said to be the work of an employee who made a conversion on his own accord.

Soviet Export Policy
In the West, the success of the Zenit line can be focused on the United Kingdom, primarily due to the marketing activity and service of TOE, and secondly the originally heavy UK tax-load of up to two-thirds on imported precision cameras. Substantial quantities were later sold by German discounters like Foto-Quelle and Neckermann. The main criticism of the USSR exporters at the time was that they could only supply hopelessly outdated equipment like the Zenit E that they had been directed to produce in quantity, despite having the capacity to produce more technically advanced products that might have been attractive to Western buyers. TOE were fighting a constant battle with their USSR-suppliers in this direction, having to fill the gap left by the excellent but not-for-export Soviet lenses which would have been a major selling-point, by a hodge-podge selection of second-rate mass-market optics from Japan, albeit under the "Helios" label.

Standard Zenit Lenses
The original Zenit came with the sturdy click-stop four-element 3.5/50mm Zeiss Tessar copy under the "Industar" designation. Early aluminium variants made in several different bodies were finely blue-coated, whereas the later mass-produced black version was either partially or un-coated with no visible colour on the glass. They were sharp but gave the typically "foggy" image of an uncoated lens with bright lighting. With the iris ring sitting inside the focussing ring it was impossible to focus at full aperture followed by stopping down, as this moved the point of focus. What makes these lenses interesting is their very compact "pancake" design. The concept of the makers was to offer a sharp Tessar-type lens of the simplest possible body construction, leaving out all progress made in this field since 1945. The most prominent lens is the 6-element 2.0/58mm "Helios" based on the pre-war Zeiss Biotar (US Patent 1,786,916 (W.Merté, 1930) Zenit also manufactures several Tair lenses in different focal lengths of which some were of 4-element pre-war Zeiss Sonnar design with the cemented second and ultra-fat third element.

Early cameras
Bottom Loading
 * Zenit (1953–56)
 * Zenit-S (S stands for flash sync, 1955–61)
 * Zenit-3 (1960–62)

Hinged Back
 * Kristall/Crystal (1961–62)
 * Zenit-3M (modified Kristall, 1962–70)

Zenit 4 line semiautomatic cameras

 * Zenit 4
 * Zenit 5
 * Zenit 6

List of Zenit DKL-mount ("Байонет Ц") lenses:

 * Mir-1Ц 37mm f2.8
 * Vega-3 50mm f2.8
 * Helios-65Ц 52mm f2.8
 * Jupiter-25Ц 85mm f2.8
 * Tair-38Ц 133mm f2.8
 * Rubin-1Ц 37-80mm f2.8

Models with a Selenium cell lightmeter

 * Zenit-E
 * Zenit-EM, Produced between 1972-1984 by KMZ.
 * Zenit-ET
 * Zenit-10
 * Zenit-11

Models without a Selenium lightmeter

 * Zenit-V, also known as Zenit-B (identical to the E but no lightmeter)
 * Zenit-VM, also known as Zenit-BM (identical to the EM but no lightmeter)

Cameras with TTL-metering and M42 thread mount

 * Zenit-TTL
 * Zenit-12
 * Zenit-12xp, Zenit-12sd
 * Zenit-122
 * Zenit-122V, also known as Zenit-122B
 * Zenit-312m
 * Zenit-412DX
 * Zenit-412LS

Cameras with TTL-metering and Pentax K mount

 * Zenit-122K
 * Zenit-212K

Cameras with non-standard mounts

 * Start
 * Zenit-7
 * Zenit-D

M42 semi-automatic cameras

 * Zenit-16
 * Zenit-19
 * Zenit-18 automatic camera
 * Zenit-MT-1 Surprise (half frame Zenit-19 variant)

Zenit-Ax line (Pentax K mount cameras)

 * Zenit-Automat, also known as Zenit-Auto
 * Zenit-AM
 * Zenit-AM2
 * Zenit-APM
 * Zenit-APK
 * Zenit-KM
 * Zenit-KM plus
 * Zenit 14 (also semi-auto)

Zenit-DF line (Minolta / Rokkor mount cameras made by Seagull)
Source
 * Zenit DF-2, same as the Seagull DF-2
 * Zenit DF-2ETM, same as the Seagull DF-2ETM
 * Zenit DF-300, same as the Seagull DF-300
 * Zenit DF-300x, same as the Seagull DF-300x2

Photosniper
One oddity of the Zenit camera range is the so-called FotoSnaiper (or Photosniper) kit, which consists of a case (either leather or metal) a gunstock and shoulderstock, filters, a 300 mm f4.5 Tair-3 lens, a normal lens and a Zenit adapted for the gunstock (recognizable by the s designation, Zenit-ES, 122s etc.). The camera is actually held in the same manner as a rifle; hence the name "Photosniper".

Production Models

 * FS-2   (FED RF based)
 * FS-3   (Zenit-E based)
 * FS-12  (Zenit-12, Zenit-TTL based)
 * FS-12-3 (Zenit-12xp based)
 * FS-122 (Zenit-122 based)
 * FS-412 (Zenit-412DX based)

Low Production and Prototype only

 * FS-4
 * FS-4M
 * FS-5

Enlargers
Zenit manufactured a large range of enlargers as well. Some of the best known are the models UPA-5 and UPA-6. UPA-5 is a portable model which folds into a small suitcase. UPA-6 is a more sophisticated enlarger for producing color photo prints.

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

title: Zenit (camera)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geoffrey Ayers Scandal

 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 already SPEEDY DELETED. Postdlf 10:22, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Geoffrey Ayers Scandal
delete this article. 169.244.70.148 16:08, Apr 26, 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:
Cyrano de Bergerac (1990 film)

Cyrano de Bergerac is a 1990 French period comedy-drama film directed by Jean-Paul Rappeneau and based on the 1897 play of the same name by Edmond Rostand, adapted by Jean-Claude Carrière and Rappeneau. It stars Gérard Depardieu, Anne Brochet and Vincent Perez. The film was a co-production between companies in France and Hungary.

The film is the first feature film version of Rostand's original play in colour, and the second theatrical film version of the play in the original French. It is also considerably more lavish and more faithful to the original than previous film versions of the play. The film had 4,732,136 admissions in France.

The film and the performance of Gérard Depardieu won numerous awards, notably 10 of the César Awards of 1991.

Subtitles are used for the non-French market; the English-language version uses Anthony Burgess's translation of the text, which uses five-beat lines with a varying number of syllables and a regular couplet rhyming scheme, in other words, a sprung rhythm. Although he sustains the five-beat rhythm through most of the play, Burgess sometimes allows this structure to break deliberately: in Act V, he allows it to collapse completely, creating free verse.

In 2010, Cyrano de Bergerac was ranked number 43 in Empire magazine's "The 100 Best Films Of World Cinema".

Plot
In 1640, the Gascon poet and swashbuckler Cyrano de Bergerac is self-conscious about his enormous nose, but pretends to be proud of it. He is admired and respected by many people for his bravery and good swordsmanship. He madly loves his cousin, the beautiful Roxane; however, he is sure that she will reject him because of his appearance. To elevate himself in her eyes, he interferes with a play being staged at the Hôtel du Bourgogne, in Paris, and wins a duel with a marquis.

In the second act of the play and film, Cyrano meets with Roxane at her request. He is crushed when Roxane tells him she is infatuated with Christian de Neuvillette, a handsome and dashing new recruit to the Cadets de Gascogne (the military unit in which Cyrano is serving). However, Cyrano learns that Christian is tongue-tied when speaking with women. Seeing an opportunity to vicariously declare his love to Roxane, Cyrano approaches Christian with a proposal: Cyrano will write the love letters, and Christian will woo Roxane with them. Christian agrees.

Cyrano aids Christian, writing heartfelt love letters and poems. Roxane begins to appreciate Christian, not only for his good looks but also his apparent eloquence. She eventually falls in love with him. But the Comte de Guiche, an arrogant and exceptionally powerful older nobleman, also has designs on Roxane. Roxane and Cyrano thwart De Guiche's attempt to visit Roxane by arranging a quick secret marriage between Roxane and Christian. In revenge, De Guiche orders his company of cadets—including Cyrano and Christian—to report immediately for military duty in the Siege of Arras against the Spanish.

The siege is harsh and brutal: the Cadets de Gascogne are starving. Christian does not know that Cyrano escapes over enemy lines twice each day to deliver a love letter written by Cyrano himself but signed with Christian's name, sent to Roxane. These letters draw Roxane out from the city of Paris to the war front to bring food to the troops. Although she has come to visit Christian, she admits to him that she has fallen in love with the author's soul, and would love the author even if he were ugly. Christian tries to find out whether Roxane loves him or Cyrano, and asks Cyrano to find out. However, during the subsequent battle, Christian is mortally wounded. The scene ends with the French returning to the battle.

In the final scene of the play and film, fourteen years later, Roxane has entered a convent and retired from the world. Cyrano has made many enemies with his writings; he is still free, but now poor. During this time, Cyrano has faithfully visited Roxane every week, never declaring his love. On this day, his enemies attack and mortally injure him. Cyrano nevertheless visits Roxane at the convent. When she mentions Christian's last letter, sensing his own mortality, Cyrano asks if he can read it. Roxane gives him the letter, which he reads movingly. Just before Cyrano dies, Roxane realizes that she has loved him all along.

Critical response
On Rotten Tomatoes, the film holds an approval rating of 100% based on 30 reviews, with a weighted average rating of 7.9/10. The site's critical consensus reads, "Love and hope soar in Cyrano De Bergerac, an immensely entertaining romance featuring Gerard Depardieu at his peak." On Metacritic, the film has a score of 79 based on 19 reviews, indicating "generally favorable reviews".

Roger Ebert from the Chicago Sun-Times awarded the film three and a half stars out of four. In his review on the film, Ebert wrote, "Cyrano de Bergerac is a splendid movie not just because it tells its romantic story, and makes it visually delightful, and centers it on Depardieu, but for a better reason: The movie acts as if it believes this story. Depardieu is not a satirist - not here, anyway. He plays Cyrano on the level, for keeps."

Author and film critic Leonard Maltin awarded the film three and a half out of four stars, calling it "the definitive screen version of the Edmond Rostand perennial". In his review, Maltin praised the film's staging of scenes, while also noting that the film somewhat faltered during the finale by being overextended.

Accolades
The film was nominated for five Academy Awards at the 1990 ceremony, this marked the second time that an actor had been nominated for Best Actor for his portrayal of Cyrano de Bergerac (the first time was in 1950, when José Ferrer won the award for his performance in the English-language version of the film).

Home media
Cyrano de Bergerac was released on DVD by Umbrella Entertainment in May 2005 as part of a collection with the 1950 version. The DVD is compatible with all region codes and includes special features such as the theatrical trailer, Umbrella Entertainment trailers, talent biographies, an interview with Gérard Depardieu and a Roger Ebert review. In February 2009 an Academy Award edition was released by Umbrella Entertainment.

title: Cyrano de Bergerac (1990 film)


text:
Talk:G-code

Someone deleted important information!
Please restore: The section "List of G-codes commonly found on FANUC and similarly designed controls for milling and turning" as well as the section "Letter addresses", and "specific codes", and the "example program". They were deleted around July to August of 2023. The article is next to useless without the substance of example G, and M codes. Those sections make the article much more educational. Keep in mind machining is a technical trade, You can only dumb it down so much before you are saying nothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.127.21.16 (talk) 02:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Typo?
Can someone fix this "a post"? I'm not sure exactly what they mean: "that can output the appropriate G-code called a post for a specific machine tool." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.23.52.216 (talk) 23:09, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Gerber
G-code and Gerber File articles seem to describe the same file format. At least googling for cnc "gerber" g00 g01 g02 and cnc "g-code" g00 g01 g02 gaves pages with similar lists. However I have little CNC experience to confirm this. --195.113.20.80 16:08, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Gerber format evolves from RS-274-D, but otherwise Gerber and G-Code have many differences, are used on different kind of machines and for different purposes. So better to keep these articles distinct. Lothartklein (talk) 10:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Units
What about the units used in the G-code? I mean, where is it defined whether one uses inches, or centimeters, or some other unit? 134.58.253.114 10:53, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
 * As far as I know units are not defined - user has to supply it externally. Milimeters or (fractions of) inches are used. --Alvin-cs ✉ 18:37, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm in my 3rd year at Deakin Uni Australia learning robotic engineering. All international specialists (except for a US specialist) that visited our division said it's best to design and program NC hardware to the world standards(ISO) which is Metric. I do recall one of the Italian lecturers from BLM Group stating it's ignorant and unprofessional to design NC equipment to anything other than ISO standards. So it's probably best for US engineers to stay in the imperial rutt.

There is a pair of G codes to switch between "inch" and metric. All CNCs have some way to switch between the two systems.

In general, G-codes are a simplistic progamming language. There are G code pairs to switch between not only inch and metric, but absolute and incremental coordinate designation. G codes are put into groups. The "motion" group includes G01 to denote linear departures, G02 to denote clockwise arc paths and G03 to denote counterclockwise arc motions.

There is only one CNC manufacturer that continues to use the EIA RS-274D standard for G code programming. All other manufacturers have adopted the international ISO standard. The two systems, while not identical, have significant overlap and commonality in how the G codes are used.

 * Just for clarity, G20 and G21 are the standard codes to specify units in inches or millimeters, respectively. Most machines will have a set of system variables accessible from both machine setup and parametric programs to permanently alter system defaults, one of which is inch/millimeter mode.

 * Inches vs. Metric: Almost all the large machine tools, both under manual and NC control, are still in inches.  Example: The shipyard lathes used to turn driveshafts on large seagoing vessels, such as nuclear aircraft carriers.  Many large floor and planing mills are still inches, as well.  At least in the United States economy, these tools play a role in keeping some industries in inches.  Why would you buy a 600 foot between center CNC lathe to replace the perfectly functional manual/NC one you already have, just to get millimeters?  More importantly, where are you going to get it from in the first place?  A floor mill with an 8'x8' table and 18' of pendant travel? Or a 15'x15' vertical boring lathe? Very few manufacturers are making equipment this large, and it is expensive to commission and transport.  Lathes and mills that size were built in the 1920s and '30s, and are still alive and maintaining accuracy.  No one wants to shell out the money for a new one just so they can switch over to metric.  Some machines get converted to CNC. Even so, conversion is still an ineffective option for some of the larger tools, or smaller shops that work on big jobs.  Or the machine design might prohibit it.

 * Outside very-large-job shops, automatic screw machines are another bit of old equipment many production shops use in quantity. Most of those are still in inches. A fancy CNC lathe or turning center isn't going to beat a screw machine in productivity, no matter how hard the lathe manufacturers try.  They just can't get four second part cycles with one spindle and a turret yet. Screw machines are cheaper and produce more parts per hour.  Some shops can afford to switch to CNC screw machines or rotary transfers, but that isn't common yet.  So if the machines that are going to produce the part the cheapest are imperial, do you want to design in metric and have to submit a second set of weird/non-standard imperial drawings?  Or are you just going to design your part in inches in the first place?

 * I really wish we'd just switch and use metric, because it would mean I don't have to stock and track of two sets of tools plus spares. But, in the end, it doesn't matter to the person making the parts if it's inches or metric - it matters to the machines.  - Toastydeath 07:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

 * The CNC computer does not care about inches or meters or even furlongs or horse lengths. Here is how units work on a CNC machine:
 * We first have to start at the mechanical level. Picture a single axis CNC machine with only an X axis. That axis sits on some kind of linear guide and uses a ball screw to move the table. Now the pitch of that ball screw is where we start. If our hypothetical table has a ball screw with a pitch of 10mm per revolution, it takes 100 revolutions to move one meter. Now how do we know where the table is? We do that with an encoder mounted to the back of the motor which direct drives the ball screw. One motor rev equals 10mm of linear travel. The encoder is an incremental quadrature encoder with a nice even count number of 1000 counts per rev. Using quadrature encoding that turns into 4000 counts per rev. Now the motor is commanded not in meters or inches but encoder counts. Using the screw travel of 10mm per revolution and our 4000 counts, that gives us 10mm/4000 = 0.0025mm linear travel per encoder count. Now in the CNC software we say our units are mm and that 1mm = 400 encoder counts. This is how we define our primary units and counts per unit. So to move 1mm the CNC starts turning the motor until it counts 400 counts. This is invisible to the operator and only is adjusted by the machine builder. From there the CNC computer handles the feed rates and acceleration/deceleration. in G code, G1 X100 moves the motor 100 units, or 100mm in our case, which means the software knows to count 100*400 or 40000 encoder counts. In summary the base units of the CNC are based on the encoder and screw pitch. Using inches on the same system requires one to multiply inches by 25.4 to get mm. So in a system with 10mm/rev, to move 1 inch we move 1*25.4*400 or 10160 encoder counts. Simple. Changing units merely involves using a multiplier or divisor relative to the numbers of counts per linear unit of movement. That function is built into the CNC software and can even be adjusted (but is usually fixed for CNC machine tools). One can then imagine a similar imperial system but with a 5 revs per inch screw. And using our encoder example, that means to move one inch you move 4000*5 = 20000 encoder counts. Each count is 0.0001 inches. To move 10 mm you move 10*0.0393*20000 = 7860 encoder counts. Again, SIMPLE. Thaddeusw (talk) 21:11, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Tool Changes
While the examples are interesting, they all lack one rather important thing: They never actually execute a tool change. T-- prepares the tool changer for the next tool swap, in the event the changer has such capability (most lower-end machines do not). M06 swaps the tool out. I have a few other concerns in this same area, and I'm going to pick on one program in particular. All suffer problems.

It begins like so: N1 X0 Y0 T01. This either goes to WCS 0,0 or doesn't move at all. We can't be sure, as the program isn't setting default modes. Then, it prepares the tool changer for a tool swap, but doesn't do anything. If the tool change DID execute via M06, the X and Y don't matter in the slightest, as the spindle on vertical machines needs only travel upwards to meet the changer. Both horizontal and vertical machines will move themselves to the tool changer in the event of a tool change, as absolute 0,0 can be anywhere on the bloody table. On top of this, no movement modes have been entered. So, even in the instance above, the machine doesn't have any of the information it needs to go anywhere (unless the machine enters a movement mode on startup, or you were running a program that actually did something beforehand). This program does nothing, moves the tool changer, and then does nothing again.

One generic, thoroughly explained program aught to be enough. Moreover, it should actually run on a machine if an example is to be included at all. Reducing complexity is necessary teaching new concepts, but not to the point where the information doesn't actually help anyone.

- Toastydeath 06:26, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

He used a lathe as a sample. On a lathe, a Txxyy (T xx=tool number - yy=offset number -- usually the first two digits designate which tool, the second two digits designate which offset. USUALLY, I said) ... anyway, when you call Txxyy, the turret immediately indexes to Tool xx, picks up offset yy, and bob's yer uncle.

Mills are different, they want an M to do the actual switch. Well, most of them. I'm sure there is one somewhere that doesn't ... M codes in particular vary from manufacturer to manufacturer or used to. Now we only have two or three controls and manufacturers, so not as much variety.

btw, I think that sample program is not very good. Turning G96 on when you are still two feet away from the part is stupid. In fact, G96 is stupid except for the finish pass. Kids these days :( 116.231.75.122 (talk) 12:46, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Mistakes
Hello here are mistakes in program in G-codes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.3.244.60 (talk) 18:10, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

example program
I think the example program is wrong. Every machine I've ever run will only allow one M code per line. Also, why would you optional stop after you've backed the tool away from the work, but before a tool change. I think the traditional way it's done is to have an optional stop between each tool change. Actually, never mind. The whole program is messed up. I think it's best just to re-write it rather than bitch about it here. I'll take care of it. SteveB67 (talk) 19:37, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

 * I wouldn't call the program wrong in general but I have to agree that I also tend to use one M code per block. Having said this, many CNCs are able to process more than one M code in certain situations. It all depends on the capabilities of the CNC and how it was configured by the machine tool manufacturer. Joergdiehl (talk) 23:42, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

 * [Update: The example program was revamped in late 2010, after the above comments. Still generalist (can't avoid that), but now a better example. — ¾-10 15:32, 26 February 2011 (UTC)]

 * I am just learning G-code, but it seems that the sample code is machining a cylinder of 1 inch radius, not diameter. GerhardRP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.236.254.107 (talk) 16:41, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

 * Ah, good eye. The program is correct, but there's something to be explained in order to interpret it that way. On most CNC lathes/turning centers, the X-axis is interpreted to mean diameter rather than radius. The machine takes care of dividing by 2. So in line N07, where you see X1.1, the tool is actually moving to 0.550" above centerline. So the tool is 50 thou (not 100 thou) above the intended finished surface. Which means that, if the bar is starting as 1-1/16 bar stock (1.0625), the tool is only 18 thou above the bar surface. The purpose of programming in terms of diameter instead of radius is to make it easier/more intuitive for the human. (The machine cares not for your puny human mental crutches.) This goes back even before CNC; among manual lathes, some have "diameter-reading" cross-slide dial graduations, and some have "radius-reading" dial graduations. (People throw around the term "direct-reading", but I don't like that term, because the hearer might hear "direct" in the sense that one thou on the dial equals one thou of slide linear distance [radius], or in the sense that you can think in terms of diameter, "directly" from dial to diameter. Better just to explicitly say which one you mean.) One might argue that diameter-reading introduces the complication that the human may *forget* that his .100" is actually only 0.50" above intended finish. But in general, two counterpoints: (1) Doing lathe work, especially manually, you grow accustomed to reflexively qualifying your thoughts with a conscientious "*per side*" and "*on diameter*" tacked onto the end of a number/distance-to-go thought; and (2) no matter which way you do it, there are some pros and some cons. Most Many machinists feel that diameter-reading is more desirable overall, and thus it's what CNCs are usually parameterized for. — ¾-10 15:32, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

 * Umm, the comment above is entirely wrong. He cannot say MOST machinists because a hell of a lot of us do NOT do not agree with this. The whole radius vs diameter programming fight has been going on for decades. A lot of us like to program with the real numbers, the opposite of what 3/4/10 says above.

 * But I amn't gonna bother changing the program cuz it don't matter to me, this is just wikipedia, not a real part 116.231.75.122 (talk) 12:52, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Bullshit that it's "entirely wrong". The only single word of the whole paragraph that you consider wrong is that "most" could be changed to "many" to avoid quantifying. I fixed that single word. — ¾-10 00:49, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

G96
Why is G96 considered constant cutting speed whereas in the example program it is specified that G96 is variable cutting speed set with Sxxxx, which is NOT surface speed, but rather spindle speed.? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.251.107.193 (talk) 22:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

 * The comment as written in the sample program was confusingly phrased. The surface speed stays constant because the spindle speed increases while the diameter decreases (and vice versa). I clarified the comment. In G96 mode, the control automatically varies the spindle speed in order to maintain a constant surface speed as the tool tip gets closer to, or farther away from, the axis of rotation. The meaning of the S address integer varies depending on whether G96 or G97 mode is in effect. In G97 mode, the integer is interpreted by the control as meaning rpm (rev/min). In G96 mode, it is interpreted by the control as meaning surface speed, aka cutting speed. If G20 and G96 are in effect, it is interpreted as ft/min. If G21 and G96 are in effect, it is interpreted as m/min. One more piece of info: G97 is the default mode per system parameter if no mode is programmed. — ¾-10 22:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Word
I believe there should be a brief description of what a WORD is before the term is used further down in the body of the text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.70.254.196 (talk) 17:23, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Word. (heh) [Those acquainted with AAVE will catch the joke there.] Anyway, you're right. It should be explained. The word "word" is being used in its comp-sci/prog-lang sense. As far as how that's precisely defined, I forget how to state it, but I have a ref or two that can help. I'll try to find time to look that up and explain/cite in the article. — ¾-10 14:13, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

NURBS
The reference to NURBS near the end of the first section is inappropriate. G0, G1, G2, etc, in the context of NURBS have to do with continuity conditions across adjacent curve segments and _nothing_ to do with NC G-codes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.242.21.29 (talk) 19:55, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

 * No doubt you're right. I think the reason someone added the NURBS paragraph here originally was just as a kind of disambiguation effort, à la "the term 'G-code' is also used in NURBS terminology." It doesn't really work that way currently, coming at the tail end of the lead. It would probably work better as a hatnote sending interested readers to the NURBS article directly (Non-uniform rational B-spline). I'll go see about improving that. — ¾-10 02:44, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Done. My edit summaries provide the explanations. — ¾-10 02:49, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Tool Header
Is there a standardized header defined with tool information (form, diameter, spindle speed, X-Y movement speed, Z movement speed etc)? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.165.103.158 (talk) 09:14, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

 * If I'm not mistaken, I think you're asking about program documentation—i.e., methods and best practices for how people capture, store, and retrieve information about the program and tooling, beyond just the executable lines. This is done through a combination of internal and external documentation. The internal aspect is the info that's written into the program in the form of program comments. (The characters in G-code for enclosing a comment string, to signal to the machine that it should not try to execute the string, are parentheses.) The external aspect is covered by various things—first, of course, is the part drawing itself, and its materials list, prepared by the part designers (engineers, detailers); but beyond that there are things prepared by the CNC programmer that can have various names, such as the tooling sheet, setup sheet, methods sheet, routing sheet, and similar. This is explained more thoroughly in Smid 2008 chapters 48 and 49 (pp. 467-478). To answer your question about standardization, that has actually grown into an unexpectedly interesting topic thanks to the IT advances of recent years (since the rise of the Web, and especially within the past 10 years). The exact nature of program documentation methods varies by era and by company. It has always been in a constant state of evolution, and it is still evolving—and in recent years it is starting to get really freaky. For decades the semi-standardization has existed on the level of personal conventions (of individual programmers) and intra-company standards (which began as personal conventions and evolved into collaborative team standards). Things like company-standard safe blocks and introductory comments, company-standard methods sheets, protocols for how the operator's program tweaks get captured for future use next time that program runs, etc. As the end-to-end CAD/CAM workflow era evolves, the divisions between the drawing and the programming downstream of it can blur a good bit (used to be entirely separate concerns). Some general trends are that as the decades go by, the documentation relies less on hard copy and more on networks, and, more recently, that machine readability is strived for in addition to human readability. In recent years there has been a drive to really take all of this networking and machine readability to an entirely new level of inter-company standardization via things like industry-standard protocols (open, proprietary, or mixtures thereof) for serious data exchange and data mining. That's what projects like MTConnect are all about. Imagine having CAD drawings, tooling sheets, setup sheets, methods sheets, operators' notes and tweaks, and process data (e.g., load metering, vibration monitoring, temperatures) collected during running, all in XML form and beamed anywhere instantly to any API and any app that any crazy bastard can possibly cook up, and all mashed up into God knows what. Semantic shit and AI shit. Robotic machine tools that look at the part drawing, think about it for a moment, and ask the robotic warehouse what materials it has, and can you send some of that shit over in a truck that drives itself? So in an interesting sense, the standardization has been trending ever higher, even recently toward the level of XML schemas and APIs, but that just opens up a whole nother level of wide-open variation and creativity—a whole nother level where nothing is "standard" and all kinds of things are novel. Almost like language—like cavemen spent eons developing a language (standardizing documentation methods), but once they've carried that far enough, they can use the language to compose literature. They once struggled just to communicate "orange ... f-f-fire ... b-b-bad" to each other, but eventually they're writing whole treatises and stories about fire. The words that make up the story are all built using standardized rules of language; but the story they tell can be any wild shit that no one ever thought of before. It's actually rather mind-blowing. Seems to me we're currently about at the stage where the most advanced of us are painstakingly stringing simple sentences together. Wonder how many decades till robots are writing epic poems and shit. But to get back to the heart of your question, what you were asking about is the traditional mix of internal and external, human-readable program documentation—program comments (internal) and tooling sheet, methods sheet, etc (external). And now I must go eat dinner. Ta! — ¾-10 00:54, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Will re-add unless a knowledgeable objection is explained
Deleted by User:Glrx from the "programming environments" section:

"Another recent evolution of the G-code programming environment is the integration of MTConnect, which makes the data of the G-code runtime environment available over internet protocol using open standards (XML schemas, XSLT, et al). For example, MTConnect wraps a block of G-code in XML tags and sends it to the mobile phone of the machine owner, who thus gets a real-time status update on the machine's operation."

Note that this is NOT the same text that was deleted the first time. It is a much-reduced mention with link, whereas the original version was, admittedly, forked versus the MTConnect article, as dawned on me after it was deleted. However, this new draft is short and unforked, so unless someone who is knowledgeable about CNC explains here in this talk thread what their objection is to this draft, it will be going back in, as this revised paragraph has NOT been reverted by two different editors. Thanks. — ¾-10 22:25, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

 * Oppose. It's your burden to justify why the material should be included; don't shift the burden. You need a consensus here before you can include the above material.
 * The paragraph above is just a collection of buzz words and apple pie. Given open standards and wrappers and mobile phones, what's the benefit of informing a machine owner? The operator sees everything in real time; what does the owner care? How do wrappers help the programming environment? Why does a reader of an excyclopedia need this material?
 * Glrx (talk) 22:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

 * Weak oppose The MTConnect stuff is interesting - I'm even looking at implementing it on my new laser cutter. It would certainly belong in CNC articles dealing anywhere near protocols. However I can't see why MTConnect is relevant (beyond a See also or a one-liner) to G-code. G-code might be relevant to MTConnect, but these relationships aren't always commutative. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:39, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

 * Comment I don't care enough to edit war in the article namespace about it, but I'll just document here that Glrx, you're so wrong that you're embarrassing yourself. First of all, nothing I say is "just buzz words", although I am not infrequently accused of that by people who don't actually know enough about a given topic to fully understand what I'm saying or to see how it's relevant (you just joined the dullards club). Speaking of shifting the burden, it's not entirely my problem if YOU'RE ignorant. I can do my best to belabor the pedagogy in order to teach you what you don't know, but in the end it can't be me who is responsible for YOUR ignorance. Second, your other question just further shows how ignorant you are ("what's the benefit of informing a machine owner? The operator sees everything in real time; what does the owner care?"). I don't even have the time right now to set one random internet user straight on that; if you're that ignorant of the machining industry, good luck with editing WP articles about it. As for "How do wrappers help the programming environment?", you're right that they don't help it, per se, but they certainly affect it because from now on CNC programmers may be expected at times to know what's going on with the MTConnect interface and know how to control it. As for "Why does a reader of an excyclopedia need this material?", (1) for the reason just mentioned, and (2) why does any encyclopedia user need any info that's in the encyclopedia? Never know the exact why for each user, but we know that people use encyclopedias to find out more about stuff, and that's enough. So here's where we're at: (1) I'm going to let the baby (you) have its bottle (leaving that section as is) because I don't really give all THAT much of a fuck about overcoming one internet user's ignorance; (2) what we really had here was ONE person wanting to add a sentence and ONE person wanting to keep it out only to save face, not because it would HURT the article by being present; (3) the first person was not the underdog there—rather, it was logically a tie (although Andy's weak oppose later tipped the balance to oppose); (4) the second person can have the face; whatevs (goto baby getting its bottle); (5) I'm putting MTConnect in the see-also section, and if you don't think it can stay there, then YOU are the one who has an issue (wanting to change the article) that needs consensus from others, and like in tic-tac-toe, since I moved first on that particular WP:3RR instance, you've lost it before you started; that's the sad thing about WP:3RR. (See how others can play the wikilawyer game, too, when provoked?) OK, I'm leaving now because I don't like wikilawyering and I've done my little bit of it for 2011Q4 (hereby). In short, I've no doubt that you're really not that much of a dick but that you felt like saving face, and I assure you that I'm not a dick, either, but neither did I want to be a total doormat about letting you have some face, so I at least called you out on it here, and embarrassed you by letting you reveal how you don't know enough about the machining industry to be credibly reverting me. Sorry to let you make yourself look silly. I hope that if we meet again on another article we'll be able to collaborate successfully having gotten this one out of our systems. Later, — ¾-10 00:43, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

 * Lay off with the WP:NPA. If you're going to describe other editors as "the dullards club", then just be aware that other editors also keep such a list (see Talk:Monobloc engine) and you're on theirs.
 * Besides which, isn't ignorance the target for an encyclopedia? MTConnect is obscure, even more obscure than G-code, and no-one would be expected to know why it was significant, unless it was being adequately explained to them. This doesn't seem to have happened here. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

 * In hindsight, I see that I could have pre-empted this disagreement with a better edit summary on this edit. When I started the edit, I was "undoing" the previous deletion in the true sense of "undo"; but then during the edit/preview/edit process, I evolved into writing a much shorter, one-sentence mention-with-link of MTConnect, thus solving the problem that prompted the original deletion (i.e., that the old draft was too long and too forked). Once I'd created that second, shorter draft (which was valid on its own merits for inclusion here), I should have updated my edit summary before saving, to something like this (paraphrase): "OK, I see why you deleted that draft, and I'm replacing it with a much better, much shorter draft that avoids those problems, and simply mentions with link." If I had communicated that, Glrx would probably have judged the new draft on its own merits and allowed it to stand. But by having my edit summary start off with "Undid revision XYZ", I was (unintentionally) inviting an edit war in which I was casting myself as an edit warrior. Just wanted to explain here (belatedly) that that was not what I was trying to do (mere edit-war ping-pong). I'll need to watch out more carefully about updating my edit summaries before saving. — ¾-10 15:00, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

 * Mostly, I think you could have pre-empted this disagreement by avoiding the 20-line attack on another editor. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:23, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

 * Chronologically, that makes zero sense. — ¾-10 17:04, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * PS: Andy, you're one of the last Wikipedians I would ever take advice from on how to collaborate respectfully with others. My record is miles ahead of yours on that score, and I plan to keep it that way. I just lose my temper on rare occasions. Not much more than that. No offense, I just won't participate in any instances of being lectured by you on such a topic. And there are scores of other Wikipedians who would agree. — ¾-10 17:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Requested move
G-code → RS-274 – This article is ultimately about the machine tool language specified in EIA RS-274. The language is frequently called RS-274 (or a close variant such as RS274). It would fit the naming convention used in other common EIA standards that are known by their RS-name: RS-232 and RS-485. I cannot find my copy right now, so I don't if if a hypen is used in the actual RS-274 standard, but my ancient copy of the serial "RS-232-B" standard shows hypens, so I expect the last rev of the machine tool language would be "RS-274-D". For our purposes (like RS-232), the revision letter is irrelevant. Renaming the the article to RS-274 would also side-step/minimize much of the "G-code" name issue. One of the external links even refers to "G-code and M-code" programming, so the mere G-code lacks precision. The NIST interpreter uses the name "RS274/NGC" instead of calling itself a G-code interpreter. The NIST doc says it reads "numerical control code in the 'NGC' dialect of the RS274 numerical control language" (page 1, first sentence). NIST uses the term "G-code" for a specific G and number combination (see pages 19-20). Glrx (talk) 21:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Support as nominator. Glrx (talk) 21:53, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

 * Strong oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Whilst I don't doubt that it's also known as RS-274, I don't recall ever having heard that name being used - certainly not in any common or conversational context (I don't write G code, I write programs that either write G code or else interpret G code and turn it into machine movements). Andy Dingley (talk) 21:56, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose as above. Also, the name "RS-274" is not used in practice. This "requested move" is nonsense. Subtropical-man (talk) 22:48, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose for several reasons. First, per WP:COMMONNAME. On this side of the pond, at least, if you talk about "G-code" on the shop floor, people know what you mean. If you said "RS-274", most machinists would say "huh?", and then when you explained, "you know, G-code", they'd wonder why you didn't just say that to begin with. Second, and more important, there are various dialects of G-code, and RS-274 is one of them. An analogy: Wikipedia has separate articles for French language and Standard French, and German language and Standard German. I view the proposed rename as analogous to proposing to rename the article "German language" as "Standard German". Not all German is Standard German, like not all G-code is RS-274. The "G-code > Implementations" section also mentions ISO 6983 and DIN 66025. Not clear to me how they fit into the proposed renaming plan. If separate articles were the plan, I would say, nah, just keep all variations of G-code in this one article, and leave it named as just "G-code" . — ¾-10 01:04, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose What everyone else said above. I hear reference to "G-Code" every day. I've never heard anyone refer to it as "RS-274 code." If someone said it, I wouldn't known what they were talking about.gargoyle888 (talk) 03:20, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. G-code also refers to a family of proprietary CNC dialects that predated and survived the standard. — Dgtsyb (talk) 15:48, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Continual reinsertion
From time to time, an IPuser will insert an advertising link, for example this edit. The link is to a page that starts, "NC Corrector, my G-code editor". The descriptive paragraph on that webpage apologizes that it is merely project:

 * NC Corrector v4.0, a free editor visualizer programs for CNC milling machines (G-code). Unfortunately development of this program is not moving very fast, due to the small amount of free time. At the moment, is able to render basic milling G and M-functions, drilling cycles, subprograms. Recognizes the 5-way problem arcs. There are exported in DXF format. Shows a tree, a variety of information about the program. (Machine time, path length, MAX MIN point of the trajectory, the number of segments, arcs, etc.) There is a hint of G, M codes when the mouse. Shows the point of the trajectory, the centers of the arcs. Displays an equidistant correction. There is a frame by frame navigation, with excretion in the status bar the current parameters of the program. There are display information about the item, when clicked on it with the mouse in the graphics window and much more ...

WP is not interested in advertising people's projects, and the site is not about G-code as a topic, but rather an application that the author wants one to download. It runs up against WP:ELNO 4, 5, and 11.

I've deleted the link on the basis of WP:BRD, but the IPs don't take it here. I'd appreciate it if somebody would revert the edit so I don't look like I'm engaging in a slow edit war.

Glrx (talk) 03:39, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

 * Maybe block the page from IP edits for a time? — Dgtsyb (talk) 23:54, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

 * It's slow enough that such a block would be overkill. If it is re-inserted, then a revert with a comment in the article not to re-insert without discussion on talk page might be appropriate. Glrx (talk) 20:33, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

 * Now it is up to twice a day. Can we request that the page be blocked from IP edits? — Dgtsyb (talk) 11:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

 * Yes, asking for temporary page protection seems appropriate (but we've had some good IP contribs recently). Go ahead and ask for it. We've been deleting this link since April 10, so a one or two month block might be appropriate. At worst, we get told to continue to play whack-a-mole. The IP range is huge (194.179.x.x, 178.92.x.x), so range blocks seem out of the question. Blacklist/Xlink are other options, but this is the only page being hit, so protecting the page is a minimal step. Glrx (talk) 16:38, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

 * I added a request for temporary semi-protection and added a request for XlinkBot as well. — Dgtsyb (talk) 12:08, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

 * Thanks. Glrx (talk) 16:25, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Origin of the name "G-Code"?
An explanation of the basis of the name "G-Code" would be helpful. Does it have anything to do with Gerber? Or does it derive from Gnn being a subset of codes that are very commonly used to tell a machine what to do? Or?

The article says "G-codes are [...] any word in a CNC program that begins with the letter G." That makes sense, but if so, why does an article that also describes all the other letters go by the title "G-Code"? Gwideman (talk) 21:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

 * Regarding your first question, I don't know, but I think either of the 2 possibilities you mentioned are likely.
 * Regarding your second question, this article used to provide the answer, but someone deleted it for some stupid reason. I will go reinsert it for the benefit of readers who want to know, which is why it was included in the first place. — ¾-10 01:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

 * OK, thanks. Gwideman (talk) 01:50, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

 * Relevant discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/hobbycnc/comments/hdryki/what_does_the_g_in_gcode_stand_for/ /u/richcournoyer suggests that it may have to do with APT (programming language) predating G-Code and using the GO command. Other users in the thread refer to these documents https://www.americanmicroinc.com/difference-g-code-m-code.html#:%7E:text=What%20Is%20CNC%20G%20Code,the%20parts%20what%20to%20do. https://tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=823374 and say that it stands for "Geometric". --Kenblu24 (talk) 15:42, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

.gcode file?
where is that? the 3d file? RealCyGuy (talk) 14:33, 12 July 2018 (UTC)

.gcode is a plaintext format that contains the g-codes listed one after another, it is not a 3D file of an object but rather the toolpath. Some programs can use the toolpath and operation commands to generate a reconstruction of the object based on some assumptions about what the g-code file is written for. --2003:D6:170C:5A82:BCC3:6C66:317:53BE (talk) 10:31, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

True origins where? At MIT? Reference needed.
The history section states, "The first implementation of a numerical control programming language was developed at the MIT Servomechanisms Laboratory in the late 1950s."

No sources cited.

My casual investigation online finds no reference to the substance of a G-code language originating at MIT. The statement in the article doesn't assert that MIT had anything to do specifically with G-code, just a "first implementation" of something else. Nowhere does the article give the origins of G-code specifically, or why it had the favor of being adopted by anyone other than whoever invented this horror of software engineering. Any other NC or robotics work of that era has plenty of claimants who take credit. Similarly imperfect language projects like FORTRAN or BASIC have their authors credited.

I've spent some hours researching the technical lore online, and all I can find are old hands talking about G-code being first encountered as a quick hack to run the early Gerber drilling machines. Nobody seems to remember where it actually started as a concrete thing.

Sure hope this unsourced assertion is not some MIT pranksters up to WP mischief.

Can we know today who is responsible in history for starting G-code? Richard J Kinch (talk) 06:17, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

 * "whoever invented this horror of software engineering" — in the 1950s, machines were not software controlled but rather finite state machines. Even in the 1960s and 1970s, instruments and machines were FSMs with fairly simple designs. Test equipment controlled by HPIB/GPIB would shift ASCII digits into a register; a single alpha character would specify a destination for the shift register. It wasn't until the middle 1970s that microprocessors enabled the switch from FSM to software/Turing machine.
 * See History of numerical control.
 * I cannot find my copy of EIA RS-274, but I think it pointed to MIT for its origins.
 * In looking over the early MIT reports, I didn't find a description of MIT's paper tape format, but the reports give some history and fit with my dim memory. The machine tool and APT development reports explain the issues. Some APT flow charts refer to "X-codes". The initial machine tool control tests were for one axis; that was later extended to 3 axes, so X, Y, and Z codes would make sense, and the term X-code would be natural. Feed rates and spindle speeds were also specified to the machine tool. It could easily be that MIT's milling machine did not have any G-code commands because it only did linear interpolation. One could dispense with G0 and G1 distinction by simply changing the feed rate (which was already required).
 * Glrx (talk) 17:46, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Glrx (talk) 17:46, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

 * So the trail from EIA RS-274 to X-code to MIT is as follows:
 * RS-274-C, which was approved in April 1974, unified two different EIA standard: RS-273 (Straight Cut) and RS-274 (Contour Cut), both of which had initial publication in January 1963 (see Library of Congress copyright filings).
 * The EIA RS standards, which governed members of the EIA, were essentially copies of earlier AIA National Aerospace Standards: NAS 943 (Straight Cut) and NAS 955 (Contour Cut). NAS 943 was approved in 1960 (as per the AIA Annual Report, available online). The EIA governed Electronics manufacturers, while the AIA governed Aerospace manufacturers.
 * Those standards are predominately based on the two leading Numerically Controlled mills during the APT work: the Giddings & Lewis mill (trademarked as the Numericord) which used a combination of General Electric and Concord Controls controllers. The second system was the Kearney & Trecker mill, which used a Bendix controller. Both machines had detailed papers published at the Eastern Joint Computer Conference in December 1957 (proceedings available online). The Bendix solution used "R-codes" to describe operational modes (essentially G-codes) and another set to describe auxiliary on/off functions (essentially M-codes). The Giddings & Lewis system used "X-codes" which also described operational modes and auxiliary on/off functions. These are the X-codes described in the APT flowcharts. The assertion that these were the two leading NC mills in the mid-50s can be found in Forces of Production by David F. Noble. The same book contains significant content as to why Bendix became the preferred solution during the standardization process, which was driven as a requirement by the US Air Force.
 * The X-codes are better documented in US patent 2963137 "Controls for a typewriter and associated apparatus" (the patent title is somewhat misleading - this is a numerical control patent). The patent assignee is Giddings & Lewis, but the four inventors (McDonough, Susskind, Grossimon, and Lee) were all MIT staff attached to the Servo Lab. Giddings & Lewis poached the entire MIT numerical control staff (with the exception of Susskind) to form Concord Controls at the beginning of 1956. Note that the same team worked on the original MIT NC Mill, which was finalized in 1952. Bendix licensed the two patents that were generated from the 1952 mill. It's unknown if the idea for X-Code occurred while the group was at Concord Controls or while at MIT. They would have been influenced by activities in the field of Automatic Programming occurring on the MIT Whirlwind computer in 1954 (Susskind was on the Whirlwind staff). Two Automatic Programming activities, well-known in Whirlwind circles, were the "CS" and "SS" programs, which both utilized labels that were called "mnemonic alphadecimals", which consisted of a single alphabetic character, followed by up to 3 decimal digits, the same as the X-Code format. (documented in MIT Report R-233, "The MIT Systems of Automatic Coding", C.W. Adams, available online)
 * The Bendix R-codes were encoded on punch tape in their own special block, so there was never an appearance of an alphanumeric code, such as "R00", although the codes were labeled "R" on the part programming sheets (see the 1957 paper). The Giddings & Lewis X-Code, however, appeared exactly as G-Code would later be used. There is no relationship between the operational code numbers between X-Code and the later G-code. It's unknown if the same can be said for the auxiliary functions, as they are deliberately not documented in the 1957 paper, nor the 1956 patent - other than the Program End function which was encoded as "X00", the same as the later "M00". (see the part programming sheet, Figure 5, of the G&L patent).
 * Alvonruff (talk) 15:17, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

FANUC sources?
Sources: Smid 2008; Smid 2010; Green et al. 1996. This line appears in the article, but there is no link to the actual publication, there is no title to the publication... and worst, it's not something that can be googled for easily! This needs to be fixed.

GRBL chapter
I miss an article or other description of GRBL in the Wikipedia, so I propose a sub-chapter 'GRBL' under 'implementations'. Okay? --Edoe (talk) 11:02, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:G-code


text:
User:FredrikM

FredrikM is an university student in Sweden. His interests include history, literature, religion and philosophy. He is an advocate of drug use.

title: User:FredrikM


text:
E8 lattice

In mathematics, the E$8$ lattice is a special lattice in R$8$. It can be characterized as the unique positive-definite, even, unimodular lattice of rank 8. The name derives from the fact that it is the root lattice of the E$8$ root system.

The norm of the E$8$ lattice (divided by 2) is a positive definite even unimodular quadratic form in 8 variables, and conversely such a quadratic form can be used to construct a positive-definite, even, unimodular lattice of rank 8. The existence of such a form was first shown by H. J. S. Smith in 1867, and the first explicit construction of this quadratic form was given by Korkin and Zolotarev in 1873.

The E$8$ lattice is also called the Gosset lattice after Thorold Gosset who was one of the first to study the geometry of the lattice itself around 1900.

Lattice points
The E$8$ lattice is a discrete subgroup of R$8$ of full rank (i.e. it spans all of R$8$). It can be given explicitly by the set of points Γ$8$ ⊂ R$8$ such that In symbols,
 * all the coordinates are integers or all the coordinates are half-integers (a mixture of integers and half-integers is not allowed), and
 * the sum of the eight coordinates is an even integer.

 * $$\Gamma_8 = \left\{(x_i) \in \mathbb Z^8 \cup (\mathbb Z + \tfrac{1}{2})^8 : {\textstyle\sum_i} x_i \equiv 0\;(\mbox{mod }2)\right\}.$$

It is not hard to check that the sum of two lattice points is another lattice point, so that Γ$8$ is indeed a subgroup.

An alternative description of the E$8$ lattice which is sometimes convenient is the set of all points in Γ′$8$ ⊂ R$8$ such that In symbols,
 * all the coordinates are integers and the sum of the coordinates is even, or
 * all the coordinates are half-integers and the sum of the coordinates is odd.
 * $$\Gamma_8' = \left\{(x_i) \in \mathbb Z^8 \cup (\mathbb Z + \tfrac{1}{2})^8 : {{\textstyle\sum_i} x_i} \equiv 2x_1 \equiv 2x_2 \equiv 2x_3 \equiv 2x_4 \equiv 2x_5 \equiv 2x_6 \equiv 2x_7 \equiv 2x_8\;(\mbox{mod }2)\right\}.$$

 * $$\Gamma_8' = \left\{(x_i) \in \mathbb Z^8 : {{\textstyle\sum_i} x_i} \equiv 0(\mbox{mod }2)\right\}

\cup \left\{(x_i) \in (\mathbb Z + \tfrac{1}{2})^8 : {{\textstyle\sum_i} x_i} \equiv 1(\mbox{mod }2)\right\}.$$

The lattices Γ$8$ and Γ′$8$ are isomorphic and one may pass from one to the other by changing the signs of any odd number of half-integer coordinates. The lattice Γ$8$ is sometimes called the even coordinate system for E$8$ while the lattice Γ′$8$ is called the odd coordinate system. Unless we specify otherwise we shall work in the even coordinate system.

Properties
The E$8$ lattice Γ$8$ can be characterized as the unique lattice in R$8$ with the following properties: Even unimodular lattices can occur only in dimensions divisible by 8. In dimension 16 there are two such lattices: Γ$8$ ⊕ Γ$8$ and Γ$8$ (constructed in an analogous fashion to Γ$8$. In dimension 24 there are 24 such lattices, called Niemeier lattices. The most important of these is the Leech lattice.
 * It is integral, meaning that all scalar products of lattice elements are integers.
 * It is unimodular, meaning that it is integral, and can be generated by the columns of an 8×8 matrix with determinant ±1 (i.e. the volume of the fundamental parallelotope of the lattice is 1). Equivalently, Γ$8$ is self-dual, meaning it is equal to its dual lattice.
 * It is even, meaning that the norm of any lattice vector is even.

One possible basis for Γ$16$ is given by the columns of the (upper triangular) matrix
 * $$\left[\begin{matrix}

2 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1/2 \\ 0 & 1 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1/2 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1/2 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 & 0 & 0 & 1/2 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 & 0 & 1/2 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & -1 & 1/2 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 1/2 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0  & 1/2 \end{matrix}\right]$$ Γ$8$ is then the integral span of these vectors. All other possible bases are obtained from this one by right multiplication by elements of GL(8,Z).

The shortest nonzero vectors in Γ$8$ have length equal to √2. There are 240 such vectors:

 * All half-integer (can only be ±1/2):
 * All positive or all negative: 2
 * Four positive, four negative: (8*7*6*5)/(4*3*2*1)=70
 * Two of one, six of the other: 2*(8*7)/(2*1) = 56
 * All integer (can only be 0, ±1):
 * Two ±1, six zeroes: 4*(8*7)/(2*1)=112

These form a root system of type E$8$. The lattice Γ$8$ is equal to the E$8$ root lattice, meaning that it is given by the integral span of the 240 roots. Any choice of 8 simple roots gives a basis for Γ$8$.

Symmetry group
The automorphism group (or symmetry group) of a lattice in R$8$ is defined as the subgroup of the orthogonal group O(n) that preserves the lattice. The symmetry group of the E$8$ lattice is the Weyl/Coxeter group of type E$n$. This is the group generated by reflections in the hyperplanes orthogonal to the 240 roots of the lattice. Its order is given by
 * $$|W(\mathrm{E}_8)| = 696729600 = 4!\cdot 6!\cdot 8!$$

The E$8$ Weyl group contains a subgroup of order 128·8! consisting of all permutations of the coordinates and all even sign changes. This subgroup is the Weyl group of type D$8$. The full E$8$ Weyl group is generated by this subgroup and the block diagonal matrix H$8$⊕H$8$ where H$4$ is the Hadamard matrix
 * $$H_4 = \tfrac{1}{2}\left[\begin{smallmatrix}

1 & 1 & 1 & 1\\ 1 & -1 & 1 & -1\\ 1 & 1 & -1 & -1\\ 1 & -1 & -1 & 1\\ \end{smallmatrix}\right].$$

Geometry

 * See 5$4$ honeycomb

The E$4$ lattice points are the vertices of the 5$21$ honeycomb, which is composed of regular 8-simplex and 8-orthoplex facets. This honeycomb was first studied by Gosset who called it a 9-ic semi-regular figure (Gosset regarded honeycombs in n dimensions as degenerate n+1 polytopes). In Coxeter's notation, Gosset's honeycomb is denoted by 5$8$ and has the Coxeter-Dynkin diagram:

This honeycomb is highly regular in the sense that its symmetry group (the affine $${\tilde{E}}_8$$ Weyl group) acts transitively on the k-faces for k ≤ 6. All of the k-faces for k ≤ 7 are simplices.

The vertex figure of Gosset's honeycomb is the semiregular E$21$ polytope (4$21$ in Coxeter's notation) given by the convex hull of the 240 roots of the E$8$ lattice.

Each point of the E$21$ lattice is surrounded by 2160 8-orthoplexes and 17280 8-simplices. The 2160 deep holes near the origin are exactly the halves of the norm 4 lattice points. The 17520 norm 8 lattice points fall into two classes (two orbits under the action of the E$8$ automorphism group): 240 are twice the norm 2 lattice points while 17280 are 3 times the shallow holes surrounding the origin.

A hole in a lattice is a point in the ambient Euclidean space whose distance to the nearest lattice point is a local maximum. (In a lattice defined as a uniform honeycomb these points correspond to the centers of the facets volumes.) A deep hole is one whose distance to the lattice is a global maximum. There are two types of holes in the E$8$ lattice:
 * Deep holes such as the point (1,0,0,0,0,0,0,0) are at a distance of 1 from the nearest lattice points. There are 16 lattice points at this distance which form the vertices of an 8-orthoplex centered at the hole (the Delaunay cell of the hole).
 * Shallow holes such as the point $$(\tfrac{5}{6}, \tfrac{1}{6}, \tfrac{1}{6}, \tfrac{1}{6}, \tfrac{1}{6}, \tfrac{1}{6}, \tfrac{1}{6}, \tfrac{1}{6})$$ are at a distance of $$\tfrac{2\sqrt 2}{3}$$ from the nearest lattice points. There are 9 lattice points at this distance forming the vertices of an 8-simplex centered at the hole.

Sphere packings and kissing numbers
The E$8$ lattice is remarkable in that it gives optimal solutions to the sphere packing problem and the kissing number problem in 8 dimensions.

The sphere packing problem asks what is the densest way to pack (solid) n-dimensional spheres of a fixed radius in R$8$ so that no two spheres overlap. Lattice packings are special types of sphere packings where the spheres are centered at the points of a lattice. Placing spheres of radius 1/$8$ at the points of the E$n$ lattice gives a lattice packing in R$\sqrt{2}$ with a density of
 * $$\frac{\pi^4}{2^4 4!} \cong 0.25367.$$

A 1935 paper of Hans Frederick Blichfeldt proved that this is the maximum density that can be achieved by a lattice packing in 8 dimensions. Furthermore, the E$8$ lattice is the unique lattice (up to isometries and rescalings) with this density. Maryna Viazovska proved in 2016 that this density is, in fact, optimal even among irregular packings.

The kissing number problem asks what is the maximum number of spheres of a fixed radius that can touch (or "kiss") a central sphere of the same radius. In the E$8$ lattice packing mentioned above any given sphere touches 240 neighboring spheres. This is because there are 240 lattice vectors of minimum nonzero norm (the roots of the E$8$ lattice). It was shown in 1979 that this is the maximum possible number in 8 dimensions.

The sphere packing problem and the kissing number problem are remarkably difficult and optimal solutions are only known in 1, 2, 3, 8, and 24 dimensions (plus dimension 4 for the kissing number problem). The fact that solutions are known in dimensions 8 and 24 follows in part from the special properties of the E$8$ lattice and its 24-dimensional cousin, the Leech lattice.

Theta function
One can associate to any (positive-definite) lattice Λ a theta function given by
 * $$\Theta_\Lambda(\tau) = \sum_{x\in\Lambda}e^{i\pi\tau\|x\|^2}\qquad\mathrm{Im}\,\tau > 0.$$

The theta function of a lattice is then a holomorphic function on the upper half-plane. Furthermore, the theta function of an even unimodular lattice of rank n is actually a modular form of weight n/2. The theta function of an integral lattice is often written as a power series in $$q = e^{i\pi\tau}$$ so that the coefficient of q$8$ gives the number of lattice vectors of norm n.

Up to normalization, there is a unique modular form of weight 4 and level 1: the Eisenstein series G$8$(τ). The theta function for the E$n$ lattice must then be proportional to G$4$(τ). The normalization can be fixed by noting that there is a unique vector of norm 0. This gives
 * $$\Theta_{\Gamma_8}(\tau) = 1 + 240\sum_{n=1}^\infty \sigma_3(n) q^{2n}$$

where σ$8$(n) is the divisor function. It follows that the number of E$4$ lattice vectors of norm 2n is 240 times the sum of the cubes of the divisors of n. The first few terms of this series are given by :
 * $$\Theta_{\Gamma_8}(\tau) = 1 + 240\,q^2 + 2160\,q^4 + 6720\,q^6 + 17520\,q^8 + 30240\, q^{10} + 60480\,q^{12} + O(q^{14}).$$

The E$3$ theta function may be written in terms of the Jacobi theta functions as follows:
 * $$\Theta_{\Gamma_8}(\tau) = \frac{1}{2}\left(\theta_2(q)^8 + \theta_3(q)^8 + \theta_4(q)^8\right)$$

where

\theta_2(q) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}q^{(n+\frac{1}{2})^2}\qquad \theta_3(q) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}q^{n^2}\qquad \theta_4(q) = \sum_{n=-\infty}^{\infty}(-1)^n q^{n^2}. $$ Note that the j-function can be expressed as,
 * $$j(\tau) \,=\, 32\,\frac{\left(\theta_2(q)^8+\theta_3(q)^8+\theta_4(q)^8\right)^3}{\left(\theta_2(q)\,\theta_3(q)\,\theta_4(q)\right)^8}$$

Hamming code
The E$8$ lattice is very closely related to the (extended) Hamming code H(8,4) and can, in fact, be constructed from it. The Hamming code H(8,4) is a binary code of length 8 and rank 4; that is, it is a 4-dimensional subspace of the finite vector space (F$8$)$8$. Writing elements of (F$2$)$8$ as 8-bit integers in hexadecimal, the code H(8,4) can by given explicitly as the set
 * {00, 0F, 33, 3C, 55, 5A, 66, 69, 96, 99, A5, AA, C3, CC, F0, FF}.

The code H(8,4) is significant partly because it is a Type II self-dual code. It has a minimum nonzero Hamming weight 4, meaning that any two codewords differ by at least 4 bits. It is the largest length 8 binary code with this property.

One can construct a lattice Λ from a binary code C of length n by taking the set of all vectors x in Z$2$ such that x is congruent (modulo 2) to a codeword of C. It is often convenient to rescale Λ by a factor of 1/$8$,

 * $$\Lambda = \tfrac{1}{\sqrt 2}\left\{x \in \mathbb Z^n : x\,\bmod\,2 \in C\right\}.$$

Applying this construction a Type II self-dual code gives an even, unimodular lattice. In particular, applying it to the Hamming code H(8,4) gives an E$n$ lattice. It is not entirely trivial, however, to find an explicit isomorphism between this lattice and the lattice Γ$\sqrt{2}$ defined above.

Integral octonions
The E$8$ lattice is also closely related to the nonassociative algebra of real octonions O. It is possible to define the concept of an integral octonion analogous to that of an integral quaternion. The integral octonions naturally form a lattice inside O. This lattice is just a rescaled E$8$ lattice. (The minimum norm in the integral octonion lattice is 1 rather than 2). Embedded in the octonions in this manner the E$8$ lattice takes on the structure of a nonassociative ring.

Fixing a basis (1, i, j, k, ℓ, ℓi, ℓj, ℓk) of unit octonions, one can define the integral octonions as a maximal order containing this basis. (One must, of course, extend the definitions of order and ring to include the nonassociative case). This amounts to finding the largest subring of O containing the units on which the expressions x*x (the norm of x) and x + x* (twice the real part of x) are integer-valued. There are actually seven such maximal orders, one corresponding to each of the seven imaginary units. However, all seven maximal orders are isomorphic. One such maximal order is generated by the octonions i, j, and $8$ (i + j + k + ℓ).

A detailed account of the integral octonions and their relation to the E$8$ lattice can be found in Conway and Smith (2003).

Example definition of integral octonions
Consider octonion multiplication defined by triads: 137, 267, 457, 125, 243, 416, 356. Then integral octonions form vectors:

1) $$\pm e_i$$, i=0, 1, ..., 7

2) $$\pm e_0\pm e_a\pm e_b\pm e_c$$, indexes abc run through the seven triads 124, 235, 346, 457, 561, 672, 713

3) $$\pm e_p\pm e_q\pm e_r\pm e_s$$, indexes pqrs run through the seven tetrads 3567, 1467, 1257, 1236, 2347, 1345, 2456.

Imaginary octonions in this set, namely 14 from 1) and 7*16=112 from 3), form the roots of the Lie algebra $$E_7$$. Along with the remaining 2+112 vectors we obtain 240 vectors that form roots of Lie algebra $$E_8$$.

Applications
In 1982 Michael Freedman produced an example of a topological 4-manifold, called the E$1⁄2$ manifold, whose intersection form is given by the E$8$ lattice. This manifold is an example of a topological manifold which admits no smooth structure and is not even triangulable.

In string theory, the heterotic string is a peculiar hybrid of a 26-dimensional bosonic string and a 10-dimensional superstring. In order for the theory to work correctly, the 16 mismatched dimensions must be compactified on an even, unimodular lattice of rank 16. There are two such lattices: Γ$8$>⊕Γ$8$ and Γ$8$ (constructed in a fashion analogous to that of Γ$8$). These lead to two version of the heterotic string known as the E$16$×E$8$ heterotic string and the SO(32) heterotic string.

title: E8 lattice


text:
Karl Becker (philologist)

Karl Ferdinand Becker (14 April 1775 Lieser (Mosel) – 4 September 1849 Offenbach am Main) was a German physician, educationalist, and philologist. He wrote a German grammar. His deductive approach to comparative philology was later discredited.

Biography
He was educated at Hildesheim, and then taught there from 1794 to 1799. He then studied medicine at the University of Göttingen, became a physician at Offenbach in 1815, and was a surgeon in the army. In 1823, he opened a small private school in Offenbach.

Philological research
His work as an instructor led him to make researches in philology, which for a time met with considerable recognition. His view was that all languages are subject to certain logical and philosophical principles, and that thus a science of comparative philology might be arrived at by a process of deduction. This method was later largely discredited by the investigations of Jakob Grimm and others, whereby comparative philology is based on principles of history and ethnology and is attained inductively.

Becker is also known for promoting the theory that there are only three grammatical relations present in language (the predicative, attributive and objective relations), a theory which is still used by contemporary linguists.

Works
His grammars and manuals on the German language went through many editions.
 * Deutsche Wortbildung (German word formation, Frankfurt 1824)
 * Ausführliche deutsche Grammatik (A complete German grammar, 3 parts, 1836–39)
 * Organismen der Sprache (2d ed., Prague 1841)
 * Der deutsche Stil (German style, Prague 1848; 3d ed. revised by Lyon, 1884)

Literature

 * W. Keith Percival. 2008. 'Josiah Gibbs (1790–1861): An echo of Karl Ferdinand Becker in the New World'. In: Lo van Driel & Theo Janssen (eds), Ontheven aan de tijd. Linguistic-historiografische studies voor Jan Noordegraaf bij zijn zestigste verjaardag. Amsterdam: Stichting Neerlandistiek VU & Muenster: Nodus Publikationen, 161-170. (ISBN 978-3-89323-757-9)

title: Karl Becker (philologist)


text:
Wings Air

PT Wings Abadi Airlines, operating as Wings Air, is a scheduled commuter passenger low-cost airline based in Jakarta, Indonesia. The airline operates out of Sultan Hasanuddin International Airport in Makassar as well as several other airports around Indonesia. The company was established as a short-haul regional flight service, wholly owned subsidiary of Lion Air and started operations on July 10, 2003 and the airline is currently linking tier-two and tier-three cities in Indonesia as to bypass the airline's congested base in Jakarta.

Fleet
, Wings Air operates an all-ATR fleet composed of the following aircraft:

Aircraft orders
On 15 November 2009, Wings Air announced that it had signed a deal with ATR worth US$600 million. The deal involved an order for 15 ATR 72-500 aircraft with a further 15 options for ATR's new ATR 72-600 aircraft. The new aircraft replaced the airline's aging Bombardier Dash 8 aircraft and will allow further expansion into smaller airports within Indonesia. The first three ATR 72-500s were delivered in January 2010 and were inaugurated at a ceremony in the tourist and diving destination of Manado.

On 25 February 2011 Lion Air signed an order for 15 new ATR 72s for the Wings Air fleet. The 2009 contract had included options for 15 additional ATR 72-600 aircraft. The deal announced in February 2011 represented the conversion of all 15 options.

On 27 November 2014 Lion Air signed an order for 40 new ATR 72-600 for the Wings Air fleet. It makes Lion Group ATR's largest customer of.

Former aircraft

 * De Havilland Dash 8-300
 * McDonnell Douglas MD-80

Accidents and incidents

 * 25 December 2016: Wings Air Flight 1896, an ATR 72-600 (registered PK-WGW) carrying 52 passengers and crew veered off the runway and crashed on its side while landing in Semarang in bad weather. No one was killed in the crash however six people were treated for shock. The aircraft was substantially damaged. Passengers stated that the undercarriage broke during landing.
 * 5 January 2017: Wings Air Flight 1372, an ATR-72-500 (registration PK-WFP), overran the taxiway while taxiing in Rahadi Osman Airport, Ketapang. The aircraft was carrying 30 passengers and 5 crew. There were no fatalities.
 * 17 February 2024: Wings Air Flight 1646 was shot in Papua Highlands by an unknown person. No one was hurt.

title: Wings Air


text:
Cristina Gutiérrez-Cortines

Cristina Gutiérrez-Cortines (born 17 December 1939 in Madrid) is a Spanish politician and Member of the European Parliament with the People's Party, part of the European People's Party and sits on the European Parliament's Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety.

She is a substitute for the Committee on Budgetary Control and the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. She is also substitute for the Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee, and a member of the Reconciliation of European Histories Group.

Education

 * Doctor of art history
 * Professor of art history
 * Researcher in art and architecture, urban planning and the history of urban development as well as in the use of new technologies in the field of art history

Career

 * 1978-1993: Director of cultural events and evening courses, University of Murcia
 * 1989-1995: Director of the cultural events of La Verdad newspaper (Murcia)
 * 1995-1999: Minister of Education and Culture, Murcia regional government
 * 1995-2003: Director of the Botín Foundation course on "sustainable development and conservation of the historical and natural heritage"
 * since 1999: Member of the European Parliament

title: Cristina Gutiérrez-Cortines


text:
Project Liberty

Project Liberty may refer to:

Technology

 * Liberty Alliance Project, a broad-based industry standards consortium developing suites of specifications defining federated identity management and web services communication protocols
 * Project Liberty, a non-profit initiative to create a new internet infrastructure
 * Project LIBERTY, a cellulosic ethanol endeavor by Jeff Broin

Military

 * Project Liberty Ship, a non-profit organization found in 1978 to save a Liberty Ship, the SS John W. Brown as a memorial for men and women of Liberty Ships during World War II
 * Project Liberty, a USAF plan to rapidly create and field the MC-12W aircraft for Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance

Comics

 * The Liberty Project, a team of former supervillains into superheroes of Eclipse Comics

Politics

 * Free State Project, a libertarian political migration movement

title: Project Liberty


text:
Talk:United Synagogue Youth

NPOV
This article needs to be made NPOV... I feel like I'm trying to be coerced into joining. --Hersch 04:50, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

 * OK. Let's discuss. It's a Jewish organization with Jewish values like any other. You wanting to join an organization that may or may not be in line with your personal or religious values does not make it un-NPOV. This is a tough issue to address. Is this a movement issue? How can we improve? --yonkeltron 04:06, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I feel an article on USY should discuss the controversy over the USY's informal 'point system' as referenced in a January 1999 issue of The Forward, and responded to by USY officials here: if it is to avoid being POV.Ferret-aaron 05:56, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

IGB
Agreed, added Cleanup and citations to the article. --User:Ben Regelshore 20:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Is it really necessary to include the names of the current IGB and IEB members? Especially since terms are only a year. --Sgeress (talk) 02:36, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Nassau County
Could someone from METNY more clearly define what parts of Nassau County are in Chazak, and what parts are in Rakevet? Right now, terminology like "most" is kind of vague.69.158.59.206 22:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)\

Fixing this up now The Tallest Tower (talk) 02:12, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Tags
Yonkeltron, could you be more specific about the problems that you tagged?69.158.48.216 21:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

New Frontier
Why is New Frontier named such? Right now, I just put a "?" and a link to edit the information, but no-ones added the reason. I was gonna say it has to do with JFK's New Frontier speech, but I think that was in SoCal. Jeztah 20:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I noticed the page currently says the reason is Based on the Film "New Frontier" with John Wayne. I doubt this is the real reason. Can anyone support this claim? If not I'm going to remove it. --Fez2005 (talk) 00:24, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

It's because it was admitted as a later region. The name of the region doesn't quite matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.92.13.221 (talk) 15:37, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Nicknames
Seems like it would be more appropriate for the regional president nicknames to be on the official USY website rathern than on Wikipedia, wouldn't it? --Fez2005 (talk) 07:18, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I would agree. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and the nicknames, especially the way they are formatted at this time, do not belong here and as such I am reverting them. Dbiel (Talk) 23:00, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Controversy
The following phrases look odd on their own:
 * Some controversy surrounds USY. A the majority of these allegations are unfounded.
 * It should be noted that this is no longer true. USY welcomes everyone regardless of race or ethniciy. The only reason in which one may not be accepted into USY is if one is not Jewish.

What is unfounded? What is no longer true? Clearly these are responses to statements which have since been deleted. But they cannot stay as they are without some description of the controversy.--Rumping (talk) 02:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)

Why no history section.
Why isnt there any background or history of USY? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.64.195.45 (talk) 01:26, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I have added a bit, and a reference that can be used to add some more. Ricardianman (talk) 21:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Delete, redirect, or merge CRUSY article?
United Synagogue Youth consists of 17 regions, yet Central Region of United Synagogue Youth (CRUSY) inexplicably is the only one of the 17 that has its own article. Why? I cleaned up the CRUSY article for now to remove all the inappropriate and non-encylopedic content - such as names of of it officers (who are all high school students) and dates/locations of events - but the important question is should it be deleted? Or merged into United Synagogue Youth? Is CRUSY even notable, per Wikipedia guidelines? And IF, for some reason, it is decided that the CRUSY article should stay, the list of the chapter's region's must be corrected. It currently lists 26 chapters, yet CRUSY's official website lists only 20 chapters, some of which are not even on the article's list. And are the chapters nicknames/abbreviations (examples: A2USY, BuckUSY, GRUSY) even necessary, or encylopedic? In any case, those issues may be moot depending on the decision of what to do with the CRUSY article. It just doesn't seem to make sense that 16 out of 17 chapters do not have an article, but CRUSY does. Should it be deleted? Merged? Thoughts? --76.189.98.15 (talk) 23:22, 14 July 2012 (UTC) 23:39, 14 July 2012 (UTC) 02:50, 15 July 2012 (UTC) 17:00, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect or possibly Merge I don't see signs that CRUSY meets our WP:GNG, and would therefore encourage a redirect or a merge.  My instinct is to suggest a redirect, as I feel the detailed listing there is perhaps goes into more detail than warranted, but I'm unfamiliar enough with the topic that I don't have a strong concern either way. I wouldn't suggest pure deletion, a redirect here would be harmless, and redirects are cheap.  I wouldn't keep, though. --j⚛e deckertalk 23:28, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm with you on the redirect. --76.189.98.15 (talk) 04:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirected --76.189.110.167 (talk) 22:06, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Redirect confirmed and maintained in regards to CRUSY being a region and not deserving of any higher status The Tallest Tower (talk) 02:14, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.usy.org/escape/na/wheels/ and other official pages. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

B-Level Status: Judaism
In regards to Judaism (Not Israel), the article has been upped to B-level status as the quality of the article, sources, and references have all been well maintained and contain adequate information. The Tallest Tower (talk) 02:16, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:22, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Aaron Albuck and Samara Wyant.png (discussion)
 * Hatikvah 6 Frontman Omri Glickman .png (discussion)

Removed alumni and past conventions
I removed the list of past conventions and the list of alumni, as these were unsourced and would be more appropriate to a directory than an article. The last versions prior to my removal are in this version of the page. Freelance-frank (talk) 18:02, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:United Synagogue Youth


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grammage

 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 routine delete as the final step in a successful transwiki. Rossami (talk) 21:21, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Grammage
DicDef, Transwikied already, not likely to expand. Kevin Rector (talk) 16:15, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * agreed. I'd have said transwiki, but it seems to already be there. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 07:50, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Tony 03:35, 6 May 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.