text:
Newport News Park

Newport News Park, in Newport News, Virginia, is the largest park in the system of municipal parks maintained by the Newport News Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism. At 8,065 acres (32.63 km²), it is one of largest city-run parks in the United States, and offers a wide range of activities for residents and tourists alike.

The park is in the northern part of the city of Newport News (13560 Jefferson Avenue, Newport News VA 23603), with its main entrance on Jefferson Avenue to the northwest of its intersection with Ft. Eustis Boulevard. Farther up Jefferson Avenue is the entrance to its campsite. To the northeast of the intersection, on Ft. Eustis Boulevard, is the secondary entrance at Old Stable Road, and farther up Ft. Eustis Boulevard is the main entrance for the Newport News Golf Club at Deer Run, which is on park grounds. The park shares a long border with the Colonial National Historical Park, and several of its biking and hiking trails cross into it.

History
During the American Civil War, the current park was the site of the Battle of Dam No. 1, part of the Battle of Yorktown (1862). In the days prior to the battle, Confederate forces constructed rifle pits and other earthworks from which they held off the Union Army forces commanded by Maj. Gen. George B. McClellan. The Lee's Mill Earthworks were preserved; though overgrown with woods, they are accessible from the White Oak Nature Trail on the reservoir's camping side.

In the 1960s, as Newport News grew, the city found itself taxing its water supply. The solution was to purchase several lakes in the Lee Hall area and pump the water into the city. To preserve the water's cleanliness, a watershed was created around the new Lee Hall Reservoir. It was developed into Newport News Park in 1966, primarily through the efforts of City Manager Joe Biggins, who considered a large park important to the city's future.

Campsites, recreation, other facilities
Newport News Park has 188 campsites, some of which include electrical and water hookups. It has over 30 miles (50 km) of hiking trails, and a 5.3 mile (8.5 km) multi-use bike path. It offers bicycle and helmet rental (helmets are mandatory for children under 14).

It has an archery range; a disc golf course; and an aeromodel flying field for remote-control aircraft, with a 400 ft (120 m) runway. The park welcomes geocaching, with dozens of geocaches in the park as of September 2018.

It also hosts the Albert E. Dorner cross country invitational annually for several public and private high schools.

Discovery Center
The Newport News Park Discovery Center gives visitors a look at the park in a more structured, educational way. There are exhibits on the park's animal and plant life, and on the land's history, including displays of Civil War artifacts.

title: Newport News Park


text:
Three-center bond

In chemistry, there are two types of three-center bonds:

 * Three-center two-electron bond, found in electron-deficient compounds such as boranes
 * Three-center four-electron bond, found in hypervalent compounds such as the noble gas compounds

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

title: Three-center bond


text:
Talk:Image dissector

Where Farnsworth was born
he was born in utah. Arc88 19:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

 * But he was a teenage farmboy from Idaho. That is, Idaho is where he was a teenage farm boy.  Is there a better way to say it?  Putting his place of birth here is at least as misleading as the original. Dicklyon 19:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

How it worked
discussion copied to here from User talk:Dicklyon for continuation, by User:Dicklyon:

You recently reverted my edit of the description of the Farnsworth Image Dissector saying that it sounded like the operation of Zworykin's design; it does, because they are fairly similar. Please consult the patent application referenced at the bottom of the page which clearly states that the primary method of scansion is detection of the surplus electrons deflected back to the electron gun. Gordon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.159.248.36 (talk) 13:11, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

 * But you didn't cite a source. It would be best to cite a secondary source that explains it, rather than give your own interpretation of the patent. Dicklyon (talk) 16:00, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree, sources should be cited. I wasn't however trying to improve the article, I was trying to correct factual inaccuracies I had noticed in my research.  I would write a better article if I had the time.  "Interpretation" aside, the account I gave was a summary of the description contained in the patent, the current revision as reverted by you is wrong.  I fail to see why citing a secondary source as you suggest would be beneficial; I would then be giving my interpretation of someone else's interpretation of the patent.  I agree that my revision is not necessarily any better in terms of an acceptable article for Wikipedia, but it was at least true.  Arbitrary reversion by you to a false description is bewildering.  Gordon 78.105.184.134 (talk) 21:37, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Don't be bewildered. See WP:BRD; you were bold, I reverted because I doubted the correctness based on the lack of sourcing, now we're discussing it.  My revert was to get your attention to the problem of making your change verifiable, so that if it is it will stick.  Now that you say it's pretty much straight from the patent, it should be easy to simply cite that.  But also see RS about why secondary sources are preferred. Dicklyon (talk) 23:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

 * So I've been looking in Farnsworth's patent filed in 1927, and can't find where you got this stuff. The one you were looking at was the 1933 filing, by which time he had incorporated a storage feature like Zworykin's apparently.  So it is my impression that your description does not apply to the original image dissector.  If we had a secondary source to help put all this into perspective, that could be very useful.  Dicklyon (talk) 01:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Hey there. As to the Image Dissector.  I've done a lot of editing on it recently.  It was being described badly, based upon the 1933 patent for a "second generation" dissector that really wasn't a dissector at all, but a storage camera (like the iconoscope) with a new feature--low velocity electrons.  Nobody else, not even Zworykin, had come up with that yet.  I reworked the major descriptions, added links to the original patents, and pointed out the features of this newer dissector. Playerpage (talk) 14:48, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

 * And what you have wrote down is wrong. You firstly wrote that the second generation image dissectors included an "electron multiplier", and then you also stated that this second generation uses a low velocity electron scanning beam. So which is the real version?, is it the "electron multiplier" version or the low velocity electron scanning beam one?

 * On the other hand, Farnsworth's US patent 2,087,683 is a very representative case. It is very difficult to control a low velocity electron scanning beam, because the electrons in the beam tend to "spread" when the image's borders and corners are scanned, so that one gets an image that is very well focused in the center but blurry in the borders. Iams and Rose were the first ones in solving this problem by using special scanning plates and coils. So that Farnsworth filed a patent for the low velocity electron scanning beam in 1933, but Rose designed and build the first working version of a tube that uses a low velocity electron scanning beam in 1941-1942. And this is not the first time that this situation appears: Dieckmann a Hell filed a patent for the image dissector in 1925, but Farnsworth designed and build the first image dissector in 1927-1928. --189.216.104.69 (talk) 21:24, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Two Historical Notes
One of the first all-electronic video camera tubes was invented in France by Edvard-Gustav Schoultz in 1921. He filed the French patent FR-539-613 on August 23, 1921. The patent was accepted on April 5, 1922, and published on June 28, 1922. You can find a copy of the original document in the web page []

The Image Dissector was also invented in Germany by Max Diekmann and Rudolf Hell in 1925. They filed the German patent DE-450-187 on April 5, 1925. The patent was accepted on September 15, 1927, and published on October 3, 1927. You can find a copy of the original document in the web page []

--134.153.204.160 (talk) 15:50, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

 * And nether bore more than a passing resemblance (if that) to Farnsworth's design, which actually produced an image. (Imagine that! A device that not only bore a patent, but did what it claimed to do.) Wasn't it Hell himself who said they couldn't get the thing to work because the didn't understand how to focus electron beams ("electron optics")? Cheers, Rico402 (talk) 06:57, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 * Indeed, there's a lot to be said for getting one's invention to work. In wikipedia, it's a losing game to engage in invention priority disputes based on primary sources like patents.  I think we just shouldn't allow that.  It's OK to report the existence of these early patents, but statements about exactly what was invented, or who should get credit for what, definitely need to be backed up by secondary sources.  Even then, there will be disagreements, in which case we should simply report who takes what sides, and avoid taking sides ourselves.  Dicklyon (talk) 07:05, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 * So would you support routine reverts (judiciously applied) when someone inserts a specious claim into an article based solely on a patent, without first doing a song and dance on the Talk page? (Cause I've been seeing, and doing, a lot of that. :) Cheers, Rico402 (talk) 07:35, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 * Personally, I'm big on the "R" step in WP:BRD; the "D" can follow if the reverted editor wants to make a case. Especially on issues of priority and invention, we have no business making claims based on primary sources.  One can say "X filed a patent application on similar device in Y year", but not "X gets credit for inventing...".  But even there, if "similar device" is subject to dispute, and not verifiable in secondary sources, that should be taken out.  Dicklyon (talk) 16:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 * I think it should be noted, as well, that we at Wikipedia do not represent the sum total of all Wisdom. We may be trying to pool all knowledge, but that is a different thing.  An example can be found in the Farnsworth debate.  During the heady days of invention, he grabbed as many headlines as his colleagues.  After the world settled into the drive to buy TV's, he was lost in the corporate siren of RCA's marketing dept.  It is only in the last 25 years that he has emerged from the shadows to be taken more seriously for the contributions he made.  A single thought, from a single individual, should never be the end-all of the debate.  That was what happened to Farnsworth.  Careful documentation, many verifiable sources, and what is the community at large--both inside and outside Wikipedia, inside and outside whatever discipline is being covered even--saying on the subject?  Playerpage (talk) 15:00, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

 * And you should rename this web page as: Farnsworth's work, the image dissector and other inventions that never worked. --189.216.74.201 (talk) 03:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Topic of this article
The topic is Farnsworth's image dissector, not the history of television. It would be OK to have a brief section on other inventions around the same time, but to hijack the lead to give credit for his invention to others seems inappropriate here. Agree? Dicklyon (talk) 02:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 * I asked admin VirtualSteve to protect the article -- protection template in place til 7 Aug. Cheers, Rico402 (talk) 05:46, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 * Seems like overkill at this point, but still, the anons can make their case here on the talk page if they wish. Dicklyon (talk) 06:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

 * I wouldn't call it overkill -- every article re television has been under attack; one can hardly keep up. The same specious crap has been popping up like weeds all over the place. All the time wasted on reverts could have been spent actually improving the articles.

 * And 134.153.204.160 posted his "Two Historical Notes" on nearly every Talk page having anything to do with television. The list of "twelve patents for an all-electronic video camera tube filed or issued before Farnsworth's" was posted nearly everywhere as well. But I don't think these guys mucked up the actual articles. Cheers, Rico402 (talk) 07:22, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Someone has to clean this article
Someone has to clean the redaction of this article because it is horrible. It is firstly said that: ''second generation dissectors equipped with Electron Multipliers, as they came to be known, were in demand by RCA for their unique technology. RCA leased the technology from Farnsworth in 1939 and incorporated it into their future television systems.''

 * As far as I know, the electron multiplier was invented by Joseph Slepian in April 1919 []; and the multi-stage electron multiplier was developed by Kubetsky in 1933 []. Thus could anyone please explain me why RCA would lease the electron multiplier technology from Farnsworth, instead of leasing it from Slepian? I wonder the author is not trying to say that Farnsworth also invented the electron multiplier.

It is later said that: ''Farnsworth submitted a patent application for a second-generation Image Dissector in 1933, based on what he learned working with his original designs and the multipactor. The new Image Dissector — actually a cathode-ray tube (CRT), and the first to use a low velocity electron scanning beam — would become the ancestor of the Image Orthicon tube, ...''

 * What? Farnsworth invented the low velocity electron scanning beam in April 1933 [], introduced (but did not invent) the one-stage electron multiplier in January 1928 [] [], invented the multicaptor multiplier in October 1933 [], and used a two-stage electron multiplier (2 dynodes) in April 1937 []. A multi-stage electron multiplier (5 dynodes) was then introduced in August 1937 []. Thus what makes a second generation image dissector?, is it the electron multiplier or the low velocity electron scanning beam?, please make your mind.

Even the ITT image dissectors with modern electron multipliers (12 dynodes) were not as sensible so as to be used in outside broadcasting, they were reserved for industrial applications [], [], and []. The real solution for the inefficiency problem was not the electron multiplier, but the charge storage principle. By the way, Farnsworth's US patent 2,087,683 was based in Tihanyi's work from 1928 [], [], and []. Yes indeed, Farnsworth did have access to Tihanyi's british patents published in 1930. Finally the first practical and all-functional iconoscope was build in November 1931 and presented to the general public in June 1933, the year 1934 is just wrong.

--148.247.186.142 (talk) 01:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

 * I believe these concerns have been adequately addressed, but I can't guaranty they won't crop up again. I'm reasonably certain I removed the whole "second generation image dissector" bit a while ago, but it recently resurfaced.

 * The confusion over Farnsworth's 1930 "electron multiplier" and contemporary dynode electron multiplier has also been addressed. I believe this confusion is why another editor referred to Farnsworth's "electron multiplier" as a "multipactor", a term he apparently didn't employ until his 1935 patent application Multipactor Phase Control, Patent No. 2,071,517. As I'm sure you know, the devices are quite dissimilar. Cheers, Rico402 (talk) 23:57, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

This article is an example of hypocrisy
Dieckman and Hell's German patent number 450,187 is dismissed as an ancestor of the image dissector because they never constructed a fully functional device. However, Farnsworth's US patent number 2,087,683 filed in 1933 is presented as the ancestor of the image orthicon even when he never built a fully functional device.

The devises using a low velocity electron scanning beam are so sensible that they can be used for outside broadcasting []. If Farnsworth ever built a fully functional model of his US patent 2,087,683 before 1938, why did he never announce that he was doing outside broadcasting, while Zworykin could not do so? The first outside broadcasting was done by the British in November 1937, before that Zworykin could do the same in the USA.

The devises using a low velocity electron scanning beam produce images which are well focused in the center but blurry in the borders []. If Farnsworth ever built a fully functional model of his US patent 2,087,683 filed in 1933, why did he never patent a solution to this focusing problem? One only needs to search at google-patents [] in order to discover that Farnsworth only produced three related patents: US 2087683, US 2237334, and US 2107778, none of the them solving the focusing problem.

The orthicon and image orthicon were once upon a time the American industrial standard for broadcasting. If Farnsworth ever built a fully functional model of his US patent 2,087,683 before 1935, why did he abandon this device and worked instead on the "electron multiplier" (multicaptor) image dissector that can only be used in industrial applications [])? Search at google-patents [] in order to discover that Farnsworth produced five patents for an image dissector with a miniature multicaptor in 1935: US 2221473, US 2143262, US 2149045, US 2153918, and US 2235477; and two patent for an image dissector with a multistage "electron multiplier in 1937: US 2161620 and US 2200166 (signed by Gardner).

In conclusion, Farnsworth never built a fully functional model of his US patent 2,087,683 and this article is an example of hypocrisy. Dieckman and Hell's German patent number 450,187 is dismissed as an ancestor of the image dissector because they never constructed a fully functional device. Nevertheless, Farnsworth's US patent 2,087,683 is presented as the ancestor of the image orthicon even when he never built a fully functional device. --148.247.186.142 (talk) 21:52, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Yes, you are completely right. Just imagine the work done by the British team. Lubszynski and Rodda invented the super-emitron for EMI on May 12, 1934 [], and 83 days later Blumlein and McGee also invented the cps-emitron (a low velocity electron scanning beam tube) for EMI on August 3, 1934 [] []. They only needed three years for constructing a fully functional camera and to directly broadcasting the King laying a wreath at the Cenotaph in November 1937, a broadcasting from an exterior location [].

 * On the other hand, Farnsworth invented the low velocity electron scanning beam in April 1933 (US patent number 2,087,683), but he was never able to directly broadcast anything from an exterior location, anything outside a well illuminated television studio. Farnsworth had to film the scenes from an exterior location and to project the film onto an image dissector in order to broadcast them.

--189.216.128.152 (talk) 03:22, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Moreover, orthicon and cps-emitron low-velocity scanning tubes have an instability problem. Whenever sudden flashes of bright light entered the scene, they produced the appearance of a large drop of water slowly evaporating over part of the scene [][]. Farnsworth never mentioned this kind of instability in his notes, because he never constructed any functional version of the device described in his US patent 2,087,683. It is also obvious that the authors of this wikipedia-article are sexing up Farnsworth's work, they only need to say that Farnsworth also discovered the penicillin and constructed the Saturn V American rocket, but the Scottish Alexander Fleming and the evil German Wernher von Braun took out the ideas and honor away from him.

--189.217.113.51 (talk) 02:26, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

 * I would rather say that one does not know whether the authors are driven by ignorance or bad intentions. For example, they say that the multipactors came to be known as electron multipliers. That is wrong, for the multipactor is a special type of the electron multiplier invented by Slepian in 1919 []. The multipactor has two anodes connected to an alternating voltage so that the electrons keep bouncing back and forth between the anodes, and several secondary electrons are produced every time the electrons strike each one of the anodes []. The authors also say that the U.S. patent number 1,969,399 [] is a multipactor, and that is wrong, the device is a multi-stage electron multiplier. The first U.S. patent for a multicaptor is the 2,071,515 [].

 * The authors say as well that the U.S. patent number 1,773,980 [] (filed 1927, issued August 1930) is the first one issued in the U.S. for a television system. This is also wrong, Farnsworth was the first person on earth in giving a public demonstration of a fully-working electronic television camera, but he neither filed nor was honored with the first patent for an electronic television camera in the U.S. There are several other patents before, just look at the patent numbers that are assigned according to the issuing date: U.S. 1,691,324 [] (filed 1925, issued 1928), U.S. 1,694,982 [] (filed 1925, issued 1928), U.S. 1,706,185 [] (filed 1925, issued 1929), U.S. 1,745,029 [] (filed 1927, issued January 1930).

 * The authors finally say that the U.S. patent 2,087,683 (filed 1933, issued 1937) is a precursor of the iconoscope built by Essig in 1931 [] []. Do I need to say something else?, It is obvious that the authors try to sex up Farnsworth's work, but they are doing such a sloppy (and laughable) research that one cannot be mad at them. One must preserve this wikipedia-article as an example of obviously biased work.

--148.247.186.142 (talk) 18:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Every time that I read this wikipedia-article, I find a lie. The author says that there is a bibliographic reference for Farnsworth's multipactor in page 148 of (1987) Albert Abramson's book: The History of Television, 1880 to 1941. Nevertheless, I just look for the word "multipactor" in the copy of Abramson book located in google-books, and I found nothing; please read the link []. On the other hand, I also look for the words "electron multiplier" in the same copy of Abramson book and I found three references in pages 148, 244, and 245; please read the link []. How is possible that someone who cannot distinguish between a multipactor and an electron multiplier dares to write down anything in a wikipedia-article?

--189.217.95.212 (talk) 03:52, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Your commentaries have been taken in consideration. --148.204.17.158 (talk) 03:08, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I would request that others please not write "the authors" say this, "the authors" say that. As best I can tell, most of the baloney in this article has been sliced up and tossed around by a single editor, who had also corrupted the Video camera tube article. I've given him/her a bit of a rebuke here: "Recent edits erroneous, poorly sourced or POV". I have devoted a considerable amount of time researching, editing and maintaining the integrity of this article, as have had others, but I can't be expected to be continuously protecting it against destructive edits. The recent errors I suspect were well-meaning, but terribly misguided.

Re Dieckman and Hell's 1925 German patent: This was not an ancestor of Farnsworth's 1927 patent. The two teams worked independently with no knowledge of the others achievements. Moreover, Farnsworth had conceived the design in 1920. No reputable source disputes this. And Farnsworth's 1933 patent is presented as the ancestor of the image orthicon just as Kalman Tihanyi's 1928 patent is presented as the ancestor to the iconoscope. In both cases the essential elements where in their respective patent applications. There exists no known evidence, even anecdotal, to suggest that Tihanyi ever built a camera or display tube based on the designs he submitted in 1928. As for Farnsworth's 1933 CRT camera tube, he could not market a tube based on this design because RCA held the patent rights for much of the technology, with the notable exception of "low-velocity scanning", although his design included other unique features. With his limited resources, he likely couldn't spare the money and manpower to construct a device he (or Philco, for whom I believe he was working at the time) couldn't sell. Had he built the device, it seems likely he would have discovered and resolved the "blurry image" problem.

Farnsworth did indeed design dissector tubes that worked adequately in direct sunlight, when equipped with his "electron multipliers". Such tubes were used in his 1934 demonstrations in Philadelphia.[Abramson, Albert (1987), The History of Television, 1880 to 1941. McFarland & Co., Inc., p. 209-210. ISBN 9780899502847.] They worked indoors as well, although the heat from the required lighting reportedly created some problems.

Indeed you will not find "multipactor" on page 148 of Abramson's The History of Television, 1880 to 1941. This is the name Farnsworth gives his "electron multipliers" (not to be confused with dynode electron multipliers) beginning with Patent No. 2,071,517, Multipactor Phase Control in 1935. The reference cited for Farnsworth's "multipactor" would better be described as an "error", rather than a "lie". (In either case, it's not mine.) The citation refers to "electron multiplier", which is indeed found on p. 148 of Abramson: "The final electron flow was a function of the potential ... and the number of impacts." (The device amplifies an electrical signal by harvesting a very large number of secondary electrons emitted as a result of multiple electron impacts; hence the term "multipactor".)

Finally, I would politely suggest contributors familiarize themselves with the meaning of such incendiary words as "hypocrisy before they use them to attack others, if even indirectly by attacking the article. Indeed I believe it best to refrain entirely from such pejorative and inflammatory language,

Let us please not cast insults nor hold hard feelings toward one another. Cheers, Rico402 (talk) 23:26, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

PS: Cheers to anon 148.247.186.142 for clarifying the description of "multipactor". (But you're still not quite off the hook for the "hypocrisy" remark. ;-) Rico402 (talk) 00:06, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Let me see. Do you really want us to believe that outside broadcasting means filming at close range in a really sunny street []? Maybe you would want to take a close look at the pictures presented in the book [], you can see there how the BBC installed television cameras in the roofs of several buildings in order to film the King laying a wreath at the Cenotaph in November 1937. I assume you know that the teleo-objective diminishes the amount of light available to the video camera tube; and I prefer avoid talking about the Olympic Games of 1936 because I have not found yet a documented picture of a real Superikonoskop camera filming the games.

 * Moreover, do you have any hard proof that Albert Rose and H. Iams inspired themselves in Farnsworth U.S. patent number 2,087,683 [] in order to design and build their orthicon? Can you prove that Rose and Iams did not inspire themselves in the work rather done by Blumlein, McGee and Lubszynski between 1934 and 1936 [] [] [], considering the fact that EMI and RCA were friend companies by then? It is obvious that RCA had to buy Farnsworth patent (for one million?) in order to be able to sell the image orthicons, but that does not mean that Rose and Iams inspired themselves in Farnsworth patent. Notice that I am not saying that the c.p.s. emitron is the ancestor of the image orthicon, for Blumlein, McGee and Lubszynski can shine by their own achievements, they do not need us to place fake wreaths in their graves.

 * It is quite offensive to hear how fans complain about RCA dismissing Farnsworth work, when at the same time they dismiss the work done by everyone else. For example, considering just one cometary done by Playerplage, Farnsworth introduced the magnetic focusing into his image dissector in 1928 [], does that make him the father of the magnetic focusing in general? Obviously not, because Swinton discovered in 1896 that the magnetic field generated by an axial coil can focus an electron beam [], Fleming corroborated this discovery in 1897 [], Dauvillier used the magnetic focusing in a (CRT) picture tube in 1924 [], and Busch gave a complete theoretical explanation in 1926 of how the magnetic focusing phenomenon works in []. Indeed, Farnsworth was the first one to introduce the magnetic focusing into his image dissectors (thing that neither Dieckmann nor Hell did), but that does not make him his father.

 * Just to conclude, someone should write down about the fact that the image orthicon was a financial failure for RCA. They had to keep the television laboratories working for approximately 20 years, they had to buy Farnsworth patents for one million, and at the end they have to compete against the European image iconoscope (which was cheaper, I suppose). And, Rico402, are you really talking seriously when you say that I am still not quite off the hook?, are you really trying to advice me?, do you really want me to get good notes and to justify myself so that I can be off the hook? You are seriously kidding. Actually, maybe you would want to be so kind so as to explain us which is the right adjective we ought to use for describing those fans who complain about RCA dismissing Farnsworth work, when at the same time they dismiss the work done by everyone else.

 * --148.247.186.142 (talk) 20:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

 * The "off the hook" remark was offered in jest, which should have been obvious, as it closed with a "wink" emoticon. And I would advise you to tone down rhetoric. There's nothing to be gained by constantly insulting your fellow editors. And if you must persist in being so abrasive and condescending, then yes, I do "really want [you] to get good notes and to justify [yourself] so that [you] can be off the hook?" Rico402 (talk) 06:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Contemporary image dissectors
Image dissectors are still being used in specialized applications, particularly for astronomical observations. I've found a few NASA papers and research articles, but nothing more general so far. If anyone has something to contribute on this, please feel free to add your remarks below. Cheers, Rico402 (talk) 00:19, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Yes ideed, the image dissectors were used in astronomy and spectrometry well into the 1980, but not the common industrial type [] [] [] [] []. By the way, I am not devoted to undermine Farnswoth's accomplishments, I am rather devoted to stop the advances of those who think that television was only developed by Farnsworth and RCA, and so they will happily dismiss the work done by everybody else. Believe or not, by my own experience, Farnsworth fans are those who are more prone to dismiss the work done by anyone but Farnsworth himself.--189.217.5.125 (talk) 02:15, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

 * You would also be interested to know that Farnsworth multipactors also have recent applications. They are used as electron guns, for they can produce intense narrow pulses (bunches) of electrons [] [] [] [] [] [] []. You see, Rico402 and Playerpage, it is perfectly possible to find a lot of places where Farnsworth work has had quite important implications, and so you do not have to dismiss the work done by other people.--189.216.100.98 (talk) 07:13, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Actually I was talking with one of the old professor in the department of Astronomy, and in his own words: his generation completely felt in love with the image dissector (ils sont absolument tombé follement amoureux du dissector d'image). They had to count the spectrum lines by hand (or by eye) before the image dissector arrived, and they loved it because its response was essentially linear over a broad illumination-range, unlike other video cameras. Here are some references: [] [] [] [] []. I obviously asked him how did they deal with the sensibility problem, for the star light is not very strong at all, and here is the answer: There was a three stage image intensifier placed in front of the image dissector, so that the incoming image was amplified before being transform into an electronic image, and the scanned electric image was then amplified with a 12-dynode electron multiplier. He called this device a intensified image dissector [].

 * He also told to me about another pair of video tubes. One was the image isocon. It seems to be that the returning beam in an image orthicon has two components, some electrons are reflected by the glass target, while other are scattered by it, so that the scattered electrons are separated, amplified, and used as the video signal []. The resulting image isocon was approximately between five to ten times more sensible than the image orthicon, but it was never a real commercial success, because it was more complicated and fragile than the already complicated image orthicon. The other tube is much more interesting and robust. The scene image is transformed into an electronic image by a semitransparent photo-cathode, the resulting electronic image is then accelerated and focused into a target composed by a myriad of silicon diodes. The accelerated electrons increase the conductivity of the diode target when they land on it (due to the avalanche effect), so that this target can be scanned as in the plumbicon case. The resulting video camera tube is more sensible, simple, and cheaper than the image orticon, but less sensible than the image isocon. It had a very good welcome in the physics community. I feel writting about it in the future, well if I can find which was its real name. --148.247.186.142 (talk) 18:27, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Oh, I forgot to say that the physics community also loved the (intensified) image dissector because you can access any pixel at any time (at random) [] [] [], while you have to wait until the rasterisation is completed in the charge storage cameras in order to access a given pixel, for otherwise the charge storage process cannot be done properly.--148.247.186.142 (talk) 20:08, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Image dissector. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110622033654/http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist10/philo.html to http://www.sfmuseum.org/hist10/philo.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080422211543/http://db3-sql.staff.library.utah.edu/lucene/Manuscripts/null/Ms0648.xml/complete to http://db3-sql.staff.library.utah.edu/lucene/Manuscripts/null/Ms0648.xml/complete

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:53, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Nandoss
mapotu

Bem

Manwayela

41.121.102.165 (talk) 17:47, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

History
This incomplete sentence should be edited for spelling and grammar.

Though RCA had paid royalties though in 1939, legal cost associated with RCA's patent disput, war time manufactuing pressure, Farnsworths patnet expiring just eight years later, and his understandable disilutionment his company would be dissolved shortly after world war two. Khoitsma (talk) 18:16, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Image dissector


text:
Pierre Carniti

Pierre Carniti (25 September 1936 – 5 June 2018) was an Italian politician and trade unionist.

Carniti was born in Castelleone, in the province of Cremona, Lombardy. He was general secretary of CISL, the major Catholic trade union federation, between 1979 and 1985. Unlike most other CISL leaders, who were aligned with Christian Democracy, Carniti was a member of the Italian Socialist Party (PSI).

Carniti was president of the Parliamentary Commission on Poverty from 1994 to 1997. He was a Member of the European Parliament from 1989 to 1999, associated with the Party of European Socialists. In 1993, with Ermanno Gorrieri, he left the PSI to co-found the socialist party Social Christians (CS). He was also a member of Committee on Employment and Social Affairs from 1997 to 1999.

title: Pierre Carniti


text:
Talk:Jedi Council

Shaak Ti Death
The deleted scenes in Episode III show that Shaak Ti died from General Grievous, not Darth Vader. Furthermore, the Kashyyyk holograms show an empty seat in the Council room, with all other masters accounted for.

Note: This statement fails to take into account the fact that George Lucas did not include this scene in the movie and instead altered the plot. Therefore Shaak Ti did not die on Grievous' flagship but in the jedi temple on Coruscant.

 * In the book Shaak Ti Dies at the hands of Grievous also, on board his flagship, exactly as depicted in the movie. Just because George Lucas cuts a scene from a movie doesn't change the story of how things get on.  Also, where does this idea grow from that she was killed in Anakin's purge of the temple, or is someone just trying to fill holes?

 * Wookieepedia disagree with you, considerably; I'm familiar with the guys who wrote their article, and if they say that Shaak Ti later appears alive in ROTS (after her putative death at Grievous' hands), that the Star Wars Databank says she was probably killed in the Purge, that deleted scenes are not canon, that Star Wars Insider issues have her not being killed by Grievous, and that the ROTS novel has her being killed by Vader- I tend to believe them more than a random clueless anon. --maru  (talk)  contribs 18:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with the 'random clueless anon'. Just because a scene was cut, does not change the story.  The book, which tells the complete story, still contains the death of Shaak Ti.  You say that Shaak Ti was seen alive in ROTS after her death - I've watched the flim many times, and I don't remember this; when/where does she appear?  The Star Wars databank says she was probably killed - it doesn't say exactly that she was.  Your argument against deleted scenes not being canon may work - were the same storyline not included, unaltered, in the book of the film.  And again, which version of the ROTS novel has her being killed by Vader - every version I have encountered, as far as I can remember, has her being killed by Grevious, or she doesn't appear anywhere in the novel at all. Themoridian (talk) 08:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

No,if she was killed in the deleted scenes and in the actual movie there is an empty chair in the council, it does not show in the movie that she is killed by Darth vader, so she must have Been killed by GG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.114.229.234 (talk) jon hart 09:49, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

New Jedi Order
I've never read the books, but it seems unlikely to me that anyone by the name of Aaron Swanson would exist in Star Wars, given the somewhat unusual monikers usually given to characters. Aidan 15:55, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * There appear to be a number of people putting in non-existent names in this article and various other Star Wars article. A good check to see if there really are characters of that name in Star Wars it to use the Completely Unofficial Star Wars Encyclopedia at TheForce.net. That is both comprehensive and up to date. David Newton 14:14, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vrook Lamar
I don't know exactly how to do it, and I don't want to mess up the page, but someone needs to change the link that says Vrook Lamar and make it go to List of Ancient Jedi. Now it goes to list of Minors Characters, and he is not even on the list. I hope whoever reads this can understand it.

Jocasta Nu
In what source is Jocasta Nu said to be a former member of the High Council? Jon Hart 19:39, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Jocastu Nu 2
Jocastu Nu is not a former member of the jedi high council but in fact the chronicler of the jedi temple on Coruscant and one of the rare jedi masters not on the council.

 * Then if no one objects or can prove she was a Council member, I'm going to remove her from the article. --Jon Hart 23:58, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Syfo-Dias
I added Sifo-Dyas to the "44 BBY" since Yaddle was never shown in the Stark Hyperspace War (which is where the information is from). The SW Tale "Yaddle: The One Below", shows Yaddle being placed on the council, who did she replace? Sifo-Dyas, as every other Jedi Master from 44BBY is accounted for.

In Episode II, Prime Minister Lama Su implies that Master Sifo-Dyas was a member of the Jedi Council at some time around the events of Episode I. However, Sifo-Dyas is not listed on any of the council member charts. Is this an error, or was Lama Su misled and Master Sifo-Dyas never actually a member of the Jedi Council?

Actors?
Anyone else think it might be of interest to include the various actors who portrayed Jedi in the various movies? Just a thought on how to make this a better article, in my (possibly mistaken) opinion. -Nachosamurai —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.90.240.56 (talk) 04:16, 24 January 2007 (UTC).

Vandalism
Beck (the real-world performing artist) is listed as a Sith Lord in a chart having to do with the "Old Jedi Council" or something to that effect. Other instances of vandalism occur within the same chart.

Eni3614 15:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)eni3614

Article needs serious re-write
What is the real world impact of this subject? This needs a serious rewrite. --Allemandtando (talk) 11:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

What?! It's Star Wars. It's fictional. Of course it doesn't have a real world impact. As an encyclopedic article covering an aspect of a fictional universe, it's pretty damn good. The Moridian  08:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I never noticed, but it seems you spent an awful lot of time yesterday essentially deleting the article through a series of close edits. This article was perfectly fine before, your edits have removed most of the detail.  You seem to be basing your edits on the article on this 'real-world perspective' idea; I think that you should bear in mind that, as an article describing a fantasy universe, there is little real-world perspective.    The Moridian   08:32, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Then the article shouldn't exist at all - if reliable 3rd world commentary doesn't exist about the subject, it should be merged into a article where such material does exist. Check out the difference between this version of lightsaber combat and this older version - even after clean-up, it's facing destruction via AFD. I'd seriously doubt this article would survive in it's current state. --Allemandtando (talk) 10:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Then the article shouldn't exist at all - if reliable 3rd world commentary doesn't exist about the subject, it should be merged into a article where such material does exist.
 * This quote encompassed many of wikipedia's articles. If a wrecking ball swipes through wikipedia removing all articles that are fantasy-based... that would probably mean the removal of about 40% of the wikipedia.    The Moridian   08:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Category: Fictional military organizations
The Jedi Order is not a military organization. Can someone delete this please? --Pellaeon (talk) 05:35, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Done.  The Moridian   08:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge it with Jedi
This whole article can fit as a subsection in the Jedi article. After the non-universe material is covered, the small info of the subject's importance in-universe can be covered in the lower sections.--Nadirali نادرالی (talk) 05:09, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jedi Council


text:
User talk:Garage luva

Image:SohoSquare_L.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:SohoSquare_L.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 19:19, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Garage luva


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragonmage

 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 - deleted - SimonP 00:37, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Dragonmage
Non-notable. Text is Dragonmage is a famous character in the world of Final Fantasy 11 on the Titan server. RJFJR 15:58, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete, vanity. The sooner the better. — Xezbeth 16:02, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete all MMORPG and RPG player characters. This could easily be a Speedy under criterion #1. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  16:22, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vanity, not notable, cruft, etc. -- BD2412 talk 16:45, 2005 Jun 2 (UTC)
 * Delete, no specific claim to fame, probably not notable. Thue | talk 20:37, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, playing a game isn't encyclopedic material. Speedy under criterion one if possible. Mgm|(talk) 20:56, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete [[User:Denni|Denni ☯ 01:30, 2005 Jun 4 (UTC)]] 21:16, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Sorry, speedy fans. This is not deletable under criterion 1, because it's not patent nonsense. It's thin-on-the-ground vanity, but we can delete it here. Denni ☯ 01:30, 2005 Jun 4 (UTC)
 * I (and presumably MGM too) was referring to article criterion #1 ("very short articles with little or no context") not general criterion #1 (patent nonsense). I'm pretty certain it would quality, and in fact it's even shorter than the example given under criterion #1... "He is a funny man that has created Factory and the Hacienda. And, by the way, his wife is great.".  Which, of course, is about Tony Wilson. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  20:48, Jun 4, 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:
Zazenkai

A zazenkai (座禅会), literally meaning "to come together for meditation" is a Zen Buddhist retreat that is usually less intensive and of shorter duration than sesshin. It may comprise a short meeting, without liturgical service, headed by a monastic, or by a group of practitioners without the presence of a teacher. It is also sometimes used to refer to a meeting of lay practitioners who practice together regularly without a resident teacher. It can also denote a period of zazen in a temple schedule.

The meeting itself is punctuated and guided through the use of bells – usually the kinhin bell and the wooden clapper known as a taku. Zazenkai may include a short period of rest or kinhin (walking meditation). A tea ceremony may also follow.

At some Zen centers or temples, zazenkai may be followed by social activities or a dharma talk.

title: Zazenkai


text:
SIGTRAN

SIGTRAN is the name, derived from signaling transport, of the former Internet Task Force (I) working group that produced specifications for a family of protocols that provide reliable datagram service and user layer adaptations for Signaling System  and ISDN communications protocols. The SIGTRAN protocols are an extension of the SS7 protocol family, and they support the same application and call management paradigms as SS7. However, the SIGTRAN protocols use an Internet Protocol (IP) transport called Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), instead of TCP or UDP. Indeed, the most significant protocol defined by the SIGTRAN group is SCTP, which is used to carry PSTN signaling over IP.

The SIGTRAN group was significantly influenced by telecommunications engineers intent on using the new protocols for adapting IP networks to the PSTN with special regard to signaling applications. Recently, SCTP is finding applications beyond its original purpose wherever reliable datagram service is desired.

SIGTRAN has been published in RFC 2719, under the title Framework Architecture for Signaling Transport. RFC 2719 also defines the concept of a signaling gateway (SG), which converts Common Channel Signaling (CCS) messages from SS7 to SIGTRAN. Implemented in a variety of network elements including softswitches, the SG function can provide significant value to existing common channel signaling networks, leveraging investments associated with SS7 and delivering the cost/performance values associated with IP transport.

SIGTRAN protocols
The SIGTRAN family of protocols includes:

The Stream Control Transmission Protocol provides the transport protocol for SIGTRAN user adaptation layer messages across an IP network. It is described in RFC 3873, RFC 4166 and RFC 4960.
 * Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), RFC 2960, RFC 3873, RFC 4166, RFC 4960.
 * ISDN User Adaptation (IUA), RFC 4233, RFC 5133.
 * Message Transfer Part 2 (MTP) User Peer-to-Peer Adaptation Layer (M2PA), RFC 4165.
 * Message Transfer Part 2 User Adaptation Layer (M2UA), RFC 3331.
 * Message Transfer Part 3 User Adaptation Layer (M3UA), RFC 4666.
 * Signalling Connection Control Part (SCCP) User Adaptation (SUA), RFC 3868.
 * V5 User Adaptation (V5UA), RFC 3807.
 * DPNSS/DASS2 User Adaption (DUA), RFC 4129

IUA provides an SCTP adaptation layer for the seamless backhaul of Q.921 user messages and service interface across an IP network. Some users that it supports are Q.931 and QSIG. It is specified in RFC 4233.

V5UA provides an SCTP adaptation layer for the seamless backhaul of V5.2 user messages and service interface across an IP network. It is a variation of IUA and is specified in RFC 3807.

M2PA provides an SCTP adaptation layer for providing an SS7 MTP signaling link over an IP network. It is specified in RFC 4165. The difference between M2PA and M2UA is described in section 1.9 of RFC 4165

M2UA provides an SCTP adaptation layer for the seamless backhaul of MTP Level 2 user messages and service interface across an IP network. It is specified in RFC 3331.

M3UA provides an SCTP adaptation layer for the seamless backhaul or peering of MTP Level 3 user messages and service interface across an IP network. It is specified in RFC 4666.

SUA provides an SCTP adaptation layer for the seamless backhaul or peering of Signalling Connection Control Part user messages and service interface across an IP network. It is specified in RFC 3868.

title: SIGTRAN


text:
Ronan Harris

Ronan Harris (born 14 June 1967) is the founding member of the electronic music project VNV Nation. He is credited with the songwriting, production, lyrical and vocal aspects of the band's music. In the years preceding VNV Nation's debut album, he worked for Q8 Petroleum in central London as an IT manager and was a journalist and webmaster for dark electro magazine Side-Line.

VNV Nation
In 1988, Harris moved from Dublin, Ireland to London, England. He began recording music as VNV Nation in 1990 and moved to Toronto, Canada later that year. In 1994, Harris moved back to Europe where he met up with Mark Jackson, who joined VNV Nation as the drummer for live shows. Since 1995, Harris has released ten studio albums as VNV Nation.

Harris was a co-founder of Dependent Records, but left the label after VNV Nation's Futureperfect album was released in 2002. Harris now releases VNV Nation's records independently on his Anachron Sounds imprint.

In 2001, Harris produced the Angels and Agony album Eternity. He performed vocals for the futurepop supergroup Bruderschaft on their Forever EP in 2003 and appeared on AFI's 2006 Decemberunderground album, providing electronic sequences and effects for some of the songs.

In 2006, Harris founded his new project Modcom, producing instrumental electronic music based entirely on the usage of analog sequencers and synthesizers.

Harris also performs live DJ sets.

title: Ronan Harris


text:
Queen Elizabeth Driveway

Queen Elizabeth Driveway is a scenic parkway in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Route Description
The parkway runs along the western edge of the Rideau Canal, from Laurier Avenue in the north to Dow's Lake where it turns into Prince of Wales Drive at Preston Avenue. Along the entire length of the Drive is a multi-use trail as part of the Capital Pathway system.

History
It is administered and owned by the National Capital Commission (NCC).

The parkway was one of the first projects of the NCC. The NCC replaced the Federal District Commission (FDC), which had been created in 1927, and the even earlier Ottawa Improvement Commission. The two-lane road replaced the industrial buildings and private boathouses that had stood along the canal. The drive was lined with trees and gardens, and a series of large houses were built along it. It was originally known as the Government Driveway but was soon renamed the Rideau Canal Driveway. Several decades later it was given its current name. The speed limit for most of its length is 60 km/h (37 mph).

In the 1950s a similar route was created on the eastern edge of the canal, the Colonel By Drive.

Portions of the parkway are regularly closed to vehicular traffic in the summer months for active use such as cycling. This sparked major debate in 2023, with city councilors and Ottawa mayor Mark Sutcliffe calling on the NCC to reopen the parkway to vehicular traffic in whole or in part, citing traffic and safety concerns. City of Ottawa data has shown that the closure of the parkway leads to increased traffic on O'Connor Street. Despite the pushback, the NCC has continued this initiative in 2024 and is exploring the feasibility of installing bicycle lanes on the parkway.

title: Queen Elizabeth Driveway


text:
Chaise longue (disambiguation)

A chaise longue is an upholstered sofa in the shape of a chair that is long enough to support the legs.

Chaise longue may also refer to:

 * Chaise Longue (Le Corbusier), a chair designed by Charlotte Perriand
 * "Chaise Longue" (song), a 2021 song by Wet Leg

title: Chaise longue (disambiguation)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samantha Nicole Land

 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 - deleted - SimonP 00:37, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Samantha Nicole Land
Vanity. --Lee Hunter 16:00, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete, vanity. — Xezbeth 16:03, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for vanity. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:27, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Hoax, vanity.  No such show, no such character, no such actress, as far as Google and IMDB can tell.  Frjwoolley 16:31, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * 5th Heaven has been deleted before as a hoax wordplay on 7th Heaven. It's not a real show and therefore this article can't be real either. Also, shows that don't list on the IMDB are likely non-existent. Strong delete. Mgm|(talk) 21:00, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, vanity. And complaining about your sibling is a topic better suited for LiveJournal or Xanga, not here. --Idont Havaname 21:16, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete hoax/vanity. --Etacar11 00:54, 3 Jun 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:
Logic in Islamic philosophy

Early Islamic law placed importance on formulating standards of argument, which gave rise to a "novel approach to logic" (منطق manṭiq "speech, eloquence") in Kalam (Islamic scholasticism). However, with the rise of the Mu'tazili philosophers, who highly valued Aristotle's Organon, this approach was displaced by the older ideas from  Hellenistic philosophy. The works of al-Farabi, Avicenna, al-Ghazali and other Muslim logicians who often criticized and corrected Aristotelian logic and introduced their own forms of logic, also played a central role in the subsequent development of European logic during the Renaissance.

According to the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy: ""For the Islamic philosophers, logic included not only the study of formal patterns of inference and their validity but also elements of the philosophy of language and even of epistemology and metaphysics. Because of territorial disputes with the Arabic grammarians, Islamic philosophers were very interested in working out the relationship between logic and language, and they devoted much discussion to the question of the subject matter and aims of logic in relation to reasoning and speech. In the area of formal logical analysis, they elaborated upon the theory of terms, propositions and syllogisms as formulated in Aristotle's Categories, De interpretatione and Prior Analytics. In the spirit of Aristotle, they considered the syllogism to be the form to which all rational argumentation could be reduced, and they regarded syllogistic theory as the focal point of logic. Even poetics was considered as a syllogistic art in some fashion by most of the major Islamic Aristotelians.""

Important developments made by Muslim logicians included the development of "Avicennian logic" as a replacement of Aristotelian logic. Avicenna's system of logic was responsible for the introduction of hypothetical syllogism, temporal modal logic and inductive logic. Other important developments in early Islamic philosophy include the development of a strict science of citation, the isnad or "backing", and the development of a scientific method of open inquiry to disprove claims, the ijtihad, which could be generally applied to many types of questions.

Islamic law and theology
Early forms of analogical reasoning, inductive reasoning and categorical syllogism were introduced in Fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), Sharia (Islamic law) and Kalam (Islamic theology) from the 7th century with the process of Qiyas, before the Arabic translations of Aristotle's works. Later during the Islamic Golden Age, there was a logical debate among Islamic philosophers, logicians and theologians over whether the term Qiyas refers to analogical reasoning, inductive reasoning or categorical syllogism. Some Islamic scholars argued that Qiyas refers to inductive reasoning, which Ibn Hazm (994-1064) disagreed with, arguing that Qiyas does not refer to inductive reasoning, but refers to categorical syllogism in a real sense and analogical reasoning in a metaphorical sense. On the other hand, al-Ghazali (1058–1111) and Ibn Qudamah al-Maqdisi (1147-1223) argued that Qiyas refers to analogical reasoning in a real sense and categorical syllogism in a metaphorical sense. Other Islamic scholars at the time, however, argued that the term Qiyas refers to both analogical reasoning and categorical syllogism in a real sense.

Aristotelian logic
The first original Arabic writings on logic were produced by al-Kindi (Alkindus) (805–873), who produced a summary on earlier logic up to his time. The first writings on logic with non-Aristotelian elements was produced by al-Farabi (Alfarabi) (873–950), who discussed the topics of future contingents, the number and relation of the categories, the relation between logic and grammar, and non-Aristotelian forms of inference. He is also credited for categorizing logic into two separate groups, the first being "idea" and the second being "proof".

Averroes (1126–98) was the last major logician from al-Andalus, who wrote the most elaborate commentaries on Aristotelian logic.

Avicennian logic
Avicenna (980–1037) developed his own system of logic known as "Avicennian logic" as an alternative to Aristotelian logic. By the 12th century, Avicennian logic had replaced Aristotelian logic as the dominant system of logic in the Islamic world.

The first criticisms of Aristotelian logic were written by Avicenna, who produced independent treatises on logic rather than commentaries. He criticized the logical school of Baghdad for their devotion to Aristotle at the time. He investigated the theory of definition and classification and the quantification of the predicates of categorical propositions, and developed an original theory on "temporal modal" syllogism. Its premises included modifiers such as "at all times", "at most times", and "at some time".

While Avicenna often relied on deductive reasoning in philosophy, he used a different approach in medicine. Avicenna contributed inventively to the development of inductive logic, which he used to pioneer the idea of a syndrome. In his medical writings, Avicenna was the first to describe the methods of agreement, difference and concomitant variation which are critical to inductive logic and the scientific method.

Ibn Hazm (994–1064) wrote the Scope of Logic, in which he stressed on the importance of sense perception as a source of knowledge. Al-Ghazali (Algazel) (1058–1111) had an important influence on the use of logic in theology, making use of Avicennian logic in Kalam.

Fakhr al-Din al-Razi (b. 1149) criticised Aristotle's "first figure" and developed a form of inductive logic, foreshadowing the system of inductive logic developed by John Stuart Mill (1806–1873). Systematic refutations of Greek logic were written by the Illuminationist school, founded by Shahab al-Din Suhrawardi (1155–1191), who developed the idea of "decisive necessity", an important innovation in the history of logical philosophical speculation. Another systematic refutation of Greek logic was written by Ibn Taymiyyah (1263–1328), the Ar-Radd 'ala al-Mantiqiyyin (Refutation of Greek Logicians), where he argued against the usefulness, though not the validity, of the syllogism and in favour of inductive reasoning.

title: Logic in Islamic philosophy


text:
King Island

King Island, Kings Island or King's Island may refer to:

Australia
 * King Island (Queensland)
 * King Island, at Wellington Point, Queensland
 * King Island (Tasmania)
 * King Island Council, the local government area that contains the Tasmanian island

Canada
 * King Island (British Columbia)
 * King Island (Nunavut)
 * King Island (Saskatchewan)
 * King Island, Newfoundland and Labrador, a settlement

United States
 * King Island (Alaska)
 * King Island (California)
 * Kings Island (California)
 * King's Island (Connecticut)
 * King's Island (Pennsylvania)
 * Kings Island, amusement park in Mason, Ohio

Elsewhere
 * King Island, Burma, in the Mergui Archipelago
 * King Island (New Zealand), island off the north coast of the North Island
 * King's Island, Limerick, Ireland, an area of Limerick city
 * King Peninsula, Antarctica, originally believed to be an island ("King Island") but later discovered to be a peninsula

title: King Island


text:
Chantilly Lace

Chantilly Lace may refer to:

 * Chantilly lace, a type of lace
 * Chantilly Lace (song), a song by The Big Bopper
 * Chantilly Lace (film), a 1993 film directed by Linda Yellen

title: Chantilly Lace


text:
St George's Bridge

St George's Bridge was a bridge over the River Severn in Shrewsbury, England; so named as it was close to the medieval St George's Hospital. It connected Frankwell, an old suburb of the town, to the town centre via Mardol. The gate on the town side was called Mardol Gate and is located where the Mardol Quay Gardens are. The gate on the other side was called Welsh Gate or St George's Gate. The bridge, sometimes now known as the Old Welsh Bridge, was demolished in 1795 and was replaced with the Welsh Bridge.

The bridge's date of construction is believed to have been about 1262. In 1539 John Leland described it as follows:

"... the greatest, fayrest and highest upon the streame is the Welsh Bridge having 6 great Arches of Stone, soe called because it is the Way out of the Towne into Walles. This Bridge standeth on the West Syde of the Towne, and hath at the one End of it a great Gate to enter by into the Towne, and at the other End towardes Wales a might strong Towre to prohibit Enimies to enter into the Bridge."

The bridge was variously described as Walshebrugge (in 1336), and Walshemanne's brigge (in 1351). A public convenience was built on it in about 1496. One span was a timber drawbridge, while several shops had been built near the middle of the bridge. It is recorded that one tower was still in existence until late in the bridge's life. Above the main tower was a statue of Richard Plantagenet, removed in 1791. The bridge was painted by JMW Turner in 1794. The Welsh Bridge however was built about 80 yards (73m) further downstream, connecting Barker Street (at what was Cripple Lode Gate) with Frankwell. This bridge remains to the day and still carries traffic over the Severn. The section of Barker Street which is on the bridge end has been called Bridge Street since the building of the new bridge.

In 2004, the council installed an information board about the history of the bridge and Mardol, at the bottom of Mardol on the approach to the site of the bridge. Only one dry arch of the old St George's Bridge now remains, on the Frankwell side. The arch was excavated during the construction of Theatre Severn in the late 2000s and is preserved within its foundations.

Saint George is the patron saint of England. It is also given to the (CofE) church in Frankwell, which is within walking distance of the Welsh Bridge/site of St George's Bridge.

title: St George's Bridge


text: Talk:Robert Mitchum

title: Talk:Robert Mitchum


text: File:Nekuf ujas nekuf at.gif

title: File:Nekuf ujas nekuf at.gif


text:
Bully Hayes

William Henry "Bully" Hayes (1827 or 1829 – 31 March 1877) was a notorious American ship's captain who engaged in blackbirding in the 1860s and 1870s.

Hayes operated across the breadth of the Pacific Ocean from the 1850s until his murder on 31 March 1877. He has been described as a South Sea pirate and "the last of the buccaneers". However, in their account of his life, James A. Michener and A. Grove Day warn that it is almost impossible to separate fact from legend regarding Hayes; they described him as "a cheap swindler, a bully, a minor confidence man, a thief, a ready bigamist" and commented that there is no evidence that he ever took a ship by force in the tradition of a pirate or privateer. Hayes was a large man who used intimidation against his crew, although he could reportedly be very charming if he chose to be.

Early career
He was born in Cleveland, Ohio, one of three sons of Henry Hayes, a grog-shanty keeper. Hayes became a sailor on the Great Lakes after running away from home. He is believed to have left New York as a passenger of the Canton on 4 March 1853, although when the ship reached Singapore on 11 July 1853 it was captained by Hayes, and sold by him there shortly after arrival. Hayes operated in East Asia, carrying out various frauds on ship's chandlers over mortgaging ships, providing forged papers in payment for cargo and selling cargo for his own account rather than for the account of the owners of the cargo.

Australia
Hayes arrived in Fremantle, Western Australia in January 1857 as captain of the C. W. Bradley, Jr. (which was the Canton, repurchased and renamed). The Bradley had excellent cabin accommodation, and made two trips to Adelaide; in March and June 1857 with passengers. The South Australian authorities were not pleased as many of these migrants were convicts with conditional pardons. The Singapore ships chandlers caught up with Hayes in Perth, Australia and forced the sale of his ship, bankrupting him. The Bradley was sold in Adelaide on 22 July and was later renamed Federation.

Hayes married the widow Amelia Littleton in the Clare Valley town of Penwortham on 20 August 1857, bigamously if, as is believed, Hayes had earlier married in the United States.

Hayes had built up debts in Adelaide, but by a ruse escaped his creditors and in Melbourne, Australia he gained the command of the Orestes sailing to Vancouver, Canada. Hayes was thrown off the ship in Honolulu by the supercargo for swindling passengers. He proceeded to gain command of a new ship, the 318-ton brig Ellenita with a cargo obtained by fraud. Hayes sailed back across the Pacific, abandoning Amelia in San Francisco. Another version has her falling from the Orestes in 1858 and drowning. On the return trip to Sydney, Hayes lost the Ellenita off Navigator Islands on 16 October 1859 and with the women and children and a skeleton crew reached Savai'i to raise the alarm. After considerable difficulties, the remaining passengers and crew were returned to Sydney by H.M. brig Elk. There Hayes evaded a charge of having indecently assaulted one of the passengers, Miss Cornelia Murray, aged 15.

While Hayes lost the Ellenita in a storm, and others to creditors, he always found new ships to command and new cargoes to fraudulently acquire and sell. Between maritime adventures Hayes became a member of a blackface minstrel troupe in New South Wales, Australia.

New Zealand
Hayes was a notable early figure in the history of the Otago region of New Zealand. After facing bankruptcy in Australia in the late 1850s, he sailed to Otago in 1862 (at the time the region was the center of a gold rush). He travelled the region with a travelling company of vaudeville artists on a tour of New Zealand. In January 1863 they arrived at Arrowtown. Hayes married a widow Mrs Roma 'Rosie' Buckingham, whose four sons were vaudeville artists, performing as The Masters Buckingham. Hayes and Roma settled in Arrowtown where he opened a hotel, the "United States", later called "The Prince of Wales". The nearby Lake Hayes is indirectly named for him; originally called Hay's Lake after an early settler, the spelling changed over the years as locals came to associate the name with that of Bully Hayes.

Hayes had a falling out with the Buckingham family who offered any barber £5 to cut his hair off short. Eventually this happened and it was revealed, as rumoured, that Hayes had been deprived of an ear in California where he had been caught cheating at cards. After this he was mocked in a popular play, and with his reputation gone he and his wife left for Port Chalmers. Later he acquired a ship in Australia, the Black Diamond which he hid in Croixelles Harbour, near Nelson. On 19 August 1864, while travelling in a borrowed yacht, the family was caught by a sudden squall and Rosie, her baby, her brother, and a nurse all drowned. Only Hayes survived.

He moved to Christchurch, where he married Emily Mary Butler in 1865.

Blackbirding on the Rona, Samoa and Leonora
In May 1866 Hayes acquired the brig Rona and operated in the Pacific with bases in Apia, Samoa, and in Mili Atoll in the Marshall Islands. Hayes became notorious in the Pacific because of his "recruiting" of Pacific islanders to provide labour for the plantations of Tahiti, Fiji, Samoa and Australia. While there was some voluntary recruitment of Pacific islanders, the activity predominantly involved kidnapping, coercion and tricks to entice islanders onto ships, on which they were held prisoner until delivered to their destination.

On 17 April 1868, Hayes arrived off Suwarrow on the brig Rona, with 109 islanders from Niue (then known as Savage Island) who were being transported to Tahiti. He found Captain Handley B. Sterndale, and a work crew of 18 men, 2 women and 3 children, whose food supplies had run out. Hayes agreed to rescue Sterndale and the islanders, notwithstanding the Rona was already crowded, with Sterndale and the Islanders being delivered to Rakahanga (Reirson island), from where they eventually were able to travel to Tahiti. Sterndale sold the pearl shell, beche-de-mer, copra and equipment to Hayes. Sterndale later discovered that John Lavington Evans (the superintendent of the Pacific Islands Trading Company Limited who had delivered the work crew to Suwarrow), had travelled to Samoa and sold the ship and departed to Sydney, and concealed that Sterndale and the islanders were on Suwarrow with a limited supply of provisions and no boats capable of leaving the island.

Hayes made money and purchased the brigantine Samoa. By coincidence Hayes lost both ships off Manihiki, Cook Islands in March 1869. Hayes then purchased the schooner Atlantic, although soon after he was arrested in February 1870 by the Consul Williams in Apia on charges related to his activities. Hayes escaped from Samoa on 1 April 1870 on the ship of Ben Pease, a fellow American of similar reputation.

There are differing accounts of the adventures of Hayes and Pease. That of James A. Michener and A. Grove Day Hayes is different in detail to that provided by Alfred Restieaux, an island trader who had dealings with both Hayes and Pease. What is consistent between the accounts is that Hayes and Pease proceeded on a trading cruise in the Caroline Islands and the Marshall Islands in the 250-ton brig Pioneer. According to Restieaux, Hayes and Pease argued over the ownership of the cargo; Hayes claimed the cargo was his and that Pease was merely carrying it as freight, while Pease claimed a half share in the cargo. Restieaux's account is that Hayes sold the cargo in Shanghai; with Restieaux recounting two stories that he had been told about Pease's death: the first was that he drowned after jumping overboard from a Spanish Man-of-War, the second was that he was killed in a fight in the Bonin Islands.

In any event when the Pioneer arrived back in Apia Hayes was in sole command with his explanation for this change in command being that Ben Pease had sold the ship to Hayes and had retired to China – an explanation that many doubted but would not or could not challenge.

Hayes renamed the ship Leonora (the name of his favourite daughter), painting her white in an effort to change her reputation. Hayes continued to trade in coconut oil, copra and blackbirding. Hayes was arrested by Captain Richard Meade of the USS Narragansett (1859) on 19 February 1872 but was released as Meade could not find witnesses or sufficient proof. Hayes's reputation meant that no crew members would give evidence against him. In 1872 Hayes was engaged in the copra trade, including installing George Winchcombe on Nukufetau in the Ellice islands.

Accusations of raping children
Hayes had a long history of charges made against him for the sexual assault of underage females. In 1860 he was brought to court in Sydney for the indecent assault of 15-year-old Cornelia Murray aboard his ship the Ellenita. In 1865 he tried to abduct a 17-year-old girl in New Zealand. However, the most shocking example was the brutal rape of a nine-year-old girl at Kosrae in 1872. In July of that year, Hayes went to the Micronesian island of Pingelap where he extorted the people to load his ship with 6,000 coconuts and to bring him a young girl. His demands were met and he sailed to his residence at the nearby island of Kosrae. Here it was reported through several verified written accounts that Hayes took the girl ashore and violently raped her. After Hayes had finished with her, the girl was taken back to the ship in severe pain, crying with blood running down her legs. She was still not able to walk properly after three months when she was returned to Pingelap. An inquiry by Captain A.E. Dupuis of HMS Rosario (1860) on 26 September 1874 medically examined another victim for evidence against Hayes but he escaped whilst being further questioned, as described in the next section. Hayes was known to treat other girls in a similar manner while at Kosrae.

Louis Becke and the wreck of the Leonora
In 1874, 19-year old Australian Louis Becke sailed a ketch, the E.A. Williams from Apia, Samoa to Mili Atoll to deliver it to Hayes. Becke then joined the Leonora, as a passenger until it was wrecked on 15 March 1874 during a storm while in Utwe harbour at Kosrae. at what is now the Utwe-Walong Marine Park on Kosrae,

After the wreck Hayes brawled with the European traders on Kosrae and with his crew, with the islanders being subject to seven months of oppression and violence. Becke chose to stay with the islanders in the village of Leassé. In September of that year HMS Rosario (1860) under Captain Dupuis arrived and Hayes was arrested, but escaped by a 14-foot boat built of timber from the wreck of the Leonora. In the words of a Petty Officer on board Rosario:

Arrived here on 25th Sept and on approaching the harbour, a boat was seen making for the ship and soon the figure of a stranger was seen on the Quarter deck and no other than the veritable Capt. Hayes, here was the outlaw on a man-of-war's deck with a bold front on him offering to pilot the ship in. On being questioned by the Capt. He informed him that his vessel was wrecked near here and he had established a station making oil. The Rev Snow had also arrived from Ebon. . . . A court of enquiry was held next day and Hayes' crew were each separately examined and their evidence noted down. Hayes was let go on parole to fetch his papers the next day, but the same evening, late, a boat came from the station to say he had escaped from the island in a small boat, taking one man with him – this proved true. The most positive proof of his villainy was in the person of a young female native, a mere child, she was brought on board and subjected to medical examination. This child was still suffering from his treatment although some time had elapsed since the committal of the outrage. Our Capt.(Dupuis) had no authority to make him a prisoner but would have taken him from the island if requested by the Missionary and King. The former acting as an American representative, but the delay in acting together ensured the time for flight. The Capt. visited Hayes' station next day and turned everything over to charge of the Mate, a Swede. The women he forwarded to the King putting them under his protection. These were mostly young females from different islands, his mistresses. The remainder of the crew were taken on board for passage to Sydney.

Becke later became an author, and wrote a number of stories of the exploits of Bully Hayes.

The final voyage on the Lotus
Hayes reached Guam. He purchased the schooner Arabia on credit in April 1875 and accepted a commission to help convicts escape from prison. He was arrested and ended up in prison in Manila, Philippines – at the time a colony of Spain. Hayes was eventually freed and landed in San Francisco without funds in early 1876. He persuaded a Mr. and Mrs. Moody to fund the purchase of a schooner the Lotus. Hayes tricked Mr. Moody into going ashore and sailed off with Mrs. Moody still on board. After arriving in Apia, Samoa, on 2 January 1877, the Lotus sailed to Kosrae, the island on which Leonora was wrecked, where Hayes intended to collect coconuts left at the time of the wreck.

Death
The commonly accepted version of the death of Hayes provided by Charles Elson, the mate of the Lotus, was that when leaving Kosrae on 31 March 1877, the ship's cook Peter Radeck, "Dutch Pete", responding to threats from Hayes, killed him. While the events are unclear, it is understood that Hayes was shot with a revolver, struck on the skull with an iron implement, and thrown overboard. Charles Elson and the remaining crew sailed the Lotus to Jaluit in the Marshall Islands and gave an account of the death of Bully Hayes. No one was concerned at his death – indeed Peter Radeck was treated as a hero.

Becke's interpretation of the events was that Charles Elson plotted with the other crew members to murder Hayes. The motive was remove Hayes and allow Elson and the crew to search for and take the money that Hayes was believed to have buried on Kosrae following the wreck of the Leonora in 1874. The existence of this buried money is part of the myth that surrounds Hayes.

Legend of Bully Hayes
Bully Hayes may not have ever taken a ship by force in the tradition of a pirate or privateer, acts of fraud having been his preferred means of gaining command of a ship; however, if the suspicion that he disposed of Ben Pease to gain command of the Pioneer is true then he may well have been a murderer.

Much of his legend is due to the writing of Louis Becke, who used his time with Hayes in his Pacific stories: In some he tells stories of Hayes that are based on first-hand experience, but there may be some fictional elements.
 * Louis Becke, A Memory of the Southern Seas (1904);
 * Captain 'Bully' Hayes;
 * Concerning 'Bully' Hayes; and
 * The Wreck of the Leonora: A Memory of 'Bully' Hayes

Popular culture

 * The 1894 novel A Modern Buccaneer, by Thomas Browne writing as "Rolf Boldrewood", is based on the story of Bully Hayes.
 * Hayes featured in an episode of the radio series Tales of the Southern Cross
 * The 1954 film His Majesty O'Keefe includes Hayes' character as the antagonist.
 * The 1983 film Savage Islands, (also known as Nate and Hayes), is an adventure film, which starred Tommy Lee Jones as Hayes.

title: Bully Hayes


text:
USS Louisville (1861)

USS Louisville was a City-class ironclad gunboat constructed for the U.S. Army by James B. Eads during the American Civil War. (While initially owned by the Army, the City-class gunboats were commanded by U.S. Navy officers, and were eventually transferred to the Navy.)

Louisville was built at St. Louis, Missouri, by James B. Eads in 1861, under contract with the War Department for the price of $89,000. Designed by U.S. Navy "Constructor" (Naval Engineer) Samuel M. Pook, she was accepted 15 January 1862; and commissioned 16 January 1862, Commander Benjamin M. Dove, USN, in command. Despite being designed by naval personnel, budgetary concerns led the War Department to fund construction of Louisville with Army funds. As such, she was turned over to Army command upon completion and joined the Army's Mississippi River Squadron. Eventually the entire western river flotilla would be transferred to Navy command.

Operational history
Louisville assisted the Army in the capture of Fort Donelson on the Cumberland River 14 to 16 February 1862. From 1 to 5 March, she aided in the occupation of Columbus, Kentucky, the "Gibraltar of the West." Departing Cairo, Illinois, 14 March, she served in the capture of Island No. 10 and New Madrid, Missouri, through 7 April, and helped to prevent southern ships from ascending the river.

In May, Louisville was ordered to Fort Pillow and participated in the First Battle of Memphis 6 June. Commanded by Rear Admiral Charles Henry Davis, her squadron captured and sank the Confederate Mississippi flotilla. On 15 June, she attacked the upper batteries at Vicksburg, before shifting efforts to the White River, departing Helena, Arkansas, 5 August. Escorting USS Benton (1861) and USS General Bragg (1851) (gunboat) to the mouth of the river, she met little resistance. In late September 1862 she was transferred to the Navy and assigned a new commanding officer, Lieutenant Commander Richard W. Meade.

After escorting transport Meteor, disembarking troops at Bledsoe's and Hamblen's landings 21 October, Louisville returned to Helena to join the gunboat fleet, Mississippi Squadron. She joined USS Baron DeKalb (1861), USS Cincinnati (1861), USS Lexington (1861), USS Signal (1862), USS New Era (1862), USS Romeo (1862), USS Rattler (1862), and USS Glide (1862) later in the month on an expedition up the White River in support of Major General William T. Sherman's army. Louisville captured the steamer Evansville near Island No. 36 on 1 November.

Now under the command of Lieutenant Elias K. Owen, Louisville aided in the capture of Fort Hindman, Arkansas Post, 4 to 11 January 1863, and formed part of the expedition through Steele's Bayou, 14 to 28 January. She was ordered to the Yazoo River the 31st and moved to stop Confederates felling trees across the bayou on 21 March. She then turned her attention to the batteries on the river, running past those at Vicksburg on 16 April, and engaging the lower ones on the 29th. She joined USS Pittsburgh (1861), USS Mound City (1862) and USS Carondolet (1861) on that date, silencing the guns of the fort on Grand Gulf and helping to establish the siege which forced Vicksburg's surrender 4 July 1863.

From 12 March to 22 May 1864, Louisville joined in the expedition up the Red River. On 2 June she engaged Confederate batteries seven miles below Columbia, Arkansas, silencing the guns. She landed Union troops at Sunnyside 6 June and anchored off Shipwith's Landing the 20th, to learn that Confederates were traveling upriver with a heavy force, and had crossed Cypress Creek and Bartholomew's Bayou 20 June with cavalry, infantry, and artillery. On learning that Parsson's brigade was 10 miles back of Gaines' Landing, providing reinforcements, Louisville departed immediately for that point, and helped break up the Confederate attack.

Louisville continued service on the Mississippi River until decommissioning 21 July 1865. She was sold at public auction at Mound City, Illinois 29 November 1865. Four of her sailors were awarded the Medal of Honor for their service in the war: Boatswain's Mate Charles Bradley, Boatswain's Mate James Byrnes, Coxswain Timothy Sullivan, and Captain of the Forecastle William Talbott.

Armament
Like many of the Mississippi theatre ironclads, Louisville had its armament changed multiple times over life of the vessel. To expedite the entrance of Louisville into service, she and the other City-class ships were fitted with whatever weapons were available; then had their weapons upgraded as new pieces became available. Though the 8-inch Dahlgren smoothbore cannons were fairly modern most of the other original armaments were antiquated; such as the 32-pounders, or modified; such as the 42-pounder "rifles" which were in fact, old smoothbores that had been gouged out to give them rifling. These 42-pounder weapons were of particular concern to military commanders because they were structurally weaker and more prone to exploding than purpose built rifled cannons. Additionally, the close confines of riverine combat greatly increased the threat of boarding parties. The 12-pounder howitzer was equipped to address that concern and was not used in regular combat.

title: USS Louisville (1861)