text:
User talk:TheArmadillo

Mormon Collaboration selection
Your supported nomination, Mormon trail, has been selected as the April 2006 Mormon Collaboration of the month. I look forward to your help with improving the article! Also, if you'd like, I'd appreciate it if you'd add your name to the list of participants in the Mormon Collaboration project. uriah923(talk) 17:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Emigration Canyon
While I appreciate you creating the Emigration Canyon article, you do seem to have your facts mixed up. Emigration Canyon is not a township in Utah, but rather is just a canyon with just a few people living in it. I appreciate the effort though, and that you took notice of this place when you live in Alberta (by the way, I love Calgary; one of my favorite cities; just thought I'd mention that). Anyway, just thought I'd let you know of this. Hope you don't mind (and you did give me the motivation to write an article on the canyon, which was on my to-do list forever). bob rulz 05:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Hey, that's great that you're working on that. I just made that article because it was linked to on Mormon Trail as a red link, so I thought I'd just make the new page.  Thanks for getting my facts straight. Tom Stringham 13:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.144.102.184 (talk) 14:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:B870.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:B870.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 23:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

September Mormon Collaboration
With the help of your vote, Apostle (Mormonism) has been selected as the September Mormon collaboration. I look forward to working with you on the article. --uriah923(talk) 19:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

FAC: Mormon handcart pioneers
Mormon handcart pioneers is currently a featured article candidate. Since this was a Mormon COTW, I figured you might be able to chime in with some useful comments. If you get the time, it would be much appreciated. --Lethargy 20:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

November 2006 Mormon Collaboration
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has been selected as the November Mormon collaboration of the month. I look forward to working with you on it. --uriah923(talk) 21:49, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Family Home Evening
Your vote has helped Family Home Evening be selected as the December Mormon Collaboration of the Month. I look forward to working with you to improve it. uriah923(talk) 15:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Mormon pioneers collaboration
Due to your vote, Mormon pioneers has been selected as the February Mormon Collaboration of the Month. I look forward to your efforts. uriah923(talk) 17:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

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

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

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 7 days after this notification, per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 21:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

You're right, I probably took the citation thing too far, but the whole article is so murky I wanted to introduce some transparency. I changed my edits now, but left in the reference to Maxine Hanks. --TrustTruth 23:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Spruce It Up Garden Centre
A tag has been placed on Spruce It Up Garden Centre requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 05:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Please confirm your membership
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 20:34, 22 December 2010 (UTC).

Re:
I'm fine with "opponents of LGBT parenting" - check your latest edit though, I think it borked some things. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:TheArmadillo


text: User talk:69.81.17.113

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

title: User talk:69.81.17.113


text:
User talk:Mrs. Adams

Welcome!

Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my talk page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.  Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log.
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language.

Happy editing! ‡  Jarlaxle   01:27, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mrs. Adams


text:
Aether theories

In the history of physics, aether theories (also known as ether theories) propose the existence of a medium, a space-filling substance or field as a transmission medium for the propagation of electromagnetic or gravitational forces. Since the development of special relativity, theories using a substantial aether fell out of use in modern physics, and are now replaced by more abstract models.

This early modern aether has little in common with the aether of classical elements from which the name was borrowed. The assorted theories embody the various conceptions of this medium and substance.

Luminiferous aether
Isaac Newton suggests the existence of an aether in the Third Book of Opticks (1st ed. 1704; 2nd ed. 1718): "Doth not this aethereal medium in passing out of water, glass, crystal, and other compact and dense bodies in empty spaces, grow denser and denser by degrees, and by that means refract the rays of light not in a point, but by bending them gradually in curve lines? ...Is not this medium much rarer within the dense bodies of the Sun, stars, planets and comets, than in the empty celestial space between them? And in passing from them to great distances, doth it not grow denser and denser perpetually, and thereby cause the gravity of those great bodies towards one another, and of their parts towards the bodies; every body endeavouring to go from the denser parts of the medium towards the rarer?"

In the 19th century, luminiferous aether (or ether), meaning light-bearing aether, was a theorized medium for the propagation of light. James Clerk Maxwell developed a model to explain electric and magnetic phenomena using the aether, a model that led to what are now called Maxwell's equations and the understanding that light is an electromagnetic wave. Later, a series of increasingly careful experiments were carried out in the late 1800s, including the Michelson–Morley experiment, to try to detect the motion of Earth through the aether, but no drag was detected. A range of proposed aether-dragging theories could explain the null result but these were more complex, and tended to use arbitrary-looking coefficients and physical assumptions. Joseph Larmor discussed the aether in terms of a moving magnetic field caused by the acceleration of electrons.

Hendrik Lorentz and George Francis FitzGerald offered, within the framework of Lorentz ether theory, an explanation of how the Michelson–Morley experiment could have failed to detect motion through the aether. However, the initial Lorentz theory predicted that motion through the aether would create a birefringence effect, which Rayleigh and Brace tested and failed to find (Experiments of Rayleigh and Brace). All of those results required the full application of the Lorentz transformation by Lorentz and Joseph Larmor in 1904. Summarizing the results of Michelson, Rayleigh and others, Hermann Weyl would later write that the aether had "betaken itself to the land of the shades in a final effort to elude the inquisitive search of the physicist". In addition to possessing more conceptual clarity, Albert Einstein's 1905 special theory of relativity could explain all of the experimental results without referring to an aether at all. This eventually led most physicists to conclude that the earlier notion of a luminiferous aether was not a useful concept.

Mechanical gravitational aether
From the 16th until the late 19th century, gravitational effects had also been modeled using an aether. In a note at the end of his work "A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field", Maxwell discussed a model for gravity based on a medium similar to the one he used for the electromagnetic field. He concluded that the medium would have "an enormous intrinsic energy" and would necessarily have to be diminished in areas of mass. He could not "understand in what way a medium can possess such properties" so he did not pursue it further. The most well-known formulation is Le Sage's theory of gravitation, although variations on the idea were entertained by Isaac Newton, Bernhard Riemann, and Lord Kelvin. For example, Kelvin published a note on Le Sage's model in 1873, in which he found Le Sage's proposal thermodynamically flawed and suggested a possible way to salvage it using the then popular vortex theory of the atom. Kelvin later concluded, This kinetic theory of matter is a dream, and can be nothing else, until it can explain chemical affinity, electricity, magnetism, gravitation, and the inertia of masses (that is, crowds) of vortices. Le Sage's theory might give an explanation of gravity and of its relation to inertia of masses, on the vortex theory, were it not for the essential aeolotropy of crystals, and the seemingly perfect isotropy of gravity. No finger post pointing towards a way that can possibly lead to a surmounting of this difficulty, or a turning of its flank, has been discovered, or imagined as discoverable. None of those concepts are considered to be viable by the scientific community today.

General relativity
Albert Einstein sometimes used the word aether for the gravitational field within general relativity, but the only similarity of this relativistic aether concept with the classical aether models lies in the presence of physical properties in space, which can be identified through geodesics. As historians such as John Stachel argue, Einstein's views on the "new aether" are not in conflict with his abandonment of the aether in 1905. As Einstein himself pointed out, no "substance" and no state of motion can be attributed to that new aether. Einstein's use of the word "aether" found little support in the scientific community, and played no role in the continuing development of modern physics.

Quantum vacuum
Quantum mechanics can be used to describe spacetime as being non-empty at extremely small scales, fluctuating and generating particle pairs that appear and disappear incredibly quickly. It has been suggested by some such as Paul Dirac that this quantum vacuum may be the equivalent in modern physics of a particulate aether. However, Dirac's aether hypothesis was motivated by his dissatisfaction with quantum electrodynamics, and it never gained support from the mainstream scientific community.

Physicist Robert B. Laughlin wrote:

"It is ironic that Einstein's most creative work, the general theory of relativity, should boil down to conceptualizing space as a medium when his original premise [in special relativity] was that no such medium existed [..] The word 'ether' has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. . . . Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry. [..] It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with 'stuff' that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is not accepted (taboo)."

Pilot waves
Louis de Broglie stated, "Any particle, ever isolated, has to be imagined as in continuous "energetic contact" with a hidden medium." However, as de Broglie pointed out, this medium "could not serve as a universal reference medium, as this would be contrary to relativity theory."

title: Aether theories


text:
Arden, New York

Arden is a hamlet around the town line of the Orange County towns of Tuxedo and Monroe in the "boot" of New York, United States, west of the Hudson River. It is roughly coterminous with the 10910 ZIP Code.

The area was originally known as Greenwood, and was noted for the iron works belonging to Robert and Peter P. Parrott, of Parrott gun fame. The Greenwood Furnace was established in 1810; during the American Civil War, the furnace produced the iron for the famous Parrott Gun, which was built in Cold Spring by the Parrott brothers. The Parrotts built St. John's Episcopal Church in Arden in 1863. By the 1890s, the iron industry in New York was in decline due to the discovery of surface beds of iron in Minnesota.

The hamlet takes its current name from the Arden estate built in the area by railroad magnate Edward H. Harriman in the late 19th century. It is today a National Historic Landmark, but not open to the public. The Open Space Institute acquired the building and 540 surrounding acres from Columbia University for $4.5 million in 2007. In 2011, the Open Space Institute sold the Arden Estate property to another nonprofit organization for $4.5 million.

title: Arden, New York


text:
Minnie Hollow Wood

Minnie Hollow Wood (c. 1856 –1930s) was a Lakota woman who earned the right to wear a war bonnet because of her valor in combat against the U.S. Cavalry at the Battle of Little Big Horn. At one time, she was the only woman in her tribe entitled to wear a war bonnet.

Biography
Her husband, Hollow Wood, was a Cheyenne who also fought at the Little Big Horn. Both Hollow Woods surrendered to Colonel Nelson A. Miles at Fort Keogh in Montana in 1877.

Minnie Hollow Wood lived on the Cheyenne reservation in Montana and became an informant of author and ethnologist Thomas Bailey Marquis. Marquis suggested that she was a "favorite" of Miles while she was a prisoner at Fort Keogh.

Representation in popular culture
Minnie Hollow Wood was the subject of an animated short by Yvonne Russo. Minnie's War Bonnet premiered at the Red Nation International Film Festival in 2019.

title: Minnie Hollow Wood


text:
User talk:Maurizio9

Welcome!

Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my talk page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.  Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log.
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language.

Happy editing! ‡  Jarlaxle   01:29, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Maurizio9


text:
List of hotels in New York City

The following is a list of some notable hotels in New York City.

Number of hotels
Most of the hotels are represented by the Hotel Association of New York City trade organization. As of 2016, the organization had 270 members, representing 75,000 rooms and 50,000 employees. Private hotels, such as the Yale Club, are members of the group.

More than half the hotels (114) are in Midtown Manhattan with 75 on the west side (most in the Times Square area) and 39 on the Midtown East Side. The city tourist list does not include single room occupancy hotels.

Largest hotels
Following is a list of the largest hotels in New York based on number of rentable rooms. Included in this lists is any hotel in the NYC area with at least 600 rooms.

The total room number includes suites. Some large hotels have been carved up into mixed use buildings in which the hotel occupies a portion of the building. This list includes only the hotel portion.

Former hotels

 * Grand Central Hotel
 * Hotel Pennsylvania
 * Hotel Vanderbilt
 * New York Biltmore Hotel
 * Stanhope Hotel
 * Marriott World Trade Center

title: List of hotels in New York City


text: User talk:69.193.171.161

title: User talk:69.193.171.161


text:
User talk:Drysponge

Welcome!

Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my talk page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.  Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log.
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language.

Happy editing! ‡  Jarlaxle   01:30, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Drysponge


text:
Sodium propionate

Sodium propanoate or sodium propionate is the sodium salt of propionic acid which has the chemical formula Na(C2H5COO). This white crystalline solid is deliquescent in moist air.

Reactions
It is produced by the reaction of propionic acid and sodium carbonate or sodium hydroxide.

Uses
It is used as a food preservative and is represented by the food labeling E number E281 in Europe; it is used primarily as a mold inhibitor in bakery products. It is approved for use as a food additive in the EU, USA and Australia and New Zealand (where it is listed by its INS number 281).

Structure
Anhydrous sodium propionate is a polymeric structure, featuring trigonal prismatic Na+ centers bonded to six oxygen ligands provided by the carboxylates. A layered structure is observed, with the hydrophobic ethyl groups projecting into the layered galleries. With hydrated sodium propionate, some of these Na-carboxylate linkages are displaced by water.

title: Sodium propionate


text:
User:Dzzl/ishy vonn

ishy vonn (German)
crazy stuff.

an unbelieveable outcome.

title: User:Dzzl/ishy vonn


text:
Viveca Lindfors

Elsa Viveca Torstensdotter Lindfors (December 29, 1920 – October 25, 1995) was a Swedish American stage, film, and television actress. She won an Emmy Award and a Silver Bear for Best Actress.

Biography
Lindfors was born in Uppsala, Sweden, the daughter of Karin Emilia Therese (née Dymling) and Axel Torsten Lindfors.

She trained at the Royal Dramatic Training Academy, Stockholm. Soon after, she became a theater and film star in Sweden. She moved to the United States in 1946 after being signed by Warner Bros., and began working in Hollywood. She appeared in more than 100 films, including Night Unto Night, No Sad Songs for Me, Dark City, The Halliday Brand, King of Kings, An Affair of the Skin, Creepshow, The Sure Thing, and Stargate. She appeared with actors including Stewart Granger, Ronald Reagan, Jeffrey Hunter, Charlton Heston, Glenn Ford, Lizabeth Scott, and Errol Flynn.

In 1952, she appeared on Broadway alongside Edmond O'Brien in John Van Druten's I've Got Sixpence. Two years later, she made her West End debut in J. B. Priestley's poorly received play The White Countess.

Lindfors appeared frequently on television, usually as a guest star, though she played the title role in the miniseries Frankenstein's Aunt. Most of her TV appearances were in the 1950s and 1960s, with a resurgence in the 1980s and early 1990s. In 1990, she won an Emmy Award for her guest appearance on the series Life Goes On. She was nominated for an Emmy in 1978 for her supporting role in the TV movie A Question of Guilt.

In 1962, she shared the Silver Bear for Best Actress award with Rita Gam at the Berlin Film Festival, for their performances in Tad Danielewski's No Exit. Among her later film roles, she played the kindly and worldly wise Professor Taub in The Sure Thing (1985).

In the last years of her life, she taught acting at the School of Visual Arts in Manhattan, and had a lead role (essentially playing herself) in Henry Jaglom's Last Summer in the Hamptons (1995). The same year, she returned to the Strindberg Festival in Stockholm to perform in the play In Search of Strindberg.

Personal life
Lindfors was married four times, to Swedish cinematographer Harry Hasso, Swedish attorney and World Chess Federation president Folke Rogard, director Don Siegel, and Hungarian writer, producer, and director George Tabori. She had three children – two sons (John Tabori with Hasso, and actor Kristoffer Tabori, with Siegel) and a daughter (Lena Tabori, with Rogard).

Lindfors was a naturalized U.S. citizen and a liberal Democrat, who supported the presidency of Jimmy Carter. Lindfors died from complications of rheumatoid arthritis at the age of 74 in Uppsala.

title: Viveca Lindfors


text:
Potassium propanoate

Potassium propanoate or potassium propionate has formula K(C2H5COO). Its melting point is 410 °C. It is the potassium salt of propanoic acid.

Use
It is used as a food preservative and is represented by the food labeling E number E283 in Europe and by the INS number 283 in Australia and New Zealand.

title: Potassium propanoate


text:
Jake Busey

William Jacob Busey (born June 15, 1971) is an American actor. Among his most prominent roles have been serial killer Johnny Bartlett in 1996's The Frighteners, Ace Levy in 1997's Starship Troopers, Kyle Brenner in 2001's Tomcats, Aiden Tanner in the 2014–2016 TV series From Dusk till Dawn: The Series, and Sean H. Keyes in the Predator franchise.

Early life
Busey is the son of actor Gary Busey. Busey spent his childhood on film sets and touring with bands in which his father sometimes played, such as Leon Russell, Willie Nelson and Little Feat.

Career
Busey's motion picture debut was in the 1978 crime film Straight Time with his father Gary, along with Dustin Hoffman and Theresa Russell. His two most notable appearances are as the murderous religious fanatic opposite Jodie Foster in Contact and as smart-mouthed soldier Ace Levy in Starship Troopers, both in 1997. He appeared in H. G. Wells' War of the Worlds, one of three 2005 film adaptations of the novel by H. G. Wells, alongside C. Thomas Howell. Additionally, he has had major roles Peter Jackson's The Frighteners with Michael J. Fox (1996),Tomcats (2001) opposite Jerry O'Connell and Shannon Elizabeth, in James Mangold's thriller Identity (2003), with C. Thomas Howell in The Hitcher II (2003), and Road House 2 (2006). Busey played the role of "Backfire" in Patrick Durham's movie Cross which was released directly to DVD and download in May 2011, and stars in the independent film Don't Pass Me By.

He has also had minor parts in films like Windrunner: A Spirited Journey starring Jason Wiles, Christmas with the Kranks starring Tim Allen, I'll Do Anything, Enemy of the State, The Killing Jar, The Stoned Age, PCU, Fast Sofa with Jennifer Tilly and Natasha Lyonne, and Reaper with Danny Trejo and Vinnie Jones. He also had a main role on the television series Shasta McNasty. Busey portrayed Professor Aiden "Sex Machine" Tanner since 2013 in From Dusk till Dawn: The Series.

He also provided the voice of The Radioman in the 2012 video game Spec Ops: The Line and of the DJ of Resistance Radio in XCOM 2: War of the Chosen. Additionally, he voiced Teenage Tom during flashback scenes in the 1989 film Hider in the House which his father, Gary Busey starred in as Tom Sykes. In 2016, Busey starred in the feature film Deserted.

In 2018, Busey appeared in two episodes of Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. portraying Mack's old friend Tony Caine. Busey later joined the cast of Stranger Things in the third season portraying a journalist named Bruce.

Personal life
In 2012, he and his girlfriend April Hutchinson had a daughter, Autumn.

title: Jake Busey


text:
Talk:Spearhead (band)

This article needs to clear up. It seems as if it were taken from a fan bio.

—

i was bold and merged Spearhead with Michael Franti. when it comes down to it, Spearhead only existed by iteself for two albums, and every album since then has been "Michael Franti & Spearhead." Spearhead was a very short stub, and all the Spearhead content was already duplicate on the Michael Franti page aside from two external web links. perhaps later someone will want to creat a more complete history of the band and its changing crew over time in which case i'd suggest the page be called "Michael Franti & Spearhead" as the majority of the albums are credited to that name. Slamorte 15:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:Spearhead (band)


text:
User talk:Nielsseh

Welcome!

Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my talk page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: . If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.  Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log.
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language.

Happy editing! ‡  Jarlaxle   01:35, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Nielsseh


text:
Talk:Medulla oblongata

There's a tuberculum cinereum in the medulla now is there?
From the current article:

>The lower part of the medulla, immediately lateral to the fasciculus cuneatus, is marked by another longitudinal elevation known as the tuberculum cinereum.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is the tuberculum cinereum not in the hypothalamus? This was my understanding, and it is also this body that is referred to in the link.

As well:

>The base of the medulla is defined by the commissural fibers, crossing over from the ipsilateral side in the spinal cord to the contralateral side in the brain stem; below this is the spinal cord.

Again, I was under the impression that this is attempting to describe the pyramidal decussation. If these are also known as commissural fibres by some, then the linked-to article should at least be changed to something else, as it doesn't talk about the crossing of corticospinal fibres at all.

I'll take a look to see if there's any other glaring errors in this article when I have more time :) corvus.ag (talk) 23:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Ascending tracts in the medulla
Good article. Studying it at the moment.

Ascending tracts (e.g. DCML / Spinothalamic) ascend through the medulla, no? So suggest add this to functions of the medulla?

C.

Info that would be useful
If anyones interested in supplying it, I'd like to see this page include the following info: Related Disorders to the Medulla. Drugs which affect the Medulla. Primary neurotransmitters in the Medulla. Seg 02:45, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

The image
The sagittal MRI image does not indicate the correct location of the medulla oblongata - it is a little too caudal & actually indicates the most cephalad extent of the spinal cord. The medulla is anterior to the cerebellum and has the inferior cerebaellar peduncles arising from it, so the circle needs to move up a little, if anyone knows how to. --Mattopaedia 00:28, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Question
What's the deal with being shot here? Is it true that this will cause to body to be completely immobile with no twitches? Are the movies right?

 * Which movie(s) are you referring to? Miami Vice or Waterboy? --WhiteEcho 20:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Orneriness in Alligators
I removed "In reptiles, such as the alligator, it is credited with controlling functions such as orneriness." since as far as I can tell this is just a rearrangement of a quote from The Waterboy, not actual scientific information about the medulla oblongata.

 * I agree. Everyone knows that alligators are ornery because they got all them teeth and no toothbrush. Tracer Bullet 05:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Clean up needed
Clean up, reference to autonomic nervous system and raphe nuclei needed. Miserlou 01:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Unneccesary revert
There is no justification in that revert. Those were all legit and very sorely needed edits. Miserlou 02:41, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I think this is just a matter of miscommunication because we were both editing the same article at the same time. Please take a closer took at the edit history. --Arcadian 03:38, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Here is your edit from today (Dec 17th) with your edit summary "REVERT! I resent the implication that it was vandalism, it was cleanup, explained in edits and even mentioned in talk page. Look at this reasonably."
 * Here is where I said I was fixing the vandalism from December 12th. I'm assuming that is what you were responding to in your edit summary, but nobody was accusing you of vandalism.
 * Here was the vandalism on Dec 12th, where the word "arteries" was replaced with "butt cheeks".

 * Sorry dude. Physiological psych final tomorrow, getting all stressed and edgy on the internets.Miserlou 03:42, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Inexcusable that information such as "buttcheeks" is still kept in the entry after such a period of time. The specific section on "Blood Supply" was better organised under Arcadian's edit. No edit wars please. Permafrost 07:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I just want to point out that "butt cheeks" and "butt hole" appear to be vandalism in the section "Between the anterolateral and posterolateral sulci"Myocastor 15:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Questioning "Effects on the Body" Section
Does the information supplied under that headline belong in there? I think it should have a different title.

What I gather from the section name is that it will tell me what effect medulla oblongata has on the body, not what shooting someone through the mouth to hit it will do to the person. This is amateurish. --WNF 08:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I have removed the unsourced section on the medula's role in assassination. If anyone wants it back, please provide a source. --Arcadian 20:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Military snipers are trained to shoot for the Medula Oblongata, because it instintaneously halts all motor functions. They call it the "chestnut", I think. The best shot, apparently, is either from the rear a at the base of the skull, or through the mouth. http://charlotte.creativeloafing.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A2090 http://www.snipercentral.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4477&start=0 (65.4.245.192 06:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC))

changed XI to IX
I think it was a typo on line 37 which read

The posterolateral sulcus lies in line with the dorsal roots of the spinal nerves. It gives attachment to the rootlets of the glossopharyngeal, vagus and the accessory nerve or the XI, X, and the XI cranial nerves from above downwards in order.

which I changed to IX, X and the XI

I forgot to sign in before editing philb 21:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Pyramid (brainstem)
The term medullary pyramids is far more widely used and this page could easily be integrated with medulla oblongata (with its own section) which is in need of expansion. Iztwoz (talk) 18:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I am leaning to oppose a merge... I think we should be careful when merging into a 'top-level' article about an organ like this. The danger is that if we merged all the relevant subarticles, we will make this into a list, and over time as edits are made we may actually lose some important information. I have also posted something at WT:ANAT about this. --Tom (LT) (talk) 20:52, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅. Notability guidelines would offer more guidance on this situation and also, I think, offer more support to other mergers. --Tom (LT) (talk) 20:56, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Page moved to Medullary pyramids and rm merge proposal.--Iztwoz (talk) 12:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

"See Also" Section...?
Other parts of the brain? Jobonki (talk) 17:16, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Contained within the nervous system navbox. I'll change its state to expanded. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:38, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

The medulla is not responsible for respiration and I have deleted references to it
In 2011 Dr Daniel Rubens showed that the vestibular system of the inner ear is responsible for the breathing impulse, and not the medulla. He did a study on mice by injecting gentamicin into their ears and found the mice with destroyed ears no longer responded to CO2 or breathed normally. He also concluded that sudden infant death syndrome was caused by inner ear damage for this exact same reason.

The article is hence heavily outdated so I have updated it to comply to new science. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.29.87.48 (talk) 08:03, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Breathing
An IP editor today added the following material to the article: "There exists a popular medical myth even among doctors that the medulla oblongata is what regulates the CO2 induced respiration reflex, and was long believed to be true. In 2011, Dr Daniel Rubens, a researcher for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) concluded that the vestibular system in the inner ear is actually responsible for the breathing reflex, as laboratory mice with chemically-induced damaged inner ears did not respond at all to CO2 and did not increase their respiration rate. New research has shown that the vestibular system is crucial for the survival of mammals as it regulates respiration, and the medulla either plays very little role in regulating respiration, or not at all."

I reverted the changes because: (a) I'm pretty sure they are not correct. The vestibular system contributes to overall arousal, and loss of activity there could in some marginal situations lead to cessation in breathing, but to my knowledge there is no evidence that any of the crucial neural circuitry that directly controls breathing lies in the vestibular nuclei. As I understand it, the statements previously in this article were correct. (b) Even if I am wrong and the new wording is actually correct, Wikipedia policy requires that it be supported by a proper published source. See WP:MEDRS for a description of what counts as a proper source. Looie496 (talk) 14:49, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Medulla oblongata


text:
Category:Fisheries organizations

This category includes articles on government agencies, national and international organizations, and corporate associations that have a major focus on the conservation and/or management of fisheries and the fishing industry.

title: Category:Fisheries organizations


text:
Stanton, Missouri

Stanton is an unincorporated community in southern Franklin County, Missouri, United States. It lies on Interstate 44 at the junction with Missouri Supplemental Route W, which provides access to Meramec Caverns, located approximately two miles southeast along the Meramec River.

A post office called Stanton has been in operation since 1857. The community took its name from the nearby Stanton copper mines.

title: Stanton, Missouri


text: Template:Generic top-level domains

title: Template:Generic top-level domains


text:
Tomás Mejía Camacho

José Tomás de la Luz Mejía Camacho, better known as Tomás Mejía (17 September 1820 – 19 June 1867), was a Mexican soldier of Otomi background, who consistently sided with the Conservative Party throughout its nineteenth century conflicts with the Liberals.

Mejía was one of the leading conservative commanders during the War of Reform and during the French invasion of Mexico which established the Second Mexican Empire. He became known for repeatedly using the Sierra Gorda, which he was familiar with since childhood, as his base of operations. After the fall of the empire, Mejía was executed on 19 June 1867, alongside Emperor Maximilian, and fellow conservative commander Miguel Miramón.

Early life
Little is known about Mejía’s childhood, but he was likely born in Pinal de Amoles, Sierra Gorda, Querétaro. He attended the primary school of the Villa del Jalpan.

His father Cristóbal Mejía was from 1840 to 1842 prefect of the Jalpan district. This was during the Centralist Republic of Mexico when Mexico had been divided into departments, and during which there were many rebellions in favor of states rights which sought to restore the federalist system by which Mexico had previously been governed. One such revolt in 1840 had been led by José de Urrea, who defeated, then found himself in Jalpan by 1841, where Cristóbal Mejía harbored Urrea in his home. The young Tomás Mejía met Urrea and the latter told him war stories and encouraged him in his wishes to join the military.

Early Military Career
Government forces led by Juan Cano then arrived in Jalpan, and Mejía enlisted in the army right there and then. Cano was impressed by the prefect’s son, and his talent for horse riding, writing a letter of recommendation to President Anastasio Bustamante so that Mejía could be admitted to the Military Academy in Mexico City.

Mejía’s first tour of service would be as part of Apache–Mexico Wars, during which he was stationed at Chihuahua City and fought against the Apache from 1842 to 1845. For his service he was promoted in ranks.

Mexican American War
After the United States annexed Texas, and tensions between Mexico and the U.S. were leading to war, Mejía formed part of the Army of the North sent to patrol the Mexican frontier. He was transferred from Chihuahua to Monterrey. After the American invasion began, Mejía followed the Mexican army as it fell back, and he saw action at the Battle of  Buena Vista.

The American northern advance under Zachary Taylor stalled after the Battle of Buena Vista, and after the bulk of the Mexican army was called back to the capital to face Winfield Scott’s expedition from the East, Mejía was made part of a garrison that was ordered to stay in the north at San Luis Potosi where he would remain until the end of the war. In 1849, he was granted the rank of commander.

In 1850 during the presidency of Mariano Arista, a revolt flared up in the Sierra Gorda led by the rebel Quiros, and Mejía was among the troops sent to pacify the region. The operation was a success and Quiros was executed at the end of the year. The region had long been a source of instability and president Mariano Arista began to plan a series of military colonies to help maintain order in the region. Mejía was made military commander of the region, but the colonization project was interrupted when the Arista administration was overthrown in 1853 and replaced by Santa Anna. Nonetheless Mejía maintained his post as the region’s political administrator.

The liberal Plan of Ayutla was proclaimed against Santa Anna in 1854, but Mejía remained loyal to the government, and crushed a local revolt. The Plan of Ayutla however continued to gain adherents. The governor of Queretaro, Mejía’s superior, was overthrown, and Mejía attempted to join a counter-revolt, which however surrendered to the government. Mejía would find himself pardoned by the new liberal government.

La Reforma
The Plan of Ayutla would triumph and result in the liberal Juan Álvarez coming to power. Under his administration would begin a series of reforms known as La Reforma which would include a new constitution, and among which were anti-clerical measures intended to strip the Catholic Church of its legal privileges and wealth.

On 25 June 1856, under the presidency of Ignacio Comonfort, the Ley Lerdo was passed, nationalizing lands which were legally held communally. The measure stripped both the Catholic Church and Mexico’s Indigenous communities of the land that they owned, and it was intended to break up the land and sell it to individual owners, under the assumption that this would lead to economic development.

Amidst nationwide conservative revolts, on 13 October, Mejía took over the town of Queretaro, proclaiming his defense of the church and also promising the Indigenous communities to protect their communal lands which had also been affected by the Ley Lerdo. The government sent General Manuel Doblado to take back the city, and Mejía was forced to evacuate it on 21 October, heading towards the Sierra Gorda.

Mejía was now dedicated to waging guerilla warfare while staying based in the Sierra Gorda. General Vicente Rosas Landa attempted to reach a compromise with Mejía, and offered official government recognition of his rank, an arranagment which President Comonfort opposed. Negotiations fell apart, and Mejía went back to the Sierra.

Reform War
The revolts against La Reforma would develop into full blown civil war after President Comonfort joined Félix María Zuloaga's Plan of Ayutla, amounting to a self coup, and which proposed to draft a new, more moderate constitution. Comonfort later backed out of the plan, and left the capital. The constitutional presidency now passed on to the president of the Supreme Court Benito Juarez, while a conservative junta declared Zuloaga to be president. States began to split their allegiances among the rival governments. By April 1858, the liberal Juarez government was esconced in Veracruz, while the conservative government remained in Mexico City. On January 1859, the conservatives chose Miguel Miramon as their new president.

Mejía joined Miramon to occupy the city of San Luis Potosi on 13 September 1858, and they defeated the liberal general Santiago Vidaurri on 29 September.

In April 1859, Mejía was among the conservative troops falling back upon Mexico City where they routed liberal troops under the command of Santos Degollado. On 12 April, Mejía participated in a Mexico City celebration regarding the victory.

On 19 April, Mejía and Marquez were dispatched with a strong army to operate in the state of Michoacan.

The tide of the war began to turn against the conservatives in 1860. Miramon had already failed to capture the liberal capital of Veracruz and another attempt in July of that year failed due to the intervention of the United States Navy. Miramon retreated back to Mexico City as liberal forces closed in on the capital.

Mejía was present at the Battle of Silao at 10 August at which the conservatives were routed. Miramon then retreated to Mexico City. The liberals finally captured Mexico City on January 1861. Mejía was at Queretaro when the conservative government fell, and he escaped afterwards to the Sierra Gorda.

Between the Wars
Mejía now found himself in the city of Jalpan, where he attempted to continue the conservative revolt. He succeeded in capturing the city of Rio Verde and took the garrison commander, Mariano Escobedo prisoner. False stories that Escobedo had been shot circulated in the press, but in reality, Mejía had let him go. Curiously enough, Escobedo would one day be the same commander that would capture Mejía during the Siege of Queretaro, and which would result in Mejía’s execution.

After taking Rio Verde's war supplies, Mejía returned to Jalpan where he joined his forces with those of Leonardo Marquez, the military head of the surviving conservative movement and Ramón Méndez to form an army of about two thousand. Marquez reprimanded Mejía for not having shot Escobedo, warning him that Escobedo would one day in turn have him shot, words that would in the end prove prophetic.

The government sent troops under Manuel Doblado to Jalpan, but Mejía defeated him in multiple skirmishes, before utterly routing him at Cuesta del Huizache, causing Doblado to retreat from the Sierra Gorda.

Mejía remained stationed at Jalpan, while Marquez went on to notable successes, managing to kill the liberal generals Santos Degollado and Leandro Valle Martínez.

In May, Mejía briefly occupied Queretaro City and around the same time President Benito Juarez placed a bounty on Mejía’s head amounting to 10,000 pesos.

Mejía left Queretaro and the Sierra Gorda, heading towards the state of Hidalgo where on 5 July he attacked the city of Huichapan taking all of its garrison prisoner. He then fell back upon the Sierra Gorda to join the rest of the conservative forces which had failed in an attack on Mexico City.

Second French Intervention
In July 1861, President Juárez suspended foreign debt payments in response to a financial crisis, and on 31 October the convention of London, saw Spain, the United Kingdom, and France, agreeing to militarily intervene in Mexico for the sake of pledging Mexico to pay its debts.

On 14 December 1861, a Spanish fleet sailed into and took possession of the port of Veracruz. The city was occupied on 17 December. French and British forces arrived on 7 January 1862. On 10 January, a manifesto was issued by Spanish General Juan Prim disavowing rumors that the allies had come to conquer or to impose a new government. It was emphasized that the three powers merely wanted to open negotiations regarding their claims of damages. On 17 April 1862, Juan Almonte, who had been a foreign minister of the conservative government during the Reform War, and who was brought back to Mexico by the French, released his own manifesto, assuring the Mexican people of benevolent French intentions. Zuloaga and Márquez joined Almonte, but Mejía, who was reluctant to fight for the Spanish, took on an attitude of wait and see.

Meanwhile Spain and the United Kingdom had come to agreements with the Juárez government and departed Mexico as they learned that France intended to overthrow the Mexican government and replace it with a monarchy. On 5 May 1862 Charles de Lorencez's small expeditionary force was repulsed at the Battle of Puebla, and the French army retreated to Orizaba to await reinforcements.

Mejía was meanwhile based in Querétaro, and he published a newspaper expressing his opinions on the ongoing war. Like other conservatives, he did not believe that the French threatened Mexico’s independence, and by October, he openly supported the establishment of the Second Mexican Empire with Maximilian of Habsburg, as its monarch.

By June 1863, the capital had fallen and a conservative, Mexican government had been installed by the French upon which Mejía headed to the capital to offer his services.

Second Mexican Empire
In Mexico City he was received warmly by Marshal Forey, then commander in chief of the French forces in Mexico, who resupplied Mejía s troops. Mejía was then given military command over the interior of the nation.

Mejía was present at the opening of the Assembly of Notables in July, which resolved to found a monarchy and invite Maximilian of Habsburg to assume the throne.

Mejía now took part in the military campaigns by Franco-Mexican forces to consolidate control of the rest of the nation. On 25 December, he captured the city of San Luis Potosi. Two days later liberal forces under Miguel Negrete attempted to take back the city only to be utterly routed, losing all of their war material and leaving nine hundred prisoners. The defeat also resulted in the voluntary surrender of the liberal generals Aramberri, Parrodi, and Ampudia.

In January 1864 Mejía was transferred to Matehuala. In May, liberal forces under Manuel Doblado attempted to take the town, only to suffer a decisive defeat at the hands of Mejía, causing Doblado to leave the nation. Because of this victory, Napoleon III granted Mejía the cross of the Legion of Honour.

On 12 June, Mejía was present at the National Palace at the official reception for the arrival of the royal couple. He was appointed spokesman by the Knights of Guadalupe, and Emperor Maximilian embraced Mejía.

For the second half of 1864, Mejía was stationed in the northeast of the nation working to pacify the region with Charles-Louis Du Pin and Édouard Aymard.

The tide of the Empire began to turn with the conclusion of the American Civil War in April 1865, after which the United States began to supply Mexican Republican forces, and put pressure on France to leave the continent. The Republican General Negrete, with some American mercenaries, began to capture towns along the Rio Grande, and Mejía retreated to Matamoros to await reinforcements.

Mejía protested to the American commandant at Clarksville that American aid and troops was being given to Republican forces, but the commandant replies that such men did so on their own behalf and not on that of the United States government. In spite of that, another American raid cause the U.S. government to remove the commandant from his post and to reprimand the soldiers involved.

As the Empire began to falter, Mejía was forced to retreat from Matamoros on 23 June 1866, and withdraw to Vera Cruz. By December of that year he and his troops found themselves at Guanajuato. By January 1867, French troops had evacuated Mexico. Imperialist forces while retaining control of Mexico City, began to consolidate at Queretaro, where the Emperor and his leading generals, including Mejía, now found themselves.

At a council of war on 22 February 1867, Mejía opposed Marquez’ notion to retreat to Mexico City. On 12 March, republican forces commanded by Mariano Escobedo finally appeared at Queretaro.

The Imperialists held out the siege for the time being and Mejía played his role in repulsing the besieging republicans, but after a few weeks of combat, Mejía was persuaded to support a plan of retreat, which was opposed by Miramon and ultimately not followed through by Maximilian. On 24 March, Mejía once more repulsed another republican assault.

Mejía now fell ill, delaying Imperialist plans of attempting to break through the Republican lines. Nonetheless, Mejía recovered enough to continue plans to escape and seek refuge in Mejía’s old haunt, the Sierra Gorda, where he was well known and regarded amongst the population.

Mejía, and the rest of the imperial leadership were captured on 15 May 1867. Escobedo, whose life had been spared by Mejía six years earlier offered Mejía an escape, but he refused it unless he could be accompanied by Maximilian, and Miramon, terms which Escobedo found unacceptable.

Mejía was tried by a court martial at which he was defended by lawyer Prospero Vega. The defense brought up that previously Mejía had been merciful when capturing the enemy, sparing general Mariano Escobedo, and Jeronimo Trevino, but the court still sentenced Mejía to death. Mejía, Maximilian, and Miramon were shot by firing squad at dawn on 19 June 1867.

Decorations
Mejía was awarded Grand Cross of the Imperial Order of Guadalupe in 1864 and Grand Cross of the Imperial Order of the Mexican Eagle in 1865.

In 1865, Napoleon III granted him the cross of the Legion of Honour.

title: Tomás Mejía Camacho


text:
Ryan Doumit

Ryan Matthew Doumit (born April 3, 1981) is an American former professional baseball catcher in Major League Baseball (MLB). He played the first seven years of his career for the Pittsburgh Pirates, then two for the Minnesota Twins,  and one for the  Atlanta Braves.

High school career
He attended Moses Lake High School, where he had an excellent high school career, setting state records in several categories.

Pittsburgh Pirates
Doumit was drafted by the Pittsburgh Pirates in the 2nd round as the 59th overall selection in the 1999 Major League Baseball Draft.

After six seasons in the minor leagues, Doumit made his major league debut on June 5,, against the Atlanta Braves. During his rookie season, Doumit played primarily as a backup catcher but also served as the Pirates' designated hitter in interleague games.

Over the next two seasons, Doumit suffered a variety of injuries, limiting him to 144 games. When healthy, he saw action as a catcher, first baseman, and right fielder.

In, Doumit played exclusively as the Pirates' starting catcher. He was once again plagued by injury and missed three weeks with a broken thumb. He returned to the lineup and consistently kept his batting average above .330 throughout the rest of the summer. Doumit shared the National League's Player of the Week award for the week ending June 16, 2008, hitting .400 and 4 home runs during the week. On September 26, Doumit attempted to throw out Willie Harris trying to steal 2nd base, but instead plunked Pirates pitcher John Grabow; see

On December 22, Doumit agreed to a three-year contract with the Pirates to avoid arbitration.

Doumit began the year strongly, starting 11 of the first 12 games and hitting .244 with 2 home runs; however, he sustained a wrist injury in a game against the Atlanta Braves, later diagnosed as a fracture in the scaphoid bone. Doumit had surgery to repair the bone, and missed roughly 8–10 weeks. He finished 2009 with 16 doubles, no triples, 10 home runs, 38 runs batted in, 4 stolen bases, to go along with a .250 average, .299 on-base percentage, a .414 slugging percentage, in 280 at bats.

Doumit played in 124 games during the 2010 season with the Pirates. He batted .251 with 13 home runs and 51 runs batted in. His season ended due to injury.

For the 2011 season, Doumit was limited to just 77 games, in which he batted .303 with 10 home runs and 38 runs batted in. He became a free agent after the 2011 season, ending his tenure with the Pirates.

Minnesota Twins
On November 18, 2011, Doumit agreed to a one-year, $3 million deal with the Minnesota Twins.

On June 29, 2012, the Twins signed Doumit to a two-year extension through the 2014 season. The extension was worth $7 million, with $3.5 million per year in 2013 and 2014.

Atlanta Braves
On December 18, 2013, Doumit was traded to the Atlanta Braves for minor league pitcher Sean Gilmartin.

title: Ryan Doumit


text:
Oh (Ciara song)

"Oh" is a song by American singer, Ciara who wrote the song with Ludacris (who features on the song), Andre Harris, and Vidal Davis. "Oh" was produced by Harris and Davis, who work as Dre & Vidal. The song was released on March 1, 2005, as the third single from her debut album, Goodies. The downtempo R&B song features hip-hop elements and a heavy bassline, and can be seen as an anthem to her hometown, Atlanta, Georgia. Ciara sings about the many things the city has to offer, while Ludacris raps the third verse.

The song was well received by music critics, who praised the song's beat, specifically noting its radio-friendliness. It won an award at the 2006 ASCAP award shows for "Most Performed Songs" with the two previous singles from Goodies, "Goodies" and "1, 2 Step". The song also took home the award for "Choice Music Make-Out Song" at the 2005 Teen Choice Awards and for "Coolest Collabo" at the 2006 Vibe Awards. The song was listed at number 127 on Pitchfork Media 's top 500 songs of the 2000s. The song was placed at number 72 on Slant 's The 100 Best Singles of the Aughts. It, along with other songs on Goodies, helped earn Ciara the nomination for Best New Artist at the 48th Grammy Awards.

The single was a commercial success, peaking at number two in the United States, becoming her third consecutive top three hit. It also peaked within the top ten of charts in many international markets, including Germany, New Zealand and the United Kingdom, and was certified platinum in the US and gold in Australia. The song was accompanied by a music video, which showed the singer dancing with friends in the streets of Atlanta, as well as in an arena and a parking garage.

Composition and meaning
In 2004, Ciara was in the recording studio with Dre & Vidal. She decided to take the beat back to Atlanta, Georgia. It took Ciara one week to complete the lyrics for the love song to Atlanta. She quoted, "I didn't waste time and just write to any beat. If I don't like a beat, I won't work with it." Also she recalled, "I wanted to make sure that we were actually talking about Atlanta".

While composing the lyrics, Ciara spoke to her management to get Ludacris on the track and he agreed. She said, "I think Ludacris is perfect".

Critical reception
"Oh" received positive reviews from music critics. Pop Matters described the track as "dark" and "infectious", "whose beat approximates the David Banner-constructed "Rubber Band Man" banger." Musicomh.com opined that "Oh" is "far and away the album's best track" and the "ultimate cruising tune". Virgin Media wrote that it was "the album's standout track". One negative review of the song, published by The Situation, said the song was "not as strong" as other songs on the album, "as Luda's raspy vocals overpower Ciara's sweet tone."

"Oh" went on to win an award at the 2006 ASCAP award shows for "Most Performed Songs" with the two previous singles from Goodies, "Goodies" and "1, 2 Step". The song also took home the award for "Choice Music Make-Out Song" at the 2005 Teen Choice Awards and for "Coolest Collabo" at the 2006 Vibe Awards. The song was listed at number 127 on Pitchfork Media 's top 500 songs of the 2000s.

Chart performance
The song debuted at number 75 on the US Billboard Hot 100 the week of March 25, 2005, to become Ciara's third top-five single. "Oh" became Ciara's second song in a row (after "1, 2 Step") to reach a peak of number two on the chart. It also peaked at two on the Billboard Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Songs chart and at number one on the Rhythmic Top 40 and Hot 100 Airplay. The song spent a total of 33 weeks on the chart. The song also peaked number six on the Pop 100, Pop 100 Airplay, and Top 40 Mainstream. It was a minor sales hit, peaking at fifteen on the Hot Digital Songs. "Oh" was commissioned dance remixes. The song appeared on the Billboard Hot Dance Airplay chart, peaking at number 20. The "DJ Volume South Beach" remix appears on the bonus CD of Goodies: The Videos & More. The single was certified platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) for sales of over a million digital copies in the United States.

"Oh" was a hit outside the US as well. The song debuted and peaked at number four in the United Kingdom and number five for two weeks in New Zealand. The song also peaked at number seven in Australia, Germany, and Ireland. It was also a top-20 hit in Finland and Switzerland.

Music video
The music video for "Oh" was directed by the Fat Cats. It begins with Ciara sitting with "little" Ciara watching a video player. The camera zooms into the video player and reveals an overview of Atlanta and scenes of Ciara and her friends at a block party in an alley. She performs the first verse and first chorus in the middle of the street, while she is surrounded by guests and their cars. There are dance sequences throughout the remainder of the video and a scene with Ciara performing on top of a car as Ludacris raps. Ciara is also "ridin' slow" in a classic model Oldsmobile. There are also cameos by Gucci Mane, Jazzy Pha, and Boyz n da Hood.

Ciara described the choreography as "the real star" and "very intense". Also, Ciara quoted that she and her choreographer tried "to find the best moves that we can". The video was choreographed by Devyne Stephens. It features former dancers of Usher and MC Hammer.

"Oh" was nominated in the "Best R&B Video" category at the 2005 MTV Video Music Awards, but lost to Alicia Keys's "Karma".

Formats and track listings
US 12-inch single
 * A1. "Oh" (main) – 4:16
 * A2. "Oh" (instrumental) – 4:16
 * B1. "Oh" (main) – 4:16
 * B2. "Oh" (acappella) – 4:16

UK CD single
 * 1) "Oh" (album version)
 * 2) "Oh" (Kardinal Beats radio edit)
 * 3) "Oh" (Bimbo Jones remix)
 * 4) "Oh" (Bimbo Jones dub)
 * 5) "Oh" (DJ Volume 'South Beach' remix)

UK 12-inch single
 * A1. "Oh" (Kardinal Beats radio edit)
 * A2. "Oh" (album version)
 * A3. "Oh" (instrumental)
 * B1. "Oh" (Bimbo Jones remix)
 * B2. "Oh" (Bimbo Jones dub)

European two-track CD single
 * 1) "Oh" (album version) – 4:16
 * 2) "Oh" (Kardinal Beats radio edit) – 3:21

European three-track CD single
 * 1) "Oh" (featuring Ludacris) – 4:16
 * 2) "Oh" (featuring M. Pokora) – 3:47
 * 3) "Oh" (Kardinal Beats radio edit) – 3:21

Australian CD single
 * 1) "Oh" (album version)
 * 2) "Oh" (Kardinal Beats remix)
 * 3) "Oh" (Bimbo Jones remix)
 * 4) "Oh" (DJ Volume 'South Beach' remix)
 * "1, 2 Step" (Phatbelly remix)

Personnel

 * Vocals by: Ciara and Ludacris
 * Produced by: Dre & Vidal
 * Recorded by: Vincent Dilorenzo at Studio 609 recordings, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Ralph Cacciuri and Sam Thomas at Doppler Studios, Atlanta, Georgia and Kori Anders at Patchwerk Studios, Atlanta, Georgia
 * Mixed by: Vincent Dilorenzo, Andre Harris and Vidal Davis at Studio 609, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
 * Assisted by: Mike Tsarsati

title: Oh (Ciara song)


text:
Talk:Aether theories

space whale

Untitled
Where the existing aether page sets out a particular historical view of aether theory (with some parts that seem to be stirring up some heated disagreement and claims of subjectivity), I put up this page as a more basic, hopefully neutral listing and jumping-off page to different aether theories.

The list is rather short at the moment. I know that there were loads of these things being suggested and shot down over the centuries, so if you can think of any noteworthy theories not listed here, please add them as a one-or two line bulletted entry, if you need more than that to describe it, give it its own page and leave a bulletted link to that page here. I did think of also doing an "aether theories" category, but at the moment there don't seem to be enough relevant wiki pages to justify it. ErkDemon 01:43, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Makes some real sense
May I suggest you have a look at an interesting concept with respect to a Fixed Frame of Reference in a book entitled "Einstein's Predicament: a new approach to the speed of light" by Clifford Denton, Twoedged Sword Publications 2005.

Leaving a place for discovery - protecting against Salsb and pseudoscience
Re-adding the "Further readings" section after an accidental delete, I've left out the "obsolete theories" category tag because of the recent interest given to a modified verson of an ether theory. Namely, there is some talk that vacuum quantum flux has fluid-like properties, which may be simialr to those of a perfect fluid. I know I should dig up the articles on arXiv.org before saying something like this, but for the moment I want to enter it into the discussion. Shpoffo 06:31, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Arxiv is not the proper source for references. Please give references to acceptable sources per WP:ARB/PS, though if you want to link to arxiv for those references, that is acceptable. Arxiv is not, in itself, a reliable source. --Philosophus T 06:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I ended up here from Related Changes through the Aetherometry article. I noticed Salsb did a sneaky recat - to psuedoscience (sic). I don't want to start another revert war over that category, but really -- no-one seemed to think that it was appropriate for six months, so if no-one else does it in due time, I'll revert that change. The Pseudoscience category is unfortunately being used as a cudgel by some editors on Wikipedia, Salsb among them.Pgio 08:21, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Hating on wikipedia
I thought this was amazing. Apparently, the Aetherometry article (which currently links here) influenced these people to write a book on the ignorant fascism that is wikipedia. It seems they are constituents of the theory, and felt NPOV violated. These paranoids became so enfuriated by their inability to contaminate the encyclopedia, they actually wrote a book about that seems to present wikipedia as some sort of conspiracy. Regardless, it seems the article was portected over all, and you should all be proud. Shaggorama 10:54, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

They do not "hate" wikipedians, they just found here the same armored behaviors that lead to what we call "fashism" ... you should read before to depreciate people so stupidely. They are not "paranoid" nor "enfuriated"... looks at your own words and see how they could feel before so much agressive comments. Wikipedia is not described as a "conspiracy" like you would say, but more like a total failure of "civilisation". You talk like a proud soldier or a fantasmed paladin of knowledge, encouraging your pair in the fight... this is a proof of your character illness at some point, and another exemple of what is wikipedia's failure.- A silent observer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Innermake (talk • contribs) 13:34, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Fuzzy intro
I removed the following text:

 * In its original and fundamental form the aether is both the medium of space, and the fundamental building blocks of all material substances. Its properties therefore include all that is observed.  In this context there exist no physical process or theory that would be considered as aether-free.  In more modern theories this stuff of space are designated as field theories. These dispense with the concept of a medium and assign or designate the properties of the medium as fields which are then considered fundamental.

I'm not sure this is entirely accurate. It would be easier to untangle if references were made to particular versions of the theory. For now, I've replaced it with something shorter that mainly lets the various individual sections speak for themselves. Perhaps a better overview will re-grow from scratch, or someone will fix this one. -- Beland 19:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Speculation is Not Proper in an Encylopedia Article
Articles are no place for introducing or speculating on fanciful topics of over-unity/Free-energy or goverment conspiracies. See Wiki's policies on NPOV, use reliable sources, and avoid unverifiable claims - User:LeSagian

I have been enjoying reading material from places like 16pi2.com for a couple of years now. Theres a number of other places where I read about Tesla's stuff and then thought to come to wiki and read whatever interesting articles it has. I can't find them. So... I typed Aether Physics Model and was surprised to find nothing I but don't see any material here relating either. Is there no articles yet for this type of thing? Maybe I am too early. -jrey

typography
I haven't been able to find out what the Wikipedia policy is on ligatures (Æ, æ) - are they even standard English spelling? Would someone who knows please unify spelling in the article, it's an awful mess. (I'd say it should be without the ligatures, as in the lemma.) And also decide whether aether should be capitalized or not throughout the article.--87.162.24.186 17:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It is awful. Non-English letters or characters should not be used, unless within quotations or references. 26 July 2007, Rughede

Gravitational aether
The additional comment I have given about the thermodynamic theory and physics of the aether with reference to a published paper is a matter of fact for the readers of this article to appreciate or refute. Discussions are invited in ordinary form within the scientific community, but not as violations of freedom and principles of contribution to Wikipedia articles, such as elsewhere given:

"The original group should not block further change on grounds that they already have made a decision. No one person, and no (limited) group of people, can unilaterally declare that community consensus has changed, or that it is fixed and determined". Rughede

Aether Wave Theory (AWT)
The recent approach to Luminiferous Aether concept is based on idea of inertial environment composed of scale invariant particles (so called unparticles), which are of infinite high matter and energy density. Such idea comes from Oliver Lodge and his Electric Theory of Matter from 1904. The AWT is currently subject of private research.

The AWT concept is consistent with idea, the Universe is formed by interior of black hole and it's surprisingly effective in explanation of nature of strings, protosimplex and spin foam, considered by string, Heim's and LQG theories, which can be considered as a density fluctuations of Aether. The vacuum foam is considered as a scaled down version of dark matter structure. Because in such environment most of energy spreads in transversal waves, it's consistent with Lorentz invariance approach of relativity theory. Because the foam gets more dense under vibrations, the mass density of foam is proportional to energy density, from this the quantization of energy density follows.

By such way, the AWT appears to be conceptually capable to reconcile most existing physical theories together with unparticle, constructal and process physics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.213.42.170 (talk) 16:43, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

 * The above comment has been contributed by the user of the fake account "Zephyr" and many more sock-puppet accounts on Phys.org, "AWT" is an entirely imaginary theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.243.52.115 (talk) 22:13, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Cleanup
Most of the content of this page is already in the article on luminiferous aether, therefore I've shortened the corresponding sections. --D.H (talk) 08:47, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Aether and general relativity
"Aether and the theory of relativity" was a title used by Einstein in a lecture on general relativity and aether theory. Einstein said that general relativity's gravitational field parameters could be said to have all the usual properties of an aether except one: it was not composed of particulate bodies that could be tracked over time, and so it could not be said to have the property of motion. The general attitude to this amongst physicists today seems to be that Einstein's comments don't count because they stretch the idea of aether theory too far: it is argued that a "non-particulate" aether theory is not really an aether theory, or at least, it doesn't correspond to the idea of "historical" aether theory that is currently taught.

Such a view, however, contradicts the continuum concept of space-time and fields and Einstein's statements in "Aether and the Theory of Relativity", May 5th, 1920:]

"More careful reflection teaches us, however, that the special theory of relativity does not compel us to deny ether." and "To deny the ether is ultimately to assume that empty space has no physical qualities whatever".

 * That just seems like an issue with nomenclature. - 17-May-2014 03:42 UTC — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.220.29 (talk) 03:44, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

2006 Rebirth
I think we should include this article. JDCAce (talk) 17:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Propose a merge
Can we just merge the Aether classical element, luminferious aether and this article? Faro0485 (talk) 22:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Did we really throw out the idea of the Aether after all?
There is something that a (now dead) self-style historian on the developement of Physics point out to me when I was a student is that conventional history has it that we abandoned the idea of the Aether to explain the propagation of light waves in favor of the vacuum defined according to relativity. But did we really? The vacuum isn't a "nothing". E.g. just from a non-quantum mechanical perspective the impedance of free space is about 377 ohms. This value is not zero. Also the Dirac sea which came later in quantum mechanics and becomes the ancestor of quantum field theory is filled with energy levels. This historian contended that we really did not give up on the idea of the Aether after all but simply attributed different properties to it. (unsigned)

 * That is right. We also have dark energy and other aether-like concepts. It is just different from what people might have expected in 1900. Roger (talk) 09:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes, add to that the Casimir effect which can be measured in the lab and again demonstrates that the vacuum isn't a "nothing". They are now looking to see if they can isolate a repulsive Casimir effect. If they are successful, then the zero-point energy drive is more than a science-fiction notion, it starts having true substance.

 * The problem is that using a word that used to mean one thing to mean a multiplicity of new things is pointlessly confusing. Informal use of the word 'aether' to mean 'space and its attendant properties' is fine but as a scientific term in needs to convey something more specific. In current scientific usage 'aether' has no meaning. Martin Hogbin (talk) 16:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 * You have it backwards. "Aether" used to mean a multiplicity of things but now, because popular science sources told the same story over and over again until all nuance and context was lost, the term is treated as a monolith by non-experts and Wikipedia editors.74.140.199.156 (talk) 14:16, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 * It can be defined as whatever transmits electromagnetic waves, and the aether has the same meaning it has always had. The term is not confusing. Roger (talk) 07:01, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * It could, but as we know that nothing is required to transmit electromagnetic waves this is rather pointless. Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:14, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

 * You can call it "nothing", and say that it is nothing more than the vacuum, as long as you agree to say that this thing you call the vacuum really has all of the properties of quantum electrodynamics. Roger (talk) 14:28, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

You are conflating classical and quantum ideas. Electromagnetic waves are classical, and are therefore not transmitted in the quantum vacuum. These waves are self-propagating in the (classical) vacuum, as the equations of Maxwell show. The definition of aether as "whatever transmits electromagnetic waves" is vacuous, as e.g. peanut butter then qualifies as a manifestation of the aether. Now it's true that some people consider everything as a manifestation of the aether, but this is really a semantic rather than a physical pronouncement. Regardless, the article should be based on the opinions from reliable sources, so it's not worth pursuing our own personal lines of argumetation. Tim Shuba (talk) 23:04, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

 * The thing you refer to as "classical vacuum" does not exist and there is no way of knowing if or how EM waves would propagate in such a vacuum, if it did exist. It is a cute idea that has been debunked for a hundred years. Wikipedia is not a place for fringe theories. If you want to refer to such theories, please provide credible sources.74.140.199.156 (talk) 14:16, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

 * I am not conflating anything. I follow standard textbook concepts. They all accept the aether, although some of them call it something different. Roger (talk) 01:50, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Perhaps you could give us a reference from a current text book that uses 'aether' with a well-defined non-historical meaning. Martin Hogbin (talk) 08:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

 * He said they accept aether theory, not that they use the term "aether". Sometimes a concept goes by more than one name. It happens all the time in the sciences. You have to understand the concept itself to identify this phenomenon. Otherwise you fall into the trap of demanding only those sources that use the particular word you're familiar with.74.140.199.156 (talk) 14:16, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

Well done Tim
For cutting out the crazy stuff. Martin Hogbin (talk) 16:43, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

New section added
This relates also to "Did we really throw out the idea of the Aether after all?" above.

I added a quote from Robert B. Laughlin on the situation of ether in contemporary theoretical physics and why physicists don't call it 'ether'. I think it goes far in explaining why sources about post special relativity ether are so fuzzy about it.

I would also suggest removing the first sentence in the following section "Modern analogies", "In physics there is no concept considered exactly analogous to the aether." It is at least apparently contradictory to what I added and has no source or citation. It seems to me that what Laughlin says goes beyond mere analogy, in any case, rendering the sentence superfluous.

Moose — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dreammoose (talk • contribs) 04:11, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Yes, that sentence is false and should be removed. Roger (talk) 17:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Harold Aspden
I think that someone should analyze Harold Aspden's work (see http://www.haroldaspden.com/) and summarize it very briefly in this article.

Peter Higgs was declared a crackpot and his theory pseudoscience
pseudoscience is a pejorative term and assumes the person declaring something pseudoscience has all knowledge and understanding. This is certainly never true. In my life time I have see many bad and impossible theories proven. HHMI once fired a scientist for idiocy who later won a Nobel prize for his pseudoscience. Who knows haw many dies without the benefit of the medical implications of that theory. When research is in an area we do not understand it is impossible to determine something is "pseudoscience" until we have valid science to explore it with. One day Quantum Theory May be Science, for now it is a very useful and poorly understood theory. All doctrines produced from it could be false but they are the best we have to work with now. Scottprovost (talk) 04:40, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Changing the name of the page
Since this page is supposed to be scientific shouldn't the title align more towards scientific nomenclature? I think it should be changed from "Aether theories" to "Aether Hypotheses" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.220.29 (talk) 02:20, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Dark energy as aether
This section already has a tag saying that it relies on one source (which seems to be a polular science magazine). It also seemd to overstate the position somewhat, in favour of the aether. It needs toning down and some new mainstream science adding. Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:41, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

I have now removed it. Martin Hogbin (talk) 11:01, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Ilja Schmelzer
Ilja Schmelzer produced a aether based theory of gravitation that was compatible with GR. Should we have something on that here? [signed later) Martin Hogbin (talk) 10:08, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Where are the references to Nikola Tesla?...
Nicola Tesla (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla) considered Aether as a main element in the universe, so why is this fact not mentioned in the article?... 77.127.248.242 (talk) 17:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Lorentz ether theory
This theory, from 1904, which is mathematically and experimentally equivalent to special relativity, should be in here somewhere. Martin Hogbin (talk) 10:09, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

 * See the last paragraph under "Luminiferous aether". Should something be added? Roger (talk) 22:13, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

EM of Nikola Tesla
Nikola Tesla advocated that all physics in the space is of EM origin. Including gravity, but the frequency could be very-low. (hours for one period). If we have aether as a medium and EM propagating through this "substance" then there must be more dense parts of space and less dense parts of space. Otherwise propagation of a "wave" is not possible. The space must have variable density. Where the speed of wave is high, the density is low and vice versa. And there seems to be nothing affecting this density as much as gravity, because its frequency (would be) is so very low. It would also imply that speed of light is not absolute. It is 300.000 km/s only for the "normal density" of space.

Another interesting idea is that, the aether must have a dampening factor affecting EM, which is very low for high frequency (light) and gets to be much more low frequency (gravity), because we know that force of gravity drops of quickly, but light appears to be traveling without obstruction. Even for low frequency audio you need very high energy and for high frequency (MHz) comparably much less energy is needed to travel the same distance.

If stars are very far, is there some expected reduction factor due to distance used to account for loss of energy due to distance of the star when looking at its light?

This could actually be proven and measured, because the speed of light at reasonable distance from earth in space in area of lower gravity should be more than if measured close to some object like earth, where the gravity is more (and space is denser).

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:EE2:2500:900:DCBE:E26D:5BB1:BDB9 (talk) 18:34, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Aether theories. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051203022126/http://bartleby.com:80/61/85/A0118500.html to http://www.bartleby.com/61/85/A0118500.html
 * Added tag to http://www.thomist.org/jour/2004/July/2004%20July%20A%20Dec.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051227132715/http://maxwell.byu.edu:80/~spencerr/phys442/history.pdf to http://maxwell.byu.edu/~spencerr/phys442/history.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:05, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

Non-standard interpretations in modern physics
The section is largely false and unrelated to aether theories and should be removed entirely.

The section Quantum vacuum is false, QFT doesn't describe the vacuum as non empty. It has zero particles but non zero energy. The quote of Laughlin is irrelevant to that claim. QFT vacuum doesn't share properties of an aether either. It's invariant. This has beside, being simply wrong as a claim, no place in an article about aether theories because it is unrelated.

It is false to suggest that general relativity does anything to reintroduce an aether into physics. General relativity adds nothing to special relativity that could be interpreted as a medium of light ("aether") - if anything it adds even more invariance than SR does (getting rid of absolute background). The section is false.

Pilot waves have also nothing to do with a medium of light / absolute background the way the aether was meant. This part is just random. It appears some people have added anything and everything that's defined in every point and think that's sufficient to call it an aether, that's not the case.

Is there anyone here who has actually studied physics who can argue against these points in any way and why the section should be kept? 77.3.233.209 (talk) 12:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

 * So the sections in question have been added by crackpots in 2008. People are saying that these unsubstantiated sections cannot be removed just like that without a source that directly says they are wrong. Even though there is no source whatsoever that would back up the three sections in question. Way to promote pseudoscience, wikipedia. Good luck. 77.8.230.201 (talk) 16:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, it looks like the removals were warranted. Footnotes != automatically good. XOR'easter (talk) 18:38, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

 * I do not agree with removing this section. Roger (talk) 01:37, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

 * I cannot see any justification for retaining any part of this section. Tangential similarity or incidental use of the name "aether" does not qualify something as an "aether theory" without due support from references, and such referencing is needed in the encyclopaedic context.  —Quondum 02:39, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Rayleigh paper
A recent edit claims that a 1902 Rayleigh paper found a way to experimentally distinguish Lorentz ether theory from Einstein's. The web site taking this view is I am skeptical that this Rayleigh paper has anything to do with differences between the Lorentz and Einstein theories. Neither Lorentz nor Einstein make any mention of it, as far as I know. Everyone else says that Lorentz and Einstein make the same predictions. I suggest removing the change. Roger (talk) 01:37, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't think that this is an entirely accurate characterization. The experiment appears to have been aimed at detecting a hypothesized effect expected from the Lorentz aether theory.  Had the result been positive, it would have distinguished it from the Einstein theory.  The negative result failed to distinguish them: Einstein's theory made a definite prediction, whereas the Lorentz theory would not give definitive predictions on refractive properties, but would lead to expected effects.  Thus, it would not be valid to say that the Rayleigh experiment was unrelated.  It may be reasonable to tone down the claim to "Lorentz theory led to an expectation that ...".  —Quondum 02:27, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The claim is not sourced to a blog post, but to an article in Applied Optics which lays out the situation pretty clearly, and to Weyl's 1922 book. (Looking into it, however, the author of the blog post is a wiki-notable OSA Fellow, so that blog post would be an acceptable source per WP:SPS.) Whether or not Einstein or Lorentz themselves said anything about it is beside the point. (As it happens, Lorentz did, in 1904, and tried tweaking his electron theory to explain the null result.) I'd get more into debating the details of possible phrasings, but as I said over at WT:PHYS, I'm not entirely sure this article should exist. XOR'easter (talk) 02:46, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * We have the article Experiments of Rayleigh and Brace. These type of experiments refuted the initial contraction hypothesis of Fitzgerald (1889) and Lorentz (1892, 1895), related to Lorentz' 1895 electron theory that accounts for all first order aether drift experiments. As later shown by Lorentz (1904) and Larmor (1904), the full Lorentz transformation explains the null result, which conceptually can be much easier understood in terms of Einstein's special relativity. --D.H (talk) 06:43, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm with XOR'easter on this, only I'd put it more strongly: this article should not exist as a topic (it should go to WP:AfD IMO), and its content is covered better by other articles. So debating the nuances of the content seems like a waste of time.  —Quondum 13:31, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I have to agree, this article is (or at least was) largely pseudoscientific nonsense. Though I have to ask, why not submit it to AfD yourself? 78.152.252.48 (talk) 07:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Misquoting Maxwell
The following passage is from the section on the Luminiferous aether:

"In 'A Dynamical Theory of the Electromagnetic Field" Maxwell showed that using a model similar to EM the medium would have 'an enormous intrinsic energy' and would necessarily have to be diminished in areas of mass. He could not 'understand in what way a medium can possess such properties' so he did not pursue it further."

This wording implies Maxwell was talking about E&M, more specifically the Aether. It seems to me that he wasn't; the link suggests he was discussing gravity. I don't know how this should be edited, does anyone have advice?

NathanRApf (talk) 03:55, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

 * I read the text and you are correct. I fixed it by moving the content in to the gravity section. thanks. Johnjbarton (talk) 17:31, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Einstien E=Mc^2
I was wondering if anyone would please head over to the Samuel Tolver Preston article and after reading please give me a Reliable source explaining how the cook Einstein is credited as the genius who discovered the relationship between mass and energy when he clearly stole it.

K00la1dx (talk) 04:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 * If you wish to claim than any of the 91 references on the page Mass–energy equivalence are not reliable, head on over to Talk:Mass–energy equivalence and provide your evidence. Preston's speculation about aether particles seems to be simply that the kinetic energy of mass at the speed of light would be extremely large. That is not at all what Einstein said. On the contrary, only massless particles can travel at the speed of light. Johnjbarton (talk) 04:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

 * This is off-topic on this article talk page. I have put a final warning for talk page abuse on your user talk page. Wikipedia is not a place for this. I recommend finding another venue to vent your grievances. - DVdm (talk) 15:12, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Aether theories


text:
Rosati, Missouri

Rosati is an unincorporated community in northeast Phelps County, Missouri, United States. The community is adjacent to the Phelps-Crawford county line on Missouri Route KK four miles (6 km) east of St. James. This road is also the former U.S. Highway 66. The St. Louis–San Francisco Railway passes through the community.

Variant names were "Knobview" and "Spading". The present namesake is the first bishop of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Saint Louis, the Italian-born Joseph Rosati.

The area is part of Missouri's grape-growing region and Rosati is well known for its wines. The first Italian immigrants attempted to plant grape varieties from Italy, with no success, and instead grew Concord grapes, used for making juice. In the 1970s, local growers started replacing these vines with wine grape varieties.

title: Rosati, Missouri