text:
Austerlitz (novel)

Austerlitz is a 2001 novel by the German writer W. G. Sebald. It was Sebald's final novel. The book received the National Book Critics Circle Award.

Plot
Jacques Austerlitz, the main character in the book, is an architectural historian who encounters and befriends the solitary narrator in Antwerp during the 1960s. Gradually we come to understand his life history. He arrived in Britain during the summer of 1939 as an infant refugee on a kindertransport from a Czechoslovakia threatened by Hitler's Nazis. He was adopted by an elderly Welsh Nonconformist preacher and his sickly wife, and spent his childhood near Bala, Gwynedd, before attending a minor public school. His foster parents died, and Austerlitz learned something of his background. After school he attended Oriel College, Oxford and became an academic who is drawn to, and began his research in, the study of European architecture. After a nervous breakdown, Austerlitz visited Prague, where he met a close friend of his lost parents, Vera, who often took care of "Jacquot" when his parents were away. As he speaks with her, memories return, including French and Czech expressions she taught him. The elderly lady tells him the fate of his mother, an actress and opera singer who was deported to Theresienstadt concentration camp. From Prague, Austerlitz travels to Theriesenstadt, and after returning to England via train, with an emotionally difficult journey through Germany, manages to obtain a 14-minute video compilation of highlights from Theresienstadt. Ein Dokumentarfilm aus dem jüdischen Siedlungsgebiet, the 1944 Nazi propaganda film, in which he believes he recognizes his mother. Vera, however, dismisses the woman from the documentary. Instead, she confirms the identity of Austerlitz's mother in a photograph of an anonymous actress which Austerlitz found in the Prague theatrical archives.

The novel shifts to contemporary Paris as Austerlitz seeks out any remaining evidence about the fate of his father. He meets up with the narrator and tells him of his first sojourn in Paris, in 1959, when he suffered his first nervous breakdown and was hospitalized; Marie de Verneuil, a young Frenchwoman with whom he became acquainted in the library, helps nurse him back to health. Sebald explores the ways in which collections of records, such as the Bibliothèque nationale de France or National Library of France, entomb memories. During the novel the reader is taken on a guided tour of a lost European civilization: a world of fortresses, railway stations, concentration camps and libraries.

Background
Sebald saw a programme on BBC television about the Kindertransport entitled Whatever Happened to Susi? In 1939, 3-year-old twins Lotte and Susi Bechhöfer arrived in London on a Kindertransport evacuating Jewish children from Germany. Adopted by a childless Welsh minister and his wife, they were given a new identity to erase all traces of their previous existence. Only fifty years later, after Lotte's death from a brain tumour at the age of 35, did Susi Bechhöfer discover that their parents were Rosa Bechhöfer, a young Jewish woman who was murdered in the gas chambers of Auschwitz, and Otto Hald, a soldier in Hitler's army. The discovery of her real identity propels Susi on a painful and courageous quest in search of her past and the surviving members of her natural family. In the course of her search, she confronts dark secrets from her own past and urgently needs to reappraise her life. In 1999, Susi published a memoir, Rosa's Child: One Woman's Search for Her Past and a film has been made from it titled Susi's Story. Sebald told Joseph Cuomo in an interview that he tried to obtain a copy of the BBC programme, but the BBC would not release it.

At the conclusion of the book the narrator takes from his rucksack a copy of Dan Jacobson's Heshel's Kingdom, an account of his journey in the 1990s to Lithuania in search of traces of his grandfather Heshel's world. The Orthodox rabbi Heshel Melamed's sudden death in 1919 had provided an opportunity for his widow and nine children to leave Lithuania for South Africa, which, in light of events two decades later, had been a gift of life. "On his travels in Lithuania Jacobson finds scarcely any trace of his forebears, only signs everywhere of the annihilation from which Heshel's weak heart had preserved his immediate family when it stopped beating."

Style and structure
Formally, the novel is notable because of its lack of paragraphing, a digressive style, the blending of fact and fiction and very long and complex sentences. One such sentence runs to seven and a half pages and combines the history and description of Theresienstadt. It is prompted by Austerlitz's having read the major 1995 study of the ghetto, Theresienstadt 1941–1945: Das Antlitz einer Zwangsgemeinschaft by H. G. Adler, and recounting it to the narrator as they are walking around London, from St Clement's Hospital where Austerlitz had been admitted in 1993 after his arrival at Liverpool Street on his return from Prague.

Mysterious and evocative photographs are also scattered throughout the book, enhancing the melancholy message of the text. Many of these features characterize Sebald's other works of fiction, including The Emigrants, The Rings of Saturn and Vertigo.

Austerlitz tells his story to the narrator between 1967 and 1997. They first meet in Antwerp, and then in a few other places in Belgium (they take a ferry together back to England from Terneuzen, in the Netherlands). Between 1967 and 1975, they meet regularly in Bloomsbury, London, where Austerlitz works as an art historian and teacher; the narrator studies in England and travels to London by train. They lose touch after the narrator returns to Germany: he surmises that perhaps Austerlitz does not like to write letters to Germany. They meet again in December 1996, in the Great Eastern Hotel, London; the narrator has returned to England and has traveled to London to visit an eye doctor, running into Austerlitz by chance. They talk until late, then meet the next day in Greenwich.

Themes
A broad and pervasive theme of the novel is the metaphor of water as time, a metaphor which helps explain two (arguably three) appearances of Noah's Ark in the novel: the first a golden picture (reproduced on page 43 of the text) in the Freemasons' temple of the Great Eastern Hotel, London; the second a toy Noah's Ark in the hermetically sealed billiards room of Iver Grove, a then abandoned estate on the outskirts of postwar Oxford (later home to Tom Stoppard); and the third (arguably) the new Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris.

Notable locations
The novel mentions and expands upon several locations in detail, including:

 * Liverpool Street Station (as well as the McDonald's located there)
 * Great Eastern Hotel, London (now called Andaz London Liverpool Street)
 * St. Clement's Hospital, London
 * Alderney Street, London
 * Rue de Richelieu, Paris
 * Montparnasse Cemetery
 * Theresienbad
 * Fort Breendonk
 * Bibliotheque Nationale de France, Paris (in particular the Haut-de-jardin reading room)
 * Lake Vyrnwy

Editions

 * Austerlitz. Munich: C. Hanser, 2001.
 * Austerlitz. Translated by Anthea Bell. New York: Random House, 2001.

Reception
Upon release, Austerlitz  was generally well-received among the British press. The book was also generally well-received amongst American press. According to Book Marks, the book received "positive" reviews based on 5 critic reviews with 1 being "rave" and 3 being "positive" and 1 being "mixed".

In the United States, Austerlitz won the 2001 National Book Critics Circle Award for fiction and the 2001 Salon Book Award. In the UK, the book won the 2002 Independent Foreign Fiction Prize and the 2002 Jewish Quarterly-Wingate Literary Prize. Anthea Bell won the 2002 Helen and Kurt Wolff Translator's Prize, awarded by the Goethe-Institut Chicago, for her translation of Austerlitz into English.

In 2019, it was ranked 5th on The Guardian's list of the 100 best books of the 21st century. The New York Times Book Review named it the 8th best book of the 21st century.

title: Austerlitz (novel)


text:
Olga Volchkova

Olga Volchkova (Russian: Ольга Волчкова; born 1970) is a Russian-born artist currently resident in Eugene, Oregon.

Biography
Volchkova was born in Tver, Russia, in 1970, in the former Soviet Union. Many of her relatives were collectivized subsistence farmers living in villages outside of the city, and across the seasons she would leave the city to farm, garden, and forage for berries and mushrooms with them. She developed a sympathy with nature that would influence her later art. As a child she went to math school, and studied piano for eight years in music school.

As an adult in Tver she studied chemistry and art, taking degrees in art restoration and Icon painting. The Grabar Institute certified her as a second-degree Oil Painting restorer. She worked as a conservator and curator in the Tver Oblast Art Gallery, and joined a journeyman team of important early post-Soviet iconostasis painters and restorers. Since she played a role in the Icon revival, her secular work could be considered a branch of that tradition.

In 1998, she moved to the United States, where she worked as an all-around art restorer in Manhattan. In 1999, she moved to downtown Palo Alto, California, where she found herself in the heart of the first Dotcom boom. She became artistic director for Workspot, a now defunct start-up and contracting house near University Avenue in Palo Alto. There she pioneered the commercial use of scanned watercolors in webpage design, a laborious approach that won her no imitators, but many admirers—Workspot took the 2000 Linux Journal award for Best Web Solution.

In 2000 she moved to Eugene, Oregon. She studied ceramics and figure sculpture at the University of Oregon, and her work became a small sensation in Eugene's wood-fired ceramics movement. She became involved in concluding work in a research project initiated by architect Christopher Alexander. In 2002 she began to study at the world-renowned Pilchuck Glass School, where she discovered cast glass. One of her first pieces was selected as the only cast glass work for Pilchuck's live auction, Passion Afire, of emerging glass artists, held at the Experience Music Project in Seattle. Within a year, Pilchuck also selected her work for their annual live auction, in the company of some of the world's most famous glass artists.

In 2003, she co-founded a non-profit dance institute, The Tango Center, and became its art director. She managed the hall's interior design and construction, but also sang Russian Tangos with the house band, and improvised Argentine Tango, the dance, with various partners in front of live audiences.

In 2005 Volchkova left the US to adjust her immigration status. In the atmosphere of the Bush administration, the adjustment was repeatedly delayed and denied, making for a total of five years in exile. She spent time painting in India, where she became inspired by colors that contrasted with the grey landscape of Moscow. In 2010, on her eighth try, she was granted residency, and returned to Oregon. On her return, she worked as a gardener, reuniting her with her lifelong love of plants, and inspiring her botanical artwork. She again became involved in community projects.

In 2013 she appeared on the cover of Crime & the City Solution's album American Twilight. She also played the central figure in music videos released by Mute Records for the album, created by Danielle de Picciotto.

Her latest major series of paintings, original icons known as the 'Garden Saints', were part of two Art exhibitions in Berlin, and two in Hamburg, in 2012 and 2013. These are based on her experience as a gardener, landscape designer, and farmer, and inspired by research on the history of human-plant interaction.

The icon series includes over a hundred plant canonizations, nineteen of which were exhibited from 2015 to 2016 at the University of Oregon's Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art. In 2016, the "Rose and Chocolate" Icon from this series became the album cover of "Unity" from the Potomak label of Einstürzende Neubauten.

Art publisher Pomegranate released notecards of the Garden Saints, and a calendar in 2018. Volchkova occasionally teaches Icon painting at the University of Oregon's Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art, and she is the topic of research projects.

A public television segment on her work was nominated for a 2016 Emmy award.

In 2022 she exhibited at the Schneider Museum of Art at Southern Oregon University.

In 2023 two of her icons were included in a history of art and plants, published in four languages by Taschen books, entitled 'Plant Magick'.

In 2023-24 she has a solo exhibition at The Museum of Russian Art in Minneapolis.

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

title: Olga Volchkova


text: Talk:Mike Inez

title: Talk:Mike Inez


text: User talk:63.19.202.62

title: User talk:63.19.202.62


text:
Kristen Silverberg

Kristen Silverberg (born 1970) was the United States Ambassador to the European Union from July 2008 until January 2009. She was nominated by President George W. Bush on April 24, 2008, and confirmed by the United States Senate on June 27, 2008. On July 22, 2008, she presented her credentials. She was succeeded by William Kennard who was nominated by President Barack Obama on August 6, 2009, and confirmed by the United States Senate on November 20, 2009.

Career
Silverberg was previously Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization Affairs for the United States government. In that role, she was in charge of the Bureau of International Organization Affairs, a part of the State Department.

Prior to her appointment to the State Department, Silverberg served in the following positions in the White House:
 * Special Assistant to the President in the Office of the Chief of Staff
 * Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy
 * Deputy Assistant to the President and Advisor to the Chief of Staff

Silverberg also served as Senior Adviser to Paul Bremer when he was Administrator of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq—reportedly "because she was interested in the work, and not at the behest of the White House." She has been described as a "rising star" in the White House, and as "one of the White House's most trusted behind-the-scenes aides."

Prior to coming to work for the White House, Silverberg served as a law clerk, first to Appellate Court Judge David B. Sentelle, and later to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

She currently sits on the advisory board for Washington, DC nonprofit America Abroad Media.

Personal life
Silverberg was born in 1970 in Alpine, Texas to Rhoda and Eric Silverberg. Silverberg is a graduate of Harvard University and The University of Texas School of Law (1996). She wrote an article (PDF) in 2002 encouraging fellow alumni to seek legal careers in government.

On May 24, 2008, she married Paul V. Lettow at the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center in Austin, Texas; Lettow is the son of Charles F. Lettow, who since July 2003 has been a judge of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims.

title: Kristen Silverberg


text:
Electrooculography

Electrooculography (EOG) is a technique for measuring the corneo-retinal standing potential that exists between the front and the back of the human eye. The resulting signal is called the electrooculogram. Primary applications are in ophthalmological diagnosis and in recording eye movements. Unlike the electroretinogram, the EOG does not measure response to individual visual stimuli.

To measure eye movement, pairs of electrodes are typically placed either above and below the eye or to the left and right of the eye. If the eye moves from center position toward one of the two electrodes, this electrode "sees" the positive side of the retina and the opposite electrode "sees" the negative side of the retina. Consequently, a potential difference occurs between the electrodes. Assuming that the resting potential is constant, the recorded potential is a measure of the eye's position.

In 1951 Elwin Marg described and named electrooculogram for a technique of measuring the resting potential of the retina in the human eye.

Principle
The eye acts as a dipole in which the anterior pole is positive and the posterior pole is negative.
 * 1) Left gaze: the cornea approaches the electrode near the outer canthus of the left eye, resulting in a negative-trending change in the recorded potential difference.
 * 2) Right gaze: the cornea approaches the electrode near the inner canthus of the left eye, resulting in a positive-trending change in the recorded potential difference.

Ophthalmological diagnosis
The EOG is used to assess the function of the pigment epithelium. During dark adaptation, resting potential decreases slightly and reaches a minimum ("dark trough") after several minutes. When light is switched on, a substantial increase of the resting potential occurs ("light peak"), which drops off after a few minutes when the retina adapts to the light. The ratio of the voltages (i.e. light peak divided by dark trough) is known as the Arden ratio. In practice, the measurement is similar to eye movement recordings (see above). The patient is asked to switch eye position repeatedly between two points (alternating looking from center to the left and from center to the right). Since these positions are constant, a change in the recorded potential originates from a change in the resting potential.

title: Electrooculography


text:
Talk:Karotype

From WP:RfD:

 * Karotype -- A spelling mistake, the correct spelling is Karyotype, nothing links there at the moment. Pilatus 17:57, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Google shows about 4,000 instances of "karotype", so it seems it's a fairly common mis-spelling. Strongly recommend keep to prevent creation of a duplicate article. Noel (talk) 21:02, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Karotype


text:
Viomycin

Viomycin is a member of the tuberactinomycin family,  a group of nonribosomal peptide antibiotics exhibiting anti-tuberculosis activity. The tuberactinomycin family is an essential component in the drug cocktail currently used to fight infections of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Viomycin was the first member of the tuberactinomycins to be isolated and identified, and was used to treat TB until it was replaced by the less toxic, but structurally related compound, capreomycin. The tuberactinomycins target bacterial ribosomes, binding RNA and disrupting bacterial protein synthesis and certain forms of RNA splicing. Viomycin is produced by the actinomycete Streptomyces puniceus.

Biosynthesis
The gene cluster for viomycin has been sequenced from Streptomyces sp. strain ATCC 11861, Streptomyces vinaceus and from Streptomyces lividans 1326. It consists of a central cyclic pentapeptide code assembled from nonribosomal peptide synthetase (NRPS). The NRPS contains 4 proteins: VioA, VioF, VioI, and VioG. These proteins condense and cyclize two molecules of L -2,3-diaminopropionate ( L -Dap), two molecules of L -serine ( L -Ser), and one molecule of (2S,3R)-capreomycidine ( L -Cam). After cyclizing these, VioJ catalyzes the α,β-desaturation of this preliminary structure. It is proposed that the viomycin gene cluster includes 36.3 kb of contiguous DNA that encodes 20 open reading frames (ORFs) that are involved in the biosynthesis, regulation, and eventual activation viomycin. In addition to these ORFs, the structure contains the resistance gene vph. The following is a summary of the ORFs and their functions.

 * VioA: NRPS (A-PCP-C-A-PCP-C)
 * VioH: Type II thioesterase
 * VioO: NRPS (A-PCP)-β-lysine activation
 * VioB: 2,3-diaminopropionate synthase
 * VioI: NRPS (PCP-C)
 * VioP: Lysine 2,3-aminomutase
 * VioC: L -Arg hydroxylase
 * VIoJ: 2,3-diaminopropionyl α,β-desaturase
 * vph: Viomycin phosphotransferase
 * VioD: Capreomycidine synthase
 * VioK: Ornithine cyclodeaminase
 * VioQ: Capreomycidine hydroxylase
 * VioE: Permease
 * VioL: Carbamoyltransferase
 * VioR: Transcriptional regulator
 * VioF: NRPS (A-PCP-C)
 * VIoM: NRPS (C)-β-lysine transferase
 * VIoS: Viomycin-phosphate phosphatase
 * VioG: NRPS (A-PCP-C/)
 * VioN: MbtH homolog
 * VioT: Transcriptional regulator

Synthesis of the backbone
The following is the proposed biosynthesis of viomycin using NRPS-catalyzed peptide synthesis. There are five modules for cyclic pentapeptide biosynthesis, including one that lacks an adenylation domain (A). It is therefore proposed that one of the other A domains functions twice. Additionally, the NRPS subunits are not suspected to function in the order in which their genes are arranged, a characteristic of viomycin biosynthesis that is unlike typical NRPS-catalyzed peptide synthesis. The NRPS components function in the order of VioA→VioI→VioF→VioG to account for the incorporation of β-ureidoalanine (β-Uda). The first A domain of VioA creates an L-Dap-PCP intermediate on the first PCP domain. Meanwhile, the second A domain of VioA loads L-Ser onto the second PCP domain, as well as the PCP of VioI. The activation of β-Uda occurs via VioF, and VioG incorporates L -Cam.

Post-modification
After α,β-desaturation via VioJ, three modifications to the preliminary cyclic structure occur. Hydroxylation of C-6 in the structure occurs by VioQ, N-acylation of α-amino group using β-lysine, VioO, and VioM, and carbamoylation of the β-amino group, producing β-ureidoalanine (β-Uda) by the carbamoyltransferase homologue VioL.

title: Viomycin


text:
Samuel Parker (bishop of Oxford)

Samuel Parker (1640 – 21 March 1688) was an English churchman, of strong Erastian views and a fierce opponent of Dissenters. His political position is often compared with that of Thomas Hobbes, but there are also clear differences; he was also called in his time a Latitudinarian, but this is not something on which modern scholars are agreed. During the reign of King James II he served as Bishop of Oxford, and was considered by James to be a moderate in his attitude to Catholics.

Early life and career
He was born at Northampton, England in 1640, the second son of John Parker the judge and Baron of the Exchequer. After studying at Northampton Grammar School, he entered Wadham College, Oxford, 30 September 1656, and matriculated at the Michaelmas term 1657. At Wadham he lived an intense presbyterian life, and graduated BA 28 February 1659. After the Restoration, his views met the disapproval of the warden of Wadham, Walter Blandford, and he migrated to Trinity College, where he proceeded MA 9 July 1663. Under the influence of Ralph Bathurst, senior fellow of Trinity, he moderated his views, and in the following year he was ordained.

Parker became rector of Chartham, Kent, in 1667, and in 1670 he became Archdeacon of Canterbury. Two years after he was appointed rector of Ickham, Kent. In 1673 he was elected master of the Eastbridge Hospital, Canterbury.

He was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in June 1666.

Against the Platonists
In 1665 he published an essay entitled Tentamina physico-theologica de Deo, dedicated to Archbishop Gilbert Sheldon, who in 1667 appointed him one of his chaplains. In 1666-7 Parker published two pamphlets targeting the Cambridge Platonists. He had just become a Fellow of the Royal Society, and these works were designed to put distance between the experimentalists of the Society and the speculations of metaphysics. In fact the Free and Impartial Censure took wide aim at hermetic thinkers in general, such as Rosicrucians, Thomas Vaughan and John Heydon. It also had as a byproduct of the critique of Platonism acute things to say about the assumption that innate knowledge was necessarily correct.

A Discourse of Ecclesiastical Politie
His Discourse of Ecclesiastical Politie (1670) advocated state regulation of religious affairs, and is his major work. It has been called "the most ferocious of the Restoration assaults upon the dissenters". The aim of the book was, 'by representing the palpable inconsistency of fanatique tempers and principles with the welfare and security of government, to awaken Authority to beware of its worst and most dangerous enemies, and to force them to that modesty and obedience by severity of Laws to which all the strength of Reason in the world can never persuade them.' Hobbes's doctrine of sovereignty is fully accepted (p. 27), and the absolute supremacy of the civil power is unhesitatingly asserted. Religion, it is asserted, is so far from being at liberty from the authority of the civil power that 'nothing in the world will be found to require more of its care and influence' (p. 15). Other points of Leviathan, however, are sharply criticised. The position of dissenters is declared to be untenable and ridiculous, and the author discourses with much spirit upon 'the Pretense of a Tender and Unsatisfied Conscience; the Absurdity of Pleading it in opposition to the commands of Publick Authority.'

This book was answered at once in a pamphlet Insolence and Impudence Triumphant, and by John Owen in Truth and Innocence vindicated. Parker replied to Owen. John Locke wrote comments on the Discourse, but they remained unpublished.

It also led him into polemical controversy with Andrew Marvell (1621–1678) who illegally published the two parts of The Rehearsal Transpros'd (London, 1672, 1673) as a response to several of Parker's pamphlets, including Discourse &c. Parker further defended his position. In the controversy, Marvell succeeded in humiliating Parker to such an extent that he did not return to ecclesiastical controversy until after Marvell's death.

Against Hobbes
Although Parker was thought to be close to the arguments on Hobbes on state power (and this opinion is still current), he went to lengths to attack Hobbes on the grounds of atheism, a common charge brought up against him. In A Demonstration of the Divine Authority of the Law of Nature (1681) Parker developed earlier work, and also adapted arguments from the De legibus naturae (1672) of Richard Cumberland. He contradicts Hobbes on human nature as selfish, and argues that our understanding of natural law develops from our understanding of nature, without the requirement that it be innate.

Bishop of Oxford, President of Magdalen
King James II appointed Parker to the bishopric of Oxford in 1686, and he in turn forwarded the king's policy, especially by defending the royal right to appoint Roman Catholics to office. In 1687 the Ecclesiastical Commission forcibly installed Parker as president of Magdalen College, Oxford, the fellows having refused to elect any of the king's nominees. This became one of the most celebrated episodes leading up to James's abdication.

In detail, Parker was early aware of the king's intention to use the appointments to office in the universities for the furtherance of Catholicism. When, after the death of Henry Clerke, President of Magdalen, Thomas Smith called upon him to canvass support, he replied that 'the king expected that the person he recommended should be favourable to his religion.' Six months later, after the failure of his attempt to force Anthony Farmer upon the fellows, the king nominated Parker himself as President of Magdalen College (14 August 1687). Parker was ill, perhaps dying, and desired to be admitted by proxy; but the fellows refused to elect him, having already elected John Hough. The King's visit to Oxford did not advance matters, and finally the ecclesiastical commission visited the college and, after inquiry, installed Parker as president by the king's mandate, and, forcibly entering the lodgings, placed him in possession (25 October).

On 2 November he came into residence, and during the next four months admitted Catholic Fellows and demies, including several Jesuits, on successive mandates from the king. He made futile endeavours to induce the members of the foundation to recognise him as president, and expelled refractory demies. It was rumoured that Parker had proposed in council that one college at Oxford should be given to Catholics. But the king's mandate ordered him to admit nine more Catholics as Fellows. Parker's patience was exhausted, and a burst of anger coincided with a worsened condition. He died on 21 March 1688.

Views
According to Jon Parkin,

For Parker, natural law required nonconformists to submit to the legal requirements imposed by the sovereign for the common good. Parker's illiberal use of the natural law argument soon attracted accusations that he was following the arguments of Thomas Hobbes.

Parker was commonly regarded as a Roman Catholic, because of his actions at Magdalen. Those were consistent with an extreme exponent of the High Church doctrine of passive obedience. To Catholic priests sent to persuade him on his deathbed to be received into the Roman Church, the bishop declared that he "never had been and never would be of that religion," and he died in the communion of the Church of England.

Family
He died in Magdalen College, Oxford in 1688 and was buried in the chapel there. His second son, also named Samuel Parker (1681–1730), was a writer.

Works

 * Tentamina Physico-Theologica de Deo. London: 1665.
 * An Account of the Nature and Extent of the Divine Dominion & Goodnesse. Oxford: 1666.
 * A Free and Impartial Censure of the Platonick Philosophie. Oxford: 1666.
 * A Discourse of Ecclesiastical Politie. London: 1670.
 * A Defence and Continuation of the Ecclesiastical Politie. London: 1671.
 * A Discourse in Vindication of Bishop Bramhall and the Clergy of the Church of England. London: 1673.
 * A Reproof to the Rehearsal Transprosed. London: 1673.
 * Disputationes de Deo et Providentia Divina. London: 1678.
 * A Demonstration of the Divine Authority of the Law of Nature and of the Christian Religion in Two Parts. London: 1681.
 * The Case of the Church of England. London: 1681.
 * An Account of the Government of the Christian Church for the First Six Hundred Years. London: 1683.
 * Religion and Loyalty. London: 1684.
 * Religion and Loyalty, the Second Part. London: 1685.
 * Reasons for Abrogating the Test Imposed upon All Members of Parliament. London: 1688.
 * A Discourse Sent to the Late King James. London: 1690.
 * History of His Own Times. London: 1727.

title: Samuel Parker (bishop of Oxford)


text: User talk:216.69.164.185

title: User talk:216.69.164.185


text:
FLiNaK

FLiNaK is the name of the ternary eutectic alkaline metal fluoride salt mixture LiF-NaF-KF (46.5-11.5-42 mol %). It has a melting point of 462 °C and a boiling point of 1570 °C. It is used as electrolyte for the electroplating of refractory metals and compounds like titanium, tantalum, hafnium, zirconium and their borides. FLiNaK also could see potential use as a coolant in the very high temperature reactor, a type of nuclear reactor.

Coolant
FLiNaK salt was researched heavily during the late 1950s by Oak Ridge National Laboratory as potential candidate for a coolant in the molten salt reactor because of its low melting point, its high heat capacity, and its chemical stability at high temperatures. Ultimately, its sister salt, FLiBe, was chosen as the solvent salt for the molten salt reactor due to a more desirable nuclear cross section. FLiNaK still gathers interest as an intermediate coolant for a high-temperature molten salt reactor where it could transfer heat without being in the presence of the fuel.

Chemistry
Fluoride salts, like all salts, cause corrosion in most metals and alloys. FLiNaK is different from FLiBe in the sense that is a basic melt—or it has an excess of fluorine ions. As FLiNaK melts, all three components are alkali fluorides and therefore disassociate into positive and negative ions. The concentration of molten fluorine ions are able to corrode any metallic structures if it is energetically favorable. This is in contrast to FLiBe, which in a 66-34 mol% mixture will be a chemically neutral mix, as fluorine ions from LiF are donated to BeF2 to create the tetrafluoroberyllate ion BeF42−.

title: FLiNaK


text:
Talk:Parental investment

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lnlesko.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 September 2018 and 10 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Joy-t-g, KKO0123, Dawgz2020. Peer reviewers: Nichag16.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation from Bateman's principle
Trivers' PI theory here needs to be disambiguated from Bateman's principle Pete.Hurd 01:44, 18 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Done. Richard001 06:22, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Summary
There needs to be a short, more clear and concise summery of this article.
 * That is, a lead section. Richard001 00:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Human parental investment
And where's the article for human parents "investing" in their children's education, upbringing, helping them get started in business or society, etc.? I met a socialist politician once who vehemently objected to the idea that "parents who love their children more" could provide any advantages to them! --Uncle Ed 15:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This is about evolutionary biology theory, and is a technical term often used. If you want to create something for humans, start from the parenting article and break it off into a new article if it gets large enough. Richard001 00:56, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Parental investment as a subject of evolutionary psychology not evolutionary biology
Hence renamed it and added quite a bit to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teddykra (talk • contribs) 17:26, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

 * Why? It is a topic within the study of biology in general, not just within EP. People study parental investment in plants... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.128.52.193 (talk) 17:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

 * Agreed. Parental Investment Theory, as proposed by Robert Trivers, is a highly influential principle in evolutionary biology in general, an one of the foundational principles of comparative animal behavior. Memills (talk) 02:38, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

How Evolution Ties In
The evolutionary changes of parental investment among species need to be discussed. Although the changes of offspring are discussed, as well as sexual selection, a specific evolutionary force, evolution should be mentioned and discussed in detail. Stuhlreyer.7 (talk) 12:50, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Sexual Selection
At the end of the article's second paragraph, sexual selection is discussed and explained in detail - mentioning that in humans, there is competition among the males and selection among females because of females higher parental investment and goes on to explain that a female will chose a mate with the highest fitness and good genes- but sexual selection is not mentioned by name. Stuhlreyer.7 (talk) 13:25, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It might be useful to add the importance of parental investment in terms of the survival of offspring. The way in which parental investment actually determines the amount of offspring that survive, and the fact that an individual can only reproduce successfully if they either access parental investment from someone else (male accessing it from female or vice versa), or expend it themselves. It would tie in nicely with what you wrote about human parental investment starting from where the sperm fertilizes the egg. (Rmwillis5 (talk) 10:45, 3 February 2016 (UTC))

Sexual selection and parental investment
This section discusses a lot of sex differences in parental investment but does not refer to them directly as sex differences. To change this, the title of the section could be renamed to 'sex differences in parental investment' to make it clearer what the following paragraphs are about and the sex differences can be explained using sexual selection. Hhammam (talk) 16:40, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Mutual Choosiness
It would be useful to reference a source that defines the phrase mutual choosiness.This will make the article more accessible to anyone who has no prior knowledge on the topic as they would then have access to a source defining this phrase helping them understand this particular section of the article better.

EmPhillips (talk) 11:25, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Adding in a reference or quote
I just think adding Steven Pinker's quote from 'The Blank Slate' summarises things nicely: "A male can get away with a few minutes of copulation and a tablespoon of semen, but a female carries an offspring for months inside her body and nourishes it before and after it is born." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.66.246.96 (talk) 12:09, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review
Hi!

Here are my comments for the peer-review section of “Trivers's parental investment theory”

This article is very detailed and covers a broad range of topics such as increased maternal investment and sociosexuality and so I think this breadth this is a strong point of the article.

I particularly like the broad overview as to what parental investment is in the introductory paragraph. It is very easy to read and readers are not bombarded with irrelevant information.

For the subtitle “Women are the more investing sex”, perhaps consider phrasing this differently as it can come across as having a tone of value judgement. Perhaps “Women AS the more investing sex?” I understand that this may seem like a minor difference but I’m just bearing in mind Wiki’s guidelines on judgement in articles. Whilst the information in this section is interesting, perhaps consider adding more information? The other sections have far more in comparison and it appears unbalanced. This entire section also lacks a citation.

I like the “women as a valuable resource” subsection as it provides a wealth of information and relevant references. However maybe in the subheading be clearer that it is as a resource for men? So perhaps consider adding “for men” at the end of the subheading?

I found the section on Sociosexuality to be a particular strength of your additions. I believe this was a beneficial addition to the article as it a different perspective to parental investment and brings in an account that many might not at first think is related to parental investment. I also believe the scientific references and the links to other pages were done properly and professionally. If I needed or wanted to know more about this I would know exactly where to look based on your references. Thus, It was not only easy and pleasurable to read this section, it was also highly informative.

The only real criticism I would have of this article is the “Commentary” section. Is this a commentary of Triver’s theory overall or is it a commentary of what you have written so far under this section in Wikipedia? I do not understand why it is called as such and it makes the subsequent information difficult to process as I am not sure what I am reading about. Maybe consider another subheading? The information included is very interesting, relevant and backed up great citations of scientific literature, it just doesn’t seem to fit in terms of organisation.

Overall, I like the structure of an introductory paragraph with various related subheadings. I found your additions highlight informative and I think it has added to the overall quality on the page for parental investment. Triver’s theory provides a comprehensive account on parental investment so I feel as though a section like this was needed - well done! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ayselisa.allison (talk • contribs) 15:35, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Hi! Thank you for your feedback, I'll make sure to make the changes you suggested. Regarding the commentary section, I have changed the subheading and related it directly to Trivers's theory, do you think that's enough? Or some further, in-depth changes to the content itself are required? Maybe more links to previous paragraphs? Let me know what you think, I really appreciate you taking the time to give us feedback!

 * Dear Ayselisa, thank you for your valuable feedback. As Joanna mentioned we have now changed the subheadings according to your recommendation. I have also tried to expand and added some additional information to the section "women as the more investing sex". I have added citations where there weren't any and aimed to balance the paragraphs lengthwise. Thank you again for your time.

Nhpopova (talk) 17:04, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

PEER REVIEW 2

 * Overall I think that your page is very detailed, and manages to go into depth on a lot of topics without making the language too complex.
 * I particularly like your use of examples to explain certain topics such as Penguins as a prime example of a species that engage in parental investment
 * One suggestion is to expand a little more on Trivers theory in your introduction. You have a mini paragraph on Fisher, then just say that Trivers is another example.
 * I personally find the mini section on how brains relate to parental investment a bit random. Whilst this is an interesting finding, perhaps expand on it a little more apart from saying that small bird animals have found to invest highly. I found this section not to fit in with how detailed the rest of your article is.
 * This is a very minor point but in one of your subheadings at the end you abbreviate parental investment theory to PIT. Whilst it is obvious to most people that this is an abbreviation, some younger readers may not be able to make this link as you have not used the abbreviation elsewhere in your text
 * Overall this is a very good article, and you have clearly put a lot of work into it. Well done! EmmaHorton (talk) 11:45, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review 3
Hey guys,

I really enjoyed reading your page and I think the adding in the section about Trivers theory was a great idea as it has really benefited it!

I think the first paragraph is a great introduction in to the theory, but there a couple of things that could be added that might make it even clearer! I think maybe mentioning earlier that by sex cells you are referring to egg and sperm cells could be helpful in allowing anyone to understand it. There is a sentence where you say females investment greatly surpasses the males. I understand that this is part of the theory and can often be the case, it might be worthwhile making it more clear that this is what this theory states rather than it being a general fact, just to avoid any possible offence! Also although this is implicit in what you have said, Emphasising that the females egg cells are limited in comparison to males which are practically infinite could explain more why they are making more of an investment. Additionally although it has the links to the relevant articles, explaining further what the gestation period is, and that it takes 9 months would help to emphasise why the theory states women invest so much more. Although you've mentioned aspects of this throughout your section, adding a section/subtitle talking about males as a resource and there investment would make comparisons between the genders easier. I really likes that you added explanations of how this theory has lead to others- such as evolutionary explanations of rape, and also your comparison of parental investment theories to sexual strategies theories. Calling Parental investment theory in the subtitle rather PIT could make it flow more but other than that it was great! Overall you've made some really great additions, well done guys! Isabel Nelson (talk) 11:17, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Isabel, thank you for your review, it was very helpful and I made some changes accordingly: 1. I have explained that when using the term "sex cells" we refer to egg and sperm cells 2. I have tried to make it clearer that females' investment greatly surpasses males' investment mainly according to Trivers' theory. 3. I also tried to explain why investing some of the limited number of your sex cells is seen as a bigger investment for females. 4. We have explained the gestation period and linked to the appropriate wikipedia page for it 5. Taking into account your suggestion for adding a section on male's investment, I have done that although it is shorter than the investment of females simply because they do invest less! Overall, I think we have tried to incorporate all of you suggestions for improvement. Please let us know if it makes more sense now or if there is anything else we need to work on. Thank you for your time! Nhpopova (talk) 16:30, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

PEER REVIEW 4
Firstly i think the structure and outline of your section is really good!!! The introduction and explanation of your theory is also really good and clear with adequate links to relevant pages. However, there is no citation or research in the "women as more investing sex" section and i also believe there is a "parent-offspring conflict" wiki page that can be linked to your "women as a valuable resource for men" section. l also love the way you added stuff from the behaviour change lecture too!!! i think you an make a few extra links to wiki pages such as "infidelity", "rape", and "one night stands". i loved your contribution. Thought it was articulated fantastically and it was very clear and easy to understand QuuenChris (talk) 20:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review 5
You have made great progress! Besides a few minor copy edits, here are some comments for improvement:

•	Each of your sub-sections are fluent and articulate; you have identified and used the appropriate sources and citations to comply with Wikipedia Guidelines. The only slight grammatical error I could identify would be your sentence reading ‘unrestricted sexuality refers to a kind of sexual strategy people adopts when they engage in more than one concurrent sexual relationship…’, under the heading ‘Sociosexuality’.

•	You have made good use of experimental findings in support of your statements. I was particularly impressed by your use of statistics and find this adds to the credibility of your argument.

•	Your ‘Application of Trivers’ Theory in Real Life’ is perhaps a bit lengthy, but again you have made good use of available research in offering alternative explanations for Parental Investment Theory, and have provided a vigorous critique of his work. My only suggestion would be to expand on the opening commentary stating that Trivers stereotypes and simplifies women’s sexual behaviour, before jumping straight to ‘An alternative explanation…’. This is under the sub-heading ‘PIT versus sexual strategies’.

•	I would also recommend that whilst you have acknowledged disagreement among sources regarding PIT, it is perhaps too negatively focused on weaknesses of his theory. I would expand on your opening paragraph to explain why exactly his theory has been quite so influential - e.g. role-reversed species. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Verity345 (talk • contribs) 20:41, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your feedback! We have corrected some grammatical errors, thank you for pointing them out! And other suggestions you made on PIT and acknowledged disagreement among sources regarding PIT are very relevant, we made some changes according to that. Thank you for helping improve this page! Kkatieeee (talk) 17:04, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review 5
Hey guys, really great! A lot of detail added to the page and it is all relevant! it's al relevant!

Just a few things I would suggest considering: •	I feel many readers would benefit from the date that Triver's theory was published being put in text

•	I think that reference 18 should come at the end of the sentence, cause initially, it seemed as if you were referencing Triver's name. However, that may just be a personal preference

•	Try to do more to within the text separate/make more distinct: rearing investment and mating investment. This is more formatting but I feel bolding or italics would help here

•	You've referenced male sperm cells production but not referenced female egg production, I think you should try to find a source for this

•	In the section 'women as the more investing sex' there are no references to the aspects described such as women preferences to financial status, resource access, commitment etc

•	In the second sentence I think it should be "will compete" instead of "with compete"

•	It might be worth trying to add possible criticisms of Triver's theory or alternatives to it

On the whole A very solid contribution, good job!

R.E.Flanagan (talk) 23:47, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Peer Review 6

Hi,

I think this is a really good article, I really enjoyed reading it!

Introduction:
 * good use of links to other pages
 * very well written
 * good use of images
 * could make it more clear that it is Trivers' theory that's going to be discussed
 * I also think Trivers' looks better than Trivers's and I feel like the first way is more correct but I could be wrong

Parental Care:
 * good use of images
 * I found the paragraph about penguins very interesting!
 * could include some examples of the benefits and costs in the second paragraph
 * could include some specific human examples
 * could define some of the concepts briefly as people won't want to keep clicking on links just to find out what it means, e.g. 'hymenoptera' and 'haplodiploid'

Sexual Selection:
 * really well explained
 * good use of links
 * very clear and well written
 * could include some images
 * could explain 'ornamented' a bit more

Trivers' Parental Investment Theory:
 * very well explained
 * really well written
 * clear and concise
 * gives definitions which is good and they're very clear
 * I really like the application paragraph - it's very relevant and relatable!
 * I feel like you need to re-word the last sentence in the 'women as a valuable resource for men' paragraph, e.g. could say 'conflict arises if the parent continues to invest in the offspring even to the critical point where the cost begins to outweigh the benefits

Overall I think it's really good, well done! Jessica Owen (talk) 10:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your feedback! We have changed Trivers's into Trivers', I feel like it sounds a lot better as well! And other suggestions you made are very relevant, we made some changes according to that. Thank you for helping improve this page! Kkatieeee (talk) 16:59, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

The effect of father absence
"In the study, females that had no father absent since the age of 0 to 5 are more likely to engage in sexual activities earlier than females who had no father absent from 6 to 13."

That sentence should be corrected. Without an access to the sources referred I can only assume it should read "females that had father absent since the age of 0 to 5 are more likely... ..than females who had father absent from 6 to 13." Or is it vice versa?--J. Sketter (talk) 11:05, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

 * Would also be beneficial if the article provided some information about the effects on the offspring if the mother was absent and the father was the only parent in the household, and thus the only one providing parental investment. (DLE) — Preceding unsigned comment added by LilBoPeep3 (talk • contribs) 05:58, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Parental investment


text:
Talk:Quantum logic gate

Number of page views in the past 30 days

Comments
The article asserts that $$R(\cos^{-1}\begin{matrix} \frac{3}{5} \end{matrix}))$$ along with a couple of other gates form a "universal" set of gates. What is the significance and/or derivation of 3/5?  Would other angles work as well?  What is the critical property of the particular angle?  --David Battle 01:39, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The fact that it's usable at all is due to the fact that it divided by 2pi is irrational, I believe. For all irrational numbers x all real numbers r in [0,1) and all open intervals that include r, there is an integer n such that nx mod 1 is in the interval. Why this specific angle? Well, $$e^{\theta i} = \cos x + i \sin x$$, so $$e^{\cos^{-1}\begin{matrix} \frac{3}{5} \end{matrix}} = \cos (\cos^{-1}\begin{matrix} \frac{3}{5} \end{matrix}) + i \sin (\cos^{-1}\begin{matrix} \frac{3}{5} \end{matrix})$$, which I believe is $$\frac{3}{5} + i \frac{4}{5}$$, whose absolute value is 1. The associated angle (the argument of this number) is irrational--I think. Actually, using $$e^i$$ for that term of the matrix should work as well, and it's pretty simple, too. Now my question is why an angle is being multiplied by 2pi. --Ihope127 23:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

 * You're right, multiplying an angle by 2pi in the phase gate example doesn't make sense. I have removed it. --V79 (talk) 17:15, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Rotating qubit
Rotating about x axis:
 * $$ R_x(\frac{2\pi}{n}) = \begin{bmatrix} \cos\frac{\pi}{n} & -i\sin\frac{\pi}{n} \\ -i\sin\frac{\pi}{n} & \cos\frac{\pi}{n} \end{bmatrix} $$.

Rotating about y axis:
 * $$ R_y(\frac{2\pi}{n}) = \begin{bmatrix} \cos\frac{\pi}{n} & -\sin\frac{\pi}{n} \\ \sin\frac{\pi}{n} & \cos\frac{\pi}{n} \end{bmatrix} $$.

Rotating about z axis:
 * $$ R_z(\frac{2\pi}{n}) = \begin{bmatrix} \cos\frac{\pi}{n}-i\sin\frac{\pi}{n} & 0 \\ 0 & \cos\frac{\pi}{n}+i\sin\frac{\pi}{n} \end{bmatrix}$$.

http://jquantum.sourceforge.net/jQuantumApplet.html

Quantum gate (PC game) confusion
concerning articles :1:Quantum gate, 2:Quantum Gate and 3:Quantum Gate (PC game) previously, 3 redirected to 2 which held the info about the game, which i thought was very confusing, as it was clear to me that 2 should redirect to 1, with 3 holding the information about the game, so i moved the game information from 2 to 3, and redirected 2 to one, this will be coppied on the other two articles' talk page 193.60.83.241 (talk) 11:47, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

NAND is not unitary
The section in the article which claims to demonstrate how a NAND quantum gate could be physically realised is most strange, because the "NAND gate" produced at the end is not invertible, thus not unitary, and hence not a quantum gate at all! Indeed, if the "gate" produced existed at all, it could be used to create copies of the state of qubits, blatantly violating the no-cloning theorem. However, I'm not sufficiently versed in the electrodynamics to tell whether the whole thing is just nonsense, or perhaps rather a poorly remembered example that was really supposed to produce some other classical gate, such as CNOT. 81.170.129.141 (talk) 23:34, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

 * In cruder terms, I too wish to call bullshit on this section. Reading it seems to suggest you can get NAND by multiplying by a clever choice of phase shift. No citations either. Should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.172.178.157 (talk) 13:48, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

 * I'm new to quantum gates, but I think I have to agree. AFAIK all quantum gates are reversable. No matter how you look at it, AND OR NAND NOR etc. can't be implemented. Only NOT Xor Xnor. (Please correct me if I'm wrong) --User:AltruismAndCake

 * Yeh the section is not Quantum mechanics, the Bloch equations are obtained by taking the saddle points of the full quantum theory resolved explicitly over only product states. This is classical mechanics.

Superpositions within Matrices
Do the logic gates allow superpositional values to act as operators or instructions? If they do, that's not really coming through in the article. If they do not, then is this a fundamental limitation of the quantum phenomena, or is it just much simpler to build a QC with "ordinary" logic gates? While the answers to these questions might turn out to be rather awkward, I think they'd go a long way to making the idea of quantum computing more accessible to a larger number of people. Thank you! -- 17:38, 22 April 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheLastWordSword (talk • contribs)

 * Superpositions are those values that are not aligned perfectly along the base vectors, which represents the observable states of the variable. It is a medium-large project to 1) figure out *which* pieces of knowledge are the basics of quantum computing, and 2) to wrap the (mine/your) head around them -- so expecting it to just jump out at you and explain itself is a bit.. much to ask. Of course it would be awesome if every article was awesome that way, but we are just humans. Also, ***you*** can enhance it. 2001:2002:51E3:8007:B66D:83FF:FE0E:C298 (talk) 20:36, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Universality via Deutsch gates
Assume Deutsch gates are permitted to take an arbitrary rotation as parameter, e.g. set via a potentiometer-like control attached to each Deutsch gate that can be rotated smoothly about 360 degrees when manually constructing the circuit. Presumably this would permit realizing any unitary operation on n qubits with finitely many quantum gates.

As a function of n, what is the minimum number of Deutsch gates needed to be sure of being able to implement any unitary operation?

It seems likely this has already been determined. If so this section of the article should say something about it. Vaughan Pratt (talk) 18:09, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Physical Manifestation?
Where can I learn about physically realizations of these various gates?

Meekohi (talk) 21:01, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

 * Check out the "Physical Implementations" section of the infobox at the bottom of the page. The two most popular models of quantum computing are the superconducting qubit (particularly transmon) and trapped ion computers. Those pages have some information on how gates are implemented, but it will vary by architecture (and potentially even by device). --Rxtreme (talk) 05:41, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Pauli Y operator is Hermitian
The section on Unitary inversion of gates claims that the Pauli Y gate is not Hermitian. The Pauli Y gate is Hermitian because the Pauli y matrix/operator is hermitian (as are all the Pauli matrices). I have edited the page to give the Ising (XX) gate instead as an example. 65.130.201.235 (talk) 19:33, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * that's correct, of course, thanks. Maybe a more standard gate like $$\pi/8 (T)$$ would be a better example? --Qcomp (talk) 22:20, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this correction! I am adding phase shift gates as examples to the article. Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 20:05, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

References missing
The top of the article has a Template:More citations needed but the article has already many references. It would be better if we could have in-line templates or specific templates per section.--ReyHahn (talk) 18:31, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for your contributions with rotation operator gates/SU(2)! :D It is joyful to read your texts. -- The references can be made better, though. I have been thinking a lot about the references, and basically the entire content of the article is just mathematical consequences derived from 1) Born rule, 2) how serial gates works, 3) how parallel gates works. Given just these three anchors, it's possible although time-consuming to figure the rest out by oneself. ← This was pretty much what I did, and I sometimes flip out and go over the math again, and again, and again, as maybe I got something wrong regarding Measurement and the two sections about entanglement. It HOPE that is possible to read the article from top to bottom without encountering anything upsetting. (Except maybe for "note3" in the section about the Hadamard Transform. I have not found a source for that somewhat wild statement, although honestly I think it's correct.) Also that someone has identified the gates listed in the article, that they are real and not something we made up (although, it does not matter which gates one use, but anyways). · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 05:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree as many of these facts are almost mathematical not everything has to be referenced (like the gate part) but we have to be sure we are using the right conventions (note 3 seems relevant, let me see what can I find). For the basic gates (Clifford gates, T, rotation gates) a simple ref to Nielsen & Chuang would suffice. I have just read up to the universal gates part, I will check the rest later but I see that there are some ref already. For quick verification for quantum gates we can also use Qiskit textbook/documentation, Quantum Inspire knowledge base] or N&C.--ReyHahn (talk) 08:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Some random ideas about this article, and how to make it more complete

 * $$CZ = SWAP \times CZ$$, which is the reason why CZ has such a weird circuit representation (just a line)
 * Extend the section of "Measurement on pairwise entangled qubits" to also talk about quantum parallelism in terms that the rest of the world also uses. Or maybe add a new section. That is, $$|x \otimes y\rangle \mapsto |x \otimes (F(x) \oplus y)\rangle$$. ← This is also what the circuits for Shors algorithm, phase estimation, et.c. looks like. The CU-gates they talk about is the "$$F(x) \oplus$$"-part..
 * Maybe a section on physical realizations of gates, how to go from hamiltonians and the schrödinger equation to gates.
 * This article, and others as well, would probably benefit from having something written about measurement basis. Pauli-Z, X, Y, computational basis (Z), Hadamard basis, Bell basis. Basis shift can be defined as application of gates.

The end of the article kindof ends with something that looks more like a tutorial than anything else. This article feels like it's about 10x easier to read than most books on the subject. I really like that :D Not sure that it is "the wikipedia way" though. · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 23:51, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Some quick answers:
 * Sure about CZ, I was thinking we could remove the image with CX, CY, CZ and put the usual images for CNOT, CY, and the symmetrical CZ.
 * I do not know if "coupling gates" is a term on its own. Usually, in the physical system you have some couplings that you can exploit to create multi-qubit gates like the Ising gates, I guess that's it.
 * I think the page is the right size but going further will make it too large.
 * --ReyHahn (talk) 09:34, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Removal of the Ising gates
I was the one that expanded on the Ising gates and the related complex SWAPs. But maybe it makes the section of the gates longer and does not really add to it. Also we do not have a circuit representation for those gates. Should we remove them from the article for better fluidity?--ReyHahn (talk) 20:09, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * No please! They are interesting! It is our only anchor to iSWAP and trapped ion machines, and maybe gates that are somewhat close to hardware gives some depth :) · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 23:30, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Mølmer–Sørensen Gate
Is there any reason the Mølmer–Sørensen gate is excluded in this article? There being no objections I could write up a section on MS gates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewvh4 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Go ahead, with the proper references.--ReyHahn (talk) 19:18, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes please write about it :) It seems to me from just reading the mapping on the basis states (g = 0, e = 1) that this gate is maybe something like a phase-shifting Hadamard-CNOT? Tried a little to find the matrix that does exactly that mapping, they don't give it as a single matrix in the sources.. · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 11:01, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Controlled gates
I deleted this section:

A controlled function or gate behaves conceptually differently depending on whether one approaches it from before measurement, or after measurement:

 * From the perspective of before measurement, the controlled function simultaneously executes on all those basis states, of a superposition (i.e. linear combination) of possible outcomes, that match the controls. Such an operation is a unitary transformation on both the control qubit and the target qubit, and is described by a controlled-U gate.
 * If one instead approaches it from the perspective of after measurement, the controlled function has either executed, or not, depending on which basis state that was measured. Such an operation is a measurement on the control qubit, with its result controlling the operations on the target qubit (i.e. a classically controlled function). For example, this is used in the typical quantum teleportation protocol where Alice measures her system and then transmits the result through classical channel to Bob, so that Bob can perform the corrsponding operation to retrieve the unknown quantum state.

End of quote.

I began writing this section, didn't add any real sources for the actual if-statement, but only for quantum parallelism. Then it morphed away as stuff sometimes do on wikipedia, and now I am no longer sure how true the 2nd half of the 2nd bullet is.

The sources (esp. Ömer) has good examples for what "quantum-if" are, and how they differ from normal if's.

Splitting the article
Should we make a separate article i.e. List of quantum logic gates? that way we could focus on a few main ones here and add even more in the new article. Note that the article is reaching 100 kB of WP:readable prose so it is suggested to be split.--ReyHahn (talk) 15:30, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * No hurry here but my proposal will be the following leave Clifford gates, Toffoli and maybe T gate in the main article and the rest goes into more detail in List of quantum logic gates.--ReyHahn (talk) 16:31, 7 September 2022 (UTC)
 * any objections? --ReyHahn (talk) 14:01, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I am okay with that, it will be lots of work updating the links in other articles though. we could add grovers diffusion operator as a gate in that list, also, maybe. and so on, a lot of oft-used "sub-routines" are actually n-qubit gates :) · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Let me work on a draft, and we can discuss it.--ReyHahn (talk) 14:55, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Here is draft of the article in question User:ReyHahn/List_of_quantum_logic_gates. Comments are welcome. Note that I removed most of the comments on the Clifford gates as those, Toffoli and controlled gates should remain in the article.--ReyHahn (talk) 17:31, 10 September 2022 (UTC) And for the Grover diffusor we could include a section of algorithm-based gates with names but not necessarily with matrix representation.--ReyHahn (talk) 19:33, 10 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Lets move it :) Its especially nice that the properties of the gates are being listed in that table, determinant, and so on. That page looks really nice :D · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 10:21, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I have created List of quantum logic gates. Please help me verify that everything is in there before erasing anything. We can also discuss somethings like should controlled phase be listed? Or should Toffoli and Deutsch go into the "other" list (at least Toffoli has its own article so it would not hurt).--ReyHahn (talk) 12:07, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Also we have to be careful with the linking.--ReyHahn (talk) 12:10, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Quick update: I have decided to leave the following in the main article (I,X,Y,Z,H,S,T,CNOT,SWAP, controlled gates, Toffoli and Deutsch), Deutsch is discussed in some other parts in the main text and Toffoli has its own article so it does not hurt if we put them all in the same table in the list article.--ReyHahn (talk) 12:23, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It reduced 23% of the prose now the article is safe from additional splitting from the time being.--ReyHahn (talk) 09:39, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thanks :)! When reading the article now, I realize that maybe I need to sprinkle some citations/references for various statements. The "this is real"-feeling only comes with references, and most of the refs come only after the Notable gates-section. But easily done :) ... or maybe not? It's just mathematical statements, and 7 sources/refs were given in the section header Notable gates (I think the gates listed is in all those sources, so super-easy to verify?) · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 15:45, 13 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The more the references the better. There is a gate that is bothering me though. Is that phase shift gate $P$. I cannot find a good book that includes it. It certainly available in most SDK (Qiskit,Quantum Inspire and so on) but it is hard to find a basic textbook that includes it.--ReyHahn (talk) 06:59, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, ok. In this paper the P gate appears (with the name E) on page 11: - the gate comes from the mathematical properties of the phase gates in general, basically. Idk, maybe it needs this explanation: If we have one phase gate, we can make any phase gate. Ph(y)Rz(2y)=P(y). (if Ph exist, then also P, and then also T and S, and their adjoints). And Ph exist because Ph*Rz*Ry*Rx is a factorization of any gate in U(2), and Ph is included in many instruction sets. Imho we should not remove P plz!
 * --- page 163 mentions the "phase shift gate" with the name R, with the P-gates matrix.
 * --- page 180-181 lists the phase shift gate, but does not give it an operator name, just shows its matrix. It does explain it somewhat the same way our wikitext does, however. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omnissiahs hierophant (talk • contribs)
 * I think you are assuming that one always has the rotation gates but some QPU only have phase gate P to start with. Not a problem with keeping it but on finding a resources that is old. I just found one! I have added it in List of quantum logic gates. I did not know about this book but it is recommended by some on stackexchange.--ReyHahn (talk) 14:55, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It is not super-awesome (Quantum computing for computer scientists), poor layout, But it teaches the basics of quantum circuit design, and how it relates to normal computing, and probabilistic computing. Its aimed at computer engineers, kindof 2nd year BSc-student level math :) · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 15:47, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Yanufki and Manucci works for me too.--ReyHahn (talk) 14:57, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I am approaching quantum logic gates from the perspective that the user has a quantum processor with a universal instruction set. and therefore all gates in U(2^n) are available, at least in principle. And especially true for gates on one or two qubits. I think this also is the case with almost all quantum languages around. But you are thinking about if from an engineers perspective? :) (bottom up/top down perspective) · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 15:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Maybe it is that. I just like minimal set gates with no continuous parameters (also gates with names). BTW Mølmer-Sørensen gate is defined as a non-parametrized gate in the wiki article, but in some other articles it has an angle. What's up with that? Any good ref?--ReyHahn (talk) 15:29, 14 September 2022 (UTC) I am under the impression that there is a difference between the MG gate and the general MG gates.--ReyHahn (talk) 15:41, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * In the papers i read they were parameterized. That was some time ago and that article (Mølmer-Sørensen gate) has evolved since then. i think the authors wrote it can implement the CNOT gate (like, in the abstract), and.. that's it all i know. · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 15:55, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Qiskit defines the MG gate as equivalent to R_xx https://quantum-computing.ibm.com/composer/docs/iqx/operations_glossary and defines also a general one for three qubits https://qiskit.org/documentation/stubs/qiskit.circuit.library.GMS.html. I think there is conflicting information and thus conflicting information here in Wikipedia.--ReyHahn (talk) 15:59, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh noes! Maybe Mølmer-Sørensen gate and Ising gates needs some fact-checking? ofc everything always needs fact-checking, not trust wikipedia blindly (do the math, check sources)..... and update. · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 16:19, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Mama mia! Cirq has also two different MS gates https://quantumai.google/reference/python/cirq_ionq/ionq_native_gates/MSGate . Yes, we need to thread these gates carefully. And possibly update the MS article.--ReyHahn (talk) 16:25, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
 * :D · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 16:28, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

About global phase
Global phase is weird. I am starting to think that maybe I have been wrong about it even existing, doubting myself. But, in the books they kindof say that it does exist. For example, by saying that gates belong to U(2), and not SU(2). They also reference it by including it in factorizations.. But, however, IBM says that the Hamiltonian for it is useless (link).

It has to exist, otherwise single-qubit gates would not belong to U(2), but SU(2). And intuitively (although I have not tested this), if one inverts the global phase early in the Grover's algorithm, then that would cause the algorithm amplify (with Grover's diffusion operator) all the wrong values, instead of the correct value(s) - essentially inverting the search query.

Why are people suggesting global phase does not exist?? Is it because it does not matter at all in normal quantum physics? · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 16:10, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Global phases do nothing in quantum circuits, as long as it is truly global. Note that you could write all quantum circuits with SU(2) gates and it will work the same. We just use U(2) gates because it is easier to write some gates in this form. For example, we could use iX instead of X as our bitflip gate, but then controlled-iX is not equivalent to CNOT (which is one of the most helpful ones), so we prefer use U(2). I do not see why a global phase would make the Grover's algorithm not work, could you provide more details? --ReyHahn (talk) 16:44, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

 * IDK, Maybe I should not have written that, without proof or anything. And maybe this topic is moot since I think there is no disagreement in that global phase is real and exist. The reason I picked this up and made it a topic is that I see various people saying online that SU(n) is the symmetry group, and not U(n). Because phase (or even relative phase) is not visible anyways. But it is! Global phase can be converted to relative phase (via P(x)Rx(2x)=Ph(x)) and relative phase is visible through usage of alternative basis (slot in the X or Y matrix instead of Z as the projection operator). Maybe these misunderstandings go away if more details are written about measurement. This article always uses computational basis (ie Z), and it is maybe not clear that other basis are equally valid idk.. "The expectation value of an observable A for a system in a state $$\psi$$ is given by the inner product $$\langle \psi, A \psi \rangle$$." // Dirac–von Neumann axioms. IDK maybe I should just be silent, but this has been bothering me for so long, and derp. I've already written this blob of text already now. This whole thing can be explained better in the articles about quantum this-and-that maybe. Also maybe I want to know if my world-view is wrong, if it actually is SU(n) and what the reason is for people saying this. We dont need it, but it is there. · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 14:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Reads like an advanced quantum mechanics text book.
I am pretty lay when it comes to the math behind quantum mechanics. I think a lot of people may have an interest in stuff like this. However, in just a few paragraphs the article jumps into things that only physics grads are going to understand. It would be nice if there was some more general and less intimidating information about how this works and its applications. The kinds of info a lay person could understand. As I understand it this page should really just describe what a Q logic gate is and how they can be applied. There should be another page with types of gates and the more complex descriptions of the mathematical formulas. I imagine that your average person reads of few lines on this page and gives up right away. Since this is an encyclopedia, it should contain the simplest way to understand how things work alongside the complex information. Thanks 162.246.112.154 (talk) 19:51, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
 * This seems easy compared to actual quantum mechanics though. For example the article is written with a simpler (but sufficient) version of "measurement" than what is usually given. Anyways, maybe you can contribute with more layman text in the beginning or give more elaborate suggestions. Wikipedia is a community effort after all :) · · · Omnissiahs hierophant (talk) 20:59, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Quantum logic gate