text:
Talk:Baseband

Does ethernet use baseband signaling?

 * Yes, it does. Although we don't have that piece of information in an article so far as I can tell. See Ethernet and IEEE 802.3. -Splash talk 17:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Not necessarily. The orignal Ethernet used "Manchester coding", which can be viewed as shifting the theoretical 5 MHz baseband of 10 Mbps data up to a carrier frequency of 10 MHz, so the band occupied can be as narrow as 5 to 15 MHz.  Due to AC coupling with capacitors and/or transformers at various points, moving the peak of the data spectrum up from 0 to 10 MHz is helpful. This, however, is but one physical implementation of Ethernet.  Others such as 802.11 shift it up to RF, of course. Dicklyon 16:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

CISCO state the the "base" in 10Base-T refers to baseband and by inference surey this means Ethernet uses baseband.

 * By definition, Ethernet uses baseband signalling. It might be that some statements in the article are wrong.  The important one being that the frequency spectrum goes close to zero.  Gah4 (talk) 22:12, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Intro
Let's work on a good opening sentence and definition (current version uses "comprises" in the typical incorrect way, and doesn't get to the point very specifically). It would be good to at least admit that any kind of Fourier analysis gives negative frequencies, too. For real signals, these are just reflections of the positive, not new information, so they are conventionally ignored. And the "RF" spectrum needs to reference double sideband and/or single-sideband modulation to explain where this comes from. I'll see if I can help. Please comment on my attempts. Dicklyon 16:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

In typical fashion, this article seems to be geared toward those who would have no reason to look it up on wikipedia in the first place, having already earned their PhDs in engineering. Perhaps it could be made a little less intimidating for the uninitiated.--72.255.35.11 (KartoumHero) 02:25, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

In the Intro, it says "from zero" to the highest frequency. Later on in the article, it doesn't say "from zero" but only to the highest frequency. This article is frustrating for that and other reasons. If you don't know what baseband is to begin with, this article doesn't help. 70.166.123.49 (talk) 03:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

ῶ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.153.61.167 (talk) 01:01, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Useless Article
What combination of idiots wrote this article? It makes no sense! To be clear, I understand the topic now, but only because I went back to the VERY FIRST draft of this article from 2002 (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baseband&oldid=71326)!!! That at least was a clear explanation, especially if read alongside the wikipedia articles for Band and Modulation. I'm afraid to help edit the article though, because I have no idea what the hell the useless drivel on the current version means. Mmurfin (talk) 20:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

This article seems to be textbook stuff for students of signal processing theory. There is a specific and widespread usage of "baseband" in mobile telephony (and in phrases such as "baseband modem", "baseband IC") - this article really could benefit from explaining that. Wikipedia's much more useful when it's making sense of fast-moving, real-world concepts than when it's just a substitute for buying a textbook. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.140.96.21 (talk) 12:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I second the opinion. This article is not only useless, but also MISLEADING. The Opening paragraph on the Baseband is totally misleading.

Aursani (talk) 12:56, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Not So Useless, and btw, what's the frequency bandwidth of Ethernet?
I disagree, I see some value here. Go around the web and search for something that connects "Bandwidth" and e.g. "Ethernet". There is so little out there that even many engineers get so confused about something so basic as to claim that an Ethernet signal has no frequency spectrum because it's digital. Granted, it's something engineered once per decade or so, but not digging into this is like not explaining how things work because we're not supposed to understand the guts of a Tamagochi like they used to understand the guts of a spring-driven toy car. And, by the way, can anybody add the real-world (as opposed to information-theory or whatever) spectrum bandwidths of the various Ethernet signals? It' a bit like not mentioning that swimming is a form of locomotion (go see! :-P ) Spamhog (talk) 22:54, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

 * In the case of many signals, it isn't useful to give one number as bandwidth. You really need a power spectrum, how much power is transmitted at which frequency.  In the case of coaxial ethernet, it gets more complicated. While the data signal might fit in a 5MHz to 15MHz band, collision detection is done it DC, that is, close to 0Hz. The signal on the cable is not AC coupled, and the average DC voltage, after filtering, is used for collision detection.  It might be that between 1kHz and 5kHz that you could squeeze in some other signal.  Twisted-pair ethernet is transformer coupled, and so can't go down, or even close, to 0Hz. Gah4 (talk) 21:55, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

What is baseband?
Isn't the definition of baseband 'the signal you are trying to transmit'? Maybe add a quick explanation for the lay person, or an example, like: "In AM radio, the baseband includes the announcer's voice. The baseband is then modulated with the carrier frequency, which is the frequency on the radio dial, and then demodulated so that a voice is heard at the receiver." 71.139.176.47 (talk) 19:35, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

 * I cannot agree more with this statement. Although replacing the entire article with this talk entry would be a large net improvement, simply offering the above explanation as the first paragraph would at least allay the offensive nature of this article to date.  5000+ people a month are being victimized by this academic fappery.  I try not to attribute malice to that which can be explained by the innocent bloviation that comes naturally to experts but articles this bad cause me to wonder if I'm being naive. Allenc28 (talk) 05:56, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Meaning of Baseband
Transmission of signal with infinite bandwidth is called the basband transmission. A single signal transmitted over the transmission line occupies all the bandwidth of the transmission line. A digital pulse transmitted without modulation occupies infinite bandwidth.

Aursani (talk) 13:03, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

 * While that sounds very intelligent, it means absolutely nothing to a person with no prior knowledge in this subject. I came here for a refresher and after attempting to decipher this article, I am now absolutely confused.  The average non-engineer is not going to be able to make sense of "infinite bandwidth".  I cannot get much out of this article as it is currently written.  Why is it that I can go on YouTube and watch 1 or 2 videos and understand this topic completely, yet I cannot do anything with this source of "information"?  That is an important question that should be address if WP is going to have any value to casual readers. And yes, it does read like a low-quality textbook - which explains why students have such a difficult time with this topic.  Perhaps a re-write with better diagrams would help? Good writing should inform, not confuse the reader. 73.6.96.168 (talk) 04:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Definition of Baseband
In my experience and opinion, a baseband signal is a signal that is centered at zero (f = 0) when viewing the two-sided (positive and negative) spectrum. It doesn't really have anything to do with bandwidth, as stated in the article.

It is true that when one needs to modulate a signal, the carrier frequency must be chosen based on the bandwidth of the baseband signal and is usually much larger than the bandwidth, but this is a consequence of modulation.

Yates (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

 * Just reading the first sentence" Baseband is a signal that has a very narrow and near-zero frequency range, raises questions to me. First of all, very narrow relative to what?  1000baseT, that is, gigabit ethernet, is baseband, though with a bandwidth over 100MHz.  And how close does it get to 0Hz?  Not very.  Seems to me that in actual use, a signal is baseband if its bandwidth is much wider than the frequency of the lower end of the band.  That is true for wide (say 10MHz or more) and narrow band signals.   The result is that there isn't spectral space for another (frequency shifted) version of the signal at lower frequencies.  There might be room for other signals, though. Gah4 (talk) 21:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

 * I was about to say something about this, but it seems that I already did. But "narrow" is always relative to something. The available frequency spectral space increases as faster transistors become available for low prices. Narrow isn't as narrow as it used to be. Gah4 (talk) 22:17, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Carrier
Baseband ethernet is, by definition, baseband, yet it does have a carrier. The distinction, in using Manchester coding, (aka. phase modulation) is that the carrier frequency is close to the modulation frequency (data rate). Actually, the carrier frequency is equal to the data rate. The carrier is obviously necessary for CSMA/CD to work. I think this means that some of the definitions in the article need to be redone. Gah4 (talk) 22:22, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

 * It might be better to think of Manchester encoding as a pulse position modulation; depending on whether the "DC pulse" is in the first half or the second half of the bit cell, you get a one or a zero. That's pretty much how it's realized, at least in systems I've looked at many years ago, though concentually it might be easier to treat it as modulation of a square-wave carrier at the bit rate. Dicklyon (talk) 04:47, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

 * OK, but in spectral space, it looks like a 10MHz carrier modulated by (multiplied by) a signal that is either +1 or -1. The modulating signal goes from 0Hz to 5MHz, the latter alternating 1's and 0's.  With appropriate filtering, which I believe Ethernet requires, the spectrum is from 5MHz to 15MHz. As usual for AM signals, the spectral space is twice the modulating spectral space. On the other hand, for broadband Ethernet, the carrier frequency is much higher.  Baseband telephone signals are considered 300Hz to 3400Hz, again not down to zero.  I think we need a definition that allows for signals that don't go all the way to zero, but close enough.  Gah4 (talk) 07:02, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Actually the "main lobe" of the spectrum is from 0 to 20 MHz, which is where the first nulls are, since the modulating signal's first null is at 10 MHz (it's not filtered to 5 MHz bandwidth, though it theorertically could be). The definitions in the book I link in the next subsection, which allow for "line codes", seems like what we need (not sure if he states a suitable def explicitly). Dicklyon (talk) 16:10, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

 * OK, back to the "very narrow" in the first sentence. I suppose "narrow" is always relative, but baseband 10G Ethernet will not be "narrow" in just about any sense.  Next, how close to zero the spectrum gets also depends on its bandwidth,as it should. 1G Ethernet might only come within 10MHz of 0Hz, but still be baseband. (I actually don't know what 10G spectrum looks like at all.) Baseband telephone signals might only go down to 300Hz, but I suspect people will complain if you add in a 100Hz signal.  Gah4 (talk) 23:39, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

 * "Narrow" is relative to carrier, if there is one, or to upper band edge; baseband Ethernet is wide relative to carrier or upper edge. Dicklyon (talk) 06:09, 10 January 2019 (UTC)
 * As well as I know it, and I well mention somewhere else, broadband came with the need to make an IF strip for TV receivers to amplify the wider bandwidth with appropriate frequency response. (There are complications from vestigial sideband modulation.) Radio signals don't require the complicated IF strip, and so qualify as narrowband. Gah4 (talk) 04:28, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * As well as I know it, and I well mention somewhere else, broadband came with the need to make an IF strip for TV receivers to amplify the wider bandwidth with appropriate frequency response. (There are complications from vestigial sideband modulation.) Radio signals don't require the complicated IF strip, and so qualify as narrowband. Gah4 (talk) 04:28, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

A possible resolution
To me, baseband can mean centered at zero, or modulated such that the bandwidth extends essentially to zero (like baseband Ethernet). I'll look for sources... This book might be useful, discussing various "line codes" including Manchester encoding, which don't quite go down to DC. Dicklyon (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

 * I think that sounds closer than the current article. It now seems, even with removal of "narrow" to suggest narrowness.  It says non-zero near f=0Hz, but 10G Ethernet is going to be non-zero up to somewhere in the GHz range.  If there are significant frequency components near, relatively, to zero it is baseband.   OK, the bottom of the traditional US TV band is channel 2 at 54 to 60MHz, a nice representative non-baseban signal.  The bottom of the spectral range is 9 times the bandwidth.  Is that a reasonable transition point?  Gah4 (talk) 09:03, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

Yet another attempted definition (Sept 2021)
I followed a link to this article to check that baseband meant what I thought, and having read the article and this discussion, I'm still not sure! Here's what I expected it to mean:
 * The information being transmitted has a certain frequency band intrinsic to it: for example ~0 to 20 kHz for audible sound.
 * The information can be represented by a signal having the same frequency content as the information, plus a suitable margin for good reproduction. This is a baseband signal.
 * However, this typically isn't a suitable band for transmission (good luck trying to use audio frequency radio waves, for example . . . ), so the signal is converted to a higher frequency band for transmission, and then needs converting back to baseband.

If this is correct, I think it gives us a couple of possible definitions:
 * A baseband signal is one whose frequency spectrum is unshifted relative to that of the information that it carries.
 * A baseband signal is one which doesn't require any frequency shift before being used for its final purpose.

In other words it's the basic frequency range of the thing we're trying to transmit, and the frequency range wanted by the subsequent electronics. Frequencies in the baseband signal represent themselves. It's "narrow" in the sense of being no wider than it reasonably needs to be to encode the information, and if it's close to zero then that's because the frequency band of the encoded information is close to zero. And we can define it in terms of its purpose, rather than how many kHz or MHz counts as "narrow" or "close to zero". Musiconeologist (talk) 20:00, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I pretty much go along with your thoughts. Here are some actual sources backing that up,
 * "Baseband: A method of communication in which a signal is transmitted at its original frequency rather than being impressed upon a carrier frequency."
 * "Baseband: Definition: Refers to a basic set of frequencies of an RF signal prior to any modulation: essentially, an unmodulated signal."
 * Furthermore, many sources contrast baseband, the unmodulated signal, with passband, the modulated signal,
 * "One of the most fundamental operations in radio communications is the act of modulating a carrier wave by a band-limited data signal. Modulation converts a baseband signal to a passband signal."
 * "Modem is a contraction of modulator–demodulator, and expresses the fundamental purpose of the modem as a device to convert a baseband digital signal into a passband analog signal that can be reliably transmitted over a passband channel."
 * Like others above, I also take issue with the claim baseband is narrow. That is at best meaningless and at worst utter nonsense.  In terms of fractional bandwidth, baseband is actually wider than the modulated passband.
 * Another issue with the lead is its talk of a cutoff frequency. Baseband signals rarely have a definite cutoff.  This usually has to be artificially imposed by the processing circuitry in order to get the signal through the transmission channel. SpinningSpark 23:57, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That makes some sense for audio, which has a natural frequency range. It makes less sense for others, like most digital data. Since we can't hear below about 20Hz, someone might argue that audio isn't baseband. I believe some radio systems use subsonic signalling, so making use of that small bandwidth. There used to be a WWV radio transmitting at 20kHz. I believe the lowest one now is 60kHz. There also used to be (in the cold war days) radio transmitters to submarines at 7Hz. (It is the resonant frequency of the earth for EM waves. And the data rate is very low.) The problem is that not all signals, especially digital ones, have an intrinsic frequency band. It is not so obvious how to assign intrinsic frequencies to video. Gah4 (talk) 00:10, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not clear what you think makes sense for audio and not for digital data. Is it my claim that baseband is not narrow?  If so I disagree and will expand on that if asked.  It is also incorrect that baseband audio signals do not go below 20 Hz.  Air pressure vibrations can get arbitrarily close to zero.  The fact that we process that signal to remove the parts that are not useful to make transmission easier is neither here nor there.  Using the consequent LF gap for signalling (as was done on POTS phones]] is even less relevant.  My relevant point was that we should go with what the sources say and they all pretty firmly define baseband as the unmodulated signal. SpinningSpark 08:25, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * In the case of audio, we know what an unmodulated signal is. We have a voltage proportional to acoustic pressure, or one of its derivatives, possibly with some pre-emphasis. (I ignore any derivatives or filtering that might be done.) But what is unmodulated in the case of data? We can't stuff physical 0's and 1's down a wire, we need a voltage. Is unmodulated some voltage for 0, a different voltage for one? In that case, baseband Ethernet, with Manchester coding (which is actually synchronous phase modulation) is not baseband! Many data transmission systems use modulation to get a clock through to the receiver, along with the data, not because they need a better frequency for (often) radio transmission. As for baseband audio, I was considering audio as only what we can actually hear, as that is (usually) the point of audio. Gah4 (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I think maybe I muddied things by thinking in terms of information content—the real point is that there's a signal in some useful form, which gets transmitted in a different form, and we need it back in the useful form. Details of how it relates to the information represented aren't relevant, but helped me see why "a narrow band near zero" doesn't make sense. "Unmodulated signal" seems accurate to me, and also gives scope for making the lead section more explanatory for non-technical readers. Musiconeologist (talk) 12:29, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * In the case of audio, it is somewhat obvious what the unmodulated signal is. It is less obvious in other cases. Especially since, as above, baseband Ethernet isn't unmodulated. Gah4 (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * In the case of audio, we know what an unmodulated signal is. We have a voltage proportional to acoustic pressure, or one of its derivatives, possibly with some pre-emphasis. (I ignore any derivatives or filtering that might be done.) But what is unmodulated in the case of data? We can't stuff physical 0's and 1's down a wire, we need a voltage. Is unmodulated some voltage for 0, a different voltage for one? In that case, baseband Ethernet, with Manchester coding (which is actually synchronous phase modulation) is not baseband! Many data transmission systems use modulation to get a clock through to the receiver, along with the data, not because they need a better frequency for (often) radio transmission. As for baseband audio, I was considering audio as only what we can actually hear, as that is (usually) the point of audio. Gah4 (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I think maybe I muddied things by thinking in terms of information content—the real point is that there's a signal in some useful form, which gets transmitted in a different form, and we need it back in the useful form. Details of how it relates to the information represented aren't relevant, but helped me see why "a narrow band near zero" doesn't make sense. "Unmodulated signal" seems accurate to me, and also gives scope for making the lead section more explanatory for non-technical readers. Musiconeologist (talk) 12:29, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * In the case of audio, it is somewhat obvious what the unmodulated signal is. It is less obvious in other cases. Especially since, as above, baseband Ethernet isn't unmodulated. Gah4 (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I think maybe I muddied things by thinking in terms of information content—the real point is that there's a signal in some useful form, which gets transmitted in a different form, and we need it back in the useful form. Details of how it relates to the information represented aren't relevant, but helped me see why "a narrow band near zero" doesn't make sense. "Unmodulated signal" seems accurate to me, and also gives scope for making the lead section more explanatory for non-technical readers. Musiconeologist (talk) 12:29, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * In the case of audio, it is somewhat obvious what the unmodulated signal is. It is less obvious in other cases. Especially since, as above, baseband Ethernet isn't unmodulated. Gah4 (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * In the case of audio, it is somewhat obvious what the unmodulated signal is. It is less obvious in other cases. Especially since, as above, baseband Ethernet isn't unmodulated. Gah4 (talk) 20:35, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

I've rewritten the lead to get rid of, or at least be more exact about, close to zero. I've also taken out a lot of other dubious stuff. SpinningSpark 21:05, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Close enough for me. Gah4 (talk) 23:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * A vast improvement! Many thanks Musiconeologist (talk) 00:17, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the improvements ~Kvng (talk) 15:36, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the improvements ~Kvng (talk) 15:36, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Signal that has a very narrow frequency range near zero
It seems to me that Signal that has a very narrow frequency range near zero leaves out what very narrow is relative to, and also near zero leaves out how near. This question comes up in real baseband signals. Start with traditional phones, which are spec'ed as 300Hz to 3400Hz. OH, 3100Hz is pretty narrow, but 300Hz is a ways from zero. For an actual real case, traditional CATV put broadcast TV frequencies into a coaxial cable, so down to 54MHz. Then later there was need for an uplink for pay-TV cable boxes, so they found space below 54MHz, to add it. The cable system amplifiers have to amplify both directions, so have to separate out the two directions first. Because filters are imperfect, you can't get all that close. In any case, broadband CATV has plenty of room below. In any case, baseband rarely gets close to zero, and rarely is narrow. Gah4 (talk) 20:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

A way forward from all of the questions about the rigor or clarity and accuracy of this article
To attempt to answer some of the questionss about this sort of slippery topic.

I have looked at the web for a better definition and so far haven't found one so I'm going to try for a 'more rigorous' definition of baseband and maybe an additional section should be added to appeal to engineers, physicists, and mathematicians. I don't think a perfectly rigorous definition is possible so we resort to some logic and an admittedly heuristic definition.

OK so the first problem is the very first figure in the article as it is, has no figure designator and it needs to be referred to in what should be added to this page. Lets call it Fig. 1 here.

OK so Fig. 1 is actually a spectrum for an analytic signal for which a good wiki article exists. So then to start this new 'more rigorous' heuristic section we must identify Fig 1 as the spectrum of an imaginary (complex or analytic) signal and redraw an additional version as the amplitude spectrum of a real signal, such spectrum as an even function adding its mirror image in a new figure. Then explain that the purpose of an analytic signal is to ignore negative frequencies of real signals for arriving at simpler depictions and analyses as in Fig 1.

OK so then we have an amplitude spectrum which is an even function which is a necessary but not sufficient attribute of a baseband signal. In addition to being an even function, every frequency point in the supported spectral domain has one and exactly one nonzero alias at its negative frequency, of identical magnitude. This works for all forms of modulation except SSB.

So then to try to deal with the SSB case we can add that for a baseband as distinct from its SSB form the spectral third moment about the second moment, is of similar magnitude as the second moment about the mean frequency (zero). This works except for extremely narrowband SSB signals e.g. sinusoids which carry no information beyond steady state frequency and phase. So if we have a spectral standard deviation $$ \omega _\sigma = \left[ \int_{-\infty}^\infty \omega^2\,F(\omega )\,\mathrm{d}\omega. \right]^{1/2} $$

and define

$$\omega _\lambda = \left[ \int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{(\omega - \omega _\sigma)^2}{2}\,F(\omega)\,\mathrm{d}\omega. \right]^{1/2}$$

then if

$$ \frac{1}{5} < \frac{\omega _\lambda}{\omega _\sigma} < 5 $$

this would be an arbitrary exclusion of narrowband SSB signals

So then we verbally exclude narrowband SSB signals such as sinusoids. This final condition being strictly logical regrettably.

The 'regrettability' arises from the fact that a SSB modulation of a sinusoid is another pure sinusoid which has no feature described as baseband. So we have to apply this last attempt using the above equations to actual information bearing signals and any of their modulated representations, which as quasi-stochastic would only be characterised in the frequency domain with spectral density as opposed to a Fourier transform amplitude.

Comments welcome.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Groovamos (talk • contribs) 23:48, 7 January 2022 (UTC) Groovamos (talk) 03:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

 * We're writing an encyclopaedia for a general readership here, not a textbook. Why do you even think that a formal mathematical definition is required?  Baseband is a straightforward, simple, basic concept that can be stated quite adequately in words.  There's no way that any of that is going in the article, especially the very arbitrary last bit, in the absence of reliable sources backing it up.  Even then, I would probably be against it – introducing difficult mathematics for our readers when it is not necessary to do so.  Even my textbook from university (Goodyear, Signals and Information), which is chocked full of integrals of spectral densities and the like throughout, does not feel the need for such a formal definition of baseband. SpinningSpark 10:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Who on here said that a formal definition should be required? It seems yours truly just posted a section that indicated a formal definition is not possible, if one cares to read it. I have a Ph.D friend, physics, who read the article yesterday and was confused by it. So would it be worthwhile to tell the reader that a formal definition is not possible, made moot in the SSB case? I think I just explained why.

From comments above may I quote: "What combination of idiots wrote this article? It makes no sense!"

"I second the opinion. This article is not only useless, but also MISLEADING. The Opening paragraph on the Baseband is totally misleading."

"Just reading the first sentence" Baseband is a signal that has a very narrow and near-zero frequency range, raises questions to me. First of all, very narrow relative to what?"

"Let's work on a good opening sentence and definition (current version uses "comprises" in the typical incorrect way, and doesn't get to the point very specifically). It would be good to at least admit that any kind of Fourier analysis gives negative frequencies, too.  For real signals, these are just reflections of the positive, not new information...."

Maybe one has a constructive comment to add to all this. There are people in the sciences and others who might appreciate that. Groovamos (talk) 18:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

 * That has not been the opening sentence of the article for five months. The earlier discussions are now completely out of date. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 22:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Oh OK so not clear if the opening sentence change revamped the article and made all ssimilar comments out of date. A sentence not out of date would be any of the ones heard on Friday from one friend with a physics Ph.D., if one cares to reread why I came on here. Groovamos (talk) 21:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Short description
The current Short description range of frequencies occupied by an unmodulated signal is too long and needs to be shorted per WP:SDSHORT and formatted correctly per WP:SDFORMAT. Two attempts to resolve this have just been reverted rather than improved. Please attempt to improve the SD — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 22:06, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Too long is preferable to wrong. This is an encyclopaedia, not online scrabble.  Also, there is an interesting conversation going on at Talk:Waveguide/Archive 1 – we cannot find views or examples of where an over-long SD has actually caused a display problem. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 22:14, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Trying to improve an article is generally the best way forward. See WP:SDSHORT, WP:SDFORMAT, WP:SDNOTDEF — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 22:25, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * As I teach the subject, to electronics engineers and technicians, I did some editing of the article for clarification. The opening line is fine I feel. The rest of the article seems a bit broad with the inclusion of RF modulation using baseband signals, however, it just passes for relevance. I agree that as soon as you put mathematics into what can be described using words, it alienates most of the reading population, so during my lessons in RF Modulation, transmission and reception, I rarely use mathematics and certainly not for an encyclopaedic article, but that's just me. --Read-write-services (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I've started a central discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Short_description ~Kvng (talk) 15:45, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Broadband
It seems that the article Broadband is now only about high-speed internet, and lost is the application to radio (well, TV) transmission and reception, and especially the IF strip required for such receivers. When the bandwidth is large compared to the frequency, and that would be IF for many receivers, it complicates the design. That term then continued on into data communications, but now the original use is lost! Gah4 (talk) 04:34, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Baseband


text: User talk:83.146.13.130

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

title: User talk:83.146.13.130


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/“Video compression system and method using time”

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. Ëvilphoenix Burn! 03:35, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

“Video compression system and method using time”, “Self Implementing Multicast Protocol Level Escalation” (SIMPLE). and “Self adapting frame intervals”
Is Wikipedia an encyclopedia for releasing patent (like this United States Patent) information? If anyone could point out any previous AfD/VfD over this, would be helpful as I didn't find any. feydey 18:34, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Non-notable patent applications. -- RHaworth 16:12, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. These articles are a further attempt by the anonymous author of the now-deleted Ian Stewart (Inventor IP Multicast and Music) vanity page to publicize this guy's inventions. --Kurt Shaped Box 22:25, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alice-Blue (color)

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was No Consensus (2 keeps to 1 merge), but no delete votes were cast so relisting isn't necessary, so keep. R  e  dwolf24  (talk) 01:08, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Alice-Blue (color)

 * The following was created on October 5, but was not listed on AfD. -Nameneko 21:57, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

There is no useful information on this article and the colour shown is nothing like the "Alice Blue" shown in the Alice Roosevelt Longworth article. Zhatt 18:36, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment the ***colour*** in this article is as quoted on http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/dhtml/reference/colors/colors.asp  The  Alice Roosevelt Longworth article seems not to quote any source at all for its version of this ***colour*** . Tonywalton  | Talk 01:33, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete nn colour Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  22:08, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I'd never heard of this song - no objection to a Merge  Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  02:16, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ' Merge' to List of colors. The colour is notable as mentioned in a song dating from 1919 (with which my granny used to sing me to sleep. Ahhhh) . Tonywalton | Talk 01:17, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You can not merge to the list of colours. The list only lists colours that have aticles, so if you merge it, there is no more artivle to list. Zhatt  03:38, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Good point. Keep, then. Tonywalton  | Talk 15:15, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Merge with Alice Roosevelt Longworth and remove this image as per Tonywalton's source. Zhatt 23:06, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This color name was certainly notable in the late teens and twenties and has become one of the standard "named colors" used in web browsers. The difference between the color shown in the Alice Roosevelt Longworth article and the standard HTML (F0F8FF) given in this article is understandable. There was never a "precise definition" of the color, generally known as a light blue-gray, until it was used within a system such as HTML. Fabric dyers of the early 20th century probably just used whatever could pass for light blue-gray. Dystopos 17:22, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It should probably be renamed Alice Blue after the AfD, though. Dystopos 17:27, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I've done some cleanup. Those who may have voted to delete because of the state of the article might want to take a second look. Dystopos 17:59, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I still don't understand why this Alice Blue is not the same as this Alice Blue. Zhatt  23:02, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * There's no reason they should be exactly the same. There's also no reason they should be different. Alice didn't provide the CMYK values of her gowns and so any light blue-gray is properly called "Alice Blue", except in the context of X11/HTML. Dystopos 23:42, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not sure that's appropriate, to be honest. As Dystopos says, prior to X11, HTML, and standardisation of all things, "Alice Blue" wouldn't have been anything defined to the one-in-sixteen-millionth part as it is now. Perhaps the Alice Longworth article (or rather the caption to the image) shouldn't state quite so categorically that this is "Alice Blue", is all. I'd ask my granny which one she thought was more "Alice Blue", but she passed away twenty-odd years ago. Tonywalton | Talk 22:28, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The way I see it, we need to figure out if this is a real color or not. If it isn't, delete the article and reword the Alice Longworth article as not to hint that it is. If it is a color, than all information can be in the Alice Longworth article with the List of colors pointing there. Either way, this article does not need to be here. Zhatt  23:13, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Depends what you mean by a "real" colour. "Alice Blue" is certainly a "real" colour, per
 * the Longworth article,
 * its having been chosen as a colour name for browsers,
 * the early 20th century song,
 * my late granny.
 * Note however that the Microsoft reference I cited also names "official" colours like "linen", "blanched almond", "ghost white", "misty rose" and "brown". I'd defy anyone to say "those boots are not brown because they are not RGB #A52A2A", "that rose is not sufficiently misty according to the W3C colour definitions". or to find a ghost for comparison. There are two things here, really - a "real" (as in "named as such by browser suppliers") colour called "aliceblue" and a range of colours into which both these grey-blue colours fall. Perhaps the Longworth article shouldn't state categorically that "this is Alice Blue", but the issue we're voting on is whether or not to delete the Alice-Blue (color) article. My vote is above. Tonywalton  | Talk 23:39, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Hum. You make a good point. I can admit when I'm wrong. Keep than. There was a rash of fake colors a while ago and I guess I was still on delete-colors-mode. Zhatt  23:51, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * At risk of further obfuscation, I recently did a comparison of four different ways that "Union Flag (Royal) Blue" is defined per "The Flag Institute" and a similar exercise regarding the specifications for "Crimson" used by Harvard University and the University of Alabama. In the big picture, there's no way to put up an image on Wikipedia and say "This is the color _____". Definitions vary by medium and use. Displays vary. Perceptions vary. What we DO know, is that "Alice Blue" is a notable concept, and was once much more notable than "Bondi blue" or "UPS brown". Dystopos 00:12, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text: User talk:69.113.10.206

title: User talk:69.113.10.206


text:
François-André Isambert

François-André Isambert (November 30, 1792 – April 13, 1857) was a French lawyer, historian, and politician. Isambert was founder and for an extended period contributor of the Gazette des Tribunaux and actively participated in Louis François Wolowski's Revue de législation et de jurisprudence.

Under the Bourbons and the July Revolution
Born in Aunay-sous-Auneau, Eure-et-Loir, Isambert studied law and, in 1818 (under the Second Restoration of the Bourbons), an attorney at the Cassation Court. As a member of the Chamber of Deputies, he worked for legislative and administrative reforms in the colonies, and was noted for his attacks on the Roman Catholic Church.

He protested against the Ordinances of the year 1830 in the name of the bar, and thus sided with the Revolution and the July Monarchy. He went among the first to the town hall, where he was named by the provisional government director of the Bulletin de Lois. Named counsel at the cassation court on August 27, he edited the Constitutional Charter, and joined the Chamber of Deputies in October of that year.

Abolition of Slavery
In the painting of the 1840 Anti-Slavery convention there is a figure to the left described as "M.M.Isambert" and in the centre is John Scoble the secretary of the British Anti-Slavery group who organised the convention. Francois Isambert had been in correspondence with Scoble and he was an active figure in trying to free the French slaves.

July Monarchy and 1848
Isambert voted for the government of Jacques Laffitte, but joined the opposition under the minister Casimir Périer. In 1834, he founded the Société pour l'abolition de l'esclavage, a militant abolitionist organisation.

After the Revolution of 1848, he was elected to the French National Assembly for the Eure-et-Loir department, and joined the Right in the Constituent Assembly, but wasn't reelected to the legislative. 1854, he converted to Protestantism; he died in Paris.

Works

 * Recueil complet des lois et ordonnances à compter du 1er avril 1814 (Paris, 1820–30, 17 Vols.), with complete commentary
 * Recueil général des anciennes lois francaises depuis l'an 1420 jusqu'à la révolution de 1789 (Paris, 1821–33, 29 Vols.), a collection he published together with Jourdan, Decrusy, Armet and Taillandier
 * Annales politiques et diplomatiques (Paris, 1823, 5 Vols.; 2. Ed. 1826)
 * Essai historique sur l'étude du droit naturel, du droit public et du droit des gens (Paris, 1826)
 * Code électoral et municipal (2. Ed., Paris, 1831, 3 Vols.)
 * État religieux de la France et de l'Europe (Paris, 1843–1844, 2 Parts)
 * Histoire de Justinien (Paris, 1856, 2 Vols.)
 * Anecdota (Paris, 1856), a translation of Procopius
 * Pandectes françaises (Paris, 1834, 2 Vols.), a complete collection of French laws, decrees and records up to his time, written for practical use, have remained unfinished.
 * Mémoire pour S. Ex. Le président de la République d'Haïti, contre M. Blanchet, avocat, sur la question morale de ce procès (Paris, 1827), Imprimerie de E. Duverger, Manioc

title: François-André Isambert


text:
Talk:Heat of combustion

Importance of LHV vs HHV Debate
I would like to include some discussion - doesn't need to be an epistle - on why LHV is used (specifically in Gas Turbines) and how that sometimes causes confusion when comparing efficiency with other thermal plant like coal-fired boilers with steam turbines. Any thoughts or suggestions?--Graham Proud (talk) 06:12, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Untitled
Can we obtain heat of combution of any product without experiment? is it same like following? A +o2 → Co2+ No2 then based on number of moles and standard heat of formation of Co2 and No2, can we take the obtained result as heat of combustion of substance A? if yes, then does heat of formation is exactly same (with opposite sign) that of heat of combustion? as if we reverse this equation, then heat of the reversed equation will be heat of formation. is this logic correct?

It would be nice if someone would make a sister page about heat of formation.

The reference to energy obtained from antimatter may be misleading as that is presumably the amount of energy contained in that weight of antimatter which would be released when combined with equal weight of matter. I won't vouch for the math in it, but the description is not sufficient, or in any case, might just be listed as the energy available in any mass, whether matter or antimatter, if that is the intent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Uhpl508 (talk • contribs) 21:12, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Improper Reference
The first reference is not specific enough to find the information that it references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.32.154.142 (talk) 23:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Nomenclature
Should the organic compounds be named according to the systematic nomenclature of IUPAC? I believe olefines should be alkenes, diolefines should be dienes, etc. i believe tthe use of trivial nomenclature is to be avoided in favor of systematic names. If the fuel has some water, is it true that the state of fuel's water is not important for LHV and HHV ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.185.134.60 (talk) 10:12, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Merge of Heating value here
It is proposed that Heating value be merged here. The two article each had a simple merge tag, but I have changed these to mergeto and mergefrom as I believe merging Heating value here is the best solution. Please discuss it. --Bduke 00:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

 * Support "Heating value" is not a standard term and it really is just a heat of combustion. I suggest tidying it up and merging the content here. --Bduke 00:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Higher Heating Value (HHV) is commonly used by the local air quality management authority in Southern California, perhaps by other air quality regulatory agencies as well. If this is combined with Heat of Combustion, "Higher Heating Value" should be such that it is searchable from a search engine such as Google, since many people, such as I, will search for HHV and not heat of combustion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.169.176.254 (talk) 22:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose I have found sulfur's heat of combustion to be ~4000btu/# in other resources, vs. the 2000btu/# given here. Where can this number be confirmed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.0.223.151 (talk) 13:27, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

 *  Yes, merge - they seem to be exactly the same thing. — Omegatron 21:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

 * This MERGE appears to have been completed in Jan 2008. N2e (talk) 20:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Merge of Higher heating value and Lower heating value here
It has been further proposed, in merge tags within each of the two Xxxxx heating value articles, that both are merged here. Both merge tags were added 2008-03-30 by User:Omegatron. One can thus assume that
 * Omegatron Supports the merge, as the proposer.

 * Support -- Rationale: both higher and lower heating values are physical characteristics for particular fuels and are thus part of the heat of combustion.  N2e (talk) 20:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Completed
All merges proposed here are now complete. D O N D E groovily  Talk to me  03:41, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

H2S heat of combustion
This should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.0.223.151 (talk) 13:45, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Inconsistency in first table
The heat of combustion values in the 1st table are inconsistent for coal. The conversion between Mcal/kg and BTU/lb is correct, but the conversion to MJ/kg seems wrong. Although I have only checked the conversion of the units, I propose that these values are changed into 18.6 - 32.6 MJ/kg. - It is possible that the conversion went wrong the other way (and that MJ/kg are correct, and Mcal/kg and BTU/lb are wrong). I cannot find the reference.

Furthermore, all the values are inconsistent with another wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal (see the 1st table). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.112.1.3 (talk) 13:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

 * The table at Heating values of some fuels is still inconsistent and poorly referenced. The HHV for coal is listed at 8000-14000 BTU/lb which converts to 18.6-32.6 MJ/kg, not 15-27 MJ/kg as stated in the table.  Searching the reference yielded no easy source of information.  --LRG (talk)  —Preceding undated comment was added at 09:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC).

"Fuel needed to run a 100 W lightbulb for a year (876 kWh, or 3153.6 MJ)"section has to be changed/deleted
This section has no thermodynamical sense, which is outlighted by the text into parenthesis. Actually, it would be better to change it or to delete it. The deletion seems to me definitely required because it would have no sense to replace "to run a 100 W lightbulb for a year" by "to provide to 100 W of heat for a year". If someone finds usefull to keep relevant data from this section, he can revert or modify this deletion. 81.56.65.180 (talk) 14:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

"Lower heating values for some organic compounds at 15.4C"

 * A BIG citation needed here - What is the significance of 15.4C anyway? One source I found is here: "http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/heating-values-fuel-gases-d_823.html" but I don't know how reputable that site is.  Also, there's no reason to keep half of the table empty, since it only differs by a conversion factor.  I added the value for carbon monoxide, since I used that value on my homework.  Traversc (talk) 09:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Is it kJ/L or MJ/L? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.6.186.1 (talk) 16:11, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Table of Higher Heating Values
I just merged in Higher Heating Value to this article, with the exception of this table, which is difficult for me to go thru. Here it is:

And here is a slightly different one taken from Lower heating value:

If there's anything new here, feel free to toss it in. D O N D E groovily  Talk to me  03:34, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

GHV definition is incorrect
I have just had a discussion with my partner who works on the thermodynamic analysis of complex plant as part of her PhD in energy engineering. She tells me "I think its wrong on the wikipedia page. GHV should be HHV, not LHV."

 * http://books.google.de/books?id=AYjFoLCNHYUC&pg=PA850&lpg=PA850&dq=%22gross+heating+value%22++%22higher+heating+value%22&source=bl&ots=GPTrND5rHC&sig=5pYQUAOt_yNNxaeGhYBszuy_GJI&hl=de&ei=GpSATYaLCsT5sgai2rjsBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAzgo#v=onepage&q=%22gross%20heating%20value%22%20%20%22higher%20heating%20value%22&f=false
 * http://www.ecn.nl/phyllis/defs.asp
 * http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/gross-net-heating-value-d_824.html
 * http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Heating_value

I will refrain from making the necessary edits as I do not intend to maintain any kind of follow up on this page. Regards Robbiemorrison (talk) 11:28, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I second this statment... The Gross Heating Value is HHV. The article is totally incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.200.157.177 (talk) 16:04, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Are the figures in the column headed kJ/L in the later LHV tables actually MJ/L? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.177.3.114 (talk) 18:49, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

The heating values in the tables appear to be molar heating values not mass heating values. The reported units of BTU/lb, etc should be BTU/lb-mole etc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.173.113.108 (talk) 03:30, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect unit conversion factors
Section "heating value" lists some conversions. Last one (Btu/lb = kcals * 1.8) is dimensionally incorrect: Btu/lb does not correspond to kcals. It should be kcals/[some unit for mass], and when this unit is chosen, the constant can be adjusted. DarkoS (talk) 18:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Usage of terms
In my opinion Wiki should refrain from making subjective statements such as: "... and if they are not already then they should be doing so..." or "...based on the simple fact that it is correct..." 138.210.84.87 (talk) 10:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Very poor quality article
This article appears to need considerable work. The most glaring issue that I see is that there appears to be no explanation of this property of a chemical. All we get is a few sentences, and then it's off to the races talking about higher/lower heating values. Essentially all of the textbook chemistry discussion is reduced to an introductory sentence and a few bullet points.

I came here hoping to remember which sign indicated an exothermic reaction. Guess what? There is no mention of a chemical which has a negative heat of combustion. It's not mentioned in this article.

Additionally, the writing is deplorable in the section "Usage of terms." Here is a gem:
 * The difference between HHV and LHV definitions causes endless confusion when quoters do not bother to state the convention being used. -- How lovely? This sentence broaches the topic of eternity, so we might as well link to it?

Why I picked on that sentence is anyone's guess. There are so many to choose from in other sections:
 * Most applications that burn fuel produce water vapor, which is unused and thus wastes its heat content. (Chemistry + Grammar = Wasted Energy?)
 * Using LHV in other energy calculations brings similar errors, especially when pulled (incorrectly) into electrolysis calculations etc. (Pulling + My Leg = Electrolysis of my Sides Splitting from Errors?)
 * Btu/lb = kcals * 1.8 (Was this error in unit conversion garbage what someone was really hoping to find here??)

Please, if anyone rates this article.... give it the lowest mark possible. IT'S A MESS! It is not fixable. I think it should be scrapped and started over. I like to saw logs! (talk) 05:51, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

150°C is NOT an arbitrary temperature
It is based upon the acid gas dew point for sulfuric acid (+ margin). Other acids (sulfurous, nitric, nitrous, carbonic) have an even lower dew point, so it is assumed that at 150°C. effectively no acids will condense. Hippocrocopig (talk) 22:22, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Poor/dubious merge ? what units ?
We seem to have an article about heating values that doesn't define its current title of Heat of combustion. Is heat of combustion (a term used by chemists?) always/usually per mole ? Heating values seem to be engineering terms, usually per mass or per volume ? - Rod57 (talk) 11:57, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

Fringe theories
The statement recently re-added to the article is

 * Accordingly, the lower heating value is strictly proportional to the amount of oxygen consumed in the combustion.

The source given does not refer to the lower heating value at all. The higher heating value per amount of oxygen consumed differs significantly between fuels. According to [indirect calorimetry], it is "21.13 kJ, the heat released per litre of oxygen by the oxidation of carbohydrate, and $$e_f$$ is 19.62 kJ, the value for fat", a significant difference even for those common (similar) fuels. The Weir formula is also more sophisticated than the "strictly proportional" found here (but not in the reference).

I propose that this statement be removed; it isn't backed up by the reference, which makes clear it's a mere rough estimation for a restricted class of fuels.

IpseCustos (talk) 06:37, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

 * The sentence about the lower heating value being proportional to the amount of oxygen consumed is true. The cited reference (titled “Oxygen consumption as the definitive factor in predicting heat of combustion”) implies it, but I have now added another reference where the relation to the lower heating value is made explicit (the authors refer to “the water vapour content of the exhaust gases”, which is the characteristic condition distinguishing the lower from the higher heating value, obtained when the water condenses).
 * It is worth noting that IpseCustos does not even claim that the sentence in question is incorrect (which would be an untrue claim). Instead, all of the comments by IpseCustos refer to the higher heating value, which is different from the lower heating value because it includes the heat of condensation of the water formed in the combustion reaction. This accounts for the slightly different quoted numerical prefactors for carbohydrates and fat. The link to the Weir formula is not relevant, not only because it refers to the higher heating value but also because the units are not kJ or kcal per mole or gram, the conventional units of heat of combustion (the topic of this article), and the temperature at which the volumes of O2 and CO2 are calculated is not obvious; furthermore, one version of the Weir formula given has only one significant figure, so it cannot be very accurate.
 * In summary, no evidence has been provided that the sentence in question is incorrect or not relevant to heat of combustion. The added reference from Fire Safety Science confirms that this sentence summarizes rigorous experimental observations from hundreds of measurements that are relevant even under real fire conditions. In what way is that fringe science?
 * One could consider a longer sentence expressing the same facts: “Accordingly, the heat of combustion (corrected for the heat of condensation of any liquid water formed) is directly proportional to the amount of oxygen consumed in the combustion.”
 * Klaus Schmidt-Rohr (talk) 17:27, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The sentence about the lower heating value being proportional to the amount of oxygen consumed is true
 * Irrelevant. It needs to be verifiable, and since it's such an extraordinary claim it needs to be verifiable extraordinarily well. I'm afraid Fire Safety Science is not the kind of source that does that.
 * Also, if it is proportional, what is the constant of proportionality? That information would be important!
 * It is worth noting that IpseCustos does not even claim that the sentence in question is incorrect
 * Oh, I do. There are compounds that differ in heat of combustion (low or high) but consume the same amount of oxygen in that process. Branched alkanes, unbranched alkanes.
 * But this is not a difficult question to research: unless the web search failed me, the LHV of hydrogen is stated to be 241.83 kJ/mol(H2), or 484 kJ/mol(O2). The HV of CO is 282 kJ/mol(CO), or 564 kJ/mol(O2). So, for those two fuels relevant in real-world fires, the statement is untrue.
 * The Weir formula is indeed specified in different units, but converts to a range of 368 to 472 kJ / mol(O2).
 * In summary, no evidence has been provided that the sentence in question is incorrect or not relevant to heat of combustion.
 * No evidence has been provided that it is widely regarded relevant to that topic. The burden of evidence here is on the editor who wants to introduce a claim, not the one challenging it.
 * Please provide evidence that your theory is considered notable by others, so we can reference its inclusion in Wikipedia articles properly.
 * IpseCustos (talk) 20:40, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The fact stated in this sentence has been known for more than a century, and maybe even since the time of Lavoisier. It is extremely well verified. I will add more references that make this clear. It is even the basis of a whole area of fire science, oxygen consumption calorimetry, which is used world-wide and was the basis of several national (ASTM E 1354-99 and ANSI/NFPA 271-1998) as well as international (ISO 5660-1:1993) standards. The constant of proportionality used in oxygen consumption calorimetry is 419 kJ/mol.
 * The paragraph to which this sentence belongs is clearly about organic fuels, so H2 and CO having slightly higher heats of combustion is not relevant. But since it was brought up in this discussion, I will make "organic fuels" explicit.
 * If the Weir formula "converts to a range of 368 to 472 kJ / mol(O2)", that's another way of saying that the heat of combustion is proportional to the amount of O2 consumed. So more evidence for this fact of nature!
 * This sentence states a long-established fact. It is not a theory, and certainly not a fringe theory, since it is utilized in fire science and studies of metabolism. It is a simple, true, and quantitative statement about the heats of combustion of organic fuels. It is clearly relevant to this article on “Heat of combustion”.
 * Klaus Schmidt-Rohr (talk) 16:08, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * To take just one example, the abstract of the Huggett paper in 1980 states:
 * The method is based on the generalization that the heats of combustion per unit of oxygen consumed are approximately the same for most fuels commonly encountered in fires
 * Using that as a reference for the statement that the heat of combustion is strictly proportional to the amount of oxygen consumed (per mole of reactant) is stretching things quite a bit. Clearly Huggett was aware that he was generalizing and approximating things to achieve a rough estimate that was sufficient for the purposes of practical fire science. It's not sufficient for a theoretical chemistry article.
 * And it's not relevant enough to go in the lead section. It should go under "ways of determination", along with Dulong's formula and, ideally, the Weir formulae. IpseCustos (talk) 22:44, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * To address the stated concern, the word "strictly" has been taken out. The uncertainty (±3%) is already specified earlier in this paragraph. In 1980, Huggett had only a moderate amount of data and he was working under non-ideal conditions, but the proportionality has subsequently been confirmed on hundreds of organic compounds; importantly, the larger and more complex the molecule, the smaller the percent error. The proportionality holds well enough to be part of national and international standards in fire science. Since this is a short, relevant sentence pointing out a simple fact about the heat of combustion that is of significant utility in combustion science, I think the second half of the lede is a quite appropriate place for it. I don't see how it has much to do with "ways of determination". Other editors should comment. Klaus Schmidt-Rohr (talk) 01:26, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "Strictly proportional" has been replaced by "directly proportional", which has the same meaning.
 * The 3% clearly refer to the 0.3h estimation method, which is different from the "mole of oxygen" method.
 * Statements that are good enough for fire science aren't necessarily good enough for theoretical chemistry.
 * If there is any error, we cannot say "directly proportional". We must make clear that we're then talking about an approximation, declare which class of fuel it is valid for, list exceptions, and provide good general sources in the context of theoretical chemistry, not fire science, that verify this approximation is considered good enough. All this makes the statement too long and bulky to go in the lead section. IpseCustos (talk) 06:56, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * To address these concerns, "directly proportional" have been revised to "proportional (±5%)". The LHV formula with 0.25h and the HHV formula with 0.3h differ only by 0.05h. Therefore, the LHV and HHV of organic molecules are similar in magnitude and in relative uncertainty. Furthermore, the correction for the condensation of water is identical (44.0 kJ per mole of H2O formed) for theory and experiment, so it does not introduce additional uncertainty. As a result, the percent deviations of the HHV and LHV predictions from the experimental HHV and LHV values, respectively, are similar for organic molecules. This also applies for careful standard-state calorimetric data, e.g. as compiled by Domalski (1972) for over 500 molecules, which are used for "theoretical chemistry" (calculations of standard molar enthalpies of formation of organic molecules). The good agreement of the proportionality factor used by fire calorimetrists (-419 kJ per mole of O2) with that from Domalski's standard-condition data (-418 kJ per mole of O2) is impressive. The value of ±5% is a conservative estimate from the quoted literature. Klaus Schmidt-Rohr (talk) 17:17, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This remains a case of violating WP:OR, WP:REFSPAM, WP:COI, WP:V, and WP:DUE.
 * This is your fifth attempt, if I'm counting correctly, and the fifth one that is wholly unacceptable.
 * The current attempt reads:
 * Accordingly,
 * According to what? Your fringe theory?
 * the heat of combustion of organic fuels
 * which fuels? It clearly does not apply to explosives, ring-strained molecules, etc.
 * (when corrected for the heat of condensation of any liquid water formed)
 * "corrected" in which direction? Not even that is clear
 * is proportional (±5%)
 * it either is proportional or it isn't. It isn't. Do you mean a range or a normalized deviation? If the latter, how did you select your fuels? There's no such thing as a usable random distribution on the set of possible molecules, so it has to be the former.
 * to the amount of oxygen consumed in the combustion
 * "per mole of fuel"
 * And if we correct all those, we are left with a technically correct but ultimately uninteresting (IMHO), well-known statement that, far from being a fundamentally new discovery, is refined by, rather than contradicting, the Weir formula, Dulong's formula, the Joback method, what-have-you. That statement does not belong in the lede section of this article.
 * And I'm sorry to bring up conduct rather than content, but you have consistently misrepresented sources as agreeing with your claims when they don't, so I'm not sure I can trust references you give in the future. Since your conflict of interest is not just exhibited through citing your own work, but concerns the subject matter itself, I would ask you to please abide by WP:COI and refrain from making controversial edits (such as the last five ones to this article) before discussing them on the talk page. Thanks. IpseCustos (talk) 17:58, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * "per mole of fuel"
 * And if we correct all those, we are left with a technically correct but ultimately uninteresting (IMHO), well-known statement that, far from being a fundamentally new discovery, is refined by, rather than contradicting, the Weir formula, Dulong's formula, the Joback method, what-have-you. That statement does not belong in the lede section of this article.
 * And I'm sorry to bring up conduct rather than content, but you have consistently misrepresented sources as agreeing with your claims when they don't, so I'm not sure I can trust references you give in the future. Since your conflict of interest is not just exhibited through citing your own work, but concerns the subject matter itself, I would ask you to please abide by WP:COI and refrain from making controversial edits (such as the last five ones to this article) before discussing them on the talk page. Thanks. IpseCustos (talk) 17:58, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

RfC about heat of combustion being proportional to oxygen consumption
Should the lead section contain a claim that the lower heating value is "directly proportional" to the amount of oxygen used in the combustion? IpseCustos (talk) 16:34, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Heat of combustion


text: User talk:82.4.63.11

title: User talk:82.4.63.11


text:
User:Ch355ir3Ca7

Im TheCh355ir3 Ca7, im the cyber version of the chesshire cat. I sneak around and do some stuff and change it up some. Other than that, i don't.

title: User:Ch355ir3Ca7


text:
Judah Friedlander

Judah Friedlander (born March 16, 1969) is an American actor and stand-up comedian. He is known for playing the role of writer Frank Rossitano on the NBC sitcom 30 Rock. Friedlander is also known for his role as Toby Radloff in the film American Splendor, a role that garnered him favorable reviews and a nomination for best supporting actor at the 2004 Independent Spirit Awards. Earlier in his career, he was recognized as "the hug guy" from the music video for the 2001 Dave Matthews Band single "Everyday".

Friedlander is known for his distinctive look, which includes oversized glasses, shaggy hair, and a t-shirt and trucker hat (both often emblazoned with slogans such as "world champion"), and a generally unkempt appearance. It is a look he maintains as a stand-up comedian, during most of his public appearances, and which he has employed in some of his acting roles.

Early life
Friedlander was born in Gaithersburg, Maryland, the son of Shirley and Art Friedlander. His father was of Russian Jewish descent and his mother, a native of Pittsburgh, is Croatian American.

As a child, Friedlander drew political cartoons and made animated films. He first tried stand-up comedy in 1989 at the age of 19 while attending New York University. Friedlander graduated from the Gallatin School of Individualized Study.

Stand-up comedy
Friedlander has performed stand-up comedy regularly throughout his entertainment career. He continued to perform stand-up several nights a week in New York City while working on the sitcom 30 Rock. Friedlander has stated that he is most relaxed when doing stand-up and that he considers stand-up to be his first true love, preferring it to acting. He stated in 2012 that stand-up comedy is "still the most important thing I do from an artistic standpoint."

Friedlander has cited comedians Steven Wright, Sam Kinison and John Mulrooney as influences. He also says that Dave Attell is one of his favorite comics.

Friedlander's comedic performances often feature him making outrageous and bombastic claims about himself with a deadpan delivery. Many of these claims are reflected in slogans displayed on the many trucker hats he wears — the most common being "World Champion", a slogan he has worn in various languages.

One of his claims include being an expert in karate, having achieved an "extra-dark black belt" in the sport. In 2010, he authored the humor book How to Beat Up Anybody: An Instructional and Inspirational Karate Book by the World Champion. Friedlander's claims provide comedic irony when contrasted against his nonchalant attitude and physical appearance. Friedlander wears large, thick-rimmed glasses, is often unshaven and is generally unkempt.

The look that Friedlander employs during his stand-up has also carried over into some of his television and film roles, including his 30 Rock role as TV writer Frank Rossitano. Frank is however much lazier than Friedlander's "World Champion" persona.

In 2007, Heeb magazine included Friedlander in their list of "100 people you need to know about".

Television
Friedlander played the role of a techie on the Al Franken sitcom LateLine in 1999. Over the 2000s Friedlander held guest roles on several television shows, including Spin City, Curb Your Enthusiasm and Flight of the Conchords, as well as providing voices for characters on the animated series Wonder Showzen and Xavier: Renegade Angel. Friedlander made regular appearances on the entertainment and pop-culture program Best Week Ever. He appeared as the online co-host of the 2009 TV Land Awards, alongside main stage host Neil Patrick Harris.

Friedlander was a regular cast member of the sitcom 30 Rock throughout its entire run, from October 11, 2006, to January 31, 2013. His character, Frank Rossitano, is a sarcastic and wisecracking writer on the fictional show TGS with Tracy Jordan Frank is lazy, slovenly, and lives with his mother (played by Patti Lupone). He is also sex-obsessed, which he often reveals by way of vulgar and sexually suggestive comments. Friedlander has stated that Frank Rossitano is based on at least two writers with whom Tina Fey used to work at Saturday Night Live. His ever-changing, slogan-bearing trucker hats also became a running gag on the show. Friedlander makes his hats himself and created enough of them to be able to wear a different one in each scene of 30 Rock, which is about three hats per show.

Friedlander has appeared on late-night talk shows such as Late Night with Conan O'Brien, The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, The Daily Show with Trevor Noah, The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, Late Night with Jimmy Fallon and Last Call with Carson Daly. In 2010 Friedlander appeared in 2 episodes of the children's series Sesame Street. He also appeared as a panelist on The Burn with Jeff Ross in 2013.

In May and June 2014, Friedlander narrated ESPN's Inside: U.S. Soccer’s March to Brazil six-part series in preparation for the World Cup in Brazil.

He has appeared on MSNBC's Last Word With Lawrence O'Donnell and provided personal commentary on The World Cup and soccer in general.

Film and video
In 2001, Friedlander played "the hug guy" in the music video for the Dave Matthews Band single "Everyday"; his character is seen hugging various people throughout the video. Friedlander was recognized for his "hug guy" role for years after appearing in the video, causing complete strangers to offer him hugs. The same year, he appeared in the comedy film Wet Hot American Summer.

In 2003 Friedlander played Toby Radloff in the biopic American Splendor, a role that received favorable reviews — his performance was deemed "unforgettable" by The New York Times and "pitch-perfect" by both Nick A. Zaino III of The Boston Globe and Dan Dinicola of The Daily Gazette. He was also nominated in the category of best supporting actor at the 2004 Independent Spirit Awards.

Friedlander had roles in the Ben Stiller films Meet the Parents, Zoolander and Along Came Polly.

He had a starring role in the 2005 independent comedy Full Grown Men and a supporting role in the 2008 drama The Wrestler.

He has also appeared in films such as Duane Hopwood, Chapter 27, Southern Belles, Live Free or Die, and Feast.

Personal life
Friedlander has lived in the New York City area for most of his career, with the exception of two years spent in Los Angeles. Currently residing in Queens, he has stated that he prefers living in New York.

Friedlander enjoys playing table tennis. As a child, he had played the sport competitively, and he took it up again in 2008. He is a big fan of professional wrestling, which is often used as subject matter for his trademark hats and shirts. He is also a fan of the New York Red Bulls, has attended games at Red Bull Arena and appeared in commercials for the team.

title: Judah Friedlander


text:
Baby of the House

Baby of the House is the unofficial title given to the youngest member of a parliamentary house. The term is most often applied to members of the British parliament, from which the term originated. The title is named after the Father of the House, which is given to the longest-serving member of the British and other parliaments.

Australia
In Australia the term is rarely used. Most MPs and senators are elected only in their thirties and later, but some prominent MPs have been elected rather early in life, including Prime Ministers Harold Holt, Malcolm Fraser and Paul Keating, the latter two of whom were both elected at age 25, in 1955 and 1969 respectively. The youngest Baby of the House was Wyatt Roy: he was elected at age 20 in 2010, being the youngest person ever to be elected to an Australian parliament.

, the current Baby of the House is the Member for Brisbane Stephen Bates (age 31). Senator Fatima Payman (age 27) is the youngest member of the Senate.

Azerbaijan
in the 2020 Azerbaijani parliamentary election, Sabina Khasayeva was the youngest MP elected, at the age of 27.

Canada
The youngest-ever elected member of the House of Commons of Canada is Pierre-Luc Dusseault, who was elected at the age of 19 years and 11 months in 2011. Dusseault is the youngest MP in Canadian history. In the past this distinction has been held by MPs such as Sean O'Sullivan, Pierre Poilievre, Andrew Scheer, Claude-André Lachance and Lorne Nystrom.

The youngest current MP is Eric Melillo, a member of the Conservative Party of Canada, representing the riding of Kenora, Ontario; born in 1998, elected at 21 years of age. The youngest member of the Senate of Canada is Patrick Brazeau of Repentigny, Quebec; born 1974, appointed at 34 years of age.

List of youngest members of the French Parliament
This is a list of youngest members of the French parliament at the time of their election.

Germany
In Germany the term is rarely used. Emilia Fester was the youngest MP elected in the 2021 federal election at the age of 23.

Emily Vontz became the youngest MP in 2023, at the age of 22.

In 2022, Pascal Leddin became the youngest member of the Landtag of Lower Saxony.

Grenada
Kerryne James was elected in the 2022 Grenadian general election at the age of 24, becoming the country's youngest ever legislator.

Hong Kong
In Hong Kong the term is rarely used. The current baby of the Legislative Council is Joephy Chan, who was elected in the 2021 Legislative Council election.

From 1991 to 2016 the youngest elected member was James To, who ran for the first Legislative Council direct election in 1991 at the age of 28. His record ceased in 2016, when the youngest-ever elected member Nathan Law and the youngest-ever elected female member Yau Wai-ching were both elected in the 2016 election at the ages of 23 and 25 respectively; they were both disqualified over the oath-taking controversy between 2016 and 2017. He was replaced by Ho Kai-ming, who was the fourth-youngest member when he was elected in 2016. He was later replaced by Au Nok-hin, who was elected in the 2018 by-election, but was unseated in 2019. The title went back to Ho, who subsequently resigned in May 2020 for joining the government and was replaced by Cheng Chung-tai, who was the fifth youngest member in 2016, until he himself got disqualified in August 2021. The title eventually returned to Steven Ho who was elected as the youngest member in 2012.

[ (b) – by-election]

Hungary
The youngest-ever elected member of the National Assembly is Ilona Burka, who became MP at the age of 19 years, 5 months and 13 days on 12 May 1971, following the 1971 parliamentary election.

India
[(b) – by-election]

Iran

 * Source:

Ireland
In the Republic of Ireland the term is rarely used, as TDs normally enter the Dáil after a political career in local government, usually only in their thirties and later. The current baby of the Dáil is the Fianna Fáil deputy James O'Connor (Cork East), who was 22 years and 7 months old when elected in February 2020.

The youngest TD of all time was William J. Murphy, elected age 21 years 29 days; the youngest female TD was Kathleen O'Connor, 21 years 7 months.

Israel
In Israel the term is seldom used. The youngest member of the current Knesset is Yitzhak Wasserlauf of Otzma Yehudit, elected in 2022 aged 30.

The youngest member of the Knesset ever is Moshe Nissim, elected in 1959 aged 24.

Italy
The youngest member of the Chamber of Deputies ever is Enzo Lattuca (PD), elected in 2013, aged 25 years, 1 month, and 6 days.

Malawi
The youngest MP in Malawi was Angela Zachepa, who was voted in as MP at age 21.

Malaysia
In Malaysia, the term is very rarely used. Most MPs are directly elected and Senators are appointed or indirectly elected, usually in their middle age, but a few were elected as an MP at a very young age, including former Prime Minister and former Pekan MP Najib Razak, who was elected at 22 years and 6 months in 1976. The youngest ever elected is Batu MP Prabakaran Parameswaran, who was elected at the age of 22 years and 3 months in 2018. The present Baby of the House is Sungai Petani MP Mohammed Taufiq Johari, who was elected in 2022. Mohammed Taufiq is a month younger than Prabakaran. Any citizen 18 years of age or older can become a candidate and be directly elected to the Dewan Rakyat as an MP and State Legislative Assemblies as an MLA, while any citizen 30 years of age or older can be appointed or indirectly elected to the Dewan Negara as a Senator.

Marshall Islands
In the 2019 general election, Kitlang Kabua became the youngest person ever elected to the Nitijeļā.

New Zealand
The term "Baby of the House" is rarely used in New Zealand. The current Baby of the House is Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke of Te Pāti Māori, who was elected on 14 October 2023 aged 21. Maipi-Clarke succeeded Chlöe Swarbrick of the Green Party, who was elected on 24 September 2017 aged 23.

Philippines
In the Congress of the Philippines, the term "Baby of the House" is rarely used; the term "Benjamin" of the chamber is used instead. Special treatment is not given to the youngest member of either chamber. However, by tradition, the youngest member of the chamber usually administers the oath of office to their incoming leader (i.e. President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives).

The minimum age for being a member of the House of Representatives is 25 years old, while for the Senate it is 35, as stipulated in the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines. In 1933, Benigno Aquino, Sr. became senator at the age of 33; the Jones Law, which created the Senate, had prescribed the minimum age of 30.

The current Benjamin of the House is Representative Jaime Cojuangco of the 1st District of Tarlac. Meanwhile, Senator Mark Villar has been the youngest Senator since 2022.

Singapore
The current youngest MP in the Singapore Parliament is Nadia Ahmad Samdin, who was elected in 2020 at the age of 30. The youngest MP ever elected in Singapore is Lim Chin Siong, who was elected in the 1955 general election at the age of 22.

South Africa
The current titleholder, since 2017, is Hlomela Bucwa of the Democratic Alliance.

Sweden
The current Baby of the House is Aida Birinxhiku. The youngest person ever to be elected MP to a Swedish parliament is Anton Abele, who was only aged 18 when elected in September 2010. Current record holder for the world's youngest-ever elected MP is Anton Abele, who at 18 years was elected to the Swedish Parliament for his activism against street violence.

Turkey
Rümeysa Kadak (born 16 May 1996) is the youngest MP in the history of Republic of Turkey.

Trinidad and Tobago
Saddam Hosein is the baby of the house of the 12th Republican Parliament.

Uganda
At 19 years old, Proscovia Alengot Oromait was the world's youngest MP and youngest ever MP in Africa when elected in 2011. Oromait is a member of the National Resistance Movement (NRM) in Uganda and was a representative of Usuk County until 2016. She was succeeded as the youngest member of parliament in Uganda by Hellen Auma Wandera.

United Kingdom
Becoming the Baby of the House of Commons is regarded as something of an achievement, despite the lack of any special treatment that comes with the title. However, some MPs who have held the position for a considerable period – Matthew Taylor was the Baby of the House for over ten years – have found it somewhat embarrassing, as it may suggest that they have a lack of experience, although many holders of the title have gone on to enjoy long and distinguished parliamentary careers.

From August 1999 to September 2001, all three of the leaders of the main political parties – Tony Blair, William Hague and Charles Kennedy – had been the youngest MPs in their party when they began their political careers, though only Kennedy had been Baby of the House.

Of those whose ages can be verified, the youngest MP since the Reform Act 1832 is Mhairi Black, elected in 2015 aged 20 years 237 days. The age of candidacy for Parliament was lowered from 21 to 18 by the Electoral Administration Act 2006. William Pitt the Younger was elected at 21 and became Prime Minister two years later in 1783. There were younger MPs in earlier centuries: Christopher Monck was elected as MP for Devon in 1667 aged 13; when his father died three years later and Monck became Duke of Albemarle, he could not then take his seat in the House of Lords until aged 21.

Owen Carron directly replaced Bobby Sands as both MP for Fermanagh South Tyrone and Baby of the House after Sands' death on hunger strike, but neither ever took his seat. George Charles Grey is the only other Baby of the House to die while in post, in World War Two.

List of babies of the House of Commons
In the following table, "(b)" denotes an MP elected at a by-election.

Youngest member of the House of Lords
The title 'Baby of the House' is not used in the House of Lords, though the youngest member is recorded on the House website. , the youngest member of the House is Baroness Smith of Llanfaes (born 15 May 1996), who was created a life peer at the age of 27, becoming the youngest-ever life peer.

The youngest male member of the House is Lord Kempsell (born 8 May 1992), who was likewise created a life peer in July 2023 at the age of 31.

Standing Orders state that "No Lord under the age of one and twenty years shall be permitted to sit in the House". When most members of the Lords were hereditary peers, a peer who had inherited his or her peerage(s) while under age was entitled to take a seat on the day before his or her 21st birthday. In theory, such a hereditary peer could still be elected to sit in the House at that age; in practice, the youngest hereditary peer to have been elected was Lord Freyberg (born 15 December 1970), who was elected in October 1999 at the age of 28.

List of youngest members of the Scottish Parliament
This is a list of youngest members of the Scottish Parliament created in 1999.

List of youngest members of the Senedd
This is a list of youngest members of the Senedd (Welsh Parliament), created in 1999. From its creation in 1999 until May 2020, the Senedd was known as the National Assembly for Wales (Welsh: Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru).

United States
While the term is used in the Commonwealth Parliaments, Baby of the House or Senate is not in general contemporary use in the United States, nor does being the youngest member confer special treatment in either house of Congress.

Members of the US Congress tend to be older than parliamentarians elsewhere in the English-speaking world, a main factor being that the minimum ages for members of Congress is written into Article One of the United States Constitution, which forbids those under the age of 25 from serving in the House, and those under the age of 30 from serving in the Senate. Moreover, election to the federal Congress is expensive and requires extensive contacts and recognition across a very wide area. Individuals aiming to serve in the federal legislature generally seek election to the state legislature (state legislatures generally have lower minimum ages for entry) or other state office before seeking to serve in Washington.

In the 118th Congress, which began on 3 January 2023, the youngest member of the United States House of Representatives is Maxwell Frost, who was born on January 17, 1997 and was first elected in 2022.

Currently the youngest US senator is Jon Ossoff, born on February 16, 1987, and first elected to a full term in the Senate in the 2020–21 United States Senate election in Georgia.

Zimbabwe
Zimbabwe is a commonwealth country where the term "baby of the house" isn't used, but young MPs are represented in the Parliament of Zimbabwe.

title: Baby of the House


text:
User talk:Echoghost

Welcome!
Hello , and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some good places to get you started! I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please be sure to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes to produce your name and the current date, or just three tildes ( ~   ) to produce your name only. If you have any questions, or are worried/confused about anything at all, please either visit the help desk, or leave a new message on my talk page at any time. Happy editing, good luck, and remember: Be Bold!   Fir  e  Fo  x  18:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * Template messages
 * Sandbox

sup thugs
sup thugs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.242.135.146 (talk) 18:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

RE: Your Love Composition
This is an article, not a load of information we already know. An average user would not come to the page not known the song derives from hip-hop and R&B influences. We don't go my implications here, everything needs to be stated. Nothing is wrong. Thanks. Candy o32  22:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Echoghost


text:
Talk:Lorentz term

Previous discussion moved to Talk:Lorentz_factor

title: Talk:Lorentz term