User talk:Gordon Vigurs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You should probably add image copyright tags to images you upload. Otherwise, people like OrphanBot will tag them for deletion. 68.39.174.238 00:45, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

1 Hunting oscillation
2 Welcome
3 Railways
4 My Thoughts on Evolution
5 Your comments at Hull Speed

[edit] Hunting oscillation

Why did you create a redirect from Hunting oscillation to Adhesion railway? I don't see the connection. AmiDaniel (Talk) 10:08, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Ah, 'hunting oscillation' is ambiguous. In the railway context it is a swaying motion caused by the coning action of the wheels on the rails. It is also used to describe a range of similar phenomena, such as the limit cycle of a general control loop (a governer on a steam engine, or a diesel engine with incorrectly set timing). We need a disambiguity page to resolve this.

Gordon Vigurs 10:14, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, okay. Glad I asked. The redirect was a double redirect (now repaired) and didn't make any sense to me, but let's just say that railway adhesion isn't my 'specialty'. Thanks for clearing that up, and keep up the good work! AmiDaniel (Talk)

[edit] Welcome

Just noticed that you hadn't been "officially" welcomed, so here goes:

Welcome!

Hello, Gordon Vigurs, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! AmiDaniel (Talk) 10:29, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Railways

Hello. The category Railways is a category-redirect to Category:Railway lines. I find that when a category name is a noun plural, a good rule of thumb to work out whether an article fits in the category is to try to describe the article's subject as the singular with the indefinite article: things that go in the category "Railways" should be describable as "a railway". The category you wanted is perhaps Category:Rail transport, or one of its sub-categories (what about Category:Rail technologies)? I quite agree with you that "Railway lines" is an inappropriate category for the article! Best wishes, RobertG ♬ talk 13:33, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My Thoughts on Evolution

Because I view creationism and intelligent design as so much contrived hogwash, doesn't necessarily mean I'm that impressed by evolution either.

Having read all the references to which I have been directed by the more fanatical adherents, I remain unimpressed. In summary, it is about as well attested as the law of supply and demand in economics, but is not in the same league as quantum mechanics or General Relativity.

Most theories worthy of the name are summarised as a mathematical equation relating the parameters, but here we have one that doesn't even define its parameters, let alone the relationships between them! The absence of predictive ability, and complete reliance on highly selective interpretation of fossil records is hardly satisfactory. It is this absence of precision, and of predictive ability which worries me.

The simple thought experiment of species adapting to an environmental niche is fair enough, but the environment of most organisms is dictated by the characteristics of the organisms with which they interact. The predator/prey or competition models are all governed by various forms of logistics map, a formulation which is noted primarily for its chaotic behaviour. It is difficult to see how interpretation of past records could be a very satisfactory means of identifying the underlying cause.

That it is what most scientists want to believe, is an argument which had is place in the pre-scientific era, it is currently completely irrelevant.

It is aesthetically appealing, I would agree, but since when was taste an arbiter of truth?

Finally, I am frankly nauseated by the pseudo-religious fanaticism with which the theory is so often held. We see nothing similar with, for example, the Laws of Thermodynamics. Why are some otherwise rational people so touchy? Methinks he doth protest too much.

Gordon Vigurs 20:45, 2 August 2006 (UTC)