User talk:Dirac66

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia

Hello, Dirac66, 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 remember to 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! 

By the way, you don't need to put article titles in quotes (I've moved the one you did to Claude Brochu if you wish to add more to it). BryanG(talk) 22:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nanochondria

Thanks for pointing that out! I was so caught up in the novelty of the idea that I didn't notice I forgot to point that out ^^; Hope you don't mind me changing that to be a little more precise! --Lucid 02:57, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, "theoretical" is fine. Dirac66 00:58, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nobel prize controversies - posthumous

See reply on my talk page. –panda 22:21, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Allotropy article

Copy from cs:Wikipedista diskuser:JAn Dudík

Hello. In the English article on Allotropy, your bot removed the link to the Italian article Allotropia. I thought it unlikely that the Italian article does not exist, so I looked and realized that the Italian Allotropia is a disambiguation page leading to Allotropia (Chimica) and Allotropia (Linguistica). I then restored the link and specified Allotropia (Chimica).

However I think the bot should not have removed the link and I am worried that it will delete other links incorrectly. Ideally when it finds a link to a disambiguation page, it should redirect the link to the right article, but I doubt that it would be possible for a bot to know whether, in my example, the English article is about chemistry or linguistics. So I think that in such case the bot should either 1) do nothing, or 2) alert its owner or another human who can figure out which Italian (or other language) article is closest to the English.

Signed: User Dirac66. Date 6 oct 2007. Please post any reply to my talk page either in English ou en français; I don't know Czech - or Italian.

You are right, it would be better. Interwiki bot normally does not remove these links, only, if running with -force parameter. When finding disambig page and run autonomously without -force, it only remember it, and when find through interwiki links another article in the same language (however correct or incorrect) without another (colliding) interwiki, bot will replace link to disambiguation with link to the other article.
But sometimes bot runs without autonomous mode when operator must says, if follow link to disambiguation or not.
You must know, that there are often incorrect links to deleted articles, so is necessary sometimes to clear it. That was this case, i tried to solve some duplicity links and clear it in the begining of alphabet.
second thing is, that thios interwiki is not lost. When some interwiki bot runs from it:, it will find article with interwiki links, but with no backlink, so it will add this link minimally to one other language, usually en.

JAn Dudík 09:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your message

Hey, thanks for you message, It was not apparent to me that it would change how it looked! I think I might go and raise this with someone.... Tiddly-Tom 19:12, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I raised it with the AWB guys here and it sounds like it will be fixed for the next update :). Thanks for raising it to my attention and I completely agree that it did not look good. Tiddly-Tom 19:58, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I was asked to do it. See Wikipedia:Bot_requests/Archive_14#Tag_chemical_pages_needing_images. Ρх₥α 02:38, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Pimentel Chemical Laser Inventor

Thanks, Dirac66 for bringing Pimentel to my attention. I'll be glad to work Pimentel into the chemical laser article if you can get me the references you mentioned. I am not familiar with his work. I was in high school at the time the articles you mentioned were published, and neither Hinchen nor Spencer mention Pimentel in their respective publications.

The original chemical laser article was obviously written by an Aerospace Corporation related party, since it gave exclusive credit to Spencer for the invention, as well as other Aerospace personnel for the developments related to chemical lasers.

I was aware of significant developments elsewhere and tried to add them to the article. I was for a short time (~1 year) the system engineering lead for the space based laser, which is centered around an HF chemical laser with an annular ring resonator. Rocket Laser Man (talk) 22:58, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I think from the articles that I figured out this:

Pimentel forced lasing using HCl and HF reactions which he induced in a pulsed fashion using optical pumping. In a technical sense, this was a chemical laser because the energy was obtained by the recombination of hydrogen and chlorine after the photo-induced dissociation.

However, this had no practical value other than to prove that chemical reactions can pump the molecular species into a population inversion. Also, this was not scalable. That means that it could never be used on a large scale. In a sense, it was like showing that filaments glow when electricity flows through them. But that would not be inventing the light bulb. You still need the right filament, a vacuum or inert gas, etc.

What was needed was to produce a chemical laser that actually was driven by the chemical reactions themselves, rather than by being induced by optical pumping. Optically pumping all sorts of species had already been done.

It was Spencer and Hinchen who turned this into a continuous system, although they really generated the fluorine by electrical dissociation, so it was only another step along the way. It was the military that succeeded in producing a purely chemically pumped laser, by chemically combining fluorine and hydrogen reactants directly.

So in a sense it took a lot of different groups to add all the pieces to make a real chemical laser in the sense of a chemical reaction driving the laser, not just being an intermediary in delivering the energy from an optical source.

I hope this helps. Feel free to disagree and add more information if you believe I got it wrong. Rocket Laser Man (talk) 03:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On Gibbs

Dirac66 Thank you for your very interesting commentary on the Willard Gibbs article. I think you summed up things very very well. I appreciate the help in putting the citations in. I encourage you sir to continue to look into information involving Technocracy related subjects. This information needs to be put forth in a direct and objective manner, and I have had much difficulty with other users in that regard. Thanks so much. Sincerely. skip sievert (talk) 04:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Glad to be of help. It is tricky to insert citations - I had to preview it 3 times before I got it right. I am thinking also of moving all the posthumous material on Gibbs out of the introduction into a later section, as mentioned in my third point. Dirac66 (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

If you develop an interest in Technate design you might look here http://technatedesign-tnat.blogspot.com/ The North American Technate TNAT As mentioned it has been terribly difficult to get the information out because of some very limited interpretations. Commercial interests are unfortunately dominate in this time period. However the over arching creative group known as the Technical Alliance made an impression on American history that is still reverberating. I value very much your way of putting things in their place on the Gibbs article. skip sievert (talk) 07:43, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fritz London

"London was born in Breslau (now Wrocław), then in Germany but now in Poland." That needs no further explanation of why I marked this segment.Slicky (talk) 20:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC) It didn`t make sense to me, as if London was born in three places due to the awkward bracket setting, and use of "then". Hence I wasn`t sure if some words were missing. e.g. moved. Regardless, it is clarified and I went with your version. Slicky (talk) 20:49, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List of important publications in chemistry

The new entry you added to this list is a good one, but we always hold a discussion on the talk page to determine whether there is consensus to keep or delete every new entry. Please go to Talk:List of important publications in chemistry and add your views. Note that to follow our guidelines it needs both an importance section, which you added, and a description section. I suggest some of the content of the first could be moved into the latter, but both would need a slight expansion. A source that supports the importance of this book would also be most welcome. --Bduke (talk) 23:16, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wecome!

Your editing work caught my eye. You are contibuting valuable information so "stick around!" Cheers! --Stormbay (talk) 17:21, 19 April 2008 (UTC)