Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Negro

2008-02-28T17:53:55Z

Diogenes: Improve awkward construction and bad organization.

'''Negro''' is an obsolete term for a person of black African ancestry or racial characteristics. Through the middle of the 20th century, it was commonly used in the United States, and was generally considered a well-intentioned and polite term. As an example of this, it was used 15 times in Martin Luther King Jr.'s [[I Have a Dream]] speech. But during the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's the term fell out of favor, and has generally been replaced by "black person" or "African-American".

The reasons for this change are a bit subtle. The point is that "negro" is a noun, whereas "black" is an adjective, used with the noun "person". The use of the word "negro", just by itself, therefore suggested in a subtle way that the subject was something other than a person. Reading things that were written prior to around 1960, one can sometimes see the word used in a way that slyly makes the distinction between a "negro" and an ordinary "person". This difference may seem trivial and picayune now, but it was felt by many to be very real at the time.

The word comes from the word for "black" in the Latin-based languages, such as Spanish, where the word is simply an adjective meaning "black". The names of the nations of Nigeria and Niger are both widely assumed to come from this root, but the etymology is somewhat obscure.

This word is not to be confused with the deliberate mispronunciation that has historically been used in an explicitly racist and hateful way. That word is simply unacceptable in modern society, and, when it must be described, is referred to as the "N word".

Although the term "negro" is obsolete in modern society, it, and the similar term "colored person" still appear in the names of two well-respected and long-standing organizations—the United Negro College Fund and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The term "Negro Spiritual" is also still used for a musical style that grew out of American slave society.

[[Category: Spanish-English Translations]]

Talk:Heart attack

2008-02-14T22:43:53Z

Diogenes: Clarify copying

The text talks about "Figure A" and "Figure B", and there's no figures on the page. That, and the formatting of the boxed lists, leads me to suspect at least a portion of this article was copy-pasted from somewhere. Can the author please provide a cite? Otherwise the whole thing should probably be rewritten.--[[User:Recorder|Recorder]] 11:39, 11 February 2008 (EST)

I am pretty sure that [[Aschlafly|Mr. Schlafly]] would not copy from another site. If you look [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Heart_attack&diff=prev&oldid=377108 here] you will see that [[Aschlafly|Mr. Schlafly]] added that info. If you want to check it out...feel free to ask him about the 'figures'. I'm pretty confused about that myself! Thanks! :P [[User:BethanyS|~BCS]][[User talk:BethanyS|Talk2'''ME''']] 12:34, 11 February 2008 (EST)
:http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/dci/Diseases/HeartAttack/HeartAttack_WhatIs.html -[[User:DrSandstone|DrSandstone]] 13:56, 11 February 2008 (EST)
::Thanks for the link, yes, it is indeed copied from the NIH. I'm not totally familiar with the rules here, so I'll pass the buck and leave the question of rewriting to others. I am going to add a reference to the NHLBI though.--[[User_talk:Recorder|Recorder]] 22:23, 11 February 2008 (EST)

:::In accordance with Conservapedia Commandment 2, I have added attribution for the text copied from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. I have also pointed out that the diagrams being referred to may be found at that site. The article was, as noted above, confusing without that information.

:::There is no plausible explanation for the original version of this article other than its being copied by Andy from the nhlbi site. There is nothing wrong with this. You (BethanyS) have even done it yourself. No laws were violated. And, Andy has pointed out many times (for example, [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Joaqu%C3%ADn_Mart%C3%ADnez&diff=prev&oldid=222630 here]), it is perfectly OK, since the material was funded by taxpayers.

:::However, doing it without attribution does appear to violate Commandment 2. Also, copying the text without the accompanying pictures made the article very confusing, which is why I made the changes that I made.

:::Maybe I will rewrite the whole page (I am an expert in this area), but not just now.

:::[[User:Diogenes|Diogenes]] 17:43, 14 February 2008 (EST)

Heart attack

2008-02-14T22:39:35Z

Diogenes: Give context for picture refs.

:This article is from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute<ref>National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/dci/Diseases/HeartAttack/HeartAttack_WhatIs.html]</ref> See that web site for the figures that accompany the text.

A '''heart attack''' occurs when blood flow to a section of heart muscle becomes blocked. If the flow of blood isn’t restored quickly, the section of heart muscle becomes damaged from lack of oxygen and begins to die.

Heart attack is a leading killer of both men and women in the United States. But fortunately, today there are excellent treatments for heart attack that can save lives and prevent disabilities. Treatment is most effective when started within 1 hour of the beginning of symptoms. If you think you or someone you’re with is having a heart attack, call 9–1–1 right away.

== Overview ==

Heart attacks occur most often as a result of a condition called coronary artery disease (CAD). In CAD, a fatty material called plaque (plak) builds up over many years on the inside walls of the coronary arteries (the arteries that supply blood and oxygen to your heart). Eventually, an area of plaque can rupture, causing a blood clot to form on the surface of the plaque. If the clot becomes large enough, it can mostly or completely block the flow of oxygen-rich blood to the part of the heart muscle fed by the artery.
Heart With Muscle Damage and a Blocked Artery

Figure A shows an overview of the heart and coronary artery. Figure B shows a cross-section of the coronary artery with plaque buildup and a blood clot.

Figure A is an overview of a heart and coronary artery showing damage (dead heart muscle) caused by a heart attack. Figure B is a cross-section of the coronary artery with plaque buildup and a blood clot.

During a heart attack, if the blockage in the coronary artery isn’t treated quickly, the heart muscle will begin to die and be replaced by scar tissue. This heart damage may not be obvious, or it may cause severe or long-lasting problems.

Severe problems linked to heart attack can include heart failure and life-threatening arrhythmias (irregular heartbeats). Heart failure is a condition in which the heart can’t pump enough blood throughout the body. Ventricular fibrillation is a serious arrhythmia that can cause death if not treated quickly.
Get Help Quickly

Acting fast at the first sign of heart attack symptoms can save your life and limit damage to your heart. Treatment is most effective when started within 1 hour of the beginning of symptoms.

The most common heart attack signs and symptoms are:

* Chest discomfort or pain—uncomfortable pressure, squeezing, fullness, or pain in the center of the chest that can be mild or strong. This discomfort or pain lasts more than a few minutes or goes away and comes back.
* Upper body discomfort in one or both arms, the back, neck, jaw, or stomach.
* Shortness of breath may occur with or before chest discomfort.
* Other signs include nausea (feeling sick to your stomach), vomiting, lightheadedness or fainting, or breaking out in a cold sweat.

If you think you or someone you know may be having a heart attack:

* Call 9–1–1 within a few minutes—5 at the most—of the start of symptoms.
* If your symptoms stop completely in less than 5 minutes, still call your doctor.
* Only take an ambulance to the hospital. Going in a private car can delay treatment.
* Take a nitroglycerin pill if your doctor has prescribed this type of medicine.
* Put an aspirin under your tongue. Aspirin reduces blood clotting and can help keep a heart attack from getting worse. But don’t delay calling 9–1–1 to take an aspirin.

== Outlook ==

Each year, about 1.1 million people in the United States have heart attacks, and almost half of them die. CAD, which often results in a heart attack, is the leading killer of both men and women in the United States.

Many more people could recover from heart attacks if they got help faster. Of the people who die from heart attacks, about half die within an hour of the first symptoms and before they reach the hospital.

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Medical terms]]
[[category:medicine]]

Negro

2008-02-07T15:55:15Z

Diogenes: Ref to MLK "I Have a Dream"

'''Negro''' is an obsolete term for a person of black African ancestry or racial characteristics. It was a commonly used and generally well-intentioned and polite term in the United States through the middle of the 20th century. During the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's the term fell out of favor, and has been generally replaced by "black person" or "African-American".

The reasons for this change are a bit subtle. The point is that "negro" is a noun, whereas "black" is an adjective, used with the noun "person". The use of the word "negro", just by itself, therefore suggested in a subtle way that the subject was something other than a person. Reading things that were written prior to around 1960, one can sometimes see the word used in a way that slyly makes the distinction between a "negro" and an ordinary "person". This difference may seem trivial and picayune now, but it was felt by many to be very real at the time. As an example of the former widespread acceptability of this word, it was used 15 times in Martin Luther King Jr.'s [[I Have a Dream]] speech.

The word comes from the word for "black" in the Latin-based languages, such as Spanish, where the word is simply an adjective meaning "black". The names of the nations of Nigeria and Niger are both widely assumed to come from this root, but the etymology is somewhat obscure.

This word is not to be confused with the deliberate mispronunciation that has historically been used in an explicitly racist and hateful way. That word is simply unacceptable in modern society, and, when it must be described, is referred to as the "N word".

Although the term "negro" is obsolete in modern society, it, and the similar term "colored person" still appear in the names of two well-respected and long-standing organizations—the United Negro College Fund and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The term "Negro Spiritual" is also still used for a musical style that grew out of American slave society.

[[Category: Spanish-English Translations]]

Talk:Momentum (operator)

2008-02-02T17:23:10Z

Diogenes: Oops; I guess I ought to explain here, rather than in private email to DanH

I fail to see the propaganda or fiction in this article. Granted, it seems out of place here, but everything in it is correct. This is familiar to anyone who has studied quantum mechanics.[[User:Penultimate|Penultimate]] 11:51, 30 January 2008 (EST)
:As I said in the edit comment, I have no idea if this is real or not. (Unfortunately the only vandalism tag I could find was the leftist propaganda one, but it's obviously not accurate in this case.) The user who created this page also created many other pages which were complete parody but intended to look real. This one is so dense, and I've not had enough QM, that it's hard for me to tell.

:If this isn't vandalism feel free to take off the tag. If you understand it, it would be great if you could take it down a couple of grade levels as well :) [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 16:25, 30 January 2008 (EST)

== Oops; I guess I ought to explain here, rather than in private email to DanH ==

My recent deletion of material was explained in mail to DanH, after I had been blocked. Why don't I just repeat the mail:

Hi there. I see you have blocked (#24669) the IP address XX.XX.XX.XX. I'm sure you know that IP blocking makes it impossible for people who have to use corporate firewalls to do any editing. I have no idea who "proud2beamerican", or whoever, is. Using the same firewall, I guess.

If you can't unblock this address (5 years seems an awfully long time to block entire companies), please make the following changes to "momentum (operator)": Take off the vandalism tag. It just gives people the impression that CP doesn't understand its own subject matter. Or that it can't find any people who have both the necessary political knowledge or the necessary scientific knowledge to talk about quantum mechanics. Then delete everything after the first equation. That is, from "It might be tempting ...." onward. Leave the category, of course. That first section will be clear to any physics major. No one will be able to complain.

Yeah, I looked at this guy's ("stones") work on the page, and I agree that it was silly. He was making fun of Andy's ideas about complex numbers. Nothing I can do about that. But I believe the page, after removal of the complex number silliness, is legit. But I don't have time to check it in detail just now, and it isn't worth it. Just take it out. No one will mind.

[[User:Diogenes|Diogenes]] 12:23, 2 February 2008 (EST)

Star

2008-02-01T16:38:01Z

Diogenes: Typos. I believe we only hyperlink the first appearance of a word unless there is good reason to hyperlink again, right?

'''Stars''' are extremely large, luminous bodies of gas. They are the most obvious features found in the [[universe]]. They are principally composed of [[hydrogen]] that is undergoing nuclear [[fusion]] to become [[helium]]. Our Sun is the nearest star to Earth, at a distance averaging 93 million miles. The Earth orbits the Sun in a period of approximately 365.25 days, and this defines the [[year]]. The diameter of the Sun, which is a typical star, is about 870,000 miles and its power output is about 1026 watts. The temperature inside the Sun is estimated to be in excess of ten million degrees, and this is hot enough for [[nuclear reactions]] to occur.

==The Magnitude scale of brightness==

The Greeks devised a rough and ready brightness scale for stars. The brightest stars were designated 'stars of the first magnitude', less bright stars were designated 'stars of the second magnitude', etc., down to stars of the sixth magnitude, which were barely visible to the naked eye. The magnitude scale is still in use, but modern telescopes and photometers have made it very much more exact and rigorous. A star of magnitude 1.0 is now 2.51188643 times as bright as a magnitude 2.0 star, which is 2.51188643 times as bright as a magnitude 3.0 star, and so on. This number has been chosen so that a magnitude 1.0 star is exactly 100 times as bright as a magnitude 6.0 star, i.e. 2.51188643 = 100.4.

The brightness of a star as seen from Earth depends on two things, how luminous it really is, and how far away it is. Stars vary greatly in their luminosity and their distance from Earth. The apparent brightness of a star varies according to the [[inverse-square law]]. Consider two stars that are equal in actual brightness, but one is at a distance of 100 [[light-years]] and the other is at a distance of 200 light-years. The farther star is twice as far away, but it will not appear to be half as bright, it will be only one quarter as bright. More generally, if one star is ''x'' times further away than the other it will appear to be ''x''2 times less bright.

==Variable stars==

Some stars vary in brightness and are known as variable stars. The star [[Algol]] in the constellation of Perseus can drop from its normal magnitude of 2.3 to magnitude 3.5. This is now known to be caused by a dim companion star orbiting Algol, which occasionally passes between Algol and the Earth, blocking some of the light. Other variable stars vary in brightness due to actual variations in the luminosity of the star itself. The time taken from one maximum brightness to the next one is called the '''period'''. The most famous of the variable stars is delta Cepheus, the first-found member of the [[Cepheid]] group of variable stars. In 1908 [[Henrietta Swan Leavitt]] noticed that the variable stars in the [[Magellenic Clouds]] (two nearby galaxies in the [[Local Group]]) had a relationship between their period and their apparent brightness. At that time galaxies outside our own (the [[Milky Way]]) had been discovered, but it was not possible to measure the distances to them. It was soon realised that the variable stars in the Magellenic Cloud were of the Cepheid type. Since Cepheid variables also occur in our [[galaxy]] it was possible measure their distances and thus convert (using the inverse square law) Leavitt's relationship between apparent brightness and period to one of actual brightness and period. Once this formula was discovered, it became possible to apply to Cepheids of unknown distance. By observing their periods, their actual brightness can be calculated and, by the inverse square law, their distance. Through observations of Cepheids in [[globular clusters]] (compact bunches of stars) in our galaxy it was shown that our galaxy is about 300,000 light-years in diameter.

== Young Earth Creationism View ==

[[Young earth creationism|Young earth creationist]] scientists assert that [[materialism|materialistic]] explanations of the origin of stars are errant and contra-evidence and reports of stars forming are invalid. <ref>http://www.icr.org/article/403/</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i2/stars.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences21.html</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/Docs/399.asp#55</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v19/i1/feedback.asp</ref> In addition, creationists cite the secular scientific literature in order to make the case that materialist explanations of star formation are inadequate:

“We don’t understand how a single star forms, yet we want to understand how 10 billion stars form.” Carlos Frenk, as quoted by Robert Irion, “Surveys Scour the Cosmic Deep,” Science, Vol. 303, 19 March 2004, p. 1750. <ref>http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/303/5665/1750</ref>

“Nobody really understands how star formation proceeds. It’s really remarkable.” Rogier A. Windhorst, as quoted by Corey S. Powell, “A Matter of Timing,” Scientific American, Vol. 267, October 1992, p. 30. <ref>http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1992SciAm.267Q..26P</ref>

==Old Universe View of Stars==

A team of astronomers from the University of Texas at Austin McDonald Observatory recently estimated the age of one of the oldest stars in the Milky Way, HE 1523-0901, at 13.2 billion years. They used radioactive decay dating techniques. This star is close to the estimated age of the universe, 13.7 billion years.

The team leader, Dr. Anna Frebel, said that it was hard to pin down the age of a star, but that it can be inferred that chemically primitive stars must be very old, since they would have been born before many later generations of stars had provided chemical enrichment to the galaxy. A very few old stars contain huge amounts of some chemical elements, including radioactive thorium and uranium, and astronomers can use known rates of decay to deduce the ages of the stars using uniformitarian assumptions.

Frebel's team measured the uranium in HE1523-0901 using the UVES spectrograph on the Kueyen Telescope. This is one of four that together comprise the Very Larte Telescope based in Chile. She explained that although uranium had been discovered in two other stars, HE 1523-0901 also contains thorium. Uranium has a half-life of 4.5 billion years while thorium has a half-life of 14 billion years. However, HE 1523-0901 also contains other elements that can be anchored to the radioactive elements - europium, osmium and iridium. This combination provided Frebel with six 'cosmic clocks' that could be used to check each other.

The team hope to gain new experimental data and important clues about the hypothesized creation and evolution of the chemical elements shortly after the Big Bang. <ref> http://www.astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=5533 </ref>

==References==
<references/>

==Other References==
The ''Observer's Book of Astronomy'', by Patrick Moore. Published by Frederick Warne and Co. 1967.

The ''Cosmological Distance Ladder'', by Michael Rowan-Robinson. Published by Freeman. 1985.

[[category:astronomy]]

Charles Townes

2008-01-31T15:10:22Z

Diogenes: Opps. Another.

[[Image:Charles H Townes.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Charles H. Townes (2005)]]
'''Charles Hard Townes''' (July 28, 1915) is an [[United States|American]] [[physicist]] and Nobel laureate in Physics in 1964. He also won the 2005 Templeton Prize.

Townes was born in Greenville, South Carolina to Baptist parents. He graduated with a bachelor's degrees in physics and modern languages from Furman University in 1935. He graduated ''summa cum laude''. He then completed his M.A. in physics from Duke University in 1936 and his Ph.D. in physics from the California Institute of Technology in 1939. His wrote a thesis on isotope separation and nuclear spins. He worked at Bell Labs and later joined the faculty at Columbia University. Townes headed the Institute for Defense Analyses in Washington, D.C from 1959-1961 . From 1961-1967, he served as provost and professor of physics at MIT. He joined the faculty at the University of California, Berkeley in 1967. Currently, he works at Berkeley.

Towner was known for his role in the invention of the maser and the laser. In December 1953, Towner and two of his students completed the first device which used ammonia molecules to amplify microwave radiation. It was named maser, an acronym for "microwave amplification by stimulated emission of radiation". In 1958, Townes and Schawlow constructed a similar device using light which is known as laser.

Townes is a [[Protestant]] [[Christian]], and is a member of the [[United Church of Christ]]. According to Townes, "science and religion [are] quite parallel, much more similar than most people think and that in the long run, they must converge"<ref>Harvard Gazette, June 16, 2005 [http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2005/06.16/05-laser.html Laser's inventor predicts meeting of science, religion]</ref>

==Further reading==
*'''Townes, Charles H.''' [http://www.templetonprize.org/pdfs/THINK.pdf ''The Convergence of Science and Religion''] (1966). Accessed 31 January 2008

== References ==
{{reflist}}
* [http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1964/townes-bio.html Charles H. Townes ]

[[Category:Physicists]]

Charles Townes

2008-01-31T15:08:56Z

Diogenes: Typo. Is this right? The three of them? I don't actually know.

[[Image:Charles H Townes.jpg|right|thumb|250px|Charles H. Townes (2005)]]
'''Charles Hard Townes''' (July 28, 1915) is an [[United States|American]] [[physicist]] and Nobel laureate in Physics in 1964. He also won the 2005 Templeton Prize.

Townes was born in Greenville, South Carolina to Baptist parents. He graduated with a bachelor's degrees in physics and modern languages from Furman University in 1935. He graduated ''summa cum laude''. He then completed his M.A. in physics from Duke University in 1936 and his Ph.D. in physics from the California Institute of Technology in 1939. His wrote a thesis on isotope separation and nuclear spins. He worked at Bells Lab and later joined the faculty at Columbia University. Townes headed the Institute for Defense Analyses in Washington, D.C from 1959-1961 . From 1961-1967, he served as provost and professor of physics at MIT. He joined the faculty at the University of California, Berkeley in 1967. Currently, he works at Berkeley.

Towner was known for his role in the invention of the maser and the laser. In December 1953, Towner and two of his students completed the first device which used ammonia molecules to amplify microwave radiation. It was named maser, an acronym for "microwave amplification by stimulated emission of radiation". In 1958, Townes and Schawlow constructed a similar device using light which is known as laser.

Townes is a [[Protestant]] [[Christian]], and is a member of the [[United Church of Christ]]. According to Townes, "science and religion [are] quite parallel, much more similar than most people think and that in the long run, they must converge"<ref>Harvard Gazette, June 16, 2005 [http://www.hno.harvard.edu/gazette/2005/06.16/05-laser.html Laser's inventor predicts meeting of science, religion]</ref>

==Further reading==
*'''Townes, Charles H.''' [http://www.templetonprize.org/pdfs/THINK.pdf ''The Convergence of Science and Religion''] (1966). Accessed 31 January 2008

== References ==
{{reflist}}
* [http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/1964/townes-bio.html Charles H. Townes ]

[[Category:Physicists]]

Talk:Negro

2008-01-30T23:17:53Z

Diogenes: Contemporary American usage

==Why delete?==

This is a perfectly valid topic? [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 15:29, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

Not here. Not yet. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 15:32, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:Ok, that's arcane. So you decide wether or not something is valid for people to look at? That sounds like censorship to me. I don't see why we can't have open discussions about topics that are uncomfortable "yet" [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 15:34, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::Okay, I will take it to AFD not speedy. And expand my reasons there. [[User:Tmtoulouse|Tmtoulouse]] 15:35, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Thank you. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 15:35, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

This page is stupid. there is absolutely no need to give people a tranzlation of the spanish word for black. Are we going to have a page for every foreign word??? I don't think so. If we wer going to have a page for negro it at least reference the fact that it is used to mean "individual w/ colored skin" however even that would be a pretty lame page. I say delete. --[[User:BenjaminS|Ben]] [[User Talk:BenjaminS|Talk]] 15:00, 28 January 2008 (EST)

== Deleting this term & changing the links ==

Apparently it's been deleted before. If the Admins agree that it should be deleted again, I'd be happy to change all the pages that link to it, so it won't show up as "wanted."-[[User:MexMax|MexMax]] 13:00, 3 December 2007 (EST)

Is this site now offering a one-word Spanish-English dictionary? Either allow for an entry that discusses what the word means and its rich and varied cultural history in the US, the Caribbean and elsewhere, from racist uses to the United Negro College Fund, or leave it blank. This current version is a cop-out. [[User:Claude|Claude]] 17:30, 5 December 2007 (EST)
:The entry says exactly "what the word means" even better than wikipedia does. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:32, 5 December 2007 (EST)

I'm not familiar with Wikipedia's entry. Why does this one Spanish word warrant an entry? When are you going to get going on the rest of the language?[[User:Claude|Claude]] 18:38, 5 December 2007 (EST)
:This is educational. Negro is the Spanish word for black. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:56, 6 December 2007 (EST)

Then I eagerly await the rest of your entries to the Spanish translations category I've started for you. I'd do it myself, but I don't speak Spanish.[[User:Claude|Claude]] 14:09, 6 December 2007 (EST)
:Beuno. Gracias. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 14:54, 6 December 2007 (EST)

== Pronunciation ==

I apologize; I was wrong. Thanks for the citation. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 13:38, 28 January 2008 (EST)

:No problem. [[User:Nyflah|Nyflah]] 13:40, 28 January 2008 (EST)

== Contemporary American usage ==

What's going on with this page is absolutely inexcusable and appalling. The fact that the page has been deleted in the past, and that people insist that "The entry says exactly what the word means" and that "This is educational. Negro is the Spanish word for black." is utterly outrageous. As used in modern American society, it means a black person, plain and simple. If you take a survey of people in this country what the word means, I doubt that very many would say it's a Spanish word. (OK, I'm not an expert on statistics, and I haven't conducted that survey.) As Andy likes to say "We don't censor <fill in the blank> here". That this site can't say what the word is well known to mean in American English is unfathomable. It gives the impression that CP wants to hide something.

The underwhelming response to the offer to make CP a place that has a robust Spanish translations category is also rather striking.

Therefore, I have rewritten this.

While I feel very strongly about the existence of this page, I have no problems with people disagreeing on details. I hope that what I've written is acceptable within the standards that CP is trying to adhere to as an educational website. In particular, I have no opinion on whether pronunciation guides should be given, in English or Spanish. If you think pronunciations should be put back in, please do so. But make it really clear, as in "knee-grow" vs. "nay-grow" or whatever.

Of course, this is a topic that can easily be abused, and, no doubt, some 10-year-olds will come along and add certain words so that they can get their 15 minutes of fame on the internet. Editing a page draws attention to it, so it may be necessary to lock this for a while.

[[User:Diogenes|Diogenes]] 18:17, 30 January 2008 (EST)

Negro

2008-01-30T23:15:58Z

Diogenes: Describe common contemporary usage, see talk

'''Negro''' is an obsolete term for a person of black African ancestry or racial characteristics. It was a commonly used and generally well-intentioned and polite term in the United States through the middle of the 20th century. During the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's the term fell out of favor, and has been generally replaced by "black person" or "African-American".

The reasons for this change are a bit subtle. The point is that "negro" is a noun, whereas "black" is an adjective, used with the noun "person". The use of the word "negro", just by itself, therefore suggested in a subtle way that the subject was something other than a person. Reading things that were written prior to around 1960, one can sometimes see the word used in a way that slyly makes the distinction between a "negro" and an ordinary "person". This difference may seem trivial and picayune now, but it was felt by many to be very real at the time.

The word comes from the word for "black" in the Latin-based languages, such as Spanish, where the word is simply an adjective meaning "black". The names of the nations of Nigeria and Niger are both widely assumed to come from this root, but the etymology is somewhat obscure.

This word is not to be confused with the deliberate mispronunciation that has historically been used in an explicitly racist and hateful way. That word is simply unacceptable in modern society, and, when it must be described, is referred to as the "N word".

Although the term "negro" is obsolete in modern society, it, and the similar term "colored person" still appear in the names of two well-respected and long-standing organizations—the United Negro College Fund and the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The term "Negro Spiritual" is also still used for a musical style that grew out of American slave society.

[[Category: Spanish-English Translations]]

Talk:Lifeboat ethics

2008-01-17T00:50:31Z

Diogenes: Major rework

You know, I detest this scenario, too (I always said, "Pick the meatiest ones, in case we run out of food"), but your "fallacies" are misplaced. With the possible exception of the first one, the others are often a fact in sea disasters--boat sinks, more swimmers than boats, problems ensue, lifeboats get swamped, more people drown. In the real world, of course, there wouldn't be picking and choosing going on--it'd be a first-come, first-serve sort of operation. Using the Titanic as an example is particularly misguided--much of the death toll can be attributed to a lack of lifeboat space, and (contrary to your scenario) there were fights for lifeboat space, and men had to be restrained at gunpoint to allow the women and children to board.--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 20:37, 8 December 2007 (EST)

:Andy, you've got to do better than this. As a lawyer, you know better than to refute a hypothetical scenario with the argument "this will never happen." Remember torts class? You were given a grade over nonsense that would never happen. Deal with the argument on the merits, and quit being retarded. --[[User:JamaicanJah|JamaicanJah]] 20:55, 8 December 2007 (EST)

:: In reply to RossC, that isn't true about the [[Titanic]], as more than enough people voluntarily gave up spots on lifeboats, and the rescue came quicker than some probably expected. The content page also identifies other flaws in the problem.

:: JamaicanJah, in torts class the hypotheticals should illustrate real controversies, not pure fantasy. There is no end to the absurdities if unrealistic problems are presented. Suppose a UFO landed and demanded a parent to give up one of her children? Which would it be? The proper answer is, "that's silly."

:: The root of the lifeboat dilemma is a lack of [[faith]], as the Biblical account illustrates.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:00, 9 December 2007 (EST)

:::Regarding your Titanic claim and RossC's claim not being true:
::::''Mrs. Beane, interviewed shortly after the sinking, said she had seen members of the Titanic's crew holding men back at gunpoint from the lifeboat stations after the order was given for only women and children to board the boats. According to the interview, she said she had seen one man shot.''
:::(Source: Found [http://www.encyclopedia-titanica.org/item/326/ here] but can also be found [http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9502E6D91138F933A1575AC0A965948260 here].) --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 09:15, 9 December 2007 (EST)

:::: Jenkins, it's undisputed that scores of men voluntarily went down with the ship. In fact, your story tends to reinforce that there was extra lifeboat space, as Mrs. Beane's groom was pulled into a lifeboat and saved.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:33, 9 December 2007 (EST)

:::::Andy, please try to focus on what I actually clarified. Here's a summary, using quotes:
::::::RossC: "there were fights for lifeboat space, and men had to be restrained at gunpoint to allow the women and children to board."
::::::Andy: "that isn't true about the [[Titanic]], as more than enough people voluntarily gave up spots on lifeboats"
:::::The truth is that men were held at gunpoint, contrary to your claim that RossC is wrong. Also, you're arguing that there was more than enough space because he was pulled into a lifeboat, but it's just as likely that somebody had fallen out. Or do you think that the Titanic deployed their lifeboats with empty seats?
:::::In fact, your "more than enough men gave up their slot" and the cited "men held at gunpoint" are both solutions for the Lifeboat Ethics scenario of the Titanic: Ship sinks, not enough lifeboats, a decision has to be made who goes into the boats and who is left to drown. Yet you claim that "no one is likely to be in the situation described" and that such an event has the same probability as an encounter with an UFO. I could say more about the fallacies you list in the article, but I'm 95% certain that you would dismiss any criticism, so I'll do more productive things instead. --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 11:25, 9 December 2007 (EST)
::::::I fear that this is getting off-topic in relation to the article, but...Titanic had a lifeboat capacity of about 1200. Only about 700 were rescued, meaning about 500 seats were empty. Many of the lifeboats went partly empty because of confusion and disbelief (early on, many thought it was only a drill), fear that boat capacity was overstated, and problems during launch (two were swamped upon launch, and floated off empty). Now, once the boats were away and people were in the water, there was discussion/argument in the part-empty boats about going back and taking on more passengers, but only one boat (#14) did; the rest feared that--yes--they'd be swamped by desperate people trying to get into the lifeboat. Now, regarding women/children, there was theoretically space enough in the lifeboats for all women and children (even as empty as they were), but about 30 percent of women and children passengers died, their theoretical spots in the lifeboats taken by men and crew (who should have been the last to go).

::::::But enough of that. Instead a practical suggestion: How about an example of (or a link to) the lifeboat dilemma problem, so that readers can better understand how it varies from reality, and how it pushes situational ethics, etc.--[[User:RossC|RossC]] 12:05, 9 December 2007 (EST)

::::::: The point is this: even on the [[Titanic]], the rarest event imaginable, there were plenty of lifeboat spaces after the volunteers gave up their spots. This underscores how the [[lifeboat problem]] is much a fantasy as a UFO invasion would be.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 13:06, 9 December 2007 (EST)

::::::::How can you say that there were plenty of lifeboat spaces after volunteers gave up their spots? Out of nearly 2300 people on board, approximately 1500 died when the ship foundered. Are you suggesting that those 1500 people all voluntarily gave up their chance to be on a lifeboat so that the 700 could be saved? [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 22:21, 9 December 2007 (EST)

::::::::: The ''stated'' lifeboat capacity was 1200. Everything was top quality on the [[Titanic]], and it's plausible that 1500-1800 could have been squeezed on those lifeboats without causing them to sink. Yes, there were 500 who voluntarily gave up their lives. There may have been 1000 who did so. Welcome to [[Christianity]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:26, 9 December 2007 (EST)

::::::::::I'm sorry, there's a difference between voluntarily giving up your seat and not taking a seat because you've been told by the crew that there are no seats available because you're male, for example. The truth is that the Titanic situation was actually an example of lifeboat ethics in action: People weren't saved randomly or based on order of arrival, they were saved by class. The life of a 1st class passenger was more important than a third class passenger. And the "women and children first" claim doesn't necessarily fly either. More 1st class men were saved that 3rd class children, for example, and more crew were saved than second or third class passengers (separately, not combined). On Titanic, your status bought your life. [[User:SSchultz|SSchultz]] 22:43, 9 December 2007 (EST)

The strongest argument here is still that the lifeboat problem is based on lack of faith - when you let someone die to let someone else survive, rather than believing that God will either save you all. I believe that in such a situation, God is the one who should decide who lives and dies. The whole argument is based on lack of faith and even though it opens up some very interesting discussions, it's a horrible way to learn "morals" to children in public schools. [[User:Hammet|Hammet]] 17:55, 9 December 2007 (EST)

: Right. Basically, the [[lifeboat problem]] is the equivalent of dividing both sides of a math equation by zero. By introducing fallacies and expelling [[faith]], everything goes wacky and it becomes an absurdity, which [[liberals]] then use to confuse and indoctrinate with illogical and immoral "solutions".--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:19, 9 December 2007 (EST)

==Is conservapedia advocating suicide?==

Schlafly - your 4th "logical fallacy" concerning the lifeboat scenario presents you with a significant challenge. You claim that the scenario would never happen, because people will be willing to not go into the lifeboat. These individuals would be engaging in [[suicide]], which is a [[sin]]. Do you really want to tell young children that view this site that they don't have to worry about difficult ethical decisions, because they can wait for people to kill themselves?

Seems like a terrible idea. --[[User:SacchoPavta|SacchoPavta]] 15:22, 9 December 2007 (EST)

:I think you have self sacrifice confused with suicide. There's a difference between sacrificing your own life to save the life of others (though a very small percentage of non-lifeboaters actually lived) and killing yourself for selfish reasons. Jesus could have gotten out of crucifixion but he did not -- I'm pretty sure he didn't commit a sin in doing so. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 15:28, 9 December 2007 (EST)

::Jazz, I think you might have gotten yourself confused. Look at this encyclopedia's entry for [[suicide]]. There is no differentiation between suicide and self-sacrifice. You're just making that up out of thin air.

::Suicide is only bad when killing yourself for selfish reasons? Seriously? Where do you get this stuff?

::Additionally, Jesus didn't kill himself, the Jews did it. He did't put a spear through his own side. However, Schlafly wants us to sit around until an adequate number of people throw themselves into the ocean. Can you see the difference between the two examples,<s> or do you need me to type it really slowly for you</s>? [[User:SacchoPavta|SacchoPavta]] 15:34, 9 December 2007 (EST)
:::You say "Jesus didn't kill himself, the Jews did it." Might I also say "those people on the Titanic didn't kill themselves, the water did it"? Both situations are one in which the sacrificer can make a decision which saves the lives of others, but which has a high certainty of their own death. It doesn't matter that a man-made object killed one and a force of nature killed the other.
:::Are you trying to argue that someone who saves others by throwing himself on a grenade (to use Ed's example) is the same as someone who kills himself just because? That a police officer dying in the line of duty is morally no different than a bank robber dying during a heist? If you truly believe this then I think we just have to agree to disagree. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 16:02, 9 December 2007 (EST)

The legal '''and''' moral definition of suicide goes beyond "deliberately causing one's own death". If I throw myself on a live grenade, to save another person's life, I do not expect to wake up in hell a few days later for this. Rather, "Greater love hath no man ...". Likewise, [[Socrates]] drank hemlock but this is not considered suicide even though he could have resisted this "form of execution". The Japanese [[kamikaze]] I'm not sure about, but no one doubts their self-sacrificial motives. Now, the anti-Israeli and anti-American [[suicide bomber]]s of recent years is yet another thing.

One thing is for sure, that sacrificing '''myself''' to save others is not a sin. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 15:36, 9 December 2007 (EST)

:Side note: [[Kamikaze]] redirects to [[Homicide Bomber]] (as does [[suicide bomber]], by the way), so the Kamikaze pilots were "combining the heinous sins of suicide and mass murder" (and if they still attended some sort of school, they would've even been [[young mass murderers]] :P), according to CP. --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 17:16, 9 December 2007 (EST)

User:SacchoPavta, see if you can figure out the difference between suicide and sacrifice, and then get back to us once you figure that out.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:47, 9 December 2007 (EST)

== Major rework ==

I recently made a major rework of this page. The new version is appended to this, below the line. This change was reverted, 5 minutes later, by Aschlafly, with no explanation other than that I should make smaller changes. So here is my first proposed change, persented for discussion. The 90/10 rule will probably prevent me from further discussion of this.

What I propose is to change the sentence starting with:
:This lifeboat problem is often taught in public school in order to persuade ...
to
:This problem is often used as the model for a number of interesting ethical and philosophical questions involving endangering or sacrificing people for the "greater good".

That is, removing the unsourced and unsupported speculation about teachers' motives in discussing this. Of course, maybe someone can come up with appropriate national surveys showing teachers' reasons for talking about these sorts of issues.

[[User:Diogenes|Diogenes]] 19:50, 16 January 2008 (EST)

Here is my proposed rewrite:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
'''Lifeboat ethics''', or the lifeboat problem, is the moral dilemma created by imagining the following situation:

:You are the captain of a lifeboat that can only hold 15 people, but there are currently 20 in it. The boat will sink unless several people leave, resulting in their deaths. How do you decide whom to throw off?

This problem is often used as the model for a number of interesting ethical and philosophical questions involving endangering or sacrificing people for the "greater good".

Various forms of the lifeboat problem have been the theme of a number of books, movies, and television programs. The lifeboat situation is the starkest setting for this theme, but there are many others.

While fictionalized scenarios are often contrived to the point of extreme improbability, various analogues show up, to varying degrees, in a number of real-life situations. In fact, the "[[Triage]]" problem is an actual variant of this. Triage refers to the categorization of disaster victims into three categories: those who '''will not''' survive whether they are given assistance or not, those who '''will''' survive whether they are given assistance or not, and those for whom assistance will affect the outcome. The point of triage is to allocate scarce resources (doctors, medical facilities, blood) to those who will actually benefit. The ethical dilemma is that it sometimes requires decisions to let people die.

Other real-life examples are decisions about selecting organ transplant recipients, or allocation of very scarce or expensive drugs or medical treatments.

As a philosophical or ethical exercise, the lifeboat problem can involve discussions of life or death decisions based on a person's "worth"—such traits as a physical handicap, old age, or other perceived "defect". In actual triage situations, such considerations are generally not considered, though they occasionally show up in things like organ transplant decisions.

The training of medical personnel and emergency responders deals with these sorts of questions, even though the lifeboat problem itself is mostly a philosophical exercise.

== Faith-based approaches ==

There are those who believe that religious faith, guided by prayer, can solve instances of this problem. They cite the following factors:

* The future is never known with the degree of certainty required by the problem. There is, for example, a real chance that the lifeboat will hold more, or that help will arrive, or that people will volunteer to leave the boat, or that other solutions will be found by ingenuity or prayer.

* No one is likely to be in the situation described, any more than it is likely that a [[UFO]] will land in 5 minutes and create such a dilemma.  It's silly to speculate on a scenario that will never happen.

* A shortage of lifeboat space is due to the negligence of someone: the captain, the shipowner, or someone else. There is no shortage of lifeboat materials and supplies in the world that require this scenario to occur.

* It is unlikely that too few people would volunteer to leave the boat. When the [[Titanic]] sunk, men volunteered to give lifeboat space to women and children, for example, and there was no ethical dilemma.

Faith-based approaches also cite the following Biblical considerations:

There is a passage in the [[Gospels]] that suggests that a lack of [[faith]] is the cause of the dilemma, and greater [[faith]] is the solution:<ref>Matthew 8:23-27 (NIV).</ref>

:Then [[Jesus]] got into the boat and his disciples followed him. Without warning, a furious storm came up on the lake, so that the waves swept over the boat. But Jesus was sleeping. The disciples went and woke him, saying, "Lord, save us! We're going to drown!" He replied, "You of little [[faith]], why are you so afraid?" Then he got up and rebuked the winds and the waves, and it was completely calm. The men were amazed and asked, "What kind of man is this? Even the winds and the waves obey him!"

It is not known whether adherents of faith-based or biblical approaches are employed in hospital emergency rooms or in police, fire, or similar first-responder organizations.

== Rationality-based approaches ==

As noted above, situations similar to the lifeboat problem actually do arise in modern life, and are the subject of serious study and training. The philosophical attitude of the practitioners of this approach appears to be "If God gave us brains, He probably intended that we use them."

== References ==

<references/>

[[category:education]]
[[category:philosophy]]

The Pirates of Penzance

2008-01-13T23:21:06Z

Diogenes: Major rework

'''The Pirates of Penzance''', or "the Slave of Duty", is one of the most enduringly poular of [[Gilbert and Sullivan]]'s many comic operas. It is known for its many memorable songs, its witty dialog and lyrics, its clever plot, and its charicatures.

Among the many famous songs from this opera are Mabel's brilliant coloratura song "Poor Wand'ring One", the Police Chief's song "A Policeman's Lot is Not a Happy One", the Pirate King's song:

{{cquote|
Oh better far to live and die, 
Under the brave black flag I fly, 
Than play a sanctimonious part 
With a pirate head and a pirate heart.}}

and, perhaps most famous of all, the Major General's song:

{{cquote|
I quote in elegiacs all the crimes of Heliogabalus, 
In conics I can floor pecularities parabolous.}}

The latter is perhaps the best known of Gilbert and Sullivan's "patter songs" -- songs with extremely rapid-fire delivery of nonsensical lyrics. It has been adapted and parodied many times, most notably in [[Tom Lehrer]]'s song "The Elements".

Gilbert and Sullivan's characters were often portrayed in exaggerated and outlandish ways, as in the officiousness of Joseph Porter in H.M.S. Pinafore, or the hubris of Pooh-Bah in The Mikado. Pirates of Penzance is no exception: Frederic, the central character, is fanatically devoted to what he sees as his "sense of duty", carrying it to ridiculous extremes. Also, the band of pirates are actually very moral people who have taken up comical piracy as a form of social protest. They are really very soft-hearted, and burst into tears at the mention of orphans.

The story is about Frederic, mistakenly apprenticed to a band of self-styled pirates until he turns 21. He abhors his trade, but stays with them because of his sense of duty. He is now 21 and is about to leave them. But the pirate king reminds him that he was born on February 29th in a leap year, and his contract states that he is apprenticed until his 21st birthday, not his 21st year.

==Trivia==

*Penzance is a small coastal resort town in the southwest corner of England. "Pirates of Penzance" sounds to a Briton the way "Pirates of Myrtle Beach" might sound to an American.
*Since Frederic says his actual 21st birthday will occur in 1940, the opera must have been set on February 28th or March 1st of 1873. But this requires knowledge of the fact that 1900 would not be a leap year, which may not have been widely known at the time, and may not have been known to Gilbert and Sullivan. They may have believed that they were setting the action in 1877. The first performance was in December, 1879.
*The melody of the second section of the song "With Catlike Tread" (sung while the pirates are plotting to kill the major general) was adapted in 1915 into the popular song "Hail, Hail, the Gang's All Here", perhaps best known as having been, for a while, the theme song of the United States [[Republican Party]].
*There are a number of witty plays on words. Frederic was mistakenly apprenticed as a "pirate" because his nurserymaid confused the word with "pilot". There is also a play on "often" and "orphan", though it doesn't work very well with American pronunciation.
*The concept of a "plug" (promotion of one work from within another work) is not a 20th century invention. There is a plug for H.M.S. Pinafore in the Major General's song.
*Gilbert and Sullivan were in something of a tricky political situation with Queen Victoria, since they had made disparaging comments about her cabinet ministers, and about the House of Lords, in their earlier opera H.M.S. Pinafore. They put an artful apology into the final scene of Pirates of Penzance. The police, having lost a battle with the pirates, make a last-ditch patriotic appeal -- "We charge you yield, in Queen Victorias's name". The pirates, being charicatures of extremely moral people, surrender -- "We yield at once, with humbled mien, because with all our faults we love our Queen".

==Links==

*[http://math.boisestate.edu/gas/pirates/html/intro.html plot synopsis]

[[Category:Plays]]

Lifeboat ethics

2008-01-13T04:19:54Z

Diogenes: Major rework

'''Lifeboat ethics''', or the lifeboat problem, is the moral dilemma created by imagining the following situation:

:You are the captain of a lifeboat that can only hold 15 people, but there are currently 20 in it. The boat will sink unless several people leave, resulting in their deaths. How do you decide whom to throw off?

This problem is often used as the model for a number of interesting ethical and philosophical questions involving endangering or sacrificing people for the "greater good".

Various forms of the lifeboat problem have been the theme of a number of books, movies, and television programs. The lifeboat situation is the starkest setting for this theme, but there are many others.

While fictionalized scenarios are often contrived to the point of extreme improbability, various analogues show up, to varying degrees, in a number of real-life situations. In fact, the "[[Triage]]" problem is an actual variant of this. Triage refers to the categorization of disaster victims into three categories: those who '''will not''' survive whether they are given assistance or not, those who '''will''' survive whether they are given assistance or not, and those for whom assistance will affect the outcome. The point of triage is to allocate scarce resources (doctors, medical facilities, blood) to those who will actually benefit. The ethical dilemma is that it sometimes requires decisions to let people die.

Other real-life examples are decisions about selecting organ transplant recipients, or allocation of very scarce or expensive drugs or medical treatments.

As a philosophical or ethical exercise, the lifeboat problem can involve discussions of life or death decisions based on a person's "worth"—such traits as a physical handicap, old age, or other perceived "defect". In actual triage situations, such considerations are generally not considered, though they occasionally show up in things like organ transplant decisions.

The training of medical personnel and emergency responders deals with these sorts of questions, even though the lifeboat problem itself is mostly a philosophical exercise.

== Faith-based approaches ==

There are those who believe that religious faith, guided by prayer, can solve instances of this problem. They cite the following factors:

* The future is never known with the degree of certainty required by the problem. There is, for example, a real chance that the lifeboat will hold more, or that help will arrive, or that people will volunteer to leave the boat, or that other solutions will be found by ingenuity or prayer.

* No one is likely to be in the situation described, any more than it is likely that a [[UFO]] will land in 5 minutes and create such a dilemma.  It's silly to speculate on a scenario that will never happen.

* A shortage of lifeboat space is due to the negligence of someone: the captain, the shipowner, or someone else. There is no shortage of lifeboat materials and supplies in the world that require this scenario to occur.

* It is unlikely that too few people would volunteer to leave the boat. When the [[Titanic]] sunk, men volunteered to give lifeboat space to women and children, for example, and there was no ethical dilemma.

Faith-based approaches also cite the following Biblical considerations:

There is a passage in the [[Gospels]] that suggests that a lack of [[faith]] is the cause of the dilemma, and greater [[faith]] is the solution:<ref>Matthew 8:23-27 (NIV).</ref>

:Then [[Jesus]] got into the boat and his disciples followed him. Without warning, a furious storm came up on the lake, so that the waves swept over the boat. But Jesus was sleeping. The disciples went and woke him, saying, "Lord, save us! We're going to drown!" He replied, "You of little [[faith]], why are you so afraid?" Then he got up and rebuked the winds and the waves, and it was completely calm. The men were amazed and asked, "What kind of man is this? Even the winds and the waves obey him!"

It is not known whether adherents of faith-based or biblical approaches are employed in hospital emergency rooms or in police, fire, or similar first-responder organizations.

== Rationality-based approaches ==

As noted above, situations similar to the lifeboat problem actually do arise in modern life, and are the subject of serious study and training. The philosophical attitude of the practitioners of this approach appears to be "If God gave us brains, He probably intended that we use them."

== References ==

<references/>

[[category:education]]
[[category:philosophy]]

Computer

2008-01-13T03:58:39Z

Diogenes: I guess "never completed" isn't correct!

A '''computer''' is a machine that is designed to perform [[mathematical]] calculations. Most computers manipulate data in the form of [[binary|binary code]], which consists of 1s and 0s.

Prior to the advent of computing machines, the definition for ''computer'' was a human being who performed complex mathematical calculations. This was accomplished with the aid of a manual counting device, such as an abacus or a slide rule, and was mainly used by traders and early bankers to keep a reliable record of funds

Charles Babbage, a [[British]] scientist who lived in the 19th century, has been credited as the designer of the first digital computer, the Difference Engine, a machine set to do calculations reliably up to six decimal places. It was entirely mechanical. However, the Engine was never constructed, being deemed as "had derived no emolument whatsoever from the government" by a member of parliament. He also designed an even more sophisticated "Analytical Engine", that would actually have been a programmable computer in the modern sense; it, too was mechanical. Though it was never built, Augusta Ada wrote some programs for it (to compute Bernoulli polynomials), making her the world's first computer programmer. A small version of the Difference Engine, was built after his death by his son.<ref>http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Babbage.html</ref>
[[Image:Babbage.jpg|right|thumb|200px|Charles Babbage's Analytical Engine.]]

Babbage later designed an even more clever "Difference Engine Number 2", that was also not completed in his lifetime. But in 1991, the bicentennial of Babbage's birth, this computer was built in the British Science Museum, from Babbage's original plans. It operates flawlessly, though a few billion times more slowly than modern electronic computers. It is operated by turning a crank.

The first computer comparable to the modern day computer, an electronic calculation machine, was the ENIAC. Built as a artillery support machine, it was unveiled in early 1946.<ref>http://ftp.arl.army.mil/~mike/comphist/</ref>

==References==
http://www.msu.edu/course/lbs/126/lectures/history.html

<References/>

[[Category:Information technology]]
[[Category:computer science]]

Computer

2008-01-13T03:56:48Z

Diogenes: More info, and corrections, about Babbage.

A '''computer''' is a machine that is designed to perform [[mathematical]] calculations. Most computers manipulate data in the form of [[binary|binary code]], which consists of 1s and 0s.

Prior to the advent of computing machines, the definition for ''computer'' was a human being who performed complex mathematical calculations. This was accomplished with the aid of a manual counting device, such as an abacus or a slide rule, and was mainly used by traders and early bankers to keep a reliable record of funds

Charles Babbage, a [[British]] scientist who lived in the 19th century, has been credited as the designer of the first digital computer, the Difference Engine, a machine set to do calculations reliably up to six decimal places. It was entirely mechanical. However, the Engine was never constructed, being deemed as "had derived no emolument whatsoever from the government" by a member of parliament. He also designed an even more sophisticated "Analytical Engine", that would actually have been a programmable computer in the modern sense; it, too was mechanical. Though it was never built, Augusta Ada wrote some programs for it (to compute Bernoulli polynomials), making her the world's first computer programmer. A small version of the Difference Engine, was built after his death by his son.<ref>http://ei.cs.vt.edu/~history/Babbage.html</ref>
[[Image:Babbage.jpg|right|thumb|200px|Charles Babbage's Analytical Engine.]]

Babbage later designed an even more clever "Difference Engine Number 2", that was also never completed. But in 1991, the bicentennial of Babbage's birth, this computer was built in the British Science Museum, from Babbage's original plans. It operates flawlessly, though a few billion times more slowly than modern electronic computers. It is operated by turning a crank.

The first computer comparable to the modern day computer, an electronic calculation machine, was the ENIAC. Built as a artillery support machine, it was unveiled in early 1946.<ref>http://ftp.arl.army.mil/~mike/comphist/</ref>

==References==
http://www.msu.edu/course/lbs/126/lectures/history.html

<References/>

[[Category:Information technology]]
[[Category:computer science]]